February 2009 Archives

I think Barry Bonds is going to beat the Feds. The fact that the prosecution is appealing -- it wants banned evidence allowed back in the trial -- means it's nervous. It can't win on what it has left.

The appeals court almost certainly will turn the prosecution down, so what the prosecution did is a desperate move. The prosecution feels desperation. Bonds is rounding third and heading for home.

The 49ers and Giants are getting used, the Niners more than the Giants.

San Francisco teams used to be the users. Now they're the usees.

Kurt Warner is using the 49ers to get a better offer from the Cardinals. The Niners, to their credit, are open to talking to him. They need an upgrade at QB and Warner is an upgrade. But I don't believe Warner wants to leave the Cards, a better team than the 49ers, a team with better receivers. I also don't believe Warner wants to be the hand-off-to-the-back guy in a primarily running offense. Warner is using the 49ers.

Same goes for Manny Ramirez and the Giants, although the Giants are merely onlookers in the Manny Circus, haven't jumped in all the way. Ramirez wants an obscene amount of dough from the Dodgers and the possibility of Giants' interest gives him some leverage.

Don't expect Ramirez on the Giants. It's more likely he will make the deal with the Dodgers. Be honest. Ramirez would make the Giants a better team. But he'd be another Bonds figure, a me-firster and, worse than Bonds, he has a reputation for quitting on his team. If the Giants have a chance at him that would be a tough equation to work out -- Manny's value vs. his selfishness. Good luck.

This delay in the trial of the century is not good for barry b.

forget that he has to wait around and fret some more while the prosecution appeals stuff. that stinks for starters. but remember barry wants to play this year. if he could get this trial over with fast he might be able to convince some team to take him on and pay him a fortune and let him live out his dreams of playing more ball.

now with the trial delayed no sucker team is likely to want him because he'll have to leave in midseason to defend himself in court. on the face of it, this is a bad break for barry.

do you feel sorry for him?

does anyone?

First Don Nelson likes Al Harrington, then he doesn't like him. Then the Warriors trade Harrington for Jamal Crawford and that's supposed to be great.

Nelson plays Anthony Morrow a lot then doesn't play him and now he'll play him some more.

Nelson played Rob Kurz and now he forgot Kurz exists.

Nelson just last week said his backcourt is Monta Ellis and Crawford and the other guys had to fight for "crumbs" in terms of playing time. Now Nelson decided Crawford shouldn't play tonight and Crawford's agent has gone bonkers. And this means the trade Harrington for Crawford has resulted in a (temporary) non-player for the W's.

Nelson has a lot of wins but he's sure using his personnel in a weird way this season. It makes you wonder about him. It sure does.

Scot McCloughan held a noon phone conference with writers and indicated he is not necessarily looking for a starting quarterback in free agency -- the period begins tonight at 9:01. If he gets a veteran to compete for the starter job, cool, but it's not necessary. If he takes a QB in the draft he would not expect him to compete.

All of which makes me worry. The Niners can't believe their QBs are good enough. These are their QBs:

JTO -- not on the roster but McCloughan said there's a 50 percent chance he'll be back. Good grief.

Alex Smith -- McCloughan said, "I am a fan of Alex Smith." It is hard to be a fan of Smith who hasn't played in 1 1/2 seasons because of a bad shoulder and wasn't great before the bad shoulder.

Shaun Hill -- he's the frontrunner although Mike Singletary refuses to say he's the frontrunner. Hill has great intangibles but he can't throw long and sometimes you have to.

With these quarterbacks the Niners are limited, have a self-imposed ceiling on their offense. It means they really do plan to be a running team. But even running teams have to throw. What gives?

I wrote a blog yesterday about the word "wrong," said it's wrong for people to take steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs. Cohn Zohn readers disagreed with me, to put it mildly, more like went after me. No problem. I can take it.

One guy called me a bloated gas bag, and there's truth to that. I'm carrying a few extra pounds I can't seem to shed. Others wondered who the heck I am to lecture about morality. I'll tell you who I am. I am the author of this blog. You get your blog and you can lecture, too.

The disturbing responses were what I would call the morally relativistic responses. The writers said taking the drugs may be wrong but other things are more wrong. They said the players entertain us and they should be allowed to take whatever drugs they want. They said my reasoning is simplistic.

Really?

First an explanation: I actually am "liberal," if you will, about past offenders. I don't think people should be held out of the Hall of Fame for what they did, or may have done in the past. I voted this year for Mark McGwire. I also don't think people should lose whatever honors they accrued in the past.

My issue is going forward. I believe if, starting now, a guy fails a drug test his team should get docked 2 wins. If a guy fails a drug test, even if the result comes out later, he should lose his batting championship, home-run championship etc.

He should be penalized because taking these drugs is wrong, compromises the game, means you have to be a chemical freak to compete, means guys coming into the league must also take the drugs if they want careers. The guy should be penalized because taking the drugs is cheating and goes against the spirit of fair competition.

I also think the guy -- or guys -- should be penalized because taking these drugs is wrong. Why are all the moral relativists afraid of the word wrong? Wrong is wrong.

Are any Warriors players indispensable? You could ask that another way -- which player should the Warriors build the team around?

The answers to those questions used to be simple -- Monta Ellis. He was a unique player with great, lightning-fast moves to the hoop, an unstoppable guy. But that was before he ruined his ankle. And now his ankle is stiff again and, honestly, no one knows if he ever will be the player he was going to be. So, if I were starting a team I would not start with him, couldn't take the chance.

Andris Biedrins: I think he's the most valuable Warrior right now. He has nice moves to the hoop, he passes the ball, he plays defense, although bigger stronger centers have their way with him. He is a valuable NBA center.

