Brewed Sports

Know The Fair Catch Kick!

2012-01-23T11:29:00.002-06:00

At the end of the first half of the Pats-Ravens game the Patriots made a somewhat baffling decision to take a knee. The Pats still had two timeouts and if anyone can move a team down the field in under a minute, it’s Tom Brady.

The Ravens were content to let the Pats run out the clock, but had they been a bit more on the ball they probably could have forced a shot at a fair catch kick with an outside chance of blocking the punt for a TD or safety.

The Ravens took 2 timeouts into the locker room with them after Tom Brady knelt at his own 9 yard line with 16 seconds left. Had Baltimore taken a TO there it would have put the Pats in a 3rd and 11 situation with 15-16 second left and forced them to run another play. Had the Pats taken another knee the Ravens could have used their final timeout to force a punt from the Patriot 9 yard line or so.

Zoltan Mesko had 2 punts on the day for a 36.5 yard average with a long of 53. Assuming Mesko hit a 37 yard punt with the line of scrimmage as the 9 yard line, this would have put the ball at the Patriot 46 yard line, allowing Billy Cundiff a shot at a 56 yard-fair-catch kick. While Cundiff obviously struggled and is, by all accounts a substandard kicker, this would have been very low risk, and since the defending team may not attempt to block a fair catch kick, even poor kickers have extended range when trying them.

It is possible that once the Ravens started taking timeouts that the Pats would run some plays instead of merely taking a knee, but that also plays into the Ravens’ favor as it increases the chances for a turnover.

I should also acknowledge that forcing the Pats to punt is not without risk to the Ravens. The 49ers went out of their way to prove that. That said, the risk to the Pats is much higher.

In a fair catch kick situation, the returning team does not need gunners, just one or two returners to ensure that a fair catch can be made.* Everyone else can go all out for a block. This can lead to blocks and rushed, bad punts. A team trying to prevent a fair catch kick does have a few options. They can punt the ball out of bounds; however with over ten seconds remaining there is no guaranty that this will drain the entire clock. They can also attempt to kick away from the returners, but this increases the chances of a shorter kick.

It would have been very difficult for the Pats to prevent a fair catch kick once they kneeled themselves into 3rd down. Even kicking it out of bounds would have probably allowed the Ravens a long field goal attempt.

I’m a big fan of any weird NFL rule and there may not be any weirder rule than the fair catch kick. The Ravens deserved to lose for denying us the opportunity to see it.

*It's a good idea to put two players back there. You should have one player deep to field a standard punt, and one short to prevents a squib in an attempt to run out the clock (or an outright shank).

Should "women" play "sports?"

2011-12-13T15:59:00.004-06:00

What’s that? A Women’s NBA? The Kaiser didn’t take my leg so I could see strumpets in hoops skirts tossing the old leatherball into perfectly good peach baskets, no sir! In my day women toiled 23 hours a day pausing only momentarily for sleeping, eating, the “lower” tasks, and perhaps 15 minutes of Bridge, which is, if you ask me, the only thing that should be played by women.

And with this new-fangled “Liberal Media” good luck finding someone to agree with someone like me. Fortunately you can still find sense on this glowy-technobox that my great granddaughter installed at the end of my death-cot last year in the form of Dave Begel of OnMilwaukee.com.

“With a nod to Julie Andrews and "The Sound of Music," here are two of my favorite things:”

Julie named “a few” of her favorite things which, in many parts of this great country is considered to be more than two, but I think we should cut Mr. Begel some slack since Julie is pretty needy in that song.

“Women.”

Who else would fix my oatmeal and clean my bedpan?

“Basketball.”

The boys and I did enjoy a fine game of “horse” when killing time between slaughtering Turks.

“And then there is women playing basketball, which doesn't even make the top 1,000 on the list of my favorite things. And please note that getting hit by a car but luckily only suffering a broken ankle does make my list.”

Indeed. My favorite things list stretches over 100,000 entries, and well over half includes me suffering some sort of affliction less severe than that which could reasonably be expected. Then again I’m a bit of a masochist. And a sociopath.

“The only reason I'm thinking about this is that I heard a pretty good rumor that two guys in Milwaukee are looking into the idea of having a WNBA team. They have already made preliminary forays into seeing what kind of dates and rent could be had at the Milwaukee Arena, which is now called something else but I forget what.”

A sentence about a “pretty good rumor” in which two men are “looking at the idea of having a WNBA team*” would have gotten one dishonorably discharged in my unit; however we should offer our charity to this scribe. He clearly has not experienced the same level of modern technology as I. If I can get the operator to ring this Begel I will offer to send my great granddaughter to his house to show him the Google on his glowy-technobox and we can finally unearth the name of this theater.

“When I was doing my usual amount of thorough research for this column, I had to go online to find out when the Women's National Basketball Association (known colloquially as the WNBA) played."

Oh.

Perhaps his version of Google does not look up theater names. Good people of Milwaukee, someday this feature will arrive, I promise!

“I wasn't sure if they played in the dead of winter or the heat of summer or somewhere in between. I think summer is the answer with a slight overlap into early fall.”

Perhaps he was foiled after all, and really why provide solid facts when we can use conjecture and guessing?

“I've thought a great deal about the differences between the men's game and the women's game, and why the women's game puts me to sleep.”

It is undoubtedly the lack of mobility created by the bustle, the lack of appropriate footwear, the general female temperament, and, of course, the necessity of placing feinting couches every 20 feet in case of exhaustion or mania.

“Men play like they have jets attached to their shoes, women play like they have cement shoes.”

Ha! I’m sure we call got a good chuckle out of his juxtaposition of futuristic speed shoes with mafia execution devices. I know I did.

“Men play in the air, soaring above the fray, women play like a rugby scrum, unable to slide a piece of paper between their shoes and the floor.”**

Back in Europe we would occasionally take on the Brits in the vulgar version of Canadian football know as Rugby, and without question the most difficult portion of every game was obtaining a piece of paper to ensure everyone adhered to the “no lifting your feet while playing like a rugby scrum” rule. It was always an odd game made more striking by their inability to use proper English despite being English. That said I’ll never forget our stirring war cry, “Play like a rugby scrum today!”

“Men slap five when they make a good play, women clap furiously.”***

Just yesterday I was watching the Rams play on my black-and-white (color is vulgar and stunts the imagination) and went to high-five my nurse on a particularly tough Stephen Jackson run. Her subsequent furious clapping gave me such a start that I had to be sedated!

“Men push and shove and hit each other and dive into the stands, women say "ouch" and kind of wave at balls headed out of bounds.”****

It’s true. I just threw a Basket Ball at my nurse’s head and she just said “ouch” and waved.

“Just so people know that I am not strictly opposed to women playing basketball, I want to make it clear that I'm only opposed to and bored by them trying to play men's basketball.”*****

It was hard enough to get them to change the Women’s Men’s National Basketball Association to just the Women’s National Basketball Association.

“I love softball and women's tennis and skiing and golf and the lingerie football league (Let's get one of these teams, because these girls can really play) and even women's hockey. It's just basketball.”******

Don’t forget Foxy Boxing!

“And living up to my life goal of always trying to be nice and help people, let me offer an alternative. An alternative with lots of historic precedent as well.
Women should return to the way they used to play the game. The good old days.”

Let me just use the google on the thing…. Ah! The old 3-3 game. How I’ve missed you! Why, I’d almost forgotten…

“There are six players to a team. Three forwards and three guards. The forwards play on one side of the floor and the guards on the other. The forwards are the offense and the guards are the defense. A foul is called if a player steps over the half-court line.”

…during the inevitable slow-down that came from playing like rugby scrums the unoccupied side of the court would fix tea and crumpets for the male attendees. Occasionally we would engage in courtly dances, and I still remember old Johnson who courted, married, and witnessed the birth of his first child during a fe-male basket ball match.

“I am also in favor of making a few other rule changes, all of which have some historical precedent.”

You’ve made so much sense so far I look forward to hearing your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

“Women would be allowed only two dribbles. They would then have to pass or shoot.”

This rule is unnecessary as no woman is coordinated enough to dribble more than twice, however I also see no harm in it and one day some woman could conceivably master the third dribble. I’m in favor.

“A foul would be called if both feet of a player were off the floor at the same time.”

And the woman in question would have to immediately clean the scuff marks!

“If you touch an opposing player, it's a foul. If you touch an opposing player more than once, it's an automatic ejection.”

If it happens a third time we will keep an ignited stake courtside.

“And finally, I would add a mercy rule. If the game, which has only one period of 30 minutes, finds one team up by 20 points or more, the game is called and we all go home.”

And the ladies make us dinner. It is good to see that the wisdom of the early 1900s still has a champion in this day and age.

*Presumably by impregnating an NBA team?

**I must break misogynistic old dinosaur character to point out just how terrible this sentence is, and just how remarkable it is that someone was apparently paid to write it. None of these clauses go together. The tortured metaphor about the piece of paper refers back to the cement shoes from the sentence before when it should be referring to the rugby scrum comment. It doesn’t really matter because the rugby scrum comment doesn’t make any sense anyway. Rugby is an exciting, constantly moving game and it is in no way insulting to compare any form of basketball to any part of rugby. I suspect he’s never seen rugby. I’ve read this sentence like 25 times now and my brain hurts, so let’s move on.

***One of the reasons I wrote this as a senile 130-year-old war veteran is that doing a straight FJM on this is almost impossible because it’s almost too dumb for words. Seriously, men high five and women clap? Women clapping is a stereotype? Is it like how all Polish people where Rugby shirts.

