The Gauntlet Report, Volume I

In our current era of vapid pop culture, the phrase “guilty pleasure” gets thrown around quite frivolously in order to justify wasting our time on crappy television and music. I resist the urge to fall prey to this phenomenon, but when it comes to “The Gauntlet,” as well as any other reincarnation of “The Real World/Road Rules Challenge,” I can’t help myself.

I’ve been watching for years, and I’m hoping to make my “Gauntlet Report” a weekly feature here on ABCQ. Bill Simmons has long advocated replacing the NHL with the challenges as the fourth major sport in this country, so this even fits the sports theme of this blog. Don’t worry, I’ll mix it up sometimes.

We’re two episodes into the newest season, but we got the special bonus of seeing two people eliminated this week. That’s like the time the guy at Dunkin’ Donuts accidentally gave me two crullers when I only asked for one.

First we lost Angel from the Rookies team after she almost miraculously came back to defeat Jillian in the Gauntlet. Angel seemed nice, but I didn’t care because I had no idea where she came from. I used to make a point to at least watch a few episodes of every season of both “The Real World” and “Road Rules”, but I guess I missed one somewhere because I didn’t recognize her.

It might be a sign of maturity that I’m no longer fully aware of every member of “The Real World” or “Road Rules”, but I felt a little out of touch. I had actually tuned into a couple of episodes of “The Real World: Sydney” just so I would be familiar with them in this challenge. Much to my dismay, none of them are on “The Gauntlet.” There is no doubt that Dunbar would have already been in a fight with CT and sucked face with any of the Pamela, Tori, Janelle triumvirate. It’s a shame.

The second person to go down was Tyler, who seemed to be doing his best to reinforce every negative gay stereotype in the world. When he wasn’t overly emotional and catty, he was doing everything he could to get into the pants of Ryan, the only other gay guy in sight. Ryan, doing his best to resist gay stereotypes, shunned Tyler’s advances and seemed very pleased when Tyler hit the bricks.

After three challenges, the veterans seem to be in control with a 3-0 lead. There is definitely more firepower on their side, but you can easily see them falling apart once they lose a challenge or two, and you know it’s going to happen.

And if Vegas were to create prop bets on “Gauntlet”-related events, I feel strongly that “CT getting kicked off for punching someone else on his team,” would be off the board.

Oye Como Va

I was all prepared to mix up the sports theme of this blog with a post about “The Millionaire Matchmaker,” a new reality show on Bravo that I have recently become fascinated with.

But then the Mets went out and acquired the best pitcher in baseball, and I figured that since baseball is kind of my “thing” and I’m a Mets fan, I should probably weigh in.

Before I progress, I want to make it clear that I am aware that this trade could fall through if the Mets can’t reach a contract agreement with Johan Santana in the next 72 hours, but I have a feeling Los Wilpones will open the check book wide for the two-time Cy Young award winner. Therefore, YIPPEE.

After I heard about this trade I recalled my feelings on July 31, 2004, when the Mets made the ill-fated Scott Kazmor-for-Victor Zambrano swap, and I decided that today’s emotions were pretty much the exact opposite of that.

I am normally opposed to four-for-one trades like the one the Mets made to get Santana because I believe strongly in building through the farm system. But I also believe that there’s a time to pay big, and that’s when truly elite talent is available. It’s why the Mike Piazza trade made sense, it’s why the Carlos Beltran signing made sense, and it’s why this Santana trade makes sense.

And having ranked the top 30 prospects in the Mets farm system in the 2005 and 2006 Baseball America Prospect Handbook, I feel qualified to speak about the four prospects the Mets gave up with some degree of authority.

I’m not going to list the merits and faults of Carlos Gomez, Kevin Mulvey, Phil Humber and Deolis Guerra, but I will say that I don’t think the Mets gave up any future stars. Gomez and Guerra have that potential, but they are far from being locks. I’ve always seen Gomez’ ceiling as being comparable to Alex Rios, and Guerra’s lack of a breaking pitch (and the fact that he is barely old enough to go to R-rated movies) makes it hard to truly project him.

