Duck Tales on the NES

Recently I learned that the classic NES game Duck Tales was getting an HD remake for modern systems.  Here's the trailer:




It's considered one of the best games on the NES, placing at #10 on IGN's top 100 NES games of all time.  The game had incredible non-linear level design, secrets to discover all over the place, and (what many consider) some of the best music on the NES.

I was so fond of this game, I reached the point that I knew all of it's secrets.  I knew the game well enough I even got my high score printed in Nintendo Power!  (This is sometime in 1990, when I was 10-11).

However, it's funny looking back on the game as an adult.

(Spoiler Alert - telling game plots if you care)

The plot of the game is that you control Uncle Scrooge as he wanders the world looking for treasure to help him keep his hold as the world's richest Duck.

I think in today's post-financial crisis and post-occupy movements, having the protagonist of a children's game look like a greedy CEO is something that most video game/cartoon creators would likely pass over in today's social climate.

In addition, Uncle Scrooge isn't really going around the world looking for long lost treasure.  He goes around the world STEALING treasure.  There is one level in particular where he steals the great treasure from a ground of underground "mole" people.

I can't help but laugh thinking of a really modern review of the game, "Help Uncle Scrooge wander the world attacking indigenous people to steal their cultural treasures."

Les Misérables - Too Much Singing!

So I recently saw Les Misérables.  It was the first time I ever saw it in movie form or otherwise.  My immediate reaction after watching it was, "All they did was sing, there was no talking."  I'm used to musicals where it's half acting and half singing, and things just seemed out of whack in Les Misérables.

I wasn't sure if I was just imagining this, so I looked up the number of musical numbers in the following musicals. The musicals I selected are pretty much at random, whatever came to mind. I didn't bother to differentiate between orchestra only or singing numbers, b/c I haven't seen all of these.  I just counted the number of different items listed on Wikipedia.

Musical	Number of Musical Numbers
Les Misérables	50
Wicked	21
The Sound of Music	26
Phantom of the Opera	39
My Fair Lady	24
Cats	27
Chicago	21
The Book of Mormon	22
Grease	21
West Side Story	27
American Idiot	30

So I guess I wasn't imagining things, there are just way more musical numbers than the average musical.

Apple TV vs Xbox/Playstation

I saw this article, The Fall TV Lineup May Include Apple Dominating Gaming,  and wanted to comment, because I couldn't help but disagree.

The author makes the argument that an Apple TV would completely crush Xbox, PS3, Wii, etc.

Here are some of the arguments in the article:

Apple is going to dominate where their rivals cannot simply because of the support of small, third-party app developers.

That the Apple TV is already nearly powerful enough to run [games like Call of Duty]. Perhaps not the highest of the high end, but give it a year or two. That’s the thing: Apple will likely push yearly hardware (and software) updates for anything they do. Microsoft has not updated the Xbox in over 7 years. Huge mistake.

the audience for non-hardcore games when Apple opens up an Apple TV SDK will be much larger than the audience for the hardcore games.

Apple will not win this space by playing the game that Microsoft, Sony, and to some extent, Nintendo, are playing. They will win by changing the rules of the game. And that game is all about developers, developers, developers, developers.

I disagree with these based on one major theory:

The TV is not a casual entertainment device, it is a serious one.

People spend a lot of money on better sound, better definition TVs, etc. because they want a much higher quality experience when they sit down.

They pay a premium on cable, on video streaming, and movie disks (i.e. blue ray vs. DVD) simply for the privilege of experiencing this higher quality content.

On phones, people can play Angry Birds or Words With Friends in 5 minute increments, but I don't believe people do that on a TV.

This isn't to say there isn't a casual market for this.  After all, the Wii sold 100 million units.  There is a market for the casual, but is it one that can destroy the Xbox or Playstation?  I'm skeptical.  This is not a world where a Zynga can thrive, it is one where an Activision can thrive, where investing $50 million in the development of a game results in huge sales and profit.

Now, this isn't to say there won't be people that develop the $50 million dollar game for the Apple TV, I'm sure they will.  But will they develop it only for Apple TV or also for Xbox & Playstation?  If you're willing to put $50 million into the development of a game, I can't imagine it being for only one platform.