If I were projecting for the future I'd say -- more like guess -- Anthony Randolph has the most potential. He's athletic, fast and he's a good rebounder for his size and strength. The problem is we don't know much about him because Don Nelson refused to play him for a while and instead played Rob Kurz and Anthony Morrow. Why?

If I were building a team for tomorrow I'd take a chance and begin with Randolph.

I've been reading a lot about performance enhancing drugs, roids and the rest of the junk. Sports writers are flailing and that includes me. But some stuff troubles me, the idea of lowering moral standards. I don't like that.

I've read the Hall of Fame should eliminate their character clause for admission. I understand why someone would think this way but I disagree. I read where players should be allowed to take whatever drugs they want -- it's their bodies, they're mere entertainers. I read where there should be no penalties for prior use or use in the future. I read where I'm out of touch because I don't like people cheating or breaking the law or changing the basic conditions of competition -- that you need to be a chemical freak to compete.

And I have one thing to say. Wrong still means wrong, thank God. It's wrong to take that stuff. It's wrong to cheat and it's wrong to deceive and it's wrong to lie. Just plain wrong.

When did "wrong" become an outdated concept? It's important to acknowledge some things are just wrong. Wrong is a good word.

Fremont for the A's is officially dead. That's what the press release said. So here are 3 ideas that make sense.

1. Stay in Oakland. Talk to the new mayor about a baseball only stadium in the Coliseum parking lot or investigate something downtown. The new mayor may have ideas, although honestly this mayor hasn't had one idea since he's been in office.

2. Move to San Jose and pay off the Giants. It is their territory but a little money -- or a lot -- can do wonders.

3. Move to Sacto where Raley field is ready to be expanded and the fans would support the A's.

By the way, ideas 2 and 3 come to me from Doug Kelly all around sports genius and friend.

When it comes to performance-enchancing drugs baseball is a joke, a sport with zero accountability. A-Roid admits to drug use and he gets no penalties. Oh, sure he apologized and he seemed sad, but he didn't pay back one penny and he won't get suspended one game.

No accountability.

Here are some suggestions Bud Selig could take if he wants to get tough.

1. If a guy tests positive during the season his team gets docked two wins. This would generate peer pressure and would get players where it hurts. (This idea came to me from Santa Rosa doc Gary Furness, also a doctor for the California State Athletic Commission. He also points out if a cheater in T&F gets caught and he/she ran on a relay, all relay members forfeit medals.)

2. If you test positive, even in retrospect, your numbers don't count -- this would apply to batting champs, home run and RBI champs. Their records simply get expunged for cheating. This would follow the lead of track and field where cheater and phony Marion Jones had to give back all the Olympic medals she won in Sydney.

3. Selig should try to get the Hall of Fame onboard. Any player who twice tests positive is banned from the Hall.

I would be eager to hear some of your ideas on this subject. To read my column on whether Bud Selig is a weenie click here.

Jeff Fletcher wrote a fascinating blog disagreeing with my position on drug testing and posting an SI article from 40 years ago detailing drug use in baseball. To read Fletch's blog click here.

It's not going to work for the A's in Fremont. We could see this one coming. There are so many obstacles the A's will no longer pursue their utopian ballpark/village project.

Where does that leave them?

1) Out in the cold.

2) They could grin and bear it and play in the Coliseum.

3) They might work out a deal where the Raiders get the Coliseum and the A's construct a little baseball park gem in the parking lot nearby. I know this poses problems. Everything in life poses problems.

4) They could move to San Jose. They could convince Bud S. that the Giants owning San Jose is ridiculous and outmoded, the Giants owning the largest Bay Area city. If the A's move to San Jose their new park would be farther away from AT&T Park than the Coliseum. One way or another I don't see the A's leaving the Bay Area no matter what anyone says. To read my column on the Fremont-less A's click here.

Mike Singletary keeps talking about his offense and the more he talks the more you should worry. He wants it to be simple. He wants power. He wants to be "physical with an F," as he says -- it's a good line but it may be a bad philosophy.

Singletary -- S. McCloughan calls him Sing -- wants to be able to run the ball at any given time. He wants the Niners to be a tough, power team. He said new offensive coordinator Jimmy Raye, whom nobody heard of, is the ticket for this simple offense.

One time I was talking to Bill Walsh and he said power football is well and good -- remember, Walsh had some tough running backs -- but Walsh said if you're a power team you inevitably meet a team more powerful than you, a team that stops you. Then what? You better have a fabulous alternate approach.

Sing and Raye have to answer the "then what." If their simple attack gets stopped -- and it will sometime -- what else will they bring?

Now it comes out A-Roid may have traveled on the sly in the 2007 season with a trainer who was banned from baseball because of his association with banned drugs.

I have no idea if this is true, but come on, that performance A-Roid gave with Peter Gammons has to make us wonder. A-Roid came off contrite, intelligent, a fallen angel. It's just too convenient he stopped taking bad stuff after 2003 -- he did it in his Texas years because he had so much pressure on him, he said. What, there wasn't pressure when he went to the NY Yankees? Give us all a break. If this stuff about the trainer is true and if this guy gave A-Roid banned stuff -- a lot of ifs -- A-Roid is even more of a liar than he admits to being. A ton of baseball players are liars, by the way. If Bud Selig catches A-Roid in a further lie on this matter, the commish should suspend him.

One more thing. In that softball interview A-Roid did with Peter Gammons, A-Roid, an admitted liar and cheater, went after SI's Selena Roberts and cast doubt on her professionalism and morals. What a nerve. She wrote the truth about him -- that's all she did. She's a hero. It's A-Roid we wonder about, not Roberts.

I titled this entry "Poor Asomugha," although you hardly can call the guy poor as he stands to earn up to $45.3 million over the next 3 years. But he is poor. It's possible he's doomed to play 3 more seasons with a team going nowhere. Of course, the money makes up for that. Of course, the money is a fortune.

