The Frozenated Awards

First of all I'd like to apologize to anyone who tuned in yesterday expecting the debut of Some Things Thursday. I got busy and never got a chance to do it. I will start it next week I promise.





Today I debut a little thing I called the Frozenated Awards. When I was in college I spent the part of a summer in Mexico. While I was there I saw an advertisement for Icee, the Slurpee wanna-be. It was one of those signs that is in English but you can tell that it was translated to English. Under the picture of the Icee Bear in big bold letters was the word: Frozenated.





I have lived in 1 foreign country and spent significant time (airports don't count) in 6 others. My Frozenated experience wasn't the only time that the intertwining of different cultures or languages have caused hilarious results.





From time to time I will be giving out Frozenated Awards to blog posts that find the humor in intercultural adventures. My inaugural winner are The Curious Experiences of a Family in Beijing.





If you haven't linked to it already this picture says it all . . .

If you see something that is worthy of a Frozenated Award please send me a link and I will seriously consider it.

Next Time: Six Word Saturday

1 Year Ago Today . . .

The FAQS of Life: My life in Frequently Asked Question Format

Special Blogoversary Edition

Q: Do you know what is special about today?

A: Yes. Today is a special anniversary.

Q: An anniversary of what?

A: It's the 4 year anniversary of date multiplication day. Just 4 years ago on 1-6-06. You see 1 times 6 = 6.

Q: Doesn't that happen quite frequently? Aren't there 4 just this year?

A: Oh, that's right! January 10th, February 5th, May 2nd and October 1st.

Q: Is it maybe a different anniversary?

A: Can't think of any.

Q: Does this ring a bell?

A: Literally, no it does not ring a bell. But figuratively, yes, this here blog is a year old today.

Q: Are you doing anything special to commemorate the day?

A: Yes?

Q: Are we back to that joke again?

A: Yes

Q: What are you doing to commemorate the day?

A: I thought you'd never ask. I have been making changes to the format of the blog over the past few weeks and I am unveiling them today.

Q: What's new?

A: Not much. We had fish today. Don't usually have fish at home. It was quite tasty.

Q: No I mean what's new with the blog?

A: Well first of all, I am starting a new segment where I feature a new blog in the top right corner of my blog.

Q: Cool. What's it called?

A: Featured blog .

Q. Catchy. Who are you featuring now?

A: Cornforth Adventures. It is an excellent blog. I have known the Cornforth's for several years and it is nice to follow someone in cyber life who you know in real life. She has great music on her blog. I'm even listening to it right now. She is also been a consistent commenter and encourager of this blog. Even when we don't see eye to eye she gently states her points without destroying me in the process.

Q: Will you basically be featuring blogs that you already link to?

A: No. I will probably feature all those but I will also be featuring many others.

Q: Has your blog changed a lot over the past year. If so what about it has changed?

A: Yes, it really has evolved. In the first few months I was changing links and music and other things on a weekly basis. It was wearing me out. I did a lot of experimentation over the first few months as well. I really learned my lesson from the NABLOPOMO incident. Blogging is not an end in itself.

Q: Didn't you write about that in the End of blogging?

A: Sure did. Tackled it in Danger: Blogging as well. It is a theme I kept going back to. I constantly need to be reminded to put this blog in it's proper place. Another thing that changed was that the blog often took on a more personal nature than I thought it would when I started it.

Q: What do you think that was due to?

A: It was definitely due to the passing of my Brother last April.

Q: How did blogging affect your grieving process?

A: I think it both helped and hurt. It helped in the sense that I had an outlet to air my feelings. It hurt that it created an idea inside myself that because I blogged about it, I had dealt with it fully. But that's enough about that now. Ask me another question.

Q: Gladly. What have been some of the more surprising aspects of blogging over the past year.

A: I think most surprising is that I have started 2 more blogs and each of my oldest kids have started their own. Lucy can't wait until she can get in on the act.

Q: Isn't she already the act with all her Lucyisms?

A: She sure is.