Baseball MVP and CY Young Voting Travesties

Awhile back in 2012 R.A. Dickey threw two one-hitters in a row.  He was the first player since Dave Stieb of the Toronto Blue Jays to do so.  When I was looking up Dave Stieb's history online, it made me sad.  Stieb should have gone down in history as one of the greatest pitchers of the 1980s, should have gotten his name written into history with some Cy Young awards, but due to lack of sabrmetric knowledge by Cy Young voters in the 1980s, Stieb will be largely forgotten by most baseball fans.

From 1981 to 1985 here is Dave Stieb's AL WAR, his rank in the AL for WAR, and how he placed in CY Young voting.

Year	WAR	AL Rank	CY Young Place
1981	4.3	2	N/A
1982	7.3	1	4th
1983	6.7	1	N/A
1984	7.6	1	7th
1985	6.5	2	7th

So from 1981-1985 Stieb was 1st or 2nd in AL WAR for pitchers every year.  He twice lead the league in innings pitched (was top 5 three other times), lead the league in ERA once (was top 5 three other times), was top 3 in strikeouts twice (top 10 three other times).  I could go on more.

For all that wonderful performance, the Cy Young voters decided to give him nothing better than a 4th place finish in 1982 and two 7th place finishes.  Two times, they didn't even bother to give him a single vote.  Cy Young voters were still too hung up on wins & losses.  That is a travesty.

Unfortunately for Stieb, if he had played in the 2010s things might be different.  By 2010, Felix Hernandez was able to win the Cy Young award despite having only a 13-12 record.  Voters were able to see his overall performance and look past David Price's 19-6 record and CC Sabathia's 21-7 record.

My subjective analysis is that with modern voters, Stieb would have easily won the Cy Young award in 1982 (beating out Pete Vuckovich and his 18-6 record), would have been top three in 1983 (close vote w/ Jack Morris and Lamarr Hoyt), been atleast top two in 1984 (would have still battled Willie Hernandez, but was the clear best starting pitcher), and probably would have beaten Bret Saberhagen for the Cy Young in 1985 (with a healthy challenge by Bert Blyleven).

At the minimum, this would have changed Stieb's legend and history.  A couple of Cy Young awards suddenly turn you from "star of an era" into "Hall of Fame candidate".  Stieb's injuries early in career probably hurt is Hall of Fame candidacy for good, but voters would have looked at him more seriously.

So that got me thinking, has this happened to anyone else recently?  I suddenly recalled the 1987 MVP vote in both the NL and AL.

Lets start with the NL in 1987, as it was the more famous controversy.  Despite all of the ballyhooing over how an MVP player needs to play on a playoff team or a winner, Andre Dawson won the MVP playing for the last place Chicago Cubs.  Yup, that's LAST PLACE.  Not 2nd place, or close to making the playoffs, or atleast having a .500 record, LAST PLACE. He won the MVP playing for a team that was 76-85.  My overwhelming assumption why he won is because he hit 49 home runs and had 137 RBIs ... which are big numbers.

On the other hand, Ozzie Smith, the Hall of Fame defensive wizard of the St. Louis Cardinals had his best offensive season of his career hitting .303 and driving in 75 runs.  He had a WAR of 6.2 to Dawson's 3.7.  Oh, and he also lead the Cardinals to a division title and a playoff appearance.  He was the runner up in the MVP voting in 1987.  Ozzie Smith split the MVP vote with his teammate Jack Clark, which probably cost him the award, but it is a travesty that Andre Dawson secured 11 of the 24 first place votes. (Oh, and Jack Clark had a WAR of 5.2 over Dawson's 3.7.)

On the AL side, George Bell won the MVP.  Why?  My assumption is it's because he hit 47 home runs and had 134 RBIs, which are again big numbers.  He did a little better than Dawson by having a 4.6 WAR.  However, he beat out Tigers great Alan Trammell for the MVP.  Trammell had an 8.0 WAR that year, second to Wade Boggs' 8.2.  He hit 28 home runs and had a .343 batting average.  Oh yeah, remember that thing about MVPs playing for winning teams?  The Tigers made it to the playoffs and the Blue Jays didn't.  Granted, the Blue Jays were just behind the Tigers in the pennant chase (2nd place finish w/ 96-66 record to Detroit's 98-64 record), so it's not as tragic as the NL MVP case.