****It was at this point in the article that I realized he may be going for a George Carlin “Baseball/Football” thing, and I’m still not 100% sure. I am 100% sure that George Carlin would claim that he is not.

*****Yeah, I didn’t know where he was going with this either.

******I just wanted to point out that he puts the qualifier “women’s” on tennis but not on softball or skiing or golf. Or lingerie football. Presumably he thinks men should never play these things?

On Tim Tebow…Again.

2011-12-02T11:00:00.002-06:00

What is Tebow Good For?

First off I want to say that I love having Tebow in the league. I find this type of old-timey football immensely entertaining, and I’ always glad to see someone try unorthodox strategies. If someone is running Single Wing I’m happy. If someone tries having 2 QBs on the field simultaneously I’m really happy.

Second, I think the Broncos will win the West and perhaps even a playoff game even though I’m about to rip Tebow, but we’ll get to that (and why it doesn’t really matter) in a sec.

Tim Tebow does offer some positives and they are covered by this article. He does not turn the ball over that much for two reasons: 1. Low-risk plays and 2. Limited possessions. With a good defense that can work, and we know this already because we’ve seen it with Trent Dilfer and with Brad Johnson.

Tim Tebow is Bad At Passing. That’s a Bad Thing.

This raises the question: Is Tim Tebow really that novel? I’d assert that he is not. Michael Vick has been around for quite some time now, and while he hasn’t been running “the option” (and by the way, Tebow is not running “the option” in the conventional sense either, at least not yet. He runs the spread option which is actually pretty similar to a conventional passing offense with more QB runs. People talk about it like it’s the true, old-school triple option. It’s not. STOP CONFUSING THE OPTIONS.) he has forced defenses to account for a speedy QB. Ben Roethlisberger’s huge ass has required defensive coordinators to account for a QB who can shrug off lineman and buy time (as did Dante Culpepper before his catastrophic knee injury).* The difference is that these guys CAN pass, and this is where all the Tebow praise needs to take a step back. Tebow is a running QB who cannot pass, and this weakness is becoming a strength in the eyes of some. That’s dumb for the simple reason that teams that can pass are (almost always) more efficient than teams that run.**

Let’s use Football Outsider’s stats here since they’re context driven and incorporate things like turnovers. The top 6 offenses are: GB, NE, Hou, NO, Pitt, and the NYG. All of these teams rank highly in passing efficiency (even the Texans, who are 4^th in rushing efficiency are 3^rd in passing). In fact, their passing rankings almost perfectly sync up with their overall offensive rankings with Pitt the lone outlier (they are 7^th in passing, 5^th overall). The best rushing team (the Eagles) rank 9^th overall, and the 2^nd best rushing team (the Panthers) ranks 7^th.

Let’s talk about the Panthers for a second because Cam Newton is an excellent runner in his own right. He is, in some ways, the Panther’s most valuable runner and you can make the case (as you can with Tebow) that his presence opens things up for his RBs. The difference is that Newton is also a decent passer (the Panthers are 12^th in passing DVOA, not too shabby.) Here’s a question: Does anyone think that Carolina should run the option? They have talented RBs, and doing so would probably reduce turnovers. The obvious answer is no, because Carolina’s defense has been laughable (dead last in DVOA, behind even Indy). To win games the Panthers need MORE offense, and so Cam Newton needs to pass, because that is ultimately how you score points. This also means that the primary reason that Denver has been winning while scoring fewer points is their defense, and indeed, this appears to be the case.

The Denver Defense Is The Reason The Broncos Win.

On October 9^th Tim Tebow entered the game against the San Diego Chargers and had a minor role in a stirring comeback that came up just short. The Broncos then had a bye and declared Tebow the starter. He subsequently managed an 18-15 win over a pretty bad Dolphin team (in front of a very friendly crowd) and in his next start was destroyed by a pretty good Lions team. (People tend to gloss over this game.) Anyway, something else interesting happened in their next game on November 6^th against the Raiders. The day before Rotoworld wrote the following about Elvis Dumervil:

"Broncos RE Elvis Dumervil has yet to record a sack this season.

Dumervil has been active for only five games with nagging shoulder and ankle injuries that have impacted his ability to get to the corner with his signature up-and-under move. Dumervil will look to get on the board against Raiders left tackle Jared Veldheer this week. Nov 5 - 10:15 AM"

Elvis Dumervil*** started the season dinged up. He missed time and was ineffective upon returning. Then against the Raiders it’s fair to say he got healthy. Dumervil recorded 1.5 sacks in that game and went on to record .5, 1.5, and 2.0 sacks in his next 3 games. Against Oakland all of his sacks were on 3^rd down. Against KC his half sack came on 4^th down in a one score game. Against the Jets he had another half sack on 3^rd down and a full sack in the 4^th quarter. Dumervil put Rivers in bad situations several times as well.

Elvis Dumervil recovering is just a one part of the total picture. DJ Williams missed the first 3 games of the season. Champ Bailey missed games 2, 3, and 4. Tebow, remember, came in at half-time of game 5. In the last Denver game (against San Diego) Williams led the team in tackles with 10 solo and 2 assists, Champ Bailey took Vincent Jackson out of the game, and Elvis Dumervil had 2 sacks. Of the stars on the Denver defense, only Von Miller has played in every game. All of the rest have missed time, and in every single one of those games Kyle Orton was the QB.

Tim Tebow may help out his defense a bit, but do you know what helps more? Having all of their best players.

There are two things you should look at when explaining the successes and failures on an NFL team. The first is injuries, which we just covered. The other is schedule.

Kyle Orton didn’t exactly play a murderer’s row, but his schedule was notably more difficult than Tebow’s. When Orton faced the Oakland Raiders in week 1 Darren McFadden ran at will (22 carries, 150 yards), and Oakland won a tight game (23-20) on a record-tying, 63-yard field goal from Sebastian Janikowski. Oakland had also not yet suffered several key defensive injuries (most notably Matt Shaugnessy****) while Denver was without Williams and Dumervil. When Tebow faced Oakland they were starting a fresh-off-the-boat Carson Palmer (3 picks), Michael Bush was in for Darren McFadden (though he is a quality player in his own right), and the Broncos had their full complement of defensive players.

When Orton started against San Diego (and replaced by Tebow at half time) Ryan Mathews had a huge game (24 carries, 125 yards) and Malcolm Floyd wasn’t hurt yet (3 catches, 100 yards). While Champ took away Jackson again, Floyd was able to exploit the other side and San Diego was able to put up 29 points. LT Marcus McNeil was also still around for this game.

In the second meeting Mathews was great again, but without Floyd opposite Vincent Jackson (and without McNeil) the Charger passing game couldn’t do a thing.

Orton actually played very well in a win over the Bengals, but had the misfortune of facing the juggernaut Packers without Champ Bailey or a fully healthy Dumervil (the Packers put up 49 points).*****

Orton’s Broncos suffered a narrow loss against the Titans, again without Bailey or Dumervil, and at a time when the Titans still had Kenny Britt (at least for 2 quarters. He was injured in this game).

The point is that Orton caught his opponents at the worst possible times. Tebow, on the other hand, had nothing but good fortune.

Aside from the Raiders and Chargers, he also started against a bad Miami team and was lucky to escape with a victory (Tebow was sacked 6 times and was fortunate to recover a fumble at one point). He beat a Chiefs team that is one of the worst in the NFL, and has been decimated by injuries. (And did so despite only completing 2 passes). The Jets, like the Broncos, try to play defense/ball control, but in their matchup Shonn Green was knocked out with an injury and they were already without Ladanian Tomlinson. Joe McKnight was their leading rusher with 16 carries for 59 yards. You’ll recall this as the game where Tebow had that ridiculous 20 yard TD run to win it when the Jets decided to blitz and not contain. If either Jet runner is available Tebow may never even get that chance.

Tebow’s luck is going to continue too as the Broncos have a pretty easy schedule the rest of the way (@Min, Chicago (with Hanie), NE (this is the one tough game), @Buffalo, KC again). I think it’s very likely that the Broncos either win the West or a wildcard with that schedule.

Wins, Causation, Correlation, Symbolism

Tebow critics (like me) should not be counting on a late season Tebow collapse. The Broncos schedule isn’t very difficult and it’s entirely possible that they’ll continue winning. This also shouldn’t be a problem for any halfway intelligent fan because, as we know, “wins” are a terrible way to measure individual performance, especially in a game with as many moving parts as football.

The Broncos will still win (probably) and their quarterback will still be terrible, and those two sentences are in no way contradictory. It’s easy for your average rube football fan to see Orton-losses, Tebow-wins and make the “obvious” association, but that is entirely correlation, not causation. This is exacerbated by Tebow’s outspoken Christianity. Christian fans want to believe in Tebow even if there’s no reason to do so. Being Christian is neither an asset nor a hindrance to football, but the fact is that there exists a substantial fan base with an inherent bias for Tebow. In the never-wanting-to-offend****** mainstream sports media, this colors the analysis further.

It’s really kind of a shame. The Denver defense should be getting far more credit than they are, and even when they do it’s usually limited to Von Miller. They’re a good story; they’re just not as good a story as the grindy upstanding Christian white boy who is seemingly overcoming his inability to do his job correctly.

I’d rank the factors in Tebow’s “success” as follows:

1. 1. Defense.

2. 2. Schedule.

