Cardiac Arrest 'Cats

You know what this was, really? It was the 2010 Outback Bowl with Auburn all over again. All the elements were there. Northwestern goes down early, then rallies, then looks to be down a disappointingly large amount with not much time left only to close fast and tie things at the end. And then came the punch to the gut, followed by a miracle reprieve... only to be followed by the actual loss.

Really, considering how poorly they shot the ball - particularly from three, where they were a gapingly bad 10-of-39 - it's amazing Northwestern was in this game at the end. But there they were, having just tied the score on a John Shurna layup - one of his few positive contributions to the game, frankly, and actually it was a goaltending call - with 4.2 seconds to go. It wasn't a lot of time, but it was enough for Washington State to race upcourt. The man with the ball - possibly Reggie Moore, though I don't remember now - raced into the lane. Either Shurna or Marcotullio managed to get in front of him just enough to force a pass underneath. It was kind of a wild pass, but as Drew Crawford lunged for it, he smashed into Abe Lodwick with 0.2 seconds on the clock. The officials called a foul.

I should say I'm not a huge fan of the foul call. It's hardly the worst call I'll ever see, but Crawford was clearly going for the ball and it wasn't a perfect pass that by all rights belonged to Lodwick. On the other hand, if Crawford just stops, there's no way Lodwick has enough time to corral the ball and put up a shot. At any rate, the foul was called, the officials huddled to see how much time was left, put 0.2 seconds back up, and Lodwick stepped to the line with the score tied at 64.

And he missed both.

This, of course, was the miracle reprieve. Crawford's foul was Demos hitting the upright, and Lodwick missing both shots was the roughing the kicker penalty. Unfortunately, the 'Cats didn't even get as close this time as their football counterparts did. While Markshausen was stopped just two yards short of the end zone to end the Outback, the Wildcats went down with a whimper in the overtime, perhaps as exhausted physically as I felt watching them. They went five minutes of overtime with just a single made basket, going just 1-for-10 from the field, and though they were tied at 66 as late as with 1:10 to go, they never really seemed in danger of winning. Washington State wasn't much better, but they were able to get three free throws, and that was enough to hold on. If just one of the 29 threes that Northwestern missed had fallen in regulation, they would have won.

Still, you have to be proud of the 'Cats. For one thing, they got farther than they ever have in the postseason. They went toe-to-toe with an arguably better team in a tough road environment and outworked them - even though Northwestern is a terrible rebounding team, they actually outrebounded Washington State, 34-33, and they had to in order to compensate for all the three-pointers they were bricking. They were 14-of-25 inside the arc, mostly on easy layups, and Carmody seemed frustrated at times by how often the players were willing to settle for difficult three-point looks when they were having so much success inside. On the other hand, Washington State played a pretty decent defensive game and did a good job not allowing too many looks like that.

The 'Cats showed heart. They were down as many as 14 in the first half, 31-17 with 4:22 left in the opening period. Then they went on a 14-7 run to close the half and opened the second with a 7-0 run to tie it and even had the lead a few times, though never by more than two and not later than the six-minute mark of the second half. You can't really argue that they were ever in a position to win the game - only once in the last two minutes of either the second half or OT did they have a shot in the air that would have given them a lead, Shurna's missed three with 33 seconds left and Washington State up 63-62. But they played until the end. Usually when Northwestern shoots their threes that badly they lose badly. This time, at least, they were in it until the horn sounded.

That's the life of a Northwestern sports fan these days - some highs, but ultimately a series of near misses in the big spots. Then again, considering where the football program was 30 years ago, and where the basketball program was even just a decade ago, I guess I'll take it. Sigh. Go 'Cats.

Back in Bracket

I haven't watched much college basketball this year, although naturally I found myself utterly addicted to it during Tournament Week. Now it's time for the NCAA Tournament and of course I don't have the greatest sense for who's going to win. So get ready for a long post wherein I talk myself through all the regions. It's probably going to be utterly uninformative to anyone else (though I will be pulling info from elsewhere), but I only get to do this once a year, so whatever.

East Region

1) Ohio State vs. 16) Texas-San Antonio or Alabama State

8) George Mason vs. 9) Villanova

5) West Virginia vs. 12) Alabama-Birmingham or Clemson

4) Kentucky vs. 13) Princeton

6) Xavier vs. 11) Marquette

3) Syracuse vs. 14) Indiana State

7) Washington vs. 10) Georgia

2) North Carolina vs. 15) Long Island

Ohio State is the number one overall seed, which is funny if you saw Northwestern come within one basket of beating them on two separate occasions. They destroyed small-conference opposition this year, including a few teams in the field (Oakland, Morehead State and UNC-Asheville), so clearly the first round will pose no threat. But can they make it all the way to Houston? Their biggest threats are clearly UNC, Syracuse and Kentucky - I know the Big East is deep, but West Virginia as a 5 seed with 11 losses? Also, they lost to Minnesota. OSU-UK is the most likely matchup in the Sweet 16 and it could be a very interesting game between two teams with freshman stars. North Carolina also has freshman stars, which raises the question: could Syracuse's experience be a valuable asset in this region? Maybe, but first they would have to get past a similarly experienced Xavier squad that came within a double-overtime game of the Elite Eight last year. (Assuming Xavier can beat Marquette, of course. But Marquette is a 14-loss team. 14! I don't care what conference they play in, that's a lot.)

My picks:

First Round

Ohio State over UTSA/ASU

George Mason over Villanova

'Nova has lost seven of their last nine coming in, and the two wins were narrow escapes against Seton Hall and DePaul, not exactly the class of the Big East.

West Virginia over Clemson/UAB

It's weird this year because 11 and 12 seeds win first round games all the time, yet we won't know who two of them are until the night before the real games - it's a little harder to pick with that in mind, but I think WVU will probably beat either team here.

Kentucky over Princeton

Xavier over Marquette

Syracuse over Indiana State

Washington over Georgia

North Carolina over LIU

Second Round

Ohio State over George Mason

Kentucky over West Virginia

UK's top three scorers are all freshmen, which has to scare you a little, but they were super young last year too and still went to the Elite 8 - though they did lose to West Virginia once there... meh, I'm sticking with the team that didn't lose to Minnesota.

Xavier over Syracuse

Pickin' the upset here! Syracuse has made the Sweet 16 the last two years, but Xavier's made it the last three and they always seem to make a run. I think Syracuse is a bit overrated - Seton Hall, a bad team, mopped the floor with them in the Carrier Dome in January. They enter on a mild hot streak, but so does Xavier.

Washington over North Carolina

What??? Well, did you know that UNC also lost to Minnesota? Plus their best player is a freshman and their point guard is a freshman. Dangerous. UW's best three players are a junior and two seniors, plus they can score a lot of points. I do worry a little about their size against Zeller and Henson, but if they can make it into a shootout I like their chances.

Sweet 16

Ohio State over Kentucky

OSU's best player is a freshman, but with Diebler, Buford and Lighty they've got plenty of experience. Kentucky may have the size to slow down Sullinger, but OSU's more experienced guards should be able to get it done.

Xavier over Washington

When in doubt, take the team with the best player. I give Tu Holloway the nod over Isaiah Thomas.

Elite 8

Ohio State over Xavier

I like this to be a closer game than most would expect, but I can't make myself pick Xavier into the Final Four. OSU has big guards and even though Xavier has some size at the forward position and might actually be able to neutralize Sullinger if only through sheer volume, I don't know how Lyons and Holloway are going to guard Diebler and Buford and their several-inch height advantages.

One thoroughly incorrect bracket down, three to go.

West Region

1) Duke vs. 16) Hampton

8) Michigan vs. 9) Tennessee

5) Arizona vs. 12) Memphis

4) Texas vs. 13) Oakland

6) Cincinnati vs. 11) Missouri

3) Connecticut vs. 14) Bucknell

7) Temple vs. 10) Penn State

2) San Diego State vs. 15) Northern Colorado

Kind of a weird region. As the last #1 seed, Duke has to travel a long way from home for the regional in Anaheim - advantage Arizona (if they get past Memphis and Texas) and San Diego State (if they make it to the Elite Eight). I'm sure San Diego State is a good team, but did you notice that they haven't really played anyone this year? They made their bones on a win over Gonzaga in November; Gonzaga was ranked #12 then, but now they're an 11 seed. BYU took them out twice and had to lose a key forward before SDSU could beat them. I don't know. They don't have the hardest road here and they're much closer to home than Temple, Penn State, UConn and Cincy... but can a team that has never won a tournament game suddenly coast into the Elite Eight? Meanwhile on the other side, if Duke can get past the Sweet 16 matchup with either (presumably) Arizona or Texas, they're primed for another Final Four run. Ugh.

My picks:

First Round

Duke over Hampton

Tennessee over Michigan

27 combined losses between UT and UM, so hold your nose for this one. I picked Michigan elsewhere before actually doing any research, but their entire reputation seems based on taking Kansas to overtime. (They also lost to Minnesota at home and got blown out at Indiana.) Tennessee actually beat some quality teams, including #1 seed Pitt. They also look to be more experienced.