Q: Do you have any more?

A: This past week she was on her way home from AWANA. She asked Amy if she (AMY) was a Christian and Amy said "yes, why." Lucy told her that she (LUCY) was not a Christian. Amy asked "why not, don't you believe in Jesus?" Lucy said, "Yes, but I'm not a Christian". Amy asked why not? Lucy said, "because I don't want to go to Medieval Times".

Q: Medieval Times! What's That?

A: It's a dinner theatre experience where there is jousting and knights and much merriment.

Apparently Lucy had heard about Jesus being King and tied it together with Medieval Times.

Q: That's quite a story, How do we move on from that?

A: Ask me what I'm doing tomorrow.

Q: Why can't I ask you right now?

A: Aren't I supposed to be handling the jokes?

Q: And shouldn't I be asking the questions?

A: Good point.

Q: What are you doing tomorrow?

A: Eating the leftover fish. Oh! On the blog! I am making a change t0 3 Things This Thursday. From now on I will call it Some Things This Thursday. That way if people only have 1 or two things going on they can still contribute.

Q: Any closing thoughts you'd like to share?

A: I'd like to thank everybody who followed the blog this past year and say I am looking forward to having you along for the ride in the years to come.

Next Time: Some Things Thursday

The Day is Finally Here

I have been anticipating this day for a long time. It is my 1 year blog-o-versary at Home School Dad. Head over there for a celebration.

Today also happens to be the day they announce who is going to Baseball's Hall of Fame via the writer's election process. I have spent the last 7 posts here preparing for today's announcement.

Today I'd like to recap who I would vote for given a ballot, give my predictions for who I think will get in and also some general remarks.

There are many scientific ways to determine who should be in the hall of fame. This year I attempted to develop one of my own. I call it the BILYNM index. What I did was on Christmas Eve took the list of HOF candidates and read them to my BIL Mike. Mike is a writer, a baseball nut (not to be confused with the seasonal 31 flavor's ice cream variety of the same name) and a pretty nice guy.

I asked him to respond yes, no or Maybe to whether the players should be enshrined in Cooperstown. I will admit that I omitted Mike Jackson from the list just because of the double Mike factor.

Here are the results:

Andre Dawson: Y
Bert Blyleven: N
Lee Smith: Y
Jack Morris: M
Tim Raines: N
Mark McGwire: N
Alan Trammell: N
Dave Parker: N
Don Mattingly: N
Harold Baines: N
Roberto Alomar: N
Kevin Appier: N
Ellis Burks: N
Andres Galarraga: N
Pat Hentgen: N
Eric Karros: N
Ray Lankford: N
Barry Larkin: N
Edgar Martinez: N
Fred McGriff: Y
Shane Reynolds: N
David Segui: N
Robin Ventura: N
Todd Zeile: N

Mike's Summation: If Lee Smith doesn't get in, no one should get in.

Speaking of which, the last time that any player on the ballot failed to get the 75% of the vote needed for election was 1996. I think there's a chance that no one will be elected this year.

If I was a 1o year member of the BBWAA I would vote for 7 players this year. Roberto Alomar, Harold Baines, Andre Dawson, Dale Murphy, Tim Raines, Lee Smith and Robin Ventura.

I Predict

I think there will be 1 player elected to the Hall this year and I think that player will be Andre Dawson

I think the top 3 vote getters will be Dawson, Roberto Alomar, and Bert Blyleven

Along with Alomar I think 3 other first ballot players are likely to get more than 5% of the vote and stay on for 2011. They are Barry Larkin, Fred McGriff, and Edgar Martinez

So this end my build up to the hall of fame announcements. I will be be back today or tomorrow with an HOF recap.

The New Year in Review

I posted this a few days ago. But I just decided the word I want to get out, might get out well as a half dozen words. So, here is a subtitle for this post, Six Word Saturday Style . . .