But at some point a pro athlete wants to win, especially one as good as Asomugha. And I'm not sure Asomugha ever can play on a winner in Oakland. Do I sound pessimistic about the Raiders? Yes. The burden of proof is on them to show they know what they're doing. I give Al Davis credit for signing Lechler and Asomugha but he's paid big bucks before and never got anywhere.

I hope this works out for Asomugha on the field as well as in the bank. But, please, he needs to stop criticizing the Raiders. When you get money like this you get it with a smile.

The pattern of Warriors losses is consistent. They play really well at first, shoot out the lights. Jamal Crawford for example had 14 points in the first quarter alone against the Lakers tonight. Looking at the Warriors early on you thought no way the Lakers can compete. Right.

Crawford, not to pick on him, ended up with 23 points total. That's the Warriors in a nutshell. They look good early, and then the other team takes them over and the Warriors suffer a "heartbreaking" loss. It's what bad teams do.

Special shout out to Monta Ellis, who singlehandedly helped the Warriors lose with horrible shooting and bad turnovers late in the game. Don Nelson said he wanted the ball in Ellis' hands. Why?

Of course, Nelson was quite happy after the game. He gets paid a ton win or lose and there's no pressure in the wacky Warriors organization for him to produce. "We couldn't play much better than most of the game, which we did," he said in a good mood.

I agree they couldn't play much better. I also agree this is Nelson's same old song. He's happy with a pretty good performance for say three quarters and then what the heck. "We played pretty well against what I think is the best team in the league," he said. He also said, "I thought we competed and played hard and played up to our potential tonight."

Big deal. He can spin it any way he wants. The Warriors still have a ridiculous 19 wins and what they are is good losers.

On another subject, I have a question. Whenever there was a timeout tonight the public address announcer said, "Time out on the floor." So what's the difference between time out on the floor and time out? Someone please enlighten me. To read my column on Don Nelson and small ball click here.

I have a story to tell and it's about Michael Vick but it's also about the pitfalls of daily journalism.

As readers of the Zohn know, I wrote a pointed blog yesterday saying the 49ers never should even consider signing Michael Vick and I criticized them for leaving the door open to Vick at their town hall meeting on Monday. I said it was morally indefensible. Later on Monday, I wrote a column on the same subject. It was longer and even stronger. I wrote shame on the 49ers. I sent it into the paper and then headed off to SF where I teach a Tues night class in creative writing at USF -- have done for 20 years.

Just before my class started Matty Maiocco phoned my cell and told me the Niners were going to make a statement "clarifying" their position on Vick. I had a pretty good idea what clarifying would mean. I phoned the desk at the Press Democrat and told them to be on the lookout for the clarification and I would call them when my class took a break to find out what happened.

My class runs 6:15 pm to 9:00 pm. We took a break at about 7:15 and I called and Robert Rubino told me the Niners categorically said they don't want Vick. "The 49ers are not interested in Michael Vick," is how the terse statement went. That meant my column was kaput because I was criticizing Jed York etc. for considering Vick and now they had thrown him overboard and I was nowhere near a computer to re-do the column and in fact I was in class. So that column never ran.

Here's what I have to say about the 49ers. They did the right thing in categorically saying no to Vick. I hope I had a small part in driving them to that conclusion with my blog even though it means my blog ended up killing my column.

I have one criticism of the Niners. They should have given the No to Vick response 24 hours earlier at their town hall meeting. They should have been prepared and they should have said the right thing the first time. When they clarified a day later it felt like a team doing damage control because it got bad public relations. Taking the right moral stand is always preferable to doing damage control and engaging in spin..

Anyway, the important part is the result -- no Vick in SF.

The 49ers had the chance to slam the door shut on Michael Vick -- that sadist, that dog mauler, that criminal. The 49ers should have slammed the door shut on Vick but they didn't. Their failure is sad, disgusting.

The Niners held their state-of-the-franchise townhall meeting Monday night and afterward met with some beat reporters who asked if signing Vick is possible. They asked Mike Singletary and Jed York, two men with power. That was the chance for Singletary and York to say, not on your life. We don't employ felons, we don't employ people who have offended against human (and dog) decency. We don't want a man like this on our team.

That's what they should have said -- especially Singletary a God-fearing man as he tells us every day. A God-fearing man should understand the difference between forgiveness and reward. We can forgive Vick after he serves his time and gets out of the slammer. Sure we forgive the guy. But we don't reward him with a rich contract in the NFL. He doesn't deserve that even if he says he's a different man.

It's fair to tell Vick -- We don't want you here, not around decent people. The 49ers didn't do that when they had the shot. They should be ashamed.

In case you don't know the 49ers are holding a state of the 49ers tonight. It's kind of a town hall meeting and they sold tickets to it -- the thing is sold out. No problem. You can listen 7 to 8:30 on 49ers.com. Singletary and McCloughan and Jed will talk. I have no idea what they'll say about their state, but I'm interested.

Be interesting to know what they have to say about QB and the new offensive coordinator, not to mention a new stadium and possibly sharing one with the Raiders.

It is common these days to bash Bud Selig. The logic goes like this. He is a bad commissioner. The drug crisis was happening under his eyes and he did nothing about it. Worse, he benefited from it. He's either a dope or a borderline crook. Plus, he didn't have the strength to stand up to the player union which is dragging its feet on this performance-enhancing drug crisis. He's just terrible.

I agree with all of that. But it doesn't matter. This is the sad part of the story. Say, Selig was the greatest commissioner who ever lived. Say he did all the right things. Say he was the second coming of Abraham Lincoln. Drugs still would be rampant in baseball and guys would be cheating right now. You and I can blame Bud all we want but the situation is much more complicated than finding one scapegoat.