Arizona over Memphis

Texas over Oakland

Oakland's best player, Keith Benson, is a 6-11 senior center who goes for 18 and 10 a game. Oakland is also, get this, second in the country in scoring, 14th in rebounding, 17th in assists, and second in field goal percentage. Texas is an even better rebounding team, however, and they play in a real conference. The one thing to watch here is if Texas can guard Benson - the obvious assignment looks to be Tristan Thompson, a freshman who gives up three inches to Benson. If Benson can go for 25 and 10, and gets the appropriate help, Oakland could spring the upset. But I won't pick against a team that beat Kansas at Allen Fieldhouse.

Missouri over Cincinnati

Neither team had much in the way of marquee wins. Cincy got shellacked by Notre Dame in the Big East Tournament, and their best players just don't seem to be that great if you just look at the numbers. Missouri is a high-scoring team that should be able to hit free throws if it jumps out to a lead.

Connecticut over Bucknell

Bucknell, as a school, has upset experience (stunning Kansas from the same seed line in 2005), but this is the first tourney trip for everyone on the current squad. Though UConn may be a little tired from their five-day run through the Big East Tournament, and though they were really inconsistent over the last month and a half, it's hard to see how they lose this one.

Temple over Penn State

San Diego State over Northern Colorado

Second Round

Duke over Tennessee

Texas over Arizona

The game is in Tulsa, meaning Texas is likely to have a pretty sizable advantage in terms of fans.

Connecticut over Missouri

This one is slightly dangerous, because if Connecticut is tired from their Big East run, an up-and-down team like Missouri could be tricky for them. On the other hand, if Missouri doesn't play the greatest defense, Kemba Walker could eat them alive. And this is a UConn team that won at Texas this year, something Mizzou sure couldn't do. UConn will also have the fan advantage in Washington DC.

San Diego State over Temple

Sweet 16

Duke over Texas

This Duke team has been vulnerable on the road, losing at Florida State and Virginia Tech and getting blown out at St. John's - but while Anaheim is closer to Austin than to Durham, this isn't really "the road." I don't think Texas can match Duke's size and experience, sadly.

San Diego State over Connecticut

Another tough call, but SDSU has shown it can win against a team with a big scorer and maybe not enough extra help (BYU in the MWC final) and at this point UConn might just have asked Walker to do too much for too many games in too few days. Plus SDSU is in their backyard and UConn is three thousand miles away.

Elite 8

San Diego State over Duke

Man... am I really going to pick this? I guess I am. Call it wishful thinking if you must - SDSU has a lot of big bodies (although in a one-to-one matchup scenario they tend to give up an inch or two to Duke in most cases) and they'll be close to home, which routinely pans out as a major advantage in the tournament. Duke's road woes could catch up with them here, and given their injury issues I wouldn't put it past them to be additionally banged up by this point. My one big worry is that SDSU is not a great foul-shooting team.

Southwest Region

1) Kansas vs. 16) Boston University

8) UNLV vs. 9) Illinois

5) Vanderbilt vs. 12) Richmond

4) Louisville vs. 13) Morehead State

6) Georgetown vs. 11) USC or Virginia Commonwealth

3) Purdue vs. 14) St. Peter's

7) Texas A&M vs. 10) Florida State

2) Notre Dame vs. 15) Akron

Weird region, because I don't trust most of the high seeds any farther than I can throw them. To me it would be a massive upset if Kansas didn't coast out of this thing; I just don't buy Notre Dame at all (they lost to Northwestern just last year, and that was a team that still had Luke Harangody!), and none of Purdue, Louisville, Vandy or Georgetown excites me. I mean, I'm looking at Purdue in the Elite 8 right now. Really?

My picks:

First Round

Kansas over Boston University

UNLV over Illinois

Richmond over Vanderbilt

Vanderbilt stubbed its toe as a high seed in their last two appearances (2008 and 2010), and Richmond is a senior-heavy team that actually beat Purdue this year (though they also lost to a bad Georgia Tech team).

Louisville over Morehead State

Georgetown over USC/VCU

Hard to know what to do here, but by all accounts VCU is a team that has no business in the field at all, and while USC had some marquee wins (Arizona, at Washington, at Tennessee) and also a key close loss (by two at Kansas), they also had 14 losses, several of them awful (they lost to Rider by 20 points at home [!!!] as well as at a terrible TCU team). Georgetown is stumbling into the tournament having lost four straight, but I still think they can get by either of the potential 11 seeds, at least.

Purdue over St. Peter's

Texas A&M over Florida State

Notre Dame over Akron

Second Round

Kansas over UNLV

Louisville over Richmond

Purdue over Georgetown

Notre Dame over Texas A&M

Sweet 16

Kansas over Louisville

Purdue over Notre Dame

Elite 8

Kansas over Purdue

Not much to say there. I guess you could say this is the bracket I feel the surest about, which probably means USC will make the Sweet 16 and Notre Dame will get to the Final Four.

Southeast Region

1) Pittsburgh vs. 16) UNC-Asheville or Arkansas-Little Rock

8) Butler vs. 9) Old Dominion

5) Kansas State vs. 12) Utah State

4) Wisconsin vs. 13) Belmont

6) St. John's vs. 11) Gonzaga

3) BYU vs. 14) Wofford

7) UCLA vs. 10) Michigan State

2) Florida vs. 15) UC-Santa Barbara

This region, I think - and Seth Davis, for one, seems to agree - could break down like the 1998 Midwest Region. If you'll recall, that one featured top seed Kansas going out to #8 Rhode Island in Round Two; #12 Florida State and #13 Valparaiso both winning, and Valpo subsequently reaching the Sweet 16; and #3 Stanford finally emerging to make the Final Four. (I didn't trust most of the top seeds and so went with #5 TCU to make it out, to my later chagrin.) Now look at this one. You have Pitt as the one seed - good team, but are they great? Florida seems like a weak 2. It's hard to know what to expect out of BYU, and Wisconsin, Kansas State and St. John's all look like potential upsets, drawing three of the best mid-majors in the whole field.

My picks:

First Round

Pittsburgh over UNCA/UALR

Old Dominion over Butler

Of course Butler came up just short in the finals last year, but Gordon Hayward is gone. These teams have a common non-conference opponent: Xavier, who beat Butler but lost to ODU.

Kansas State over Utah State

Belmont over Wisconsin

Wisconsin has routinely underperformed its seed line, dropping to teams seeded at least five lines lower in 2007, 2008 and 2010. Belmont, meanwhile, is a high-scoring team that hits its shots, and if they can get out to a lead, Wisconsin's big advantages - clock management and hitting free throws - will be thoroughly negated. This was probably the one upset in the whole bracket that really jumped out at me, especially after Wisconsin scored just 33 points in the Big Ten semifinal against Penn State. Utah State definitely has a good chance of taking out KSU as well, but I was reluctant to pick the 12 and 13 here.

Gonzaga over St. John's

St. John's made its name this year as a giant-killer, with wins over Duke, Pitt, Notre Dame and UConn. They also lost to Fordham, St. Bonaventure and Seton Hall and will be playing without D.J. Kennedy, one of their top three guys. Gonzaga underachieved this year but they've won nine straight and have been here before.

BYU over Wofford

Michigan State over UCLA

Florida over UCSB

Second Round

Pittsburgh over Old Dominion

Kansas State over Belmont

I find Belmont intriguing, but Kansas State was in the Elite 8 just last year and still has the best players from that team. You don't see 13 seeds winning multiple games, even if Belmont has an argument for being underseeded.

BYU over Gonzaga

I'm not sure how BYU will handle 7-foot Gonzaga center Robert Sacre, but I think Fredette's scoring and a favorable crowd in Denver can get BYU to the Sweet 16.

Florida over Michigan State

Florida has some losses that really give one pause - Central Florida, home to Jacksonville and South Carolina - but Michigan State was so inconsistent this year it's a minor miracle they made it this far.

Sweet 16

Pittsburgh over Kansas State

Looks real good on paper, a battle between two experienced teams. Pitt looks like they have a little more talent, though KSU might have the best player. Nod to Pitt.

BYU over Florida

BYU beat Florida last year behind 37 points from Fredette, so why not again this year? The game is much closer to Florida, but Fredette hasn't shown a tendency to wilt on the road.

Elite 8

Pittsburgh over BYU

Fredette alone couldn't carry BYU past Kansas State in the second round last year, and I don't see him doing it here, but with no Brandon Davies, the Elite 8 would be a nice run.

So that's the four regions. How about the Final Four?

Final Four

Ohio State over San Diego State

The shooting touch of OSU's guards should carry the day here.

Kansas over Pittsburgh

Just don't see Pitt having an answer for the Morrises inside.

National Championship

Ohio State over Kansas

A tantalizing final, even if it is the top two seeds. How will Sullinger and the Morrises play each other? Can Kansas' guards keep up with the hot shooting of Ohio State's? In the end I think it's Buford and Diebler who win it for Ohio State, 76-72.