One of the other reasons I view the 1987 AL MVP vote a travesty is how it could have changed perceptions for Alan Trammell.  Alan Trammell has regularly failed to secure enough votes to get into the Hall of Fame.  Allan Trammell unfortunately played in a time when Ozzie Smith and Cal Ripken Jr. (and for awhile Robin Yount) were setting new standards for shortstops, so he may have never been viewed as an elite shortstop during his era.  Somehow, that didn't affect Barry Larkin's election into the Hall of Fame, as he also had the problem of playing when Ozzie Smith and Cal Ripken Jr. were playing.

What are the differences between Trammell and Larkin?  Lets see

Allan Trammell career WAR - 67.1
Barry Larkin career WAR - 67.1

Allan Trammell Gold Gloves - 4
Barry Larkin Gold Gloves - 3

Allan Trammell All Star Teams - 6
Barry Larkin All Star Teams - 12

Allan Trammell Silver Slugger - 6
Barry Larkin Silver Slugger - 8

Allan Trammell MVPs - 0
Barry Larkin MVPs - 1

Now I don't know if Alan Trammell really deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, but I can't help but think that one MVP award made a difference for Barry Larkin.  Unfortunately, the lack of voting consistency and illogic in 1987 may have really hurt his chances.

High End Fashion - I Just Don't Get It

Not so long ago I went on a date and a conversation about clothes and fashion happened.  My date told me, "You know a lot about fashion and brands."  I responded, "Haha, don't read too much into it, everything I learned I learned in the last two weeks."

With the opening of the Livermore Outlet Mall, I became personally curious about fashion, brands, and the retail business of it (see previous post).

One thing I still find personally curious is how some of the high end fashion can simply cost so much.  I simply struggle to understand how it can be so many multiples higher than what I buy. 

For example, I looked up the following retail prices for standard white crew neck t-shirts.

Old Navy - $9.94
Gap - $16.95
Banana Republic - $24.5

There are always sales (the Old Navy one is actually $8.00 as of this writing), but we're going to use these retail values for the discussion.

I specifically picked these three stores b/c they are all within the Gap family.  I find it very interesting from the lowest priced brand (Old Navy) to the highest end brand (Banana Republic) the t-shirt price is only a multiple of 2.5X.

While I don't fully understand everything about clothes, I can believe better quality cotton and better quality manufacturing can make a plain white t-shirt softer and better, so a 2.5X multiplier on price doesn't seem that unreasonable.

What spurred this analysis was this white crew neck t-shirt I saw on Armani's website.

Yup, that's a $125 plain white t-shirt.  At first I thought maybe this t-shirt was made out of something fancy like cashmere.  Nope, it's just plain 100% cotton that you can machine wash.  At first it didn't look like this t-shirt even had a logo or branding on it, but if you look very closely there is a white silhouette of the Armani logo on the front.  It's only barely noticeable (it's not like a different colored Polo or Lacoste logo).

So that shirt is a 12.5X multiple over Old Navy and a 5X multiple over Banana Republic.  The law of diminishing returns convinces me that this shirt cannot be of such a quality that it is worth 5X over Banana Republic.


Personally, I just don't understand how the brand of Armani can be worth such a price to someone.  As someone who has lived so practically for most of his life, the concept of a veblen good is just foreign.  It's the same reason I cannot understand why someone will buy Cristal.

What spurred this blog post was a flip flop I saw on Zappos just by chance.   Yup, Salvatore Ferragamo flip flops for $170.  They have a rubber sole (which might be better than the cheap flip flops I normally buy).  But there is absolutely no quality difference than can make me think they are worth a 34X multiple over what I normally pay for flip flops (i.e. $5).

Kansas City Wil Myers for James Shield trade analysis

Recently the Kansas City Royals made a huge trade.  They traded Wil Myers, Jake Odorizzi, and two other prospects for James Shield and Wade Davis from the Tampa Bay Rays.

The trade has been widely panned by the media and critics.  The Royals traded a significant amount of their future for a push to try and make the playoffs.  Wil Myers was the #28 2012 Baseball America prospect and Jake Odorizzi was the #68 prospect before 2012.  The question is, was it a wise trade?

I can't recall who said it (although I believe it was Billy Beane), but there's a saying that you shouldn't pull off big blockbuster trades and trade top prospects until you are "close" to being a playoff contender.  You don't do it when you're far away.