3. 3. Luck.

4. 4. Tebow.

*Another problem that Tebow is likely to face is injury. He runs to contact and backs who run to contact tend to have short shelf lives. Toss in the notion that the punishment he takes could impact his already substandard passing further and it’s hard to see this working long term. Culpepper missed time in 01 and 03, and had his career cut short in his prime by injury. Roethlisberger has been in the league for 8 years and if he plays in 16 games this season it will be only the 2nd time. Something to keep in mind.

**They run this offense because of what Tebow CANNOT do, which means that any talented runner with less-than-stellar passing can probably run it too. Tommy Frazier is probably kicking himself right now.

***Von Miller gets all the press, but Dumervil is exactly 2 seasons removed from leading the league in sacks with 17. He is a huge impact player when healthy.

****Here’s Rotoworld on Shaughnessy just after he was placed on IR: “Shaughnessy hadn't played since Week 3, but it's still a big loss for a Raiders defensive line hoping to get back its best end later in the year. The 25-year-old former third-round steal racked up seven sacks and graded out as Pro Football Focus' No. 5 run-stopping defensive end last season. Oakland will close out the year using a rotation of Jarvis Moss and Kamerion Wimbley at right defensive end. Shaughnessy will return in 2012 on a cheap, $565,000 base salary.”

*****Not having your top corner against the Packers is about as bad as it gets. It’s a bit like losing your ace in baseball as the guy that replaces him isn’t the 2nd or 3rd or 4th or 5th best pitcher on the team, it’s the 6th best starter. It’s always a HUGE drop-off. The Packers are so deep at WR that starting practice squad-level talent at CB is a recipe for failure.

******Except for guys like Cowherd and Bayless who offend in calculated and incredibly stupid ways just to rile you up.

Tim Tebow and QBR: Frauds of a Feather

2011-10-10T14:46:00.003-05:00

First read this. I’ll cut and paste the important bits:

Tim Tebow (83.2 Total QBR) Makes Case To Be Broncos’ Starter

Tim Tebow came in for Kyle Orton at halftime and almost led the Broncos back from a double-digit deficit against the Chargers. Both quarterbacks were on the field for six drives. Orton led the Broncos to just three points while he was on the field (the Broncos' only first-half TD came on a defensive return) and threw an interception, while Tebow led the Broncos to two touchdowns and had no turnovers.

While Tebow's rally fell just short, he finished the game with an excellent Total QBR of 83.2, while Orton's ineptitude resulted in a paltry score of 5.1.

This is so very very stupid.

If you want to be successful, you need to either put yourself in situations where picking up a first down is likely, or pick up first downs. You need to have a high completion percentage and you need to pick up yards with those completions. ESPN’s new QBR thinks that Tim Tebow had quite the day on Sunday. 83.2 is a high number. (The highest of the year, equally ridiculous, is Alex Smith's 98.2 against the Bucs on Sunday.) It is higher than Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady. So what did Tim Tebow do to “earn” this ranking?

Well, he threw 10 passes, completing 4 (40%!), and ran 6 times. And what did those look like?

Tebow’s 1st run, 2nd quarter – gain of 2 yards on first down, putting Kyle Orton in a bad situation (which he converted, by the way)

Tebow would then take over in the 2nd half.

Tebow’s 1st pass, 3rd and 8 – complete to Decker for no gain. One of Tebow’s 4 completions is a huge negative play in that it results in a punt. Checking down on 3rd and 8 when you’re down 23-10 is just not a good idea.

Tebow’s 2nd and 3rd passes, on 2nd and 7 and 3rd and 7 respectively – incomplete. Tebow’s second series is another 3-and-out resulting in a punt.

Those were Tebow’s only plays of the 3rd quarter. Nick Novak would hit a 51 yard field goal on the ensuing drive putting the Broncos in a 16 point hole.

Tebow’s 4th pass – 1st and 10, incomplete.

There are now 13 minutes left in the game. Tebow has been a disaster and the Broncos are in a 2-score hole (if they’re lucky on 2-point attempts). You’re probably thinking that this is where Tebow turns it around. Well…

Tebow’s 2nd run, 2nd and 9, for 5 yards. This brought up 3rd and 4, which is at least manageable, however…

Tebow’s 5th pass – 3rd and 4, incomplete.

Yup, another punt. The Broncos gave it back to the Chargers, down 16 with 11 minutes to go. They would give up one first down to the Chargers and get the ball back with under 9 minutes to play. A nice punt return (15 yards) and a 28-yard run by Willis McGahee would take the Broncos all the way to the SD 23 yard line. We then have…

Tebow’s 3rd, 4th, and 5th runs, for 11 yards, no gain, and 12 yards and a TD.

Almost all of Tebow’s value comes on this sequence, and it’s not like it’s not valuable, it’s just that special teams and McGahee put him in a good spot, and he didn’t do anything that McGahee (who also took in the 2-pointer) didn’t do on this drive.

On the next drive Tebow was again the recipient of excellent field position after a Philip Rivers fumble. Denver recovered at the SD 41. At this point we have:

Tebow’s 6th run, 1st and 10, 8 yards.

Followed up a few plays later by,

Tebow’s 6th pass, 1st and 10 at the SD 28, I’ll quote the NFL gamebook directly:

“(3:30) (Shotgun) 15-T.Tebow pass short right to 27-K.Moreno for 28 yards, TOUCHDOWN.”

This was a screen pass to a RB. It’s the kind of pass that basically anyone can throw. It’s a nice play, but it doesn’t tell you as much about Tebow as Aaron Rodgers 70 yard TD to James Jones tells you about him (for instance).

So the Broncos were down by 2 at which point we get a HUGELY negative play that doesn’t show up on the stat sheet or, apparently, in QBR, that being:

Tim Tebow’s Two Point Conversion Attempt – Incomplete, fails.

Yes, with an opportunity to tie the game Tebow failed to complete a pass to Brandon Lloyd, another huge negative play.

Because of this failure the Broncos found themselves down 2 with under 3:30 to play without the ball. Because of this failure the Broncos at this point had almost no chance to win. And in fact the Chargers would run off almost all of the time and kick a FG to go up by 5, leaving the Broncos only 24 seconds.

At this point we get Tebow’s final 4 passes. With only 24 seconds left and down by 5, a FG does no good, so SD dropped into prevent. If you want to know where Tebow got all of his passing yards,

Tebow’s 7th pass – 1st and 10 from the Denver 20, Complete to Lloyd for 20 yards.

Tebow’s 8th pass – 1st and 10 from the Denver 40, Complete to Fells for 31 yards.

Tebow’s 9th pass – spiked.

Tebow’s 10th pass – Incomplete to Willis. Game over.

In short, to approve of this performance by Tebow you have to ignore the fact that he had three 3-and-outs when the game was still reasonably in reach, that he put his team in bad positions several times over, that most of his passing yardage came in garbage time when San Diego was simply trying to prevent a long TD, that he failed on a 2-point conversion which was probably the single-largest WPA play of the day, and that he benefitted from great field position provided by his defense, RB, and special teams.

To claim that his game was better than Aaron Rodgers' which featured a come-from-behind victory that solidly put Atlanta away, a higher completion percentage, more TDs, more yards, and success in ways that surely increased his team’s chances of winning more than Tebow's, is just silly.

QBR looks worse every week. Only ESPN knows the exact formula and absent the ability to provide context for some of their more unorthodox rankings, it looks to be completely useless. Overrating Tim Tebow is such an ESPN thing to do, one wonders if this metric was created to adhere towards certain narratives than to provide any sort of meaningful analysis.

Roenicke's Bullpen Flowchart

2011-06-15T09:38:00.000-05:00

This is brilliant.

Tragedy of Errors

2011-06-15T08:49:00.003-05:00

Look, bitching about the manger is one of the oldest traditions in sports and it can frequently mark you as a mouth-breathing, talk-radio show calling ignoramus, and I understand that, but the last two games from Ron Roenicke have just been complete debacles. Train wrecks. Ron Roenicke didn't see the iceberg. Ron Roenicke decided to go with Hydrogen over Helium.

And what makes it all the more maddening is that just a few days ago I watched the Dallas Mavericks put research and analysis to work to win the NBA Championship. (Read this post by John Hollinger. Rick Carlisle was fantastic, and Roland Beech was the first person I ever read who put sabermetric-style analysis to a sport other than baseball.)

And I could point out all kinds of examples of Ron not using his lefty correctly, not understanding platoon splits, and not pinch hitting. I could bring up the "8th inning guy" thing again. But why be so complicated? I have an example that flies in the face of traditional baseball notions AND advanced stats, as if he was trying to be as wrong as possible.

In the 10th inning last night, he brought in Tim Dillard. Crappy, grindy fast guy Tony Campana promptly doubles to lead off the inning and is sacrificed to third by Kosuke Fukudome, bringing up Starlin Castro.

Now, in this situation, the following things are true:

1. Tony Campana is very fast. Even with an extra infielder he is pretty likely to score on a ball in play. He is the only runner that matters.

2. Tim Dillard doesn't strike a lot of people out, and induces ground balls about 46% of the time, and FBs/LDs about 54% of the time.

3. Your best chance to get out of the inning involves either a double play or a SO.

4. Starlin Castro, who cannot hit into a DP because no one is on first, only strikes out about 12% of the time. The rest of the time he either walks or puts the ball in play, and he only walks 3.5% of the time.