My fellow nerds and I will retire to the nerdery with our calculators

Earlier today, I saw the following piece of trivia on ESPN.com's mobile site: "Derrick Rose is the first Chicago Bulls player to score 40 points in a game against the Spurs since Michael Jordan."

My first thought was: not bad.

My second thought was: how many Bulls players have scored 40 points in a game since Jordan left at all?

As it turns out, not very many. The Bulls, from the start of the 1998-99 season until now, have had just ten regular season games in which one of their players has scored 40 points. Rose's is one; Jalen Rose, Elton Brand and Luol Deng had one each; Jamal Crawford had two; and Ben Gordon had four. That's the entire list. Ten games, six guys. So it seemed like the fact that Rose was the first Bull to score 40 on the Spurs since Jordan wasn't too surprising given that very few Bulls since Jordan had scored 40 on anybody. (To put it another way, in Jordan's final 1997-98 season alone, he scored 40 points or more twelve times, plus twice more in the playoffs. Even adding the playoffs to every 1998-99 to 2010-11 Bull only gets them to eleven.) I posted as much on Facebook.

But then I started to wonder if that was unfair in a way, because 40 points is a pretty rare mark to hit unless you're a really elite scorer. In other words, it seemed fairly likely that most teams' records over the last thirteen seasons wouldn't look that much different from the Bulls', especially for teams that rarely had elite scorers and didn't spend the entire thirteen seasons or close to it with playoff caliber teams (as the Bulls were pretty lousy for almost half that span).

And so, thanks to the Basketball-Reference play index, I came up with the following numbers:

Most 40-point games: Lakers, 129

Not terribly surprising - 106 of those games belong to Kobe Bryant, and he also owns the highest-scoring single game in that span, with the infamous 81-point game.

Second-most 40-point games: 76ers, 70

All 70 belong to Allen Iverson. The 76ers have the second-most 40-point games total but are also the only team with just one player to score 40 in a game for them during the span.

Other teams with more than 40: Cavaliers 49, Wizards 43

42 of Cleveland's 49 belong to LeBron James, unsurprisingly. Gilbert Arenas leads the Wizards with 28, but 8 of the 43 are Michael Jordan - meaning that he almost had as many 40-point games as anyone who played for the Bulls even though he was at the end of his career and kind of washed up.

Mean 40-point games: 26.4
Median 40-point games: 20

129 is sort of an extreme outlier, so I also did the median, which gives you a more realistic number. In other words, the Bulls had half as many 40-point games as an "average" franchise during this span.

Teams with fewer 40-point games than the Bulls: Pacers (9), Jazz (9), Grizzlies (7), Bobcats (6), Clippers (5)

The Bobcats haven't existed the whole time, so it's a little unfair to them. The Clippers' number of five is even more pathetic when you consider that Blake Griffin has two of them just this year - and no one else has more than one. So in a 12-season span, there were just three Clippers games in which someone on their team scored 40 points. That is awful.

Most different players to score 40: Warriors, 10

Not really surprising when you think about the Warriors' style of play. The Warriors also had the most total 40-point games (29) for a team that didn't have any one player reach double figures (Monta Ellis had the most with seven).

Players to lead more than one team in 40-point games: Tracy McGrady (30 for Orlando, 15 for Houston) and Vince Carter (17 for New Jersey, 14 for Toronto)

McGrady had a 62-point game with the Magic, the highest single-game output during the period of anyone not named Kobe.

Is this the kind of thing that's only interesting to me and Joe Posnanski? Probably. But I'm posting it anyway, because what else am I going to do with it?

Here are the stats for every team, since I already bothered to look them up.

Team / 40 pt Games / Different players to score 40 / Player with most / Player with highest scoring game

Lakers / 129 / 4 / Bryant, 106 / Bryant, 81
76ers / 70 / 1 / Iverson, 70 / Iverson, 60
Cavaliers / 49 / 5 / James, 42 / James, 56
Wizards / 43 / 7 / Arenas, 28 / Arenas, 60
Thunder / 36 / 6 / Durant, 17 / R. Allen, 54
Heat / 36 / 4 / Wade, 31 / Wade, 55
Nuggets / 34 / 6 / Anthony, 19 / Iverson, 51
Magic / 34 / 4 / McGrady, 30 / McGrady, 62
Suns / 30 / 9 / Stoudemire, 15 / Delk, 53
Warriors / 29 / 10 / Ellis, 7 / Jamison, 51
Nets / 27 / 5 / Carter, 17 / Carter, 51
Rockets / 25 / 7 / McGrady, 15 / McGrady, 48
Raptors / 25 / 4 / Carter, 14 / Carter, 51
Knicks / 24 / 8 / Marbury, 5 / Houston, 53
Celtics / 21 / 2 / Pierce, 19 / Pierce, 50
Bucks / 19 / 6 / Redd, 11 / Redd, 57
Pistons / 19 / 4 / Stackhouse, 10 / Stackhouse, 57
Mavericks / 19 / 4 / Nowitzki, 16 / Nowitzki, 53
Kings / 16 / 4 / Kevin Martin, 6 / Webber, 51
Blazers / 13 / 7 / Roy, 4 / D. Stoudamire, 54
Hornets / 13 / 4 / Paul and West, 5 / Mashburn, 50
Spurs / 13 / 3 / Ginobili, 6 / Parker, 55
T-Wolves / 11 / 7 / Garnett, 4 / Garnett, 47
Hawks / 11 / 4 / J. Johnson, 6 / Abdur-Rahim, 50
Bulls / 10 / 6 / Gordon, 4 / Crawford, 50
Pacers / 9 / 5 / Granger, 4 / J. O'Neal, 55
Jazz / 9 / 5 / K. Malone, 3 / Millsap, 46
Grizzlies / 7 / 5 / Gasol and M. Miller, 2 / M. Miller, 45
Bobcats / 6 / 3 / G. Wallace, 4 / S. Jackson, 43
Clippers / 5 / 4 / Griffin, 2 / Griffin, 47

Ranking the state capitols so far

I've checked 16 capitol buildings off the list since officially starting the project on August 27, 2009 - add to that Madison, where I'll be on Monday, and that's 17, or a third of the total, in 17 months. At that rate I'd be done by late 2013, although of course there's pretty much no way I'll keep up that pace - I hit eight capitals in two weeks this past summer, and nothing like that will be, or really even could be, repeated.

Nevertheless, we're off to a blazing start and one that at least puts me substantially ahead of the game even as the pace inevitably slows from one a month. But being at a third of the contiguous 48 got me to thinking about how I'd rank the various buildings in terms of their structural appeal. So, below, the rankings of the first 16 capitol buildings, a list that will be updated as new buildings are visited. This first time only, I'm going to start at the bottom and work my way forward; future updates to the list will probably be done starting at #1.

16. Dover, DE
I feel bad for not liking Dover, maybe because it seems kind of cliché. But there's no real way of getting around this one. It looks uninteresting on the outside - it wouldn't be out of place on a college campus. It isn't much more interesting on the inside - it doesn't have a true dome, and so it doesn't have anything on the interior but a flat skylight and no rotunda to speak of. The legislative chambers are fine but certainly nothing spectacular.

15. Carson City, NV
Not too far ahead of Dover, really, though at least it has a bit more history on its side. Drew already compared the building to a college admissions office when I first posted the photos last year. The first floor interior is maybe a little classier than Dover; the legislative rooms are probably more boring (and also now unoccupied). Ultimately I find the exterior a bit more appealing, and that accounts for most of the difference here.

14. Raleigh, NC
The first two visited for the project (Raleigh and Carson City) turn out to be two of the most boring so far. Perhaps not coincidentally, Raleigh also only holds the governor's office, with the state assembly having moved elsewhere. The exterior looks like a bank; the (former) legislative chambers are pretty blah; the dome is at least a dome, but really not much to speak of. It's not Raleigh's fault that 1840 was a less exciting architectural time than, say, 1880, but I have to call them like I see them.

13. Phoenix, AZ
For a structure built in 1901, the Phoenix capitol (which no longer houses any branch of government) is surprisingly not ostentatious, but between the desert climate and the fact that Arizona was not yet a state and wouldn't be for 11 more years, maybe it isn't so shocking after all. I like the building, and the copper dome is great, but it's pretty functional inside and outside, with the dome being the only signature feature - and while it's an attractive dome, there are many more impressive.

12. Concord, NH
Nice on the outside, but in kind of a quaint way - it lacks the oomph of many of the buildings we'll get to later. The Senate chamber is subdued; the House chamber looks like a college lecture hall. The interior architecture doesn't seem to have a single guiding principle and certainly is not built around a rotunda like in the most visually arresting capitols.

11. Annapolis, MD
This hurts, because I love the history of Annapolis and the state house in particular - but this isn't about history. The building is very appealing in its own way, but it lacks an imposing presence. More damningly, it's kind of a frankenbuilding - the line between the original building and the 1905 annex is pretty noticeable, and it seems pretty clear that the state would have happily knocked down the original if not for its grand historical value. The 1905 chambers are nice but not incredibly distinctive.