I was once almost Bill Walsh's personal shopper. I think it was 1992. We were driving in his car -- he was driving -- from Palo Alto to SF and he realized he needed gas. So he pulled into a station near the Bayshore in East Palo Alto. I thought it might be awkward for him to buy gas where everyone knew him so I offered to put the gas in the car.

He turned me down. He got out, went to the window, told how much he wanted and filled it up. It was a nice moment, Bill turning down a personal shopper -- me. I have no idea what his other shopping practices were. But I do remember that day.

I read the feds are going to call Barry Bonds' personal shopper to the stand as a prosection witness. I don't know about you, but I think this trial is getting out of hand. I don't even like Bonds but how much dough are we spending to put away a guy who cheated in a game. I know he's accused of lying to a grand jury and that's bad, but still . . .

Back to the shopper. Until I read about Barry's shopper I didn't know shoppers exist. I mean it never crossed my mind to get a shopper. Barry's wife says to him, "Hey, Honey, run to the store and get a quart of milk." And he replies, "That's the shopper's job, not mine."

Really? People really do have personal shoppers?

OK, I get it. Rich people don't have to shop. They hire other people for that. So when Barry isn't shopping what is he freeing up time to do? Why is his time so vauluable? Is he wrting a novel? Reading War and Peace? Painting a picture? Aiding the poor? I mean why doesn't he have time to shop? Maybe he's too busy taking banned performance drugs.

Cheap shot.

This is about free agency in pro sports. I used to think it was the best thing. I'm an American and I'm all in favor of people being free and working wherever they want. No need to expand.

But in my more conservative moments I examine some bad results of free agency.

1. Players earn so much money it has changed them from normal people to egocentric moneygrubbing jerks. Look at Manny Ramirez who can't be satisfied with the millions he's offered. What will he do with all his money?

2. It means team can't afford to keep players. A bunch like the A's must trade or sell its good players when they reach a certain salary plateau.

3. Fans can't afford to go to games often. I'd hate to think what it costs a family of 4 to go to a Warriors game. And I'm not just picking on the Warriors.

4. Because teams can't keep players, fans can't afford to give their hearts to players -- to really root -- because the players will/may be gone.

5. The fans are the losers in all this. It's not as much fun to root as when you knew Mays always would be in center and Marichal would be pitching. In this era they would have migrated to several teams.

People are down on Bud Selig because he didn't stop the drug onslaught in baseball. Is that fair?

Obviously, he gained by it, gained by Sosa and McGwire duking it out for the home run crown. Baseball attendance increased and everyone made money. So you can fault Selig for that.

But how was he going to stop use of bad drugs? A more pertinent question how is any commissioner going to stop use of performance enhancing drugs now and in future? The athletes' chemists are usually a step ahead of the enforcers. So here's a sad truth. Sports as we know them are tainted and, in a sense, phony and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Oh, there's something fans can do. They can live with it.

Baseball commish Bud Selig said A-Rod shamed the game of baseball. Sure. We know that. But notice Selig used the past tense "shamed." That implies A-Rod and hundreds other players are not continuing to shame the game. Hey, I'm not saying A-Rod still takes performance enhancing drugs, but it wouldn't suprise me if he does. It's way too convenient to say he stopped before he came to NY. If he had pressure to perform in Texas he had a ton more pressure in NY.

Even if he's clean -- I doubt it -- hundreds of other guys are not clean. That's what I believe. So, Selig is deluded if he thinks the shame has stopped. Baseball is a continuing shame and I believe so is the NFL and so is track and field. A real pharmacy that sport. How about cycling? Come on, you know those guys have cheated and are cheating. I feel sure they are.

Sometimes it's depressing being a sports fan, not to mention a sports writer.

Is Don Nelson a nice guy? This question is relevant because Al Harrington, in town with the Knicks, said no. He said Nelson treats some guys crummy. He said Nelson lied when Nelson said Harrington was trying to leverage the Warriors for money. Harrington said he merely wanted out because he couldn't get along with Nelson.

So I come back to my question. Is Nelson nice? It's a two-part answer. The man known as "Nellie" is nice. Nellie is one of the nicest guys I know, and for years I have liked to talk and laugh with Nellie. He is funny, whimsical, smart, generous -- an overwhelmingly attractive personality.

I know Nellie isn't the real guy, though. He's the front man. Coach Nelson is a different story. He is hard on some players. He can be scheming. I believe he schemed -- or helped -- to have Chris Mullin marginalized on the Warriors even though Mullin brought him out of mothballs back to the team. I believe Nelson is capable of stuff like this. If Nelson ruined Mullin in the Warriors organization that will be on his head until he dies and it is a betrayal.

Nelson has had battles with any numbers of players over the years. No need to name them. Nelson is a power guy who must be the boss and he likes to use power. Sometimes he uses it harshly and crudely and that's what bothered Harrington.

Now I'm going to say something in Nelson's favor. We judge him as a coach, not as a humanitarian. If the Warriors play well, we judge him favorably. If they stink, as they stunk early in the season, we blame Nelson. He should get blamed. The team is playing somewhat better now. He gets credit for that. It remains to be seen if he can make the team a contender with his weird short lineups. There may be a glass ceiling these Warriors never can penetrate. But right now we praise Nelson for modest recent success.

If he worked behind Mullin's back, the man who resurrected his career, we don't praise Nelson. We condemn him.

Athletes are role models -- it's the biggest lie perpetrated on the American public.

Now Miguel Tejada is being charged with lying to Congress about his drug use. That probably means he used whatever. Was he young and stupid like A-Rod? Let's see if I have the count right. Implicated one way or another -- some are still in the alleged category -- are Jason Giambi, Roger Clemens, Tejada, A-Rod, B. Bonds, Mark McGwire, Canseco. There's another 103 out there, at least.