5. Starlin Castro is exceedingly likely to put the ball in play and drive in the winning run.

6. Aramis Ramirez is on deck. He hits GBs 35.6% of the time. This year he has struck out about 12% of the time, but for his career he has struck out 15.4% of the time.

7. Tango's win expectancy chart recommends walking the batter in this situation absent other information (i.e. who is pitching, hitting, on base, etc.)

8. You could also choose to walk Ramirez as well and pitch to Carlos Pena. This raises the possibility of walking in the winning run, but consider....

9. Carlos Pena for his career strikes out 31.3% of the time.

10. And Carlos Pena for his career, hits ground balls 37% of the time on balls in play.

In this situation, I think you should pitch to Pena. He's somewhat likely to ground into a DP, he's fairly likely to strike out, and the pitcher's spot is on deck at that point, so the Cubs would have to go to their pretty awful bench at that point. What would be even better is if the Brewers had another lefty in the pen at which point it's a no-brainer. Given that they didn't, I suppose it's defensible to pitch to Ramirez instead. It is completely indefensible to pitch to Castro.

And you know what else would have helped? Having Kam Loe available, as he truthfully has no special powers in the 8th inning, but does have a special power of inducing ground balls 56% of the time, or 12% more frequently than Dillard. But you used him in the 8th inning last night against players who are a poor matchup for his skillset, and for the 3rd night in a row, so he wasn't available.

One more fact for you. Dillard, for his career, strikes out about 5 people per nine. A strike out helps you a lot in this situation. You know who is better at striking people out? John Axford, that's who. He strikes out almost 12 per nine innings. But we had to save him for the save situation that never came to pass. At least he's well rested. (And by the way, the Cubs DID use their closer to get out of a similar jam, so don't tell me that no managers do things like that.)

I grant you that there were thousands of ways to avoid getting into this situation in the first place and I'm sure that all of these will be criticized as well, but I think this situation really shows the lack of thinking going on in the Brewer dugout.

A baseball team is a multi-million dollar investment, and wins add revenue and add value. I will never understand how owners can still entrust these enterprises to people who rely on folk-wisdom, gut feeling, and the concept of "8th inning guys".

Darwin Barney is Legen (wait for it)*

2011-06-03T11:10:00.004-05:00

Cubs fans love their grinders. From Ryan Theriot to Mike Fontenot to Juan Pierre, if you’re small and have no power, Cubs fans will probably love you. I, as a Brewer fan, also love that the Cubs faithful love these players as it increases the odds of having them stick around. I’ve always secretly hoped that the Cubs would sign David Eckstein, the grindiest grinder who’s ever grindeded, and while Eck has yet to show up in blue pinstripes, we may have the next best thing on our hands in Darwin Barney, who was signed in the offseason when the Ricketts found him guarding a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. Most people would have just taken the gold or made a wish, but the Ricketts signed the plucky gent to man the keystone. The Chicago Sun-Times Gordon Wittenmyer thinks this has paid off in spades:

The Cubs’ best player so far this year is also what the rest of the season figures to be all about.

Oh, the surprising OBP machine (and likely trade bait) that is Kosuke? Carlos Zambrano who has been steady on the mound and deadly with the bat? The up-and-coming star at SS, Starlin Castro? Carlos Marmol before the last week or so? Matt Garza, maybe? You can make a case for any of these guys…

He’s one of the best reasons to keep paying attention, the leading example of why there might be hope for this rebuild/patchwork process by next year. And two months into a season already circling the National League drain, he’s the Cubs’ best early bet for any kind of postseason recognition.

He must be talking about Castro, right? The 21-year-old phenom whose slick fielding complements his better than average hitting, and who should only get better. He should be a fixture on the north side for years, and the cornerstone of any future post-season campaigns…

And Darwin Barney’s not even on the All-Star ballot.

What the hell does Darwin Barney have to do with Starlin Castro?

Darwin Barney?

Darwin Barney?

That’s how far the shortstop-turned-second baseman — the utility prospect-turned-key starter — has come in the last three months, not to mention how far this season has veered from modest expectations.

Wait, what? Let me check my pre-season list of expectations for Darwin Barney:

1. Who is Darwin Barney?

2. I’ve never heard of him. I expect him to hit for almost no power and barely ever get on base.

3. He may also be bad at fielding.

4. My word, he’s short. Cubs fans will love this guy.

So far he has in fact lived up to all of my expectations. Nice work Darwin!

But as the Cubs open their toughest stretch of the season tonight in St. Louis, with temptation growing daily to wrap Albert Pujols in a $300 million bear hug, save the hugs for guys such as the rookie Barney.

Just so we’re clear,

1. St. Louis is tempted to “wrap Albert Pujols in a $300 million bear hug”, which sounds like some type of Saw-esque death trap, and

2. Wittenmyer is suggesting that we “save the hugs for Barney.”

“Bear hugs” are wrestling moves. They’re aggressive. He’s suggesting that the Cardinals want to lock Albert down. I think I’ll just assume he’s trying to pull off some awkward parallelism with the Barney hug and not assume he wants to give Barney $300 million salary bump to stick around, but with all the fawning praise I’m only like 90% sure.

He’s this team’s future, with the Cubs expected to keep building from within even as tens of millions of dollars fall off the payroll books each of the next two years.

That could be a good thing if Barney keeps developing at this pace. He’s already showing leadership skills and is a stabilizing influence in the middle of the Cubs’ diamond, paired with sophomore hitting star Starlin Castro.

And here we go with the leadership nonsense. So Barney is a leader. What, would Carlos Pena only have 5 HRs without Barney’s leadership? Would Tyler Colvin have been cut outright instead of merely being sent down to the minors?

This is the kind of garbage people write when someone is terrible at baseball, but also cute and likeable. We haven’t looked into Barney’s numbers at all yet, so let’s do that now. Here are the Cubs’ normal starters by OBP:

1. Kosuke - .428
2. Carlos Pena - .359
3. Aramis Ramirez - .346
4. Marlon Byrd - .346
5. Starlin Castro - .338
6. Geo Soto - .326
7. Darwin Barney - .325
8. Alfonso Soriano - .297.

Of course, Fonzi is slugging .525, whereas Darwin Barney is slugging .383. Note also that as bad as the Cubs have been, it can always get worse. Their top four players in terms of not making outs were all born in 1978 or earlier.

Anyway, the point is that Barney is pretty bad on offense, and there’s not a lot to suggest that the empty batting average will fill up with time.

‘‘The so-called youth moment, we don’t look at it like, ‘Let’s get experience for these guys for next year,’ ’’ Barney said as the Cubs prepared for a three-city trip with veterans filling the disabled list and minor-league callups such as Tony Campana, Brad Snyder, DJ LeMahieu and Scott Maine dotting the active roster.

‘‘They’re here to contribute. That’s the way we look at it.’’
Even if they might start feeling more like Mitt Romney’s dog on a road trip by the time this one ends.

Google says that Mitt Romney once drove to Canada with the family dog strapped to the roof of his car. Ha! Animal abuse! Witty! Trying to capture the Michael Vick fans no doubt.

‘‘The kids that have showed up will be baptized into the National League Central, if nothing else — let alone Philadelphia,’’ Cubs manager Mike Quade said. ‘‘They’re getting a taste, and they’re finding out the rigors here.”

Might as well start force-feeding a bigger taste now — a process that could accelerate over the next six to eight weeks as the Cubs face options for shedding chunks of veteran salary before the trading deadline.

If your season is over it’s not a bad idea to check out your young guys, just don’t have any delusions about the season being over. And also, one thing worth noting about the Cubs is that they gave a bunch of older guys big contracts with no-trade clauses, so “shedding chunks of veteran salary” isn’t really that simple for this team. Back to Barney.

Meanwhile, Barney has become — like Castro, Tyler Colvin and Andrew Cashner a year ago — the newest symbol for the Cubs’ future and hopes.

Tyler Colvin, just recalled from AAA after a miserable start to the season, is in fact a symbol for the Cubs’ future and hopes.

‘‘We’ll take 25 of him,’’ said bench coach Pat Listach, a former Rookie of the Year shortstop who works with Barney one-on-one daily and who agrees the Cubs’ best all-around player is the former fourth-round draft pick from back-to-back Oregon State championship teams.

The Baseball Musings lineup calculator thinks that a lineup composed entirely of Darwin Barneys would score 684 runs this year (4.22 runs per game). The Cubs scored 685 last year so they essentially did play all Darwin Barneys last year. And finished in 2nd last place in a pretty terrible division.

Since we’re talking about Darwin as an “All-Star," why don’t we also plug in one of his competitors, say, Rickie Weeks? A team of all Rickie Weeks would be expected to score 6.073 runs per game, or 983.8 runs per season. Basically, a lineup of Rickie Weeks is 300 runs per year better than a lineup of Darwin Barneys.

‘‘No doubt,’’ Listach says. ‘‘He does the little things right. He’s a winning baseball player.’’

Cubs current record – 23-31. Darwin’s current WAR - .6

Barney, who’s hitting .303 and is second on the team in RBI (25) and runs (28) from the No. 2 spot, is still learning, still new to second base and, consequently, still making mistakes of technique and positioning.