10. Trenton, NJ
Proving I'm not a homer. The exterior is nice enough (it seems to owe some inspiration to the French), but the dome is so hard to see from ground level in most places that it almost feels like an afterthought. The rotunda is fine but kind of meek. The chambers are okay but lack a real kick. This, like Annapolis, is a building that was first built in the late 18th century and then added onto rather than being replaced in the early 20th, and I think hurts it - most of the best ones coming up were built in the late 19th century to replace another building. Again, history is nice, but if we're just talking architecture, frankenbuildings are not the way to go.

9. Boise, ID
Great dome, reminiscent of a smaller version of the U.S. Capitol, and the interior is nice enough with lots of marble, but there isn't a lot going on - there's kind of a sterile feel compared to most of the others of this style, possibly because the building is a few decades newer. The legislative chambers are pretty straightforward and unadorned.

8. Providence, RI
Also bears some resemblance to the U.S. Capitol. Very similar to Boise in a lot of ways - I give it the nod for a couple reasons. One, even though the interior has a grand staircase in the middle, which cuts into the rotunda, there's a more open feel to that center section, and the interior of the dome is prettier and more complex than Boise's. Two, while the legislative chambers here are similarly just fine, there's the addition of the state reception room, a nice room and unlike any Boise has.

7. Richmond, VA
I was always tempted to put this one lower because it lacks a dome, but from the exterior it's still a pretty imposing structure, clearly a worthy house of government, and there's still a nice (if small) interior dome above the rotunda. Bonus points to Richmond also for doing a better job of integration with its older and modern portions, preserving the history of the original building nicely while not making the interior into a mess.

6. Boston, MA
Boston also comes in two parts, and it's also pretty noticeable because of the wide gap in style, but the more modern section is so nice that I can overlook it. Boston's dome is simple and attractive with its coating of gold leaf; the interior features many appealing spaces like the Hall of Flags with its stained glass skylight, the main staircase, the Senate reception room and the current House chamber.

5. Hartford, CT
The Eastlake/Victorian building would look good from the outside even without the mammoth golden dome, but the dome is great and really pops, making the structure jump out from hundreds of yards away. The interior is very appealing, though I might quibble that the rotunda is kind of small. The legislative chambers are nice spaces with lots of light; the atria have nice skylights, even if they were covered up when we were there.

4. Harrisburg, PA
The dome, with its distinct green terra cotta tiles, is a good start, although the remainder of the building's exterior isn't as distinctive as maybe it could be. The legislative chambers are both extremely fancy with their stained glass, huge paintings, and several-ton chandeliers. The Supreme Court room has a wonderful stained glass interior dome/skylight. The rotunda has a great view of the dome interior and an impressive central staircase. The governor's reception room is a great space. The new wing, built in the 1980s, doesn't add much, but it doesn't subtract as much as you'd think, either, especially since it wasn't just welded right to the back like most of the other buildings with more modern wings.

3. Albany, NY
Albany is an insanely impressive building, but a few things held it back from the top of this list. For one thing, it doesn't have a dome. It's a great building even from the outside, but something about it just doesn't scream "capitol." The Million Dollar Staircase is an incredible work of art; the House chamber is an amazing space; the Senate staircase has an awesome rose window; the Senate reception area is great and the Senate chamber, though we couldn't enter, looked darn good as well. But somehow the whole feels like slightly less than the sum of its parts - as awesome as everything is, there's a vague lack of cohesion about the place, with the time it took to build - more than three decades - quite probably contributing to that feeling. Also, the interior is labyrinthine and often feels more like some sort of museum than a seat of government. I can't argue with the appeal of the architecture, but I can argue with (a) how it hangs together and (b) its appropriateness for its purpose. I love this building, but with an overly complex interior plan I find myself ranking it just behind two buildings that are similarly attractive but a lot less difficult to navigate.

2. Springfield, IL
The tallest state house not built as a skyscraper, Springfield's capitol building is definitely an impressive structure on the outside. It has a great dome, but the interior of the dome is even nicer, with carved scenes of state history running around it and what looks like stained glass at the top. It's probably my favorite interior dome, which helps its position here. The legislative chambers aren't as impressive as Harrisburg's, but they're nice.

1. Des Moines, IA
I thought about this one for a while, but ultimately it has to be Des Moines, even if the weather sucked when I was there. From the outside it's a great building - the one golden dome is set off by four complementary domes, and the whole looks like a tsar's winter palace or something. The dome interior isn't Springfield's, but it's very nice; there's a great grand staircase with artwork all around it. The painting on the walls (often looking like wallpaper, but it's not) and the floor tile are terrific. There are multiple nice skylights - nothing to the level of the Harrisburg Supreme Court skylight, but plenty good. The state law library is a fantastic room with its great spiral staircases, balconies and stained-glass skylight. And the legislative chambers, while perhaps not as ornate as Harrisburg, have great ceilings and a lot of character. All told, this will be a tough one to top.

(If you want to see pictures of a lot of the architecture mentioned here, you can check out my albums on Facebook. Or Google would probably work just fine.)

Airports again

Travels with Alma in December and January have yielded a total of eight new airports for me in the space of a month, taking my total from 45 (33 D, 12 I) when last I updated on 1/25/10 to 54 (42 D, 12 I) today (as I also added a new one in the summer). New airports in bold in the list below, with some explanation/discussion.

Domestic
ALB - Albany, NY
ATL - Atlanta, GA
AUS - Austin, TX
BOI - Boise, ID. Alma's ninth interview of the season, and sixth road interview, was in Boise.
BOS - Boston, MA
CLE - Cleveland, OH
CLT - Charlotte, NC
CMH - Columbus, OH
CVG - Cincinnati, OH
DCA - Washington National, DC
DEN - Denver, CO
DFW - Dallas/Fort Worth, TX
DSM - Des Moines, IA. Alma's eighth interview of the season, and fifth road interview, was in Des Moines. DSM came in the middle of a full week on the road and was surrounded by layover airports I'd been to before - we flew in from DFW and out to DEN.
EWR - Newark, NJ
GSO - Greensboro, NC. This one came back in December; Alma's first interview was up by Roanoke, VA, but it was cheaper to fly into GSO and drive the two-plus hours up to Roanoke than it was to fly into ROA. The airport technically knows itself as Piedmont Triad International Airport (I love that name), serving the triad of Greensboro, Winston-Salem and High Point, and it often refers to itself as PTI, which I think is just kind of confusing. Airports shouldn't be able to call themselves by three-letter names that aren't their IATA codes, don't you think? The PTI code appears to be assigned to Port Douglas, Australia, a small airfield in northern Queensland, so there's not much risk of confusion, but still.
IAD - Washington Dulles, DC
IAH - Houston, TX
ISP - Islip/Long Island, NY. Alma's fifth interview, and second road interview, was on Long Island.
JFK - New York JFK, NY
LAS - Las Vegas, NV. We had a few layovers during the Dec/Jan travel, but the only one that added a new airport to my list was the return from Boise to Chicago. I wasn't a big fan of Las Vegas - it does have Carvel, but it was crowded, noisy, seemed dated, and was large without having a lot of benefit to that size (our longest in-airport walk of the trip came between terminals here). Maybe I would have written that off if I liked gambling, but I don't.
LAX - Los Angeles, CA
LGA - New York LaGuardia, NY. The only new one of the past year that didn't come from Alma's interview trips, we flew in here in July for the week in New Jersey to see Man City play, among other things. My mom seemed surprised that LGA was a new airport for me, and perhaps it wasn't, but if I ever went through it before it would have been at a very young age and I certainly didn't remember.
MDW - Chicago Midway, IL
MKE - Milwaukee, WI. Mom was also surprised that I'd never used this one, but I'm pretty sure that was the case. We flew out of here in December to go to GSO because it was literally hundreds of dollars cheaper to drive to Milwaukee, fly back to ORD, and then fly from there to GSO than it was to just go to ORD and fly right to GSO. I cannot, for the life of me, understand how this makes sense - presumably United figures that most people who need to go ORD-GSO will simply suck it up and pay the 700 bucks, having no real option because most would not bother to drive all the way to MKE. But it still seems really strange to me. The one nice thing is that this enabled me to go on what I'm pretty sure was the shortest flight of my life, as MKE-ORD is less than 20 minutes from takeoff to landing.
MOB - Mobile, AL
MSP - Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN
MSY - New Orleans, LA
OAK - Oakland, CA
ORD - Chicago O'Hare, IL
ONT - Ontario, CA. We flew in here for Alma's seventh interview, and fourth road interview.
PHL - Philadelphia, PA
PHX - Phoenix, AZ
PIT - Pittsburgh, PA. We flew in here for Alma's sixth interview, and third road interview. The Pittsburgh airport is amazingly huge for the volume of passengers it actually serves; it has so much land area that ORD and ATL, the two biggest airports in the country and world by volume, could both fit inside its borders. Yet it seemed pretty empty when we were there, probably because it has way more space than it needs for the people who use it.
RDU - Raleigh/Durham, NC
RIC - Richmond, VA
RNO - Reno, NV
SAN - San Diego, CA
SAT - San Antonio, TX
SEA - Seattle/Tacoma, WA
SFO - San Francisco, CA
SJC - San Jose, CA
SLC - Salt Lake City, UT