Which means baseball players, at least a bunch of them, are liars and cheaters. They are role models in the sense of being bad role models. Any parent who says a baseball player is a role model is a bad model of a parent.

I have a confession to make. I took performance enhancing drugs to improve my writing. I wanted stronger, more active verbs. I was young and stupid. Just kidding.

Finally, the drug tests that implicated A-Rod and might implicate 103 more should have been destroyed, or the players never should have taken them. A promise of confidentiality is just that, a serious promise. The players may be cheaters but the government cheated by seizing the tests and that's scarier than some guys cheating in baseball. The government is being a snitch and is strong arming players. It's bad to be a snitch. Canseco is a snitch and that's why he's hated throughout the majors. You don't turn snitch on your own kind, especially if you do it for monetary and not for any moral gain.

In the old days you never could print stuff like this. The old days are over.

The NY Post renamed A-Rod in an appropriate way. I'll give you the link in a minute. First, I'm not convinced A-Rod was young and stupid. He knew the meaning of what he was doing when he took whatever it was he took. He might still be taking stuff. A bunch of major leaguers still may be taking stuff. If you think baseball is cleaning itself up or that A-Rod and others let down the "high" ethical standards of baseball, think again.

To read what the Post had to say about A-Rod click here.

Some sports writers are outraged. They say 104 big leaguers tested positive for performance enhancing drugs in that 2003 so-called confidential test. So if someone ratted out A-Fraud we have a right to know the other 103.

Not so fast. It's crummy someone squealed on Rodriguez and he didn't deserve that even though he's a cheat and a phony, and even though his goody goody image is false. But if ratting on A-Rod was wrong it's wrong 103 times more to blow the lid on other guys. These men thought they had a right to privacy. Right to privacy trumps yours and my right to know. No argument there.

1) Kellogg had every right to dump Michael Phelps as its poster boy. The cereal king was paying big money for Phelps' image and he loused up that image by sucking on a bong. Kellogg had no moral imperative to retain Phelps after he blew his all American image. That's how it goes.

2) USA Swimming was phony baloney to suspend him 3 months. He never tested positive for weed. Marijuana is not a performance enhancing drug. He's not currently competing. USA Swimming was purely making a public relations move to protect its phony clean image. Disgusting. To read my full column on Bonggate click here.

Now A-Fraud admits to taking illegal performance enhancing drugs while with the Rangers. But, cross his heart hope to die, he never did that with the Yankees. He was a foolish youth but he's been a model adult ever since.

He may be telling the truth but why should we believe him? He's already shown himself a liar, so he may be lying again, telling just what he needs to tell. When A-Fraud is shown to be a fraud McGwire doesn't look so bad and, gulp, neither does Bonds, although Bonds probably perjured himself to a grand jury. Big mistake

So how does the national pastime look to you now, fans?

The Manny rumors won't die. He and his agent Scott (The Squeezer) Boras have not responded to a Dodger offer of two years for $45 million. And how  can you blame Boras and Manny when $45 million is such chump change? Just kidding.

Which brings us to the Giants. On the Boston Globe website it sites sources saying the Giants are still in the running for Manny, may still be in the running or something like that. The Giants are talking to Boras and may offer three years or two years, or a balloon trip to Paris. Manny would be great for the Giants because, in spite of what Will Clark said about Manny being one dimensional, his one dimension is pretty good. He's a great hitter, the stick the Giants need in the third or fourth spot in the batting order. With Manny and with their pitching the Giants could be a force in the NL West.

I still think Boras is using the Giants to get leverage with the Dodgers. I still think Manny will sign with the Dodgers -- two years plus a club option for a third year. He will become very rich, although he already is very rich. What he'll do with all that money I don't know. Oh, he might buy a better brand of performance enhancing drugs. Ooh, what a nasty thing to write. Not really.

I have no idea if Manny uses or has used banned substances to improve his hitting but in light of the latest news that A-Rod failed drug tests in 2003, you can't believe in anyone in the majors. If the Easter Bunny played in the majors I wouldn't  believe him. I wouldn't believe Santa Claus. Everyone in the majors is suspect and you know that's true. Bud Selig is suspect for apparently not knowing what was going on under his nose. The majors are a drug industry, pretty crooked. So don't ever tell me anymore that some player is above cheating, that he's a paragon, that he's honest. I don't know the truth for sure, but I won't believe you anyway. A-Rod probably cheated, and what in Manny's history tells you he's more ethical than others? Major league players seem as crooked as politicians.

Finally, back to the Giants. They need Manny -- with or without drugs -- because they could use a draw. They currently have three players you absolutely must see: Tim Lincecum because he's so great; The Unit because he used to be great and we want to see if he still is at least sometimes; Barry Zito to see if he can pull himself together or finally can be labeled a bust.

The A's have two players you must see: Jason Giambi, to see if he can bring it now that he's back in Oakland -- he's a dramatic hitter; and Matt Holliday, just because he's so good and may not hang around past the trading deadline.

But, yes, the Giants according to what you read on the web are talking to Manny's agent. It would be cool to get Manny, but don't count on it.

Here's a transcript of the Q&A with 45-year-old Randy Johnson from today's Giants' Fanfest. Johnson has 295 wins and surely will get his 300^th this season with San Francisco

Q: Can you talk about what it means to you to be a Giant?

