Wednesday, September 10, 2003
Giants Go Deep Five Times; Barry Gets On Five Times

The guy is just awesome. An ESPN Insider writer says that the MVP should be renamed the Bonds Award--but that it should go to Luis Pujols [Yes, I meant "Albert"(8:10am, 9/11)--E.K.]. Sorry: I am now officially on the Bonds-For-MVP bandwagon. Pujols has some great stats, but Bonds' stats overall are still quite a bit better.
Also, Kevin Correia is playing well, with an ERA of 2.00 in his 27 innings. The magic number is now just ten. In 2000 the Giants clinched the division title on my birthday; maybe they could do that again?
Pennant Races As They Should Have Been: In the National League, the Braves lead San Francisco by 2.5 games in the West, and Philly and Florida are deadlocked in the East with the Cubbies just 2.5 games back in third. In the American League, the Yanks lead Boston by 3.5 games, and Oakland leads Seattle by 2.5 games.
Home-Field Advantage: Speaking of Atlanta being just 2.5 games up on the Giants, it's seriously time to drive for that home-field advantage. And I think the Giants can get it. Atlanta has five more games with Philadelphia and seven more with the Marlins, and both those teams are going to be playing hard in their playoff stretch drive. The Braves also have five more games with Montreal. The Giants, however, have six more with San Diego and three with Milwaukee before going on to games against Houston and L.A. to finish up the year. The next week will be the key for the Giants: If they can get even with the Braves for home-field, they just might have the edge.
Two-Point Conversion Rant, Continued: I was advised by reader Josh that the reason Miami went for one point instead of two in the fourth quarter on Saturday was that they had been assessed a big penalty and were forced to try it from the 17-yard-line. Alas, this information was unbeknownst to me—I only saw the scoring summary and not the write-up—and I must amend my statement saying Larry Coker is an idiot, by saying he is sort of an idiot. Going for two when you're down by 17 is just not smart.
Frankly, I'd have still gone for two. At that stage in the game (11 minutes left), I think it's time to make sure you capitalize on every opportunity you have to tie the score. Yes, it would have been a long play, 17 yards back, but I still would have tried. Being down by one isn't any better than being down by two if the clock shows 0:00.