People really are suckers for a .300 BA. I mean, he’s not even very far above .300. One hitless night and all of a sudden we’re looking at an empty .298 instead of an empty .303 and we have no nonsense about All-Star games or franchise cornerstones. The fact is that Barney has walked 7 times this season, or one more time than Alfonso Soriano who basically never walks. Barney is a low-upside out-machine. Do you know why he is second on the team in RBI? Because Kosuke is basically always on base. He has a .428 OBP. Barney’s RBIs are completely a function of Kosuke and have nothing to do with Barney. Barney is proof that anyone hitting 2nd in the Cub lineup would rank highly on the team in RBI. Literally anyone. David Eckstein would have grinded out like 30 by now. By the way, Rickie Weeks has 23 RBI from the leadoff spot.

But he also soaks up coaching, even urging Listach and infield coach Ivan DeJesus to stay on him over the smallest mistakes.

Coaches! You’re not coaching me hard enough! Look, I didn’t even get completely in front of the ball that time! What the hell are you guys doing not yelling at me!?

By the way, we should note that the light-hitting, base-stealing grindy Pat Listach won an ill-gotten Rookie of the Year award in 1992 over Kenny Lofton, even though Lofton was worth 2.5 more wins than Listach and Lofton played what is basically a HOF-level career while Pat (due to an unfortunate catastrophic injury) was out of the league in just a few years. Just saying.

Along the way, he has earned Web Gem status on national highlight shows.

So has Yuniesky Betancourt and he is the worst regular player in baseball.

He has run the bases as well as anybody on the team.

According to Fangraphs, his base running has been worth .7 runs, which almost makes up for his -1 defensive contribution.

He has been a vocal and heads-up communicator in the field.

All yelling. No signing for Darwin.

He’s even been the best clutch hitter among the regulars, even if potential game-winners like his two-out double in the eighth inning Tuesday against the Houston Astros occasionally are lost in ugliness, such as the Astros’ six-run ninth inning that followed.

Barney has been about a quarter of a run better than normal in clutch situations per Fangraphs, and has a .24 WPA on the season. Carlos Pena has contributed .5 WPA and about half a run better in clutch situations.

‘‘I keep talking about him as an overachiever,’’ Quade said. ‘‘Maybe I just misevaluated him. Maybe he’s not an overachiever. Maybe he’s just damn good.’

I think we can all agree that Mike Quade has misevaluated Darwin Barney.

Maybe even an All-Star — though it’ll take a write-in campaign by the fans or the players since Blake DeWitt is on the ballot as the Cubs’ second baseman.

There are 14 regular second basemen (Minimum, 100 PAs) with higher OBPs than Barney. He’s not particularly good at defense. He has no power. All Star!

‘‘The odds of me making that team are slim to none, even if I was on the ballot,’’ said Barney, who has yet to be recognized by his own team with a concourse banner at Wrigley Field. ‘‘So that’s the last thing I worry about.’’

He insists he concentrates only on playing for the situation and for wins, but he admits an All-Star nod ‘‘would be cool.’’

It would be cool, if by cool you mean demented.

‘‘But I haven’t really thought about it, to be honest,’’ Barney said. ‘‘I’m thinking about the here and now.’’

But Darwin, your future is so bright! I fully advocate the Cubs giving Darwin Barney an 8-10 year extension. You’ve got to lock down talent like this early, and you’ll want to do it before he gets that first All-Star appearance under his belt and his price skyrockets. Act now before it’s too late! Light-hitting, poor defending second basemen only come around several thousand times in a generation.

*dary

Loe Down Dirty Shame

2011-06-02T07:54:00.003-05:00

Kameron Loe has now appeared in 54% of Milwaukee's games. 30 appearances in 56 games. This, despite the Brewers starting pitchers going deeper in games than any other NL team (I saw that stat on Monday, now I can't find it anywhere...so if I'm wrong I will refund you the cost of your subscription to this fine publication). If he stays on that pace, he'll appear in 88 games which would place him in a tie for 15th all time in most appearances by a pitcher. Last year he would have finished second to rubber armed Pedro Feliciano, who racked up 92 appearances (2nd all time).

One big problem...Feliciano made 92 appearances but only threw 62.2 innings. Loe has made 30 appearances and thrown a whopping 27 innings. He is essntially averaging a full inning in each appearance. If he stays on pace and pitches 88 games, he will pitch 79.2 innings. His previous most innings, as a reliever, was last year with 58 innings pitched.

Loe has become not only the 8th inning guy, but also the "he is effective against lefties" guy. Yes, he has been a useful reliever. However, he has been significantly worse than he was last year (147 v. 91 ERA+) and I cannot see how he could possibly continue to be even this effective should he continue to be ridden hard and put away wet.

It's possible that Roenicke figures he will ride Loe to death while he can, and that made sense when both Hawkins and Saito were hurt. However, Hawkins (who has been a world beater outside of his first appearance) is no longer hurt.

Someone should probably let Ron Roenicke know.

(I'm not blogging much anymore. If you want to read my special brand of bitching follow me @eznark)

The NCAA’s Terrible Black Market – The Levels of Blame

2011-05-31T11:43:00.001-05:00

When you outlaw something that people want, people will still get it. It could be birthday cake or heroin, it really doesn’t matter. The important thing to understand is that black markets exist without the normal rules and regulations, and most importantly, without a civilized way to resolve disputes.

The NCAA really is an evil organization. It doesn’t care about the fate of the student-athletes it is supposed to be protecting. It actively exploits them for millions of dollars. It punishes them for activities that are not only perfectly legal for every other member of society, but also perfectly legal for all other personnel involved in NCAA sports (coaches, assistants, admins, etc.).

It allegedly does this in the name of “amateurism” and anachronistic concept from a time when it was considered gauche for a gentleman to accept payment for sport (or for anything else other than old family money). In reality it does this because it makes a bunch of people rich.

So Ohio State got busted doing what almost every Division 1 program does, and the activity itself is something I have no problem with (that is, taking money from boosters/trading memorabilia for tattoos, etc.). And I’ve been poking some fun at them this week on Twitter I realize that it easily could have been my school. So is it fair to make fun of a program that gets busted, especially if the system is evil and corrupt? I look at it like this:

Blame Level One: The NCAA.

It’s evil for all of the previously stated reasons (and a thousand more), and it creates a system where everyone is competing to be as criminal as possible without getting caught.

Blame Level Two: The Coach/AD/Athletic Staff.

The reason I think it’s fair to pick on the program that got caught is because in a black market, the “winner” is generally the most corrupt, most aggressive player. The biggest crime boss, if you will. You get the best players because you game the system better than anyone else, and really, it’s as simple as that.

Blame Level 3: The University Administration.

They turn a blind eye, even though they know what’s going on.

Blame Level 4: The Player.

They’re mostly just victims of a needlessly complicated overly restrictive system and it’s illegal for them to even get advice on how to best handle their careers. On Mike and Mike this morning Golic said that he blames the players first. That’s ridiculous. The NCAA is ruled by a bunch of old, smart businessmen who know perfectly well what they’re doing. Jim Tressel is a grown man, perfectly aware of the rules, who knew exactly what he was doing. The players are stupid kids (note: when you are 19-22, you’re a stupid kid) who are expressly forbidden from making any extra money. I’m fairly sure that if I was in their position I would happily take a few extra bucks on the side, because it’s not wrong. In general if something isn’t wrong I have no problem doing it.

And if the players want to play in the NFL they have no other choice. If you’re a baseball player or a hockey player with professional aspirations, you have a few options besides college. (This is becoming truer for basketball as well.) If you want to play football, they’ve got you.

Some people I’ve talked to seem to think that you can’t blame anyone if you think the system is corrupt and you should blame the players if you believe the system is just. That’s silly. The system and all of its active participants are corrupt to different degrees. We should put blame where it is appropriate.

You know what sucks?

2011-05-20T12:51:00.000-05:00

• It's supposed to be an NL Central-versus-AL East year. But the only AL East teams the Cubs get to play are (lucky them) the Red Sox and Yankees. Meanwhile, the Cardinals play every AL East team EXCEPT the Red Sox and Yankees.

• And guess which three AL East teams the Brewers get to play? Just the three nobody would want to play -- the Rays, Red Sox and Yankees.

- Jayson Stark

The MLB Blackout Policy

2011-05-16T12:35:00.002-05:00

Apparently the Brewer game this Saturday against the Rockies, which starts at 6:10 CST (7:10 EST) will be blacked out because Fox is moving several National games into the Saturday prime time slot, and they have exclusive rights to broadcast games. At least, that's what I read here, via here.

That's pretty annoying. I'm not even sure what the national game is, but if you're a Brewer fan I'm sure you don't care what it is if the Brewers are playing at the same time.

I have a question for Fox and for MLB. This is your blackout policy, quoted directly from the FAQ portion of MLB.com. I have emphasized some important language:

Due to Major League Baseball exclusivities, live games occurring each Saturday with a scheduled start time after 1:10 PM ET or before 7:05 PM ET and each Sunday with a scheduled start time after 5:00 PM ET, will be blacked out in the United States (including the territories of Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands). In addition, in the event of extraordinary circumstances that produce a programming conflict, the above blackout windows may be subject to change. If you are an MLB.TV Premium subscriber outside of the United States, each of these games will be available as an archived game as soon as possible after the conclusion of the applicable game. If you are an MLB.TV Premium subscriber within the United States or an MLB.TV subscriber in any territory, each of these games will be available as an archived game approximately 90 minutes after the conclusion of the applicable game. Archived games are not available through MLB.com Gameday Audio.

7:05 EST is 6:05 CST. The Brewer game on Saturday starts at 7:10 EST/6:10 CST. In my admittedly crude understanding of space/time, 7:10 EST is later than 7:05 EST. Therefore, given the language above, MLB would only be justified in blacking out this game in the event of "extraordinary circumstances."