A: We're going on my 20-plus years in the Major Leagues and obviously my career started back in Livermore playing little league baseball in the Granada Little League and then playing Babe Ruth and attending Livermore High and playing four years there and getting a scholarship to USC. Really, it's come full circle. There could have been a number of scenarios I would have been happy with. This being a scenario I'm extremely happy with. Staying in Arizona, I don't think anyone would have blamed me for wanting to stay there. I had some pretty good years there and it didn't work out but this is a scenario I'm very comfortable with, very happy. I'm very much looking forward to playing here for a lot of reasons. I'm very familiar with the National League West. It's a division where I've had a lot of success. I believe I can bring a lot of intangibles here that a lot of people won't see, that a lot of people won't talk about. Maybe even a player doesn't even realize, but just by going out there and pitching. Just having them talk to me. When I was younger, I could throw 100 miles an hour but I didn't know how to throw it over the plate, so what I was really lacking was mechanics. I needed to understand how to throw a strike. And I got that help because I seeked it. And then everything else kind of fell into place. I wasn't looking to throw 95 mph; I already did that in high school. I needed the concept of how to pitch. When you got that situated there's more to learn - how to pitch inside, how to set up hitters, pitching according to your infield, pitching according to the ballpark, pitching according to what you have that day. Based on the type of pitcher I was and am now that can really benefit Tim (Lincecum) who's a power pitcher. I've been there most of my career so I know what it takes to be a power pitcher. And other pitchers like Sanchez who's learning how to pitch. And Barry who has a Cy Young - maybe we can exchange ideas on the mental part of the game. I'm very excited about this opportunity. I'm been coming back to the Bay Area since my career started, most of it at the Oakland Coliseum, then a little bit of it at Candlestick Park when I was with Arizona early in my career and obviously the last three or four years here. The last couple of offseasons I had back surgery and I'm a year removed from that so I feel completely different now. I haven't gotten any younger but my body is going to allow me this spring training to be a little bit more mobile and do things earlier than I was able to do the last couple of seasons. In return it will allow me to have a better year than last year and what I mean is last year I kind of got off to a slow start because I really didn't have a spring training last year and towards the second half of the season I pitched as good as anybody in baseball. That's what I'm looking to get coming out of spring training - that second half of the season last year. I had three or four rehab starts with the Tucson team - those were my spring training games and from there I went into regular season games. I wasn't where I needed to be.

Q: Randy, when you say you bring intangibles to other pitchers, will you seek them out, or will they come to seek you out, or will it just be in the atmosphere?

A: I think it's you're sitting on the bench. When I've wanted help people have been kind enough to offer. I don't know when someone wants help. You can only assume they want help by asking a question. The game's changed a little bit. There's nothing in this game I haven't done. It's not to pat myself on the back. I've lost eight games in a row, so I know the misery a pitcher can be in when you lose eight in a row. That's a month and a half of starts and you wonder are you ever going to win a ballgame. And then I've won 10 games in a row. I've had surgeries. I've had to battle back from those kinds of things. I've had bad games. I know how you mentally can be dragging toward the end of the year. I know the demands Tim will have this year after winning the Cy Young. The things I can tell him are the same things I told Brandon Webb. The door is opening for Brandon Webb. The door is opening for Tim Lincecum and I only use this example because I only want you to understand how hard you have to work every year. I won a Cy Young in Seattle, then I came to Arizona and won four in a row. Well, ironically enough my best year statistically wasn't until I won my fifth Cy Young. I brought that up because I could have been content with what I was getting out of the years prior because I was being rewarded as the best pitcher. But then I would have been cheating myself. Every year I wanted to be better. Statistically I got better and if I would have been content I would have never had the year I had in 2002 which ironically was my best year, my fifth and last Cy Young. I was trying to make a statement to them - you can be content winning one Cy Young; that's great but it's up to you what motivates and what drives you. There can be a lot of separation between you and the next pitcher - your teammate - or the next guy you're pitching against on that given day based on what you want to get out of your career. I could have retired many years ago and I don't think it would have changed the outlook people have on my career. People are basing my career on what I did many years ago, not what I'm doing now. It's kind of like I'm riding off into the sunset in a lot of people's eyes, not in mine because I'm still motivated to win. And surely its' not about five wins. I'm about winning anywhere between 15 and 20 games and you guys might think that's hype but that's what you have to have when you want to pitch at that level. When Tim is around me all year long he'll understand that. He'll understand the demands he's going to have on him by the media, by his body, those kinds of things. That's kind of over the course of the season. It's not like I sit down with him one day and just lay it all on the table. He'll ask questions. I'll tell him things. It all depends on how much someone wants to learn. You're always learning and at this point of my career my ability and my skills may have diminished but not my edge, not my desire to still be good. As long as I have that that's what motivates me. That's why I was so dangerous I suppose because I could throw 100 mph and I wanted to win. Now I still want to win but I could win throwing 92. It's made me a better pitcher as well. Someone in the rotation here that doesn't throw 95, that has to know how to pitch I can help him because I've been on both sides. It's definitely a luxury being able to throw 98 mph, to be able to tell someone, "Here comes a fastball. Hit it if you can." The last couple of seasons coming off back surgery I almost felt vulnerable for the first time in my career because I wasn't able to throw 95, 98. I actually had to pitch. The nice thing about that was when I was healthy early in my career I was understanding how to pitch at an early age and I think what you learn at an early age will only help you as you get older in this game. It's not just about on the field kinds of things. You can learn about this game off the field, studying the game. How do you recover after a whole season of pitching? How do you recover after one start? How do you study pitchers - what to watch for. The one example I've used winning, that fifth Cy Young, being content. I'm not content. This year I won't be content. I'm very excited about this year because I'm healthy for the first time in several years. I'm looking forward to being around a young rotation. I was around a young rotation in Arizona. I think this rotation is just as good.

Q: How important is the 300 milestone and you'll be remembered as a Mariner and Diamondback. Is it weird to have that 300^th win with the Giants, a team you're not associated with?