International
AKL - Auckland, New Zealand
BNE - Brisbane, Australia
CCS - Caracas, Venezuela
CPT - Cape Town, South Africa
JNB - Johannesburg, South Africa
LGW - London Gatwick, UK
LHR - London Heathrow, UK
MNL - Manila, Philippines
NRT - Tokyo Narita, Japan
SID - Sal Island, Cape Verde
SYD - Sydney, Australia
TBH - Tablas, Romblon, Philippines

My slightly weird Long Island rental car experience

Alma and I went to Long Island this week for one of her interviews. Our flight was a late departure, scheduled to get into Islip at 10:50 pm. Since the standard rental brands (like Avis and Hertz) that were located at the airport closed at 11 pm, I had to take a flyer on "E-Z Rent-a-Car," an off-brand and off-terminal company which had the virtue of remaining open until midnight. But then it turned out that the flight was delayed almost an hour and we didn't get to Islip until 11:45. Panicking slightly, I pulled out my phone as soon as we landed and called the number I had for them, hoping to confirm that they would stay open just long enough for me to get a car.

Guy: "Hello?"
Me: "Hi, um, is this E-Z Rent-a-Car?"
Guy: "Yeah, yeah, sure."

He told me to take the shuttle bus to the Holiday Inn and met us in the parking lot with the car a few minutes past midnight, inviting us to put our bags in the trunk before we went inside to the office to do the paperwork. (My immediate thought, which I brushed aside as paranoid nonsense: "His accomplice will come and drive the car away while we're inside!" Alma later told me she had thought the exact same thing.)

The "office" turned out to be a glorified closet off a small corridor just behind and to the right of the Holiday Inn's front desk. The door had a piece of paper taped to it with "E-Z Rent-a-Car" printed on it. The office contained a desk with two chairs in front of it (and one behind it), with a laptop on the desk and a printer on the back shelf. After taking my license and credit card and slowly entering the information by hand into a laptop, the guy spent several minutes trying to print a receipt, but never got the printer working. Eventually he slowly copied all the information from the screen onto a form, by hand, and gave me a copy. He said he would probably run the credit card "tomorrow." When I asked where to drop the car off on Wednesday, he told me I could bring it to a nearby gas station, and the guy there would give us a ride back to the airport. Which is, in fact, what ended up happening Wednesday morning.

All this was vaguely weird and makes for kind of a funny story, but I have to say that it was really no better or worse than any rental car experience I've had, all things considered. I had a car, it was fairly cheap, I got a ride back to the airport... and hey, if we had been talking about a national brand, instead of an obvious off-brand franchise, would the guy have waited after midnight for us? Maybe not.

The Amazing Rays

You might not know it, but the Rays and Rangers are making history with their first-round series, one which hopefully leaves the winner with Yankee-killing momentum. How so, you ask?

There have been 96 best-of-five series in baseball history prior to this year, between the League Championship Series from 1969 to 1984, the 1981 Division Series, and the modern Division Series from 1995 until 2009. Of those 96, only 26 - 27% - went the full five games. And of those 26, ten - 38% - saw one team go down 2-0, then rally back to force a fifth game. They were:

1972 ALCS: Oakland 3, Detroit 2
1981 NLDS: LA Dodgers 3, Houston 2
1981 NLDS: Montreal 3, Philadelphia 2
1981 ALDS: NY Yankees 3, Milwaukee 2
1982 ALCS: Milwaukee 3, California 2
1984 NLCS: San Diego 3, Chicago Cubs 2
1995 ALDS: Seattle 3, NY Yankees 2
1999 ALDS: Boston 3, Cleveland 2
2001 ALDS: NY Yankees 3, Oakland 2
2003 ALDS: Boston 3, Oakland 2

A couple of interesting things here. First, in not all of these cases did the team rallying to force a fifth game win the series. The '81 Brewers and Phillies, along with the '72 Tigers, were able to force a fifth game but still lost the series. The other seven, however, all won three straight. That bodes well for the Rays, who evened up their series 2-2 with their second win in Texas today. History gives them a 70% chance of winning on that alone.

Consider this, though: prior to 1998, best-of-five series formats went 2-3, with the team having home field getting the last three games. So seven of the ten series above were played like that, and of those seven, four involved the home team winning all five games - i.e. the winning team going down 2-0 but then winning three straight at home (the '81 Dodgers, '82 Brewers, '84 Padres and '95 Mariners). So in some respects we can't really judge based on these, because series are now played 2-2-1.

And that is really where we get into history. Prior to now, only two teams ever opened a five-game series with two road wins, then lost the next two games at home. They were the '01 A's and the '81 Yankees.

The '81 Yankees won the first two games of their series in Milwaukee, then had three straight at home in which to clinch it - they dropped the first two, but won Game Five.

The '01 A's won the first two games of their series in New York, but after dropping Games Three and Four in Oakland, they had to go back to New York for Game Five... which they lost.

In other words, there has never been a five-game series in which the road team won all five games. The only analogous series to what the Rays/Rangers have done is the '01 ALDS, and if that "pattern" holds, the Rays will win Game Five. If the Rangers win, not only will they be the first team to win a five-game series in which the road team won every game, but they will be just the third team (after the '72 A's and '81 Expos) to take a 2-0 lead in a five-game series, blow the lead, but then win the fifth game on the road to take the series anyway (and just the fourth team to come back to win after letting the series go from 2-0 to 2-2).

So things would seem to look pretty good for the Rays (except for the part where they have to face Cliff Lee in Game Five). One other thing to consider, though. Out of the 26 series that went to five games, however they got there, the deciding Game Five has been won by the home team 14 times and the road team 12 times (including five of the last six). So overall, the chances of the home team winning Game Five are 54% - not much better than even.

Joshymandias, king of kings

You all remember Josh Hamilton. Inspiring comeback story, baseball talent, winner of the 2008 Home Run Derby (no?). Well, here's something you may not know: he's now the best player in baseball. I know, I know - usually it takes more than 1.5 good seasons to get you this title. Don't tell that to Tom Verducci.

Just another night in the life of the best player in baseball went something like this, at least as far as last Friday the 13th:

• Smash four hits all over the park: a single to left, a 440-foot bomb to center, a single and double to right.

• Score from third base on a pop fly to deep shortstop/short left.

• Score from second base on a ground ball to second.

• Make a diving catch on the warning track and a leaping catch against the centerfield wall.

• Cause the third-base coach to halt a runner from scoring from second on an otherwise routine run-scoring single to centerfield.

Verducci's breathless bullet points, not to mention the use of "just another night," suggest that Hamilton does this literally every day. Is Hamilton having a great season? Yes. Is this ridiculous cherry-picking? Also yes. Why, just six days earlier, he went 0-for-4 with a strikeout!

The "score from second base on a ground ball to second" piece is a tad disingenuous; while it was heads-up baserunning on Hamilton's part, it's not like he turned into the Flash - there were two outs, he was moving with the pitch, the ball was a fairly slow roller up the middle which the second baseman tried to throw to first off-balance. Hamilton is hardly the only guy in baseball who could have scored there. His "diving catch on the warning track" also wasn't; Hamilton caught the ball on the run (a good but not insane play) and then fell forward and slid onto the warning track. If you have to embellish what he's doing, was it as great as you want to claim?

• Crush the postgame spread.

Fortunately we determine the best player in baseball by how many cold cuts they can consume in one sitting.

• Throw around hundreds of pounds of iron in a postgame weightlifting session.

• Gulp down a 2,000-plus-calorie protein shake, made with real cream, on the car ride home.

Oh my God... REAL CREAM??? Move over, Albert Pujols! (For the record, this was the point at which Verducci completely lost me. Real cream? Who the fuck cares?)

• Sit down for a full home-cooked meal by his wife. (Yes, for those of you scoring at home, that's the equivalent of three full meals just between the last out and bedtime.)

And for those of you who don't care - i.e. everyone - you might realize how irrelevant this is to the story. I guess maybe it's an attempt to add "color," but Josh Hamilton's eating habits are really just wholly immaterial to the case for why he might or might not be the best player in baseball.

The legend of Josh Hamilton, Texas Ranger, is growing on a nightly basis. There is nobody like him in baseball, and possibly nobody this good, this big, this fast and this unique -- a 6'4", 235-pound sledgehammer of a hitter who can run balls down in center field and fly around the bases and hit for such a high average -- since Mickey Mantle in his prime.

He's really good. He's also 29, injury-prone, and in the middle of only his second good season. Last year his OBP was .315. And if he can fly around the bases, why does he only have eight steals?