I am not of the opinion that Fox wanting a few prime time games = extraordinary circumstances.

So MLB, I would like for you to explain to the good people of Milwaukee why exactly they will not be able to watch their team play on TV on Saturday. (And if that blackout extends to MLB.tv, I'd like you to explain to me why I cannot watch my favorite team play on Saturday.)

"Aggressive Approach"

2011-05-08T17:51:00.004-05:00

Few words strike as much baseball fear into me as "new aggressive approach," but to be honest I didn't expect it too have too much impact. The first thing that comes to mind is just more stolen base attempts/caught stealings/wasted outs. That's stupid and sucks, but in the grand scheme of things it's not that bad and lots of teams do it.

The Brewers though, seem to be taking a more aggressive approach in a much more damaging facet of the game: at the plate. Last year the Brewers were 5th in the NL in walks. They were patient, they got guys on (4th in OBP), and they drove them in with power (3rd in slugging).

This season the Brewers are 3rd LAST in walks. In fact, the bottom 3 teams in the NL in walks all reside in the NL central. See below:

NL Central BBs -

STL - 123
Cin - 121
Pit - 120
Mil - 91
Chi - 87
Hou - 83

Note the giant dropoff from 3-4.

The Brewers aren't hitting for quite as much power, but there is not the marked dropoff there (still 6th in slugging). And it will probably also surprise many of you to learn that this team barely ever strikes out (only 3 teams strike out less frequently).

No, this team is swinging at ton, and mostly at bad pitches. They are putting weak balls into play on a regular basis. There's no reason to throw strikes to anyone on the team because most of them will swing at anything.

Some of this you expect with guys like Yuni ad Gomez getting regular time, and Ron Roenicke did himself no favors by batting either player higher than 7th at any point, but it's not just those 2. You don't drop 10 spots in walks based on two people (especially considering that Gomez was on the team last year, and Yuni replaced a free-swinging Alcides Escobar).

It looks to me as if the strategy on the team has fundamentally changed. No longer do they work counts to get a good pitch. I do not believe I have seen a Brewer take a pitch on a 3-1 count this tear. It's probably happened, but I have yet to witness it, and I watch a lot of games.

This team needs to get patient, and they need to do it now. I hate the idea that "aggressive" is something to aspire to in baseball. That it's some manly attribute that helps you win games and that players are all namby-pamby wusses that need coaxing into aggressiveness.

Aggressiveness is easy. It's the default. Going up there and taking hacks is what guys do naturally.

Patience is difficult, and patience is what they need.

This is also just one problem. They also appear to be stupid and bad at defense, but I'm not sure they can fix that. They CAN take a different approach. Keep an eye on their walk total. If they're not in the top 5 by the end of the year, they'll be bringing up the rear of the NL central.

100 Years Dead and Never Surpassed

2011-04-14T08:21:00.004-05:00

When I was a little kid, my family used to travel up to visit my grandparents in Dodge County. We'd go to Juneau and watch my dad play Legion ball, watch ball games with my moms' dad and play in the park. Great little town. I haven't been back in years but the thing that always stands out to me is the yearly Addie Joss Days festival. Joss grew up in Woodland, but is celebrated in Juneau. There was a Legion tournament and clowns and...well, I was a little kid so I remember it as going to a great big carnival. In reality it was probably just the tournament and some barbequing and maybe a ride or two on some years. They don't run the festival anymore and in fact, Juneau doesn't even have a Legion ball team anymore but I can trace my love of the sport, and more importantly the sports' history, to those perfect days.

Anyway, I think I post something similar every year on this date, because to me there will never be a more important baseball player than Addison Joss. Son of a cheesemaker, feller of Rube "The Ringer," and pioneer not just in baseball but in writing about the sport. Addie Joss is an important figure, a legendary figure really...sadly no one seems to remember the legend anymore. Fact is, this state has never produced a better professional athlete and I doubt it ever will. Addie Joss was an all time great and he should be celebrated throughout Wisconsin.

Do yourself a favor, read King of Pitchers.

John Steigerwald is a bigger moron than you think.

2011-04-12T16:43:00.002-05:00

If you've been on Twitter in the past 2 hours you've probably read this truly horrifying column in which Pittsburgh columnist John Steigerwald:

1. Asserts that a fan who was recently beaten within an inch of his life for wearing a visiting jersey is responsible for his condition because he wore said jersey.

2. Spells the fan's name incorrectly.

3. Claims that "drunks" are at fault while simultaneously pointing out the high price of beer at the stadium.

4. At the end of the column, seems to advocate violence in the form of Rob Dibble and Norm Charlton intentionally throwing at Barry Bonds.

Now, this column is horrible and ridiculous on it's own, but a quick glimpse into the man's past reveals that he has a habit of saying crazy, stupid, moronic things:

America is becoming more feminized all the time. Women getting involved (overly involved) in their kids' teams, Very few male elementary school teachers. You hear stories about tag being forbidden on school playgrounds. Effeminate men are celebrated (ever seen Adam Lambert and the fuss that was made over him?). I have a chapter in my book explaining why I would rather have the Three Stooges babysit my kids than Mr. Rogers because Mr. Rogers --who was a better person than I could ever hope to be and did a lot of great things--was a sissy. You're no longer allowed to discourage boys from being "sissies" because that would make you "homophobic". The country will get softer and softer the more we depend on the nanny state to take care of us.There are people in power now who want to take care of us from cradle to grave and they can't find their way to the supermarket. I'm a big self reliance guy and there's less and less of that going around every day.

So, men at ballparks are increasingly drunken thugs, but America is also being sissified by PBS. Got it.

The man seems to specialize in incoherent drivel. He also seems like a genuinely bad guy.

Tweeting a bit today

2011-04-07T12:55:00.001-05:00

Rather than have an open thread, I'll just be over on Twitter. The handle is @BadgerNoonan.

4/5 Let's Get A Win Open Thread!

2011-04-05T19:01:00.003-05:00

Look at this murderer's row! Paul said it best earlier: no team has ever missed Corey Hart more. Hopefully I was the bad luck. This is the first game I won't be at, which means it is time to win!

Weeks
Morgan
Braun
Fielder
McGehee
Kotsay
Counsell
Kottaras
Gallardo

Personally, I would hit Gallardo 6th in this lineup.

NL Central Prediction

2011-03-31T09:58:00.004-05:00

I'm not going to predict final records. Why bother? But I'll take a crack at division order.

NL Central

1. Brewers
2. Cardinals
3. Reds
4. Cubs
5. Pirates
6. Astros

I think the top 3 will be tightly bunched. I also think the Brewers are a risky pick since I feel like their depth is lacking. If they lose a big bat (Weeks for instance) or a top 3 starter (Marcum, for instance), they could finish much much lower. That said, I think they do stay healthy and come out on top.

The Astros will be one of the worst teams ever.

The Pirates are still terrible and the damage done to them will take a long time to overcome, but they will at least top the Astros.

The Cubs will be pesky and could contend with a little luck. Their pitching is still solid. It is far more likely that age will take it's toll and that they will falter greatly.

Cinci will still be a force and I expect them to be in it until the end.

The Cards look to have downgraded at several key positions (Ryan Theriot, Lance Berkman playing the outfield) and have lost their best pitcher for the season. I don't see it this year.

The Worst Thing About Nyjer Morgan

2011-03-28T10:28:00.002-05:00

Career stolen base percentage = 68.7% This makes his speed a negative.

He has led the league in CS twice.

With Ron Roenicke's allegedly "more aggressive" approach, prepare for a lot of dumb outs.

2011 MLB Predictions: ESK Edition

2011-03-28T07:39:00.003-05:00

NL East
Phillies
Braves (WC)
Marlins
Mets
Nationals

NL Central
Brewers (89-73)
Cardinals (86-76)
Reds
Pirates
Cubs (72-90)
Astros

NL West
Dodgers
Rockies
Giants
Padres
Diamondbacks

AL East
Red Sox
Yankees (WC)
Devil Rays
Orioles
Blue Jays

AL Central
Twins
White Sox
Tigers
Royals
Indians

AL West
Rangers
A's
Angels
Mariners

NLDS

Brewers - Phillies
Giants - Braves

ALDS

Red Sox - Twins
Rangers - Rays

NLCS

Brewers - Braves
ALCS

Twins - Rangers
WS

Brewers - Twins

Awards

AL Cy Young - Francisco Liriano
AL MVP - Nelson Cruz (get paid!)

NL Cy Young - Zack Greinke
NL MVP - Rickie Weeks (get paid!)

I'm high on the Twins for no particular reason other than they have a lot of room to improve, pitching wise and I love their overall talent level. If their pitching can hold up at all (and I am predicting a monster season from Liriano...only because no one else is!) I think they'll so serious damage. Plus, they are playing in a weak division. The regular season is going to be so intense for teams in the East that I think pitchers will be overused, bullpens worn out and hopefully a fight-related broken wrist or two!

Brewers are self explanatory. Greinke will win the Cy Young based on numbers equal to what guys will put up in a whole season despite missing a month. Weeks is going to absolutely blow up. I have a feeling he is going to have to carry a significant offensive burden, and he will emerge as the best 2B in the NL this year.

The Cubs are going to absolutely collapse. A complete, utter and catastrophic collapse that will take all who are present (hopefully Wrigley as well) into a deep abyssal hell from which they won't emerge for a decade. Actually I think they'll be tremendous in two years, but this year they are going to really stink.