A: It's out of my hands. I'm not about five wins. I started working out the end of November. I'm motivated to have a better year. Every year I go to spring training I don't have a book and write a bunch of numbers down because I don't have any goals in mind other than being healthy and trying to make as many starts as I can, and everything else will take care of itself.

Q: What about the milestone itself?

A: As far as being here with a different organization, you see that a lot. I had no control over that. I'm excited about being here, excited about just pitching. If winning my 300^th game happens here in front of the Giants fans or it happens somewhere else it's a part of history; everybody will be a part of that. In some regards, I've done a lot in Arizona. It would have been fitting to do it there. But I also feel this is the next best scenario, coming back. It's as good of a last chapter of my career there could be.

Q: By last chapter you don't necessarily mean this is the last year?

A: I guess we're getting close to the end of the book. It doesn't say The End. There's not a blank page yet. The author's still at work. But I will admit we're coming close. I had someone look me in the eyes and say, "You are done." I think they were basing that off a 5:00 ERA (in 2006). I told him I had a herniated disc in my back and can't even tie my shoes, so how do you expect me to go out and pitch. Yet I'm still willing to take epidurals in my back so to some degree I feel like I could do something. I haven't had a 5:00 ERA since then because my back has been surgically fixed. I won't have one this year. I can guarantee you that. If I do I will retire. Now you see the mindset I have and you can only imagine that mindset going along with the 98-mph fastball and don't-look-at-me mentality or I'm going to knock you down, or I'm going to throw three strikes and you're out. On the fifth day pitching my mentality was that mentality, the killer instinct. It's the feeling you have when you do something and you don't know if it's ever going to happen again. I've had that feeling and I don't want it to go away but it starts to dissipate, like an hourglass, you start seeing the last few granules going through - those are the years. I feel fortunate I've been able to play 20-plus years. Probably impacting my career as much as anybody is my dad passing away. He hasn't seen any of my career in the last 17 years. That's the one reason I am the pitcher I am today - have that mentality, that no BS, get-out-of-my face mentality. That's the way he was. You only have the opportunity to go out there and pitch that one time. You prepare today. You go out and pitch tomorrow. You're going to be given the ball by your coach to pitch. You may not pitch well but that's part of life. You guys don't write good stories all the time either, sometimes. The point is you put your name on it, you take pride. It's no different from what you do from what I do. A lot of people read your stories. A lot of people watch me. I had to learn it the hard way. It's tough to be accountable for that; it's tough to accept not pitching well. But that's what character is all about. That's what's going to make you the pitcher you are. I would much rather go through adversity than win 10 games in a row because in 10 in a row you're not learning about the game or yourself. When I lost eight in a row in Seattle I really took the first steps to understanding what pitching was all about. Down the road I was rewarded. I'd win 10 in a row. It's nothing I would have done if I'd won 10 because I wasn't digging deeper to find out what makes you a better pitcher until I started losing. Tim has only played a few years. You're already up here at the top of your game - start understanding what makes you so good and want to be a little bit better. Don't wait until things aren't going well to start to work harder. Do it now. It took me a while to get where I wanted to be because I couldn't throw strikes. Anybody who saw me in high school I weighed a buck 50 and was still 6-10. I was throwing 98 mph but I couldn't throw strikes. The last game I pitched in high school was a perfect game but the game before I probably walked seven or eight. It's frustrating when you know you can do it but you're not doing it on a consistent basis. You have to ask yourself - do I want to and are you paying the price? I'm not going to preach to a lot of these guys but I'm willing to help anybody that wants help. A lot of times it's going to be these guys watch me pitch then ask me something in the weight room. I'm looking forward to it. It's not like I'm going to be surrounded by 45 year old pitchers. There's only two of us, me and Jamie Moyer. I'm surrounded by youth. That's exciting. I know how good this team is. Let's go to Arizona and be optimistic. Maybe this is our year for the Giants. Why would that be so funny to say that? People asked me when I had my press conference when I came to Arizona in 1999 - why would you want to come to Arizona, the team is not fit now to win? In '99 we won the NL West. Anything's possible, that's the kind of mindset you've got to have.

To read my column on the Unit and Barry Zito click here.

If it's true A-Rod tested positive for performance enhancing drugs he could be A-Fraud in more than one sense. If he tested positive, it means you can't place your faith in any players from the steroid generation, simply can't believe in them. That means you have to treat them all the same when it comes to things like the hall of fame. You forget about the cheating and vote on records or else no one would be above suspicion. And I mean no one.

I just got home from the Giants' Fanfest. It was so crowded I almost missed the Randy Johnson interview while trying to get into the parking lot. I should have taken BART. The Unit was fascinating. I'll start transcribing right away and hopefully have the post up in an hour.

Matt Steinmetz, a man who knows a thing or two about the Warriors -- and an alum of the Press Democrat -- writes that Ronny Turiaf may get traded along with someone else so the Warriors can unload some bad contracts -- like Maggette or Jackson. Turiaf is a defender and shot blocker, the kind of big man the Warriors need as opposed to all those medium sized guys. But sadly he may have to go. For Matt's full article click here.

By the way, in addition to Matt there are other illustrious PD alums doing great sports writing and reporting.

Mike Silver

Brian Murphy

Jeff Fletcher

Kevin Lynch

What distinguished alums!

I get lots of emails saying Barry Bonds is getting a raw deal. And in some ways he is. They should never let the government snoop in files that contain results of confidential drug tests. It's a very scary precedent. And, by the way, I don't believe Bonds will be convicted of anything. His greatest crime in life is being a jerk, and that's not against the law.