Hamilton leads the league in batting (.362), slugging (.634), hits (161) and total bases (282). The rest of the league is playing for second place in the MVP race. He has no contemporaries, especially when you consider that the Rangers, somewhat against their better judgment, have started him 26 times in center field.

Miguel Cabrera is 19 points ahead of Hamilton in OBP and dead-even in slugging. Hamilton leads in VORP because he plays in the outfield and he does play for a better team, which means he probably has an edge in the MVP race. But this isn't that open and shut, Jizzy McFawnalot. His UZR - and just because he has played in center doesn't change the fact that he mostly plays in left, typically viewed as the easiest OF defensive spot - is 5.8, which is positive but hardly superlative. Also, UZR is typically considered to be a stat where you have to look at a three-year span to get anything of value out of it, and in 2008 - when he played mostly in center - Hamilton was a total butcher.

So, he's good, okay? And this year he's having a pretty awesome season. But I think maybe he needs to show he can produce consistently before we anoint him the best player in baseball.

How rare is that kind of skill set? The last three players to have batted .360 and slugged .600 while playing that much center field are none other than Mantle in 1957, Stan Musial in 1948 and Joe DiMaggio in 1939.

Now, are there any more questions about who is the best player in baseball this year?

Sigh. To be fair, Verducci does qualify it with "this year," although his glistening prose throughout the rest of the article doesn't really suggest that he's limiting the title to nothing but the here and now. You can't just hand out a title like "best player in baseball." The yearly title is the MVP; the other is a more honorary title which, right now, clearly belongs to Albert Pujols. (Who, by the way, just hit 30 home runs for the tenth straight season, aka every single one of his career.)

"He's certainly in the discussion," Texas GM John Daniels said. "You rarely see a guy perform at this level for this length of time."

Uh, what length of time? Okay, yes, since June 1 he's been thoroughly ridiculous: .454/.482/.815 in June, .418/.468/.704 in July, .362/.455/.617 in August so far. I don't know that we've seen months like that since Barry Bonds' heyday in the first half of the 2000s (lest we forget, Bonds' line in 2004 was .362/.609/.812 - and that's for the whole season, not two months). With numbers like that, this probably isn't your run of the mill hot streak. But it's still just two-plus months.

In 65 games since June 1, just when the Texas heat is supposed to wilt players, Hamilton has hit .423. He also sets himself apart from other great sluggers because he is one of the game's best base runners and can play Gold Glove-caliber defense in the middle of the field. He has made 14 of his past 24 starts in center field.

Hamilton is listed by Baseball Reference as being one run above average as a baserunner. Baseball Prospectus lists his EqBRR as 2.1, 48th in the majors. He has 8 steals, as mentioned. He's fine. I think "one of the game's best base runners" may be pushing it. And if he were really a Gold Glover in center, why does he not start there every night? If it's because he would get hurt... well, I'm sorry, but you can't tell me a guy is the best at a position he typically can't play because of injury concerns.

Baseball doesn't have official player rankings as does golf and tennis, though its No. 1 player typically has caused little debate -- from Ken Griffey Jr. to Barry Bonds to Alex Rodriguez to Albert Pujols. Pujols' consistency is remarkable, especially measured against Hamilton's career. Hamilton is 29 and only 16 months older than Pujols, but has yet to play 100 games in back-to-back seasons -- minors or majors. But in the snapshot of today's game, based on skill set and production right now, Hamilton is the new BPB -- Best Player in Baseball. At the end of the year he could wind up with the batting title, MVP, Silver Slugger, Gold Glove and All-Star Game election, all for a first-place team.

He means 16 months younger than Pujols. At any rate, this is what I'm getting at - the "snapshot" issue. You can't award the best player in baseball "title" based on a snapshot of 2/3 of a season! (Pujols, by the way, is having his typically ridiculous year, in a manner so consistent that we don't even seem to give him credit anymore. Oh, .315/.409/.586 with 30 homers by mid-August? Yawn.)

As for the rest of it, Hamilton will probably win the batting title barring a total collapse, but so what? It will take some doing for him to finish first in OBP, a more meaningful stat. I doubt he will win a Gold Glove since he mostly plays left; All-Star Game election and Silver Slugger are meaningless. MVP would be nice for him, but it's also pretty meaningless.

Ironically, I suspect that the very reason why Hamilton gets slobbered over so heavily by guys like Verducci is precisely because he hasn't really done it before. The guy is 29 and is playing just his second full season, and putting up great stats. But rather than assume this could be some sort of fluke season, Verducci falls all over himself to talk about how the guy has just become the best player in baseball. Let me throw another age 29 season at you:

Player X, 2005: .335/.418/.662, 46 HR, led league in hits, 2B, BA, SLG, OPS/OPS+ and TB

As you can probably guess if you're a Cubs fan, those numbers belong to Derrek Lee. Yes, Lee is a first baseman, but he's an excellent defender there and he was only a couple runs worse on the basepaths than Hamilton has been this year. Now, while people certainly talked about how good the season was, you didn't see anyone suggesting that Lee was turning into the best player in baseball. In part this was because of Albert Pujols (whose season was about as good overall) and in part it was because this was Lee's seventh full season in the bigs. Anyone who'd been paying attention knew that it was unlikely that he was quite this good. (And, as it turned out, he wasn't, though injuries did him no favors.) But with Hamilton, he's a relative blank slate. When he tears it up for two months, that becomes the story of the man. We don't have five or six years of data we can throw out to show that he's clearly playing well above his typical level. He has no "typical level" yet. So hey, for all we know, this is his typical level! Next year he'll hit 75 home runs and reach base seven times out of ten!

The game last Friday against Boston belongs in a time capsule, so that when somebody who never saw him play wonders what Hamilton could do on a baseball field, just that one game will suffice.

Oh, Jesus Christ. He's not Willie Mays, Tom. Josh Hamilton is going to need to have a lot more games just like that one before it will even occur to historians to wonder what he could do on a baseball field.

"There aren't many days when Josh goes 0-for-4," Daniels said, "but if it does happen there are so many other ways he can help us win a game. Josh can influence the outcome of a game with his bat and glove.

In fact, there have been fifteen such days this year. Sure, that's not many, I guess. It's five fewer than Pujols has. It's also five more than Cabrera has. Whatever. Also, if you go 0-for-4 and don't reach base, I don't know if there are "so many other ways" you can help your team win a game, particularly if you are the everyday left fielder.

"And when he goes from first to third, he's able to turn it on with his head up and without breaking stride and can see the ball or the coach. I was fortunate to see Larry Walker one year in Colorado. He runs the bases like that. He runs with his head up at full speed. He accelerates to full speed quickly, cuts the bases perfectly, and all the while his eyes are where they're supposed to be."

To the tune of one or two runs above an average player whose eyes are flying all over the place.

Walker and Bonds are the only outfielders in the past 50 years to hit .360 with 30 homers -- measurements within Hamilton's grasp. The men to do it before them were Mantle, Musial, DiMaggio and Ted Williams.

Walker played at Coors Field. Bonds was on the juice. So really, Josh Hamilton is the greatest player of this generation! Let's just come out and say it.

Also, Bonds and Walker did it twice each. So did Williams. Mantle, DiMaggio and Musial all had at least one other .350/30 season. Can we stop pretending that Hamilton is in the same class as those guys because he's having a big year?

Hamilton is nothing more than a breathtaking comet for the moment. He has no real career to speak of and no certainty to his future. He threw away his early years in baseball because of drug addiction, endured an alcohol-related relapse last year, and his years trying to remain clean have been marred by injuries. He has played fewer major league games than Billy Butler, the 24-year-old Kansas City first baseman.

And yet... he is the best player in baseball, a title he took over from Kevin Maas.

New Rangers owner Chuck Greenberg would love to lock up Hamilton this winter to a contract extension that buys out at least one year of free agency. (Hamilton is under Texas' control for two more arbitration-eligible seasons.) But what kind of length could be guaranteed when his body of work, however great, is so checkered? His value is complicated, too, by the oddity of not earning free agent rights until he is 31 years old. Remember, age matters in baseball now. There is not one player today in his age 36 season or older who is healthy and has an OPS better than .800.

Ladies and gentlemen, the BEST PLAYER IN BASEBALL! He has a "checkered body of work" and it's doubtful he can sustain his production for five more years! Would you ever see a paragraph like this written about Albert Pujols? No, you would not.

Just for argument's sake, you could draw a faint comparison to Kevin Youkilis, another rare late bloomer, who signed his extension with the Red Sox in 2009 at age 29 -- Hamilton's age now -- and with two arbitration years remaining and coming off a year in which he finished third in MVP voting. He signed for $41.125 million over four years. Here's how Youkilis' numbers then match up with those of Hamilton now:

Kevin Youkilis vs. Josh Hamilton
Player Age G HR RBI AVG/OBP/SLG OPS
Youkilis 29 553 66 314 .289/.385/.472 .857
Hamilton 29 447 87 311 .310/.370/.541 .911

Hamilton will have bigger numbers and more awards on which to bargain. He will lack the bigger body of work. The Rangers briefly discussed a contract extension with Hamilton in spring training of 2009, shortly after Youkilis signed, but the club hit a financial downward spiral that eventually led to bankruptcy and Hamilton played only 89 games while spending two stints on the disabled list. Both developments put extension talks off to the side.