All you need to know about the Badgers' loss

2011-03-25T09:05:00.002-05:00

Jon Leuer - 1/12 from the field, and that 1 was a 3-pointer. No points in the paint, no free throw attempts.

Jordan Taylor - 6/19, missed 5 free throws, committed 4 turnovers.

This was one of the ugliest games of basketball I've ever seen.

The Ugliness of Short Books

2011-03-24T09:03:00.002-05:00

If you love baseball and spend too much time reading about baseball on the internet, you've probably heard of the soon-to-be-released book "The Beauty of Short Hops."

In the much-ridiculed press release the authors claim to debunk sabermetrics generally and Moneyball specifically. I planned on purchasing this book for the sole purpose of adding to the ridicule, and to avoid the Joe Morgan hypocrisy of criticizing something without first reading it (or knowing who the author is).

A few reviews are now starting to surface, including this excellent account by Mitchel Lichtman at The Book. Lichtman takes the authors to task on several issues and summarizing his well-developed arguments would only deprive you of the joy of reading his criticism. That said, I have to mention what is perhaps the most damning fact in his review.

When I purchase a book I don't actually put much thought into how long it is, however when I pick up a book in a bookstore (ed: what's a bookstore?) I do feel that the price/weight ratio should make immediate sense to me. I'll happily spend 30 bucks on whatever weighty tome Neal Stephenson has just kicked out, and I'll happily spend 3 bucks on a used Kurt Vonnegut novella. If, however, someone attempted to charge me Stephenson prices for a Vonnegut-sized book I would probably laugh at them and head to a different bookstore. I was therefore quite surprised to read that:

A week or so ago, I received a copy, courtesy of Amazon.com and a blistering $29.95 on my part, or about 38.7 cents a page, considering that the entire book is 116 pages long, if we exclude the preface and the last two chapters, which are some examples of how “quirky” baseball can be, and a “diary” of the 2009 Boston Red Sox season to also show us how beautiful, interesting, and unpredictable baseball games can be, as opposed to the stoic, test-tube version that sabermetricians and new-age stat enthusiasts see through the lenses of their spreadsheets.

Now Lichtman is being a tad disingenuous here. Given his review of the substance, I think we're somewhat out of line discounting the value of the padding, such as it is. That said, the book comes in officially at 212 pages, which is pretty lame for 30 bucks, and even lamer if all of the substance was packed into 116 pages. That's a lot of padding.

So I won't be ridiculing the book just yet. There are still a few open B&N's around me and I suspect I'll be able to dig this one out of the bargain bin in short order, at which point I'll give it the respect it deserves.

Finally, I wonder if they actually should charge a bit more. I suspect their target audience is pretty limited to people who want to make fun of the book, and vocal critics of sabermetrics.

If High Expectations Cause Failure, Why Does Ken Rosenthal Suck So Much

2011-03-11T12:28:00.004-06:00

I really didn't have time for this, but now I've seen it quoted by far too many people to just let it go. Anyway,

Oh no! The 2011 Milwaukee Brewers are just like the 2010 Seattle Mariners! And they were terrible! Everyone panic! They both saw an ace pitcher get hurt in spring training! And they were both widely talked about as contenders! And… uhm…Something else!

Or so says Ken Roesnthal who starts an article comparing the Brewers and Mariners with this idiotic drivel:

The news that Zack Greinke hurt his ribs playing basketball evokes memories of Aaron Boone, whose hoops-induced, season-ending knee injury in 2004 prompted the Yankees to acquire Alex Rodriguez.

Gah! Let me tell you a little something about the then 30-year-old third baseman with the mysterious power spike in his 29 and 30 year old seasons. He wasn’t very good. He put up these splits in 2003:

.267/.327/.453.

Now that’s not terrible, but it followed a year in which Boone played all 162 games with an OBP of .314. It’s very possible that age was starting to take away Boone’s on-base skills. Boone’s highest ever OPS+ was a 113 in 2007 with the Marlins in limited action, but as a full timer he generally hovered around average. The idea that the Yankees would not consider signing A-Rod because they had Boone is silly in that 1. A-Rod is way better than Boone and 2. A-Rod almost signed with the Red Sox.
In 2003 A-Rod did this:

.298/.396/.600.

His OPS+ was 147. His lowest OPS+ as a Yankee came last year with 123. He was also regarded as a good defensive SS (or better than Jeter) who was somewhat wasted at 3rd. Imagine A-Rod’s VORP and WARP and WAR with a SS replacement number instead of a 3rd base replacement number. Anyway the point is that A-Rod is so much better than Aaron Boone ever was that it’s not worth talking about, and that mentioning any of this in the wake of a minor rib injury to a pitcher on a small market team is complete insanity. Or inanity. Take your pick.

I’ve got a more recent and ominous parallel: Cliff Lee.

You mean an awesome pitcher with a history of playing great in the post-season?

A year ago the Mariners were drawing praise for their offseason makeover, just as the Brewers are this spring. Then Lee suffered a right lower abdominal strain in mid-March and remained out until April 30. The Mariners still were in contention when he returned, but unraveled in May and ended up losing 101 games.

Let’s count the stupid:

1. The fact that two teams are “drawing praise” means absolutely nothing, and is certainly not a negative. You know who else is praised for their offseason moves? The Yankees and Red Sox. They do alright.

2. An abdominal sprain is a muscle tear. Zack Greinke has a broken bone. Broken bones, as a rule, always heal better than muscles, tendon, and ligaments. The two are not really comparable in any meaningful sense.

3. “The Mariners were still in contention when he returned”. So they played well without Lee and then stunk it up with him? And this proves what, exactly?

4. As any baseball fan knows, the Mariners had one of the worst offenses in the history of baseball last year. That is not hyperbole. Here, read this.

The Brewers are not going to collapse in such fashion. In fact, they are likely to contend even though they will be without Greinke for at least three starts.

I’ll bet he only misses two, but the important thing is that the Brewers have 2 off days in the first two weeks of the season and have some ability to work around this problem without too much damage.

But all winter I’ve wondered if the Brew Crew are the Mariners of 2011, overrated by fans and media after a series of impressive moves, better on paper than in reality.

They’re not. Look, the Brewers may suffer all sorts of injuries or bad years or what have you, but they are simply not the Seattle Mariners. Last year the Seattle Mariners, an AL team which employs a full-time DH, scored 513 runs. That is comically bad. But keep in mind that in 2009 they only scored 640 runs which is still comically bad. Only the Pirates (bad) and Padres (pitchers park, and also bad) scored fewer. The KC Royals scored more runs than the Mariners in 2009.

And that 2009 Seattle team that went 85-77? It was outscored by 52 runs. Anyone with a decent understanding of baseball could see that Seattle was in for a huge regression to the mean, and that they could not be expected to contend. From 2009 to 2010 the Mariners gained some pitching, but they also lost Adrian Beltre and only got 57 games out of Russell Branyan. In other words, a terrible offense basically lost its two best players.

The Brewers on the other hand feature a borderline great offense that scored 785 runs in 2009 and 750 last year. These two teams could not be more dissimilar.

I’m still wondering.

Dude, I just explained it.

Brewers general manager Doug Melvin did a better job in the offseason than Mariners GM Jack Zduriencik did in 2009-10; Zduriencik acquired Lee, third baseman Chone Figgins and outfielder Milton Bradley, but left his club with too little offense.

Note that we just glossed over Beltre and Branyan.

In truth, not even big spenders like the Yankees and Red Sox can patch every hole, and mid-revenue clubs such as the Brewers often are decidedly imperfect. Melvin fixed his starting rotation without compromising his offense, a nifty trick. But the additions of Greinke and righty Shaun Marcum cannot mask every flaw.
Here are the problems, in no particular order:

No, they don’t, but they make up for a lot. In particular, they fix an absolutely terrible starting rotation, by far the Brewers’ biggest problem. Cliff Lee had no impact on the Mariners’ biggest problem.

Rotation depth

Oh good god. Look, adding two starting pitcher does in fact increase your rotation depth. The Brewers had rotation depth last year only in the sense that Randy Wolf isn’t much better than Carlos Villanueva. The Brewers added two starters who are much better than everyone but Yo. That increases their pitching depth.

The issue will surface immediately, thanks to Greinke’s injury. And a full-blown crisis is possible if something happens to one of the Brewers’ other starters: Marcum, right-hander Yovani Gallardo and left-handers Randy Wolf and Chris Narveson.

Yes, if you have 3 ace-caliber starters, and two of them get hurt, your team will suffer greatly. This is true for every team that has 3 ace-caliber starters. However, if Randy Wolf or Narv-Dog get hurt, that’s really not much of a problem. Chris Narveson has been a nice surprise, but he’s not a kid. He’s 29 and has floated around the majors. There are many Chris Narvesons out there. Randy Wolf is 34 and has been getting shelled for awhile now. He may be better than replacement level, but not by that much.

Also, Greinke’s injury isn’t serious.

“If you look at our current starting pitching, the five guys we have to start the season are tremendous,” left fielder Ryan Braun said before learning of Greinke’s injury. “But if you look after that, we don’t have a lot of proven depth.”