As for Mulvey and Humber, their ceiling is probably as a No. 4 starter. I could be wrong about this, but even if three of these guys reach their ceiling (which is unlikely), the Mets will still be getting a few seasons from the best pitcher of this generation in the midst of his prime. I’ll take it.

The only downside to this trade that I see is Rafael Santana having to relinquish the title of best Santana in Mets history. But hey, we all have to make sacrifices sometimes.

Being the dork that I am, I threw “Meet The Mets” on my iPod today as I left the office. And if you saw me walking across 34th Street, you saw me beaming ear to ear as I strutted to the Mets theme song and visualized a day in mid-May where I’ll be at Shea watching Santana on the hill as 50,000 orange-and-blue faithful rise to their feet every time the Venezuelan reaches two strikes on some helpless foe.

And when you think about it like that, it’s hard not to be ecstatic.

Graves Mistake

I realize that launching a new blog with a post about a sport that no one south of St. Catherine Street really cares about could be a mistake. However, I started this blog to give myself a forum for whatever is on my mind (usually sports and random pop culture), and I'm hoping it will be a destination for all of you when you think you've run out of shit to read on the Internet.

Like much of the free world, I haven't cared much about the NHL for years. My interest has waned since the Rangers won the Stanly Cup 14 years ago, and I will readily admit that makes me a fair-weather fan. When it comes to hockey, I’m OK with that.

The bottom line is that I'm pretty out of the NHL loop. For example, I had no clue that the NHL All-Star game was this weekend. I work at sports magazine, and I wouldn't have known unless I stumbled across the skills competition Saturday night on "Versus." Once I realized I didn't know any of the players, I kept on the flipping.

That being said, I still have a soft spot for the Rangers. And now that I am back in New York after a three-year hiatus and armed with a 42-inch HD TV, I figured I would give hockey another shot. And what better way to re-connect with the Rangers glory years (year?) than watching Brian Leetch's number-retirement ceremony, which was on this past week.

Much like the Mark Messier ceremony from a few years back, it was way too long and self-aggrandizing. What should have taken no more than 25 minutes took 51. Leetch was a great player and a fine man, but we don't need to hear about it from every member of the 1994 Rangers.

That wasn't what really annoyed me though, because that is what these ceremonies have become. What stuck in my craw was the announcement that the Rangers would be retiring Adam Graves' No. 9 next year.

At the risk of sounding like an old-fashioned curmudgeon, what happened to the time when having your number retired meant something? Don't get me wrong, I loved the grind-out-style of Gravesy, but he finished his career with 329 goals. For some perspective, former teammate Steve Larmer finished his career with 441 goals, and you don't see No. 28 hanging anywhere except in Mama Larmer's closet.

On a side note, hockey players have a silly system for creating nicknames. My understanding is that if your name ends with a "y," it's gets shortened by a syllable. For example, Wayne Gretzky was "Gretz." On the flip side, every player whose name doesn't end with a "y" gets a "y" added on to create their new name. This means Brian Leetch is "Leetchy" and Adam Graves is "Gravesy." Stupidy.

Back to Graves and his sham of a number retirement. I've always liked the fact that my favorite teams are very selective when it comes to retiring numbers. The Mets have four retired, and the Rangers had just two (Eddie Giacomin and Rod Gilbert) until Messier and Mike Richter received the honor in the past couple of years.

Adam Graves just isn’t on that level.

I’m usually inclined to prove statements like that with some sort of statistical argument, but in this case I don’t feel as though it’s necessary. Graves was an excellent, but not great, player. And even though the fans loved him and he was active in the community, I can’t shake the feeling that seeing Graves’ number retired diminishes the honor.

The best argument in his favor is that he set the Rangers’ single-season record for goals in their Stanley Cup year, but that seems pretty flimsy.

Todd Hundley holds the Mets single-season home run record, and I’m pretty sure No. 9 is in no danger of being plastered on the walls of the Mets new stadium.