Those numbers aren't that different, by the way. They also mask the fact that while Hamilton had more eye-popping stats, Youkilis was far more consistent.

In the meantime, the Rangers will do the best they can to keep Hamilton healthy, which is why they need center fielder Julio Borbon to hit. If Borbon doesn't hit, the Rangers have to play Hamilton more in center field than they would like, with David Murphy in left field and Nelson Cruz, when he recovers from a hamstring strain, in right field. They also need to give Hamilton a few more days at DH while resting Guerrero.

Am I the only one confused by the seeming idea that the Rangers aren't sure how to handle the playing time of the best player in baseball? Shouldn't "not being made of porcelain" be a valuable quality for such a player as well?

"It's hard to take Josh out of the lineup," Daniels said.

Yes, I imagine that would be true if he were the best player in baseball. Or even if he were pretty good.

Who knows how long Hamilton can keep up this pace? He already has dealt with tendinitis in his right knee this month. But for now, the sight of a guy built like an NFL strong safety crashing into walls, blasting long home runs, flying around the bases, and chasing a batting title with a 22-point lead on Miguel Cabrera is something to behold. There is nothing like it in baseball.

As Winston Wolf would say, let's not start sucking each other's dicks just yet. Hamilton is having a great season. But is there really nothing like it in baseball? He's a good outfielder (this year) and a good baserunner but he isn't the second coming of Willie Mays and Rickey Henderson rolled into one. The fact that he's "built like an NFL strong safety" is irrelevant. Joe Mauer had an offensive season not unlike Hamilton's last year, from the more valuable catching position. Joey Votto is tearing it up this year (albeit from first base). Both of those guys are multiple years younger than Hamilton. Hanley Ramirez has 30-homer power, 50-steal speed, and has won a batting title by hitting over .340, plus he's three years younger than Hamilton and plays shortstop (albeit not well). Carlos Gonzalez is 24 years old, has played the outfield better than Hamilton over the past three years, has a better EqBRR, and is hitting .321 with 25 homers this season. But I guess he doesn't look like Troy Polamalu, so therefore he sucks.

Josh Hamilton is having a great year. But can we please rein it in? Let's at least see him stay healthy enough to do it a second time before we anoint him the greatest talent in a sport that's clearly full of equally good players right now.

(One other thing I should probably mention: Hamilton plays in Texas, where the ball flies out of the yard, especially during the hot summers. Of his 26 homers, 18 have come at home. His road OPS is a pedestrian .887; at home, it's 1.196. His home BABIP is .424, for crying out loud. For that matter, his overall BABIP is .398, aka exceptionally lucky. Pujols', by comparison, is .301 or almost exactly league average. Ted Williams' career BABIP was .328, so you can't possibly claim that Hamilton is just that good. It's a FLUKE, people.)

Capital ideas

I don't know if you've been keeping up with The Capitol Dome Project - I'd be kind of shocked if you were, especially since the three people who would read this and might care have probably already seen most of the pictures on Facebook - but we're up to six and we're still a month shy of one year, with a number of additional capitals looming on the horizon (as I'm looking to hit at least eight and possibly as many as ten during a two and a half week visit to the Northeast at the end of August). Being a massive dork, I'm of course already quite excited about getting nearly a third of the way through the list, and it's gotten me thinking seriously about the best way to get to each capital. It's listmaking time!

Alabama
Southwest, my airline of choice these days (in spite of their relatively insufferable open seating policy), has nonstop flights from Chicago to Birmingham. From there it's about 90 miles south on I-65 to Montgomery.

Alaska
This will be one of the toughest ones, as I'm sure you could guess. There's really only one way to get into Juneau, and that's by air - and there aren't exactly direct flights from Chicago. Orbitz says that Alaska Airlines will fly you there with just a single stop in Anchorage, which isn't bad (and all on Boeing 737s, assuaging my fear of having to take a prop plane into Juneau itself). Of course, that'll run you like 800 bucks.

Arizona
Done. (Southwest flies directly into Phoenix.)

Arkansas
Southwest has nonstop flights from Chicago to Little Rock.

California
Most Southwest flights to Sacramento seem to require a stopover, but they still get you there quickly enough.

Colorado
Southwest has a lot of nonstop flights from Chicago to Denver.

Connecticut
Finally we get to one that isn't just planes. Flying to Hartford is an option - Southwest has nonstops - but this one is likely to be visited on my trip east. The only real question is whether it's going to be feasible to visit it on the way from DC to Boston - something like a seven-hour drive in the best-case scenario. Hartford is in the latter half of the drive, meaning we'd have to leave DC pretty early in the morning, perhaps 8 am, to get there at a reasonable time to tour the capitol (and even then, that leaves very little time to see/do anything else; I don't know about most people who do this sort of thing but I find it a little lame to just be in and out, although that is what happened with Trenton for the most part). The other option is to get to Boston first and then go back to Hartford (an 80-mile drive or so) on one of the days up there. This seems sort of ridiculous since we have to drive through Hartford to get to Boston... but I don't know what to tell you.

Delaware
Not only can you really not fly to Dover, it's not even that easy to drive there - the capital is located in the middle of a state that only has interstate highways in its northernmost piece. Fortunately, Dover is a quick 100-mile drive from DC (mostly on US 301). I expect this will get a visit in August.

Florida
Tallahassee is surprisingly hard to get to, but you do have to consider its driving distance from Florida's four main cities - 164 miles from Jacksonville, 243 miles from Tampa, 260 miles from Orlando, and 480 miles from Miami. Southwest does fly to Jacksonville, but 164 miles is a lot when you've already had to fly in somewhere (though not a deal-breaker), and they just added service to Panama City. Google Maps lists the drive from ECP to Tallahassee as a "mere" 128 miles.

Georgia
Flying right into Atlanta is the obvious way to go given the size of Atlanta's airport, though unfortunately Southwest does not fly there. Pretty much everyone else does, of course.

Hawaii
Obviously flying into Honolulu is the only choice. It's cheaper than flying to Juneau, at least. This will likely be one of the last ones I reach unless we decide to go to Hawaii on our honeymoon.

Idaho
Southwest flies into Boise, though not nonstop from Chicago.

Illinois
Done. (I-55 south is the only reasonable course of action from Chicago.)

Indiana
While Southwest does fly to Indianapolis - and for just 59 bucks one way! - it's ridiculous for me to fly into a city that I can drive to in under four hours, especially given the additional cost of either car rental or cabs. Most of the drive is a straight shot down I-65, which is pretty simple.

Iowa
A bit of a challenge. Driving seems obvious, but Des Moines is somewhere between five and six hours away by car, right on the edge of what I would consider acceptable for a single road trip. You can fly there... on a commuter jet... for 300 bucks. I think I'll drive, thanks, but ironically, given the length of the trip and the general lack of other things to do there (no offense, Des Moines), this will probably not get checked off the list anytime soon even though it's just one state over.

Kansas
Topeka is a little more than an hour west of Kansas City on I-70, and Southwest flies nonstop to Kansas City for dirt cheap.

Kentucky
According to Google Maps, it's actually only 8 miles further from Chicago to Frankfort than from Chicago to Des Moines. However, it's extremely easy and inexpensive to fly into Louisville, and a quick hour-long drive east on (mostly) I-64 from Louisville to Frankfort.

Louisiana
Southwest flies nonstop to New Orleans, and it's about 90 minutes west on I-10 from there to Baton Rouge.

Maine
Another one that is a little trickier than it might sound. I'm hoping to make the drive up while based in the Boston area during my August trip, but at more than three hours each way, we'll have to see if it can be squeezed in. Should I need to do it later, Southwest does fly nonstop to Manchester, NH, but it's still more than two and a half hours from there.

Maryland
The easiest one left and my vote for "capital I'm most likely to visit next." It's less than an hour from my parents' house in the DC suburbs to Annapolis, and I'm sure I'll make the trip while I'm out there in August.

Massachusetts
The second easiest one left as I'm all but certain to be in the Boston area on the same trip. Southwest also now flies into Logan should I somehow miss it.

Michigan
Lansing is about four hours from Chicago east on I-94 and then north on I-69. That's probably over the limit of what could reasonably be done in one day. (My mom and I made it to Springfield - almost 3.5 hours away - and back in one day, but it was a long day.) Which isn't to say that's a real problem - anything drivable that can be done in two days should really be fine.

Minnesota
While a fairly straight shot on I-90 and I-94, St. Paul is just too far at 7.5 hours for me to consider driving it these days. Fortunately, Southwest flies there cheaply and often.

Mississippi
Surprisingly, or not, Southwest flies nonstop to Jackson.