Ryan is just being nice. Three guys are tremendous, and 2 guys are just guys.
It goes on like this for awhile, but let’s skip ahead because what this ultimately comes down to is a writer making an asinine comparison based on the nonsensical idea that the Mariners cracked because of high expectation, and therefore the Brewers will crack because of high expectations:

Listen, I’m not trying to pick on the Brew Crew; Fielder’s final season before free agency could prove memorable for the franchise. The Cardinals took a major hit when they lost right-hander Adam Wainwright to a season-ending elbow injury. The Cubs’ early defensive lapses are alarming. The Reds look like clear favorites, but it’s not as if they’re invincible.

I can see the other side of this — Greinke making a quick return, the bullpen becoming a strength instead of a weakness, Fielder, Braun and Co. going nuts offensively. But I remember how excited so many people were about the Mariners last spring. And I cringe, fearing the expectations for the Brewers are just too high.

Fortunately for Ken, he’ll never have to face the pressure of high expectations.

Braun is Destined for DH

2011-02-16T08:28:00.003-06:00

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!

It's the start of the real new year and an end to the darkest week in all of sports. Thank God I can stop watching NBA basketball...pitchers and catchers are here!

Ok, enough glee. Time to ponder the latest Rob Neyer column. (If you've been in a cave like tracker, you might not know that RN is now over at something called SBNation). Rob is looking at players of the coming decade by position. Today it's left field. Personally I think Braun is a slam dunk top three because 1. the position is pretty soft right now 2. Braun has a fantastic bat 3. left field is not hard, it's just not

Neyer thinks otherwise, discounting his bat completely (at least in terms of off-setting his defense):

And finally Ryan Braun, our youngest outstanding left fielder, just three months younger than Gardner. We know that Braun can hit with almost anyone – they don’t call him “the Hebrew Hammer” for nothing – but there is one little problem: He’s not much of a fielder. And considering that 1) Braun’s now been a gardener for three full seasons, and 2) players actually peak as fielders in their early- or mid-20s, it doesn’t seem likely that his defense will improve over the next few years.
Which leaves him and his employers in a bit of a quandary. Because if Braun gets much worse in left field, he’s unplayable out there. And he’s going to get worse. Which is why I’m crossing him off the list, too. For some goodly chunk of this decade, Braun will be either a left fielder with diminished value, or a first baseman (or a DH).
For the moment, I think we’re down to just two very talented men, Josh Hamilton and Carl Crawford.

Now I agree that Braun's negatives diminish his value. That's why they are negatives. But do they do so at such a drastic rate that he is unplayable in the field? Is he destined to get worse and worse as time goes on as Rob claims?

I think the clear answer to the second question is no. The reason your average player peaks defensively in their 20's is because they have been playing the position their entire lives and their natural athleticism is at a peak, boosting that experience. Braun has been in left for three years, giving him roughly an 18 year disadvantage to the "average defensive peak." He showed signs of improvement from 2009 to 2010, if you put much stock in fg's fielding metric. I don't think he will ever be a league average fielder, and I would love for him to slot into 1B (if only because good left fielders are cheaper) but claiming he is definitely, without a doubt, no chance otherwise going to get worse and worse seems kind of dumb.

To the first point...really? Braun has been able to register 4+ WAR seasons in each of his three in left field. His "most valuable" season, 2009 WAR 4.9, was also his worst defensively. Yes his defense hurts him significantly, but so much so that he is nearly unplayable? Sorry, but give me a break.

I would personally put Braun behind the two he ends up with, but I certainly wouldn't remove him from the discussion altogether.

If I Was A Locked Out NFL Player...

2011-02-15T08:54:00.003-06:00

Consider the following, almost certainly true things:

1. Many people (especially in Packer country and to a lesser extent, Bear country) will basically watch football no matter what. In Wisconsin, even the XFL did great.

2. There are open college stadiums everywhere on Sundays.

3. There are network TV stations that do not have NFL deals and would probably be more than happy to show football.

If I were an intrepid, locked out NFL player, I would create a small regional 7-7 flag football league. I would organize the teams as franchises with each participating player taking an equal share. I'd sign an open-ended TV deal with ABC or a bigger cable channel, maybe with a 3 week guaranty with a renewable 1-week option after that. Teams would split the gate and concessions. GB could play in Camp Randall or Miller Park. Chicago could play at Northwestern or Illinois. Detroit could play in Ann Arbor. I'd call it the Lockout Cup.

I would attempt to organize it in tournament form along the lines of the world cup, first with round robin group play followed by a knockout round. And if the labor dispute happened to settle in the meantime I'd preserve the Lockout Cup season in tact in case it ever happens again. This would feed ESPN speculation when a lockout was pending about "the return of the lockout cup" complete with updates about where each franchise stands.

Flag Football has low overhead. It has a lower injury risk than does real football. ESPN would take care of most of their marketing for them (as would Twitter and Facebook), and the NFL has already bestowed the players with valuable brand names. Remember when the Cleveland Indians sold out a spontaneous game in Miller Park? You don't think 40,000 would show up to see the Packers play the Bears?

I suspect that people would show up and tune in. They would get to see their favorite NFL-ers with no helmets, close up, and probably at lower prices. Some would do so just to show solidarity with the players. I'd instruct all participants to be as friendly as possible and to sign autographs as much as possible.

Would big names participate? I believe they would given the proper circumstances, and this idea would not require all of them, just enough of them. This would not just be a way to keep making money, it would also serve several other important functions, namely:

1. Showing the owners that the players can, in fact, survive without them.

2. Showing any anti-trust court that cares that a competitor to the NFL could theoretically exist if it were allowed to.

3. Keeping their skills sharp and their brands current.

4. Swinging leverage completely to the players' side, possibly forever.

5. Fox/CBS/NBC would be apoplectic at paying the owners lockout insurance while ABS is showing live real games.

Is this possible? Probably not. Owners are owners for a reason. But it would only take a few intrepid players and agents to get the ball rolling. Booking stadiums is, in the grand scheme of things, not that hard. Arranging travel is not that hard. Getting a TV network to cover football is not that hard. Creating media buzz via the internet when many of players already have thousands upon thousands of Facebook and Twitter followers is not that hard. Overhead is low.

The only thing this takes is hard work.

Owners have have used replacement players before. Why shouldn't the players try out a replacement organization?

Revisiting My Thoughts On Rodgers' First Game

2011-02-10T07:26:00.004-06:00

Thanks to a spam comment on an old post from 9/9/2008 (the day after Rodgers first start) I was able to read what I wrote about both Aaron and Coach McCarthy's play-calling approach with the new guy at the helm. I think a lot of it still holds true and while my enthusiasm was tempered, it needn't have been. Looking

It's tough to glean any real undeniable truths from last night. One thing is certain though, Aaron Rodgers is a capable quarterback. He didn't prove last night that he is an All Pro, but he certainly proved he can play adequately ever

y game, and gave Packer fans a reason to be excited for the season. He threw excellent balls, played under control, flashed some wheels and intelligence on when to use them (haha, Tavaris Jackson). Rodgers also displayed a very strong arm and some fantastic accuracy (that TD toss and a couple of those slants were A+ throws).

Looking at his line from that game (18-22 178 yards 1 TD; 8 carries 35 yards 1 TD) we can see a few things. First, tremendous accuracy. He only had five incomplete balls and if I recall correctly one was a dropped catchable ball on a swing route to Korey Hall. Second is his athleticism. No sacks, 8 scrambles, 35 yards. Not bad at all.

Another point that has held true throughout these past two years is the playcalling of Mike McCarthy when the Packers go up big (we had a 17-6 lead going into the 4th). Now I'm not going to complain too much about the playcalling because he did try and keep his foot on the throat of Pittsburgh in the biggest game of his coaching career, but this could have been written during numerous games this season:

My biggest worry after last night is that Mike McCarthy reigned in the offense once Green Bay took the lead. Starting with that concession field goal at the end of the half (not one shot at the end zone?) it seemed like McCarthy closed the play book. It showed a lack of confidence in Rodgers that I really don't understand.

I hope the Super Bowl gives Mike a bit more confidence going into next year in terms of aggressiveness when up big. Lastly, how correct was this assessment? Now

On the other side of the ball, Minnesota is a very, very good football team, w

ith a Tarvaris Jackson sized albatross around its neck. Hopefully, they stick with him as long as they have Peterson, because if they decide to get even a non-terrible QB, they will be a force.

It was true in 2008 and will be true again in 2012. Unless they get a McNabb or someone similar, the Vikings are doomed to battle Chicago for North dregs next season.

Sometimes it is fun to reflect. For instance, all of the above was brilliant (now obvious) analysis. Additionally I picked the Packers to win the Super Bowl this year. Sometimes it is not so fun, like remembering that I picked Green Bay to bear Cincinnati in said Super Bowl.

I have been a staunch defender of both Aaron Rodgers and Ted Thompson since day 1. When Rodgers was drafted I was sitting in The Harp downtown (Sunday funday) and ran into the street shouting with joy as I stripped off my shirt and threw it into the air. It wasn't just the booze. I was thrilled at the timing of drafting a successor, I was more than impressed with Rodgers athleticism and accuracy (lacking arm strength, but he was wiry so I was confident he could build it) and he had a poise and intelligence that was lacking in the J.P. Lohsmans and Cade McNown's of the world. I knew he would be special. I'm glad that the unbridled enthusiasm I showed that drunken morning has paid off.

Give the DPOY award to a guy the Packers humiliated, give the Executive of the Year award to a guy who build a team that Green Bay destroyed and give the MVP to a guy who can't win a big game without the assistance of an A/V team. These Packers were built with a purpose, a methodical and meticulous attention to every detail (