Anyway, people write and say Bonds is getting a raw deal to have to stand trial. They say other ballplayers used whatever drugs and aren't on trial. So, let me remind you. Bonds is not on trial for using drugs -- I beleive he did. He's on trial for allegedly lying about it to a grand jury. It's a crime to lie to a grand jury. Put in the same postion, Jason Giambi told the truth. Now he's with the A's earning a lot of money and smiling a lot. Bonds, I believe, lied and now he's paying a serious life price. I still think he'll get off.

The mind still reels from yesterday's press conference, but one moment took the cake. It's Cable talking about the "greatness" of the Raiders.

"The Oakland Raiders are back. They're back. We're going to go win football games and we're going to be a playoff team. You hear me? I'm not afraid to say that. All that negative aura, it's done. It's our time now. Every great team in sport, and there are three of them. In baseball, it's the New York Yankees. In basketball, it's the Boston Celtics. And in football, it's the Oakland Raiders. Every one of those three teams, all three of them, have had their tough times. We have had ours. It hasn't been any fun. And you all have been a part of it, those difficult times, longer than I have. But you know what? I grew up watching the great times. Now I get to be a part of the next set of great times. Every great team has done it. We're no different than those other two."

Well, actually the Raiders are different from the other two teams. The Raiders have stunk for a long time and it's debatable if they will improve any time soon. The burden of proof is on them. For Cable to make statements like these -- well, he's immediately lost all credibility.

Remember that new 49ers OC Jimmy Raye used to work for the Raiders -- as offensive coordinator although he didn't do much in the way of coordinating or playcalling in games. At today's presser, Al got asked his opinion of Raye.

Al: "For what he does I can see where Singletary would like what Jimmy does. He would run the ball, he's fundamentally sound, a no-mistake guy. I could see him and Singletary meeting and matching."

Is this criticism disguised as praise? Maybe. Al says of Raye, "for what he does." To me that means given his limitations Raye is OK. It means he's not good enough for Oakland but he'll do for San Francisco. This is not a rave review of Jimmy Raye. It's lukewarm at best. Go Niners!

It was a press conference to re-introduce Tom Cable, but Al Davis always takes center stage. As part of the conference writers asked if Davis could share a stadium with the 49ers. Here is some of that dialogue.

If the economics were favorable to you could you see yourself sharing the stadium?

I would have to think about that. Economics favorable to me over the other team you mean?

No.

Well I would have to look at it.

As vital as the stadium is, I don't see the urgency (in you). Is a stadium not important?

That's not true. I just said a stadium is vital to our fans, vital to our team.

So it's not a high priority?

I really haven't focused on which is a high priority. First thing I had to do was get a head coach.

Can the Raiders succeed with the current stadium lease they have?

It's very difficult. Succeed? It's very difficult because when you talk to me about free agency of course it's difficult. It's ridiculous not to say it. You've got to have the finances to compete with these other teams.

A new stadium brings you revenue.

Well, if we can get it. It depends on what revenue you have to give up to build a new stadium. There are a lot of issues involved. When we came back to Oakland they fixed it. When we went to Los Angeles they fixed it. When we started in Oakland they built it. I'm not used to building stadiums. Go see Amy (Trask), she'll tell you everything that's going on with stadiums. She's very alert, she's very aware, she's smarter than I am.

You're sharing a stadium now.

It does not scare me.

Where are you at in the process of working on an extension of the current lease?

Why don't you talk to Amy? We're not working on an extension of the current lease. I don't think so. I really don't.

OK, that was Al and the media. Here's my reading of things. Al would consider sharing with the Niners, but he does not want to share. It goes against his grain and his Raider pride. So his attitude, with some justification, is begrudging and he's delegated the issue to someone else. And I'll be shocked out of my shoes if it ever happens. To read my full column on the Raiders and 49ers sharing a stadium click here. 

Raiders fans are angry at me. They're miffed because I called Tom Cable Howdy Doody. I want to be clear about this. I don't think Cable actually looks like Howdy. Howdy is too thin for that. I meant Cable is a marionette and someone -- Al Davis -- is pulling his strings. I defy any Raider fan to prove me wrong.

Raiders fans can't stand to read the truth.

I am not a Raider hater. I actually feel fond of Al Davis some of the time. We grew up in the same neighborhood in Brooklyn and have cordial conversations about our shared past. Al is a unique and engaging man. But he's killing his club right now. Writing that does not make me a Raider hater. It makes me an honest sports analyst.

Tomorrow, I've heard, Al will appoint Cable fulltime head coach and probably hold a news conference. Cable is not good enough to be head coach, but he's the best Al can get. If Raiders fans think Cable will be good, please show me the evidence. I'm reading part of the Cable package will be these assistant coaches: John Marshall age 63; Ted Tollner age 68; Paul Hackett age 61.

I have nothing against people in their 60s. I'm 63. But this seems like a very old coaching staff, a retread staff with no new ideas. You don't have to be a Raider hater to question this staff. You have to be sane.

I assume Tom Cable is the Raiders coach. I assume he isn't interim anymore.

Why do I make this assumpiton? Because he's still there and no one else is. Maybe Al Davis will surprise everyone and hire Jon Gruden or Mike Shanahan or someone good. I doubt it. I think he's already chosen Cable but he never got around to telling anyone. Maybe he hasn't even told Cable. I imagine he chose Cable because there just isn't anyone else.

It's sad when an organization drifts into a head-coach hire. Everything about the Raiders is sad these days. To read my full column on Cable and Howdy Doody click here.

Great Super Bowl. Dramatic. Thrilling. Suspenseful. Everything you want.

And most of all, great QBs -- Warner and Roethlisberger. You saw it so I don't need to explain. But I have a question. Where are the great QBs in the Bay Area. At one time or another we had, Gannon, Young, Montana, Plunkett, Stabler and to a much lesser extent, Garcia. Now we have Russell and Hill. What a come down. To read my full column on the QB gap in the Bay Area click here.