Missouri
Another one that's a little harder than you might think. Southwest flies into both Kansas City and St. Louis, but Jefferson City is in the middle of the state, nearly equidistant from the two. St. Louis is about 30 miles closer, leaving a drive of about 2.5 hours, mostly on I-70. It's a little silly because were I going to St. Louis itself I would drive 99 times out of 100, but the extra 2.5 hours makes it too much for a single road trip.

Montana
When I was drawing up the preliminary version of this list, this was the first one that stopped me cold. Hard as Alaska is, at least you can fly right into Juneau on a Boeing 737. But Helena? Well, you can fly in directly (from Denver) on a Canadair jet (for 500+ bucks). The flight plan is a bit less complicated (though no less expensive) if you fly into Missoula, but that leaves a two-hour drive to Helena. The closest other "major" Montana city to Helena is Butte, a mere 75 minutes down I-15, but you're still flying a regional jet in there and it's still nearly 400 bucks. Best bet is probably going to be (eventually) to bite the bullet and just fly in directly. This will almost assuredly be one of the last five.

Nebraska
Much easier. Southwest nonstop to Omaha, then about an hour west on I-80 to Lincoln.

Nevada
Done. (Southwest into Reno, then south to Carson City on US 395. Just make sure it's not icy.)

New Hampshire
I'll probably make it up to Concord from the Boston area in August (about 90 minutes, mostly on I-93), but should I somehow not, it's Southwest to Manchester and then about a 30-minute drive up I-93 to Concord.

New Jersey
Done. (I drove down from near NYC on I-287 and US 206, but Southwest flies into Philly and it's less than an hour from there to Trenton on I-95.)

New Mexico
Surprisingly simple. Southwest flies into Albuquerque (even a couple of nonstops), and from there it's a little over an hour north on I-25 to Santa Fe.

New York
Southwest does fly direct to Albany, but I'm anticipating fitting this in on the trip east in August. On I-90 it should be three hours or less from the Boston area.

North Carolina
Done. (Southwest flies nonstop to Raleigh-Durham.)

North Dakota
Along with its southern cousin, easily one of the hardest. Bismarck is a tiny capital in the middle of a wide state with the only "major" cities on the edges. Say you take a regional jet to Fargo - even with a straight shot down I-94 ahead of you, it's still three and a half hours to Bismarck. Amazingly, United Express actually offers nonstop regional jet service from O'Hare to Bismarck, though like most flights of that nature it'll cost you an arm and a leg. The other option, of course, is a serious road trip, but I do mean serious - Bismarck is 835 miles from Chicago, twice as far as St. Paul, meaning you're looking at well over a day of solid driving (nearly all of it on I-94) just to get there. If I somehow had some time off - maybe a free summer month during grad school? - a long road trip would be an option, but for the most part it's just not happening. Along with South Dakota, Montana, Alaska and Hawaii, I'm guessing you're looking at the last five (barring some serendipitous reason for me to be in any of them).

Ohio
Southwest flies nonstop to Columbus cheaply and often.

Oklahoma
Southwest flies to Oklahoma City, although not nonstop from Chicago.

Oregon
Southwest has few nonstops to Portland, and by their standards, getting there from Chicago ain't cheap. But they do go there. Once in Portland, it's a quick jaunt south on I-5 to Salem, less than 50 miles away.

Pennsylvania
One option is to fly into Philadelphia and head about two hours west on the Pennsylvania Turnpike. However, I'm hoping this will be one of the capitals I visit in August. It's only about two and a quarter hours from DC heading north (mostly on I-83, once you pick it up north of Baltimore). The other option would be hitting it on the way down from upstate New York, via I-81.

Rhode Island
Southwest flies directly into Providence, but I'm anticipating this will be an easy one to hit while I'm in the Boston area; it's only about an hour south on I-95.

South Carolina
Another one that's a little harder than it seems, mostly due to its general lack of major cities. Columbia has its own airport, but as with other smaller cities, it's regional jet service and you're going to pay out the nose. The cheaper option (at least from a flight standpoint) is to fly into Charlotte - Southwest doesn't go there, but most airlines do. From there it's about two hours south on I-77 to Columbia.

South Dakota
Pretty much the same deal as North Dakota, and possibly worse. You want to try and road-trip it to Pierre? 13.5 hours, nearly all of it on I-90 west from Chicago. You want to fly? Enjoy flying in from Minneapolis on a prop plane. Alternately, you can fly into Rapid City or Sioux Falls, but it's still a three-hour drive from the former and four hours from the latter. The good news, since there has to be some, is that by regional jet standards it's both fairly easy and comparatively inexpensive to get from Chicago to Rapid City (nonstop and for under 300 bucks). Still, this is sure to be one of the last few.

Tennessee
Southwest flies nonstop to Nashville from Chicago.

Texas
Southwest has nonstop flights to Austin from Chicago.

Utah
Southwest has nonstop flights to Salt Lake City from Chicago.

Vermont
Another one that's a little harder than it might seem. There's really only one good way into Montpelier from the Boston area - I-89 (mostly), and that still takes almost 3.5 hours. I-89 is also pretty much the only good way out, meaning it's nearly impossible to hit Montpelier on the way to somewhere else. Should I miss it on my August trip due to that, there is regional jet service into Burlington, 45 minutes northwest of Montpelier on I-89, but if it comes to that you're likely looking at one of the last dozen or so.

Virginia
Done. (We flew into Richmond on US Air, because we had to. You can also do what my mom did and drive two hours and change from DC on I-95 south. If you're looking to do this yourself, Southwest flies into DC and Norfolk, both around a two-hour drive from Richmond.)

Washington
Southwest flies into SeaTac, although from Chicago it's one of their most expensive flights. From there it's an hour and change south on I-5 to Olympia.

West Virginia
Also one of the most difficult states east of the Mississippi. As with Maine and South Carolina, matters are complicated by the lack of any big city. There's regional jet service to Charleston, but the usual caveats apply. Driving from another large city is no easier, however. From DC it's six hours or so due to the Appalachians necessitating a wide route on either the north or south if you hope to stick to the interstates. (270 N, 70 W, 68 W and 79 S on the northern route, or 66 W, 81 S, and 64 W on the southern route.) Other major cities are slight improvements but hardly ideal - it's four hours from Pittsburgh or three hours or so from Columbus. Both of them are easily and cheaply reachable via Southwest, but even three hours is pushing it for me when it comes after a flight. Nevertheless, the Columbus idea sounds like the safest bet. It's also a safe bet that this is one of the last ten or so.

Wisconsin
After the various northeastern states, this is the most likely next one unless school-related travels take me to another. It's a simple three-hour drive to Madison up I-90, closer to Chicago than Springfield even is.

Wyoming
Actually easier than you'd think, owing to Cheyenne's location in the far southeastern corner of its state. It's less than a two-hour drive from Denver, itself (as noted earlier) easily reachable via Southwest. Regional jet service to Cheyenne exists, but at less than two hours from Denver, why bother?

Six down, 44 to go. Ten more puts me at about a third; 19 more is halfway. Here's my guess (not in chronological order) at the likeliest next nineteen:

Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Georgia
Indiana
Iowa
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
New Hampshire
New York
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
Wisconsin

Some of these are slam dunks. Some are just total guesses. Whatever.

The worst rhymes in music

For some reason, I found myself singing the chorus of Train's "Hey, Soul Sister" today - I think the elevator was showing the top songs in adult contemporary. Anyway, it made me think of just how rancid a rhyme that song's chorus turns on. "Hey, soul sister / Ain't that Mr. Mister on the radio, stereo / The way you move ain't fair, you know." Mr. Mister? Really? Tell you what - if that's the best you can do for rhyming "sister," maybe don't call your song "Hey, Soul Sister."

But is that the worst rhyme ever? Probably not. Below, some others that came right to mind:

The Beatles, "Rocky Raccoon"

As you know, I love the Beatles more than I have or will love the music of any other band. And Paul is almost certainly my favorite Beatle. But what was he thinking with this one?

"His rival, it seems / Had broken his dreams / By stealing the girl of his fancy / Her name was McGill / And she called herself Lil / But everyone knew her as Nancy"

Drives me up the fucking wall. Come on. How far can you possibly go for a rhyme? Weren't there like 85 other ways to describe that the girl was the object of Rocky's affection? You had to go with the one that was nearly impossible to rhyme?

Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, "Into the Great Wide Open"

"The paper said Ed always played from the heart / He got an agent and a roadie named Bart"

*facepalm*

LFO, "Summer Girls"

I'm almost not sure whether to count this one because I'm not convinced that a lot of these rhymes were supposed to be good. Also, many of them are not even actual rhymes.

"New Kids on the Block had a bunch of hits / Chinese food makes me sick"

"Fell deep in love but now we ain't speakin' / Michael J. Fox was Alex P. Keaton"

What? Also, not actual rhymes, aside from the vowels, which is lazy as all hell.

I'm sure, however, that there are many other examples of awful rhymes. What's your pick for the worst rhyme you've heard in a song?