I need your book reviews, Please

It may seem a little early in the year to review it. But it is never too early to review some books. On January 17th I will be hosting the 35th edition of the book review blog carnival. The 34th edition is now up at Book Dads. It's just skipping from one Dad to another when I take the helm of the fortnightly carnival later this month. In the mean time I am looking for submissions. If you have reviewed a book on your blog recently and have not submitted it to a previous book review blog carnival edition, now is your chance. I know a lot of my followers review books at their place from time to time, this would be a great time to share with the class. You can submit a post by linking here .

Next Time: 1 year ago today ...

My Official Unofficial Hall of Fame Ballot

For the past number of posts I have been fixated on the BBWAA election that will be announced this Wednesday. In previous posts I have reviewed the players returning to the ballot and the progress they have made over the years. I have also reviewed the players who are appearing on the ballot for the first time this year. The writers are allowed to vote for as many as 10 players on the ballot. In my last post I began to reveal who I would vote for if I was instructed to vote for 10 players. I ended my post at #8 as if I was given a ballot this year I would only vote for 7 players.



Today I will tell you the 7 players I would vote for if I was given the opportunity.



The 7th on my ballot would be Dale Murphy.



Why I voted for Him: There are several things that set apart Murphy from the other players who I did not vote for. Murphy was a back to back NL MVP winner in 1982, 1983. He was also the heart ans soul of the Braves teams of the 1980's Besides the back to MVPS in 1984 and 1985 he led his team in the following 4 categories: Hits,Homers, Runs Batted In, and Batting Average in 1986 he led the braves in all those categories but homers where he was second. One writer explaining in 2001 why he did not support Murphy's hall of fame bid had to admit his amazing run in the 80's and his other worthy achievements but countered with "I can't recall the last time I said to myself 'I miss seeing Dale Murphy play baseball'" 1



The thing is I do miss seeing Murphy play ball. I remember he played with a style that said he enjoyed playing the game that made me enjoy watching him play.



Why he's not higher on my list: He doesn't really stand head and shoulders above the rest of the possible inductees. Murphy was one of them. He was only listed one time in the top 5 of any offensive statistical category among position players on the ballot and that was a fith place showing in career homers. The MVPs and his 80's dominance did get him on my ballot but his inability to standout statistically in the crowd of challengers keep him entrenched in 7th.


If I was limited to 6 votes I would use the 6th for Lee Smith.

Why I voted for him: There are only 5 relief pitchers in the Hall of Fame (Goose Gossage, Hoyt Wilhelm, Rollie Fingers, Bruce Sutter, and Dennis Eckersly) Smith has more than 100 saves than any of them. He had 25 or more saves in every season from 1983 to 1995.

Why he's only 6th: The concept of relievers in the Hall took a little time to grow on me. But the recent inclusions of Eckersly, Sutter and Gossage have convinced me of his hall worthiness that being. Perhaps that previous bias helped me make stronger cases for the players in front of him.

Now is the point of my discourse than I am apt to lose all credibility. But before you put your fingers in your ears and started shouting blahcetera, blahcetera, blahcetera, I urge you to hear me out.

If I had only 5 votes I would use my fifth on Robin Ventura.

Why I voted for Him: Let me be clear. I don't think Robin Ventura belongs in the Hall of Fame. I do believe that he merits some consideration. I have noticed there is a bit of local cooking when it comes to hall of fame voting. Certain players only get votes from the reporters who covered the team he was on. I see that as a trust that the local writer has to opening the eyes of the rest of the media. As someone who is a life long fan of Chicago baseball, I do feel that trust even though mine is just a hypothetical one.

I believe that Robin deserves to be part of the conversation for more than just 1 year. Ventura splayed an excellent 3rd base and deserved each of his 6 gold gloves. A fierce competitor with a keen batting eye (5th in walks among this years hopefuls) and a clutch hitter as attributed by his 18 grand slams which ties him for 3rd all time.

Why I didn't vote for him higher: Putting him ahead of Smith and Murphy who have much brighter hall 0f fame prospects than Ventura was foolhardy enough. I can justify it by saying that if I had only 5 votes I would want Robin in more than the other two. As we get to the final 4 on my ballot, I can't bring myself to score Ventura over any of them.