Does Kansas City GM Dayton Moore think he's close to being a playoff contender?  In 2012 the Kansas City Royals had a run differential of -70, scoring 676 runs and giving up 746.  The Detroit Tigers and Chicago White Sox were ahead of them at +56 and +72 respectively.  It seems like a pretty big gap to make up.

However, it's not impossible.  I always recall the 2008 Tampa Bay Rays, a team that went from last place to first place in just one year.  How did they do it?

The 2008 Tampa Bay Rays scored 774 runs compared to 782 in 2007.  So their offense was largely the same.  Evan Longoria came onto the scene in 2008 and was brilliant, but it appeared to make up for down years from several other players.

What made them a division winner was their pitching.  They gave up 273 FEWER runs in 2008 than 2007 (671 vs 944).  This gave the Rays a run differential swing of 265 runs (-162 to +103).

How were they able to make this transition?  The short answer is they revamped their bullpen, got Matt Garza, and all their young pitchers started playing better.

In 2007 Andy Sonnanstine had a 5.85 ERA over 130 innings.  In 2008 he had a 4.38 ERA over 193 innings.  In 2007 Edwin Jackson had an ERA of 5.76 over 161 innings.  In 2008 it went down to 4.42 over 183 innings.  James Shields and Scott Kazmir performed largely the same, but Matt Garza and his 3.70 ERA was an upgrade over all the remaining starters who had an ERA over 6.00 in 2007.

In the bullpen, Dan Wheeler, Troy Percival, and Trever Miller were brought in and provided better innings out of the bullpen.  JP Howell was converted to a reliever and pitched great.  Jason Hammel was moved into the bullpen and pitched better as well.

So boom, a better pitching staff lead to a better run differential and a first place finish.  The question is, how close are the Kansas City Royals to making the same turnaround?

On offense, the Royals are teeming with young talent.  Eric Hosmer and Mike Moustakas were highly rated prospects before 2011.  Hosmer had a great rookie season but seemed to regress in 2012.  Moustakas had an ok sophomore season with 20 home runs.  Alex Gordon and Billy Butler will be entering their age 27 seasons and reaching their prime.  Alcides Escobar had his best season at age 25.  Salvador Perez also had a great sophomore season with a .798 OPS.  If the younger hitters can mature and do better, add in a few minor upgrades (I think it's imperative they replace Jeff Francoeur), the offense has a real chance to improve in 2013.

On pitching, James Shields, Wade Davis, and a full season of Jeremy Guthrie should be an upgrade over much of the starting pitching they had in 2011.  Luke Hochevar could have a rebound year.  He seemed to have been a tad unlucky with a BABIP of .318 last year (despite reaching a career high in strikeouts with 144).  Luis Mendoza pitched reliably in 2012.  If Ervin Santana can come back to some reasonable form, it's not that bad of a staff.  It's not a scary pitching staff, but with a pretty good bullpen from 2012, it's not hard to imagine the pitching staff performing a lot better.

So the pieces of the puzzle appear to be in place for a Kansas City Royals team doing a lot better.  Is it in enough to win the division?  It doesn't seem like it given how much Detroit is a powerhouse.  However, they appear to be in good shape to atleast hit .500, and perhaps make a run at a wild card spot.  Like many things in life though, everything must align correctly for the Royals.  Much like Tampa Bay in 2008, they require many of their young players to mature and play better.  Without that, they won't have much of a chance.

Update 10/1/2014:

With the Royals making it into the playoffs in 2014 and just winning the wild card, I thought I'd look back at this and see how the Royals did in 2013 and 2014 compared to 2012.

2012 Runs Scored - 676
2013 Runs Scored - 648
2014 Runs Scored - 651

2012 Runs Allowed - 746
2013 Runs Allowed - 601
2014 Runs Allowed - 624

2012 Run Differential - -70
2013 Run Differential - +47
2014 Run Differential - +27

Effectively, the offense didn't change much in 2013 and 2014, but the pitching got a lot better.  Not so different from the 2008 Rays.  James Shield pitched like an ace as expected.  A revived Ervin Santana in 2013, strong performances from Yordano Ventura & Danny Duffy in 2014, solid innings from Jeremy Guthrie in 2013/2014, were a big part of the turnaround.

Elmo's Comedic Genius

I wrote about the comedic genius of Cookie Monster before (here) and have recently discovered how Elmo is equally genius.  This skit on Jimmy Fallon is absolutely brilliant.