Before I reveal my top 4 I want to say a bit about the list of 12 statistical categories I have been talking about. I made this chart after I decided who I was going to vote for to see if my voting pattern meshed with the player career numbers. The 12 categories are two Bill James Stats: Hall of Fame Monitor and Hall of Fame Standards and then 10 traditional stats: Games, At Bats, Runs, Hits, Home Runs, RBI, Stolen Bases, Walks, Batting Average and Slugging Percentage. I was glad to see that the three of the 4 players I have left to reveal appeared most frequently on those top 5 lists, two 7 times and 1 8 times. I felt that lended a little credibility to my selections.

If I was allowed to vote for 4 players to the Hall of Fame. My 4th vote would be for Roberto Alomar.

Why I voted for him: Alomar seems to me the most Hall of Fame worthy of anyone on the ballot for the first time this year. He had the highest scores of anyone on the ballot in terms of the Hall of Fame Monitor and Hall of Fame Standards metrics. He is second in runs and stolen bases and 3rd in 3 other categories including his career batting average of .300. He was an All Star every year from 1990 to 2001 and won gold glove awards in all but 2 of those seasons.

Why He was not higher: I have Alomar rated ahead of all the other first timers on the ballot. Even though Alomar's accomplishment are stellar it would take an even more special player than him to overtake the 3 returners remaining on my ballot.

If I was told that I only had 3 votes for the Hall of Fame my 3rd vote would be Harold Baines.

Why I voted for Him: While Harold was only listed in the top 5 4 times in the statistical categories referenced above he is on the top of more lists than any other candidate. Baines played more games, got more hits and batted in more runs than anyone else up for consideration this year and He had the second most at bats. Granted those are longevity records and longevity is often dismissed when it comes to the Hall. What can't be dismissed is the quality of effort Baines put out on the field. He was a fan favorite with the White Sox and the Orioles having 3 stints with each team. After his first stint with the White Sox the owner retired his number while he was still playing! Baines missed a game as coach for the White Sox this past year to be honored by the Orioles at a special Harold Baines night.

Why he's not higher: some of the things I said about Edgar Martinez in my last post are true about Harold to a degree. He spent more than 1/2 his career as a Designated Hitter and isn't always one of the first two players you think of in those White Sox teams in the 80's. To be fair though he led the team in both hits and Rbis 4 times between 83-88 and was just 1 RBI behind Ron Kittle from doing it a fifth time. That being said he just doesn't have the numbers to compete with my top two.

If I only had 2 votes for the Hall of Fame my second vote would be for Tim Raines.

Why I voted for Him: If Tim Raines ever makes it to the Hall of Fame which I believe he will, he will have Rickey Henderson to thank for it. In my opinion Hendersons enshrinement last year will force voters to reevaluate Raines who is much like Henderson. Raines had more stolen bases, runs scored and walks than anyone else on the ballot. He appeared on 5 more top 5 lists for a total of 8. Again more than any other player on the ballot.

Why I don't have him higher: Out of respect for the career of who I have # 1.

If there was a rule that you could only vote for 1 player a year for the hall of fame, that player would definitely be Andre Dawson.

Why I have him #1: My best memory of Dawson is in his years with the Cubs in his batting stance with the brick wall behind him at Wrigley field. It is a beautiful memory and to me it resonates baseball. Of all the candidates for the Hall no one is as deserving as Dawson. Of those on the ballot this year he ranked 1st in at bats, second in games and RBI, third in hits and home runs and fourth in stolen bases. I mentioned in phase 1 that Dawson is 1 of 6 players with more than 300 homers and stolen bases. He is one of only 3 players that has 400 + homers and 300 + swiped bags. The other 2 are Willie Mays and Barry Bonds.

So there it is my official unofficial hall of fame ballot. The results of the official balloting will be announced Wednesday. I will check in Wednesday with some final thoughts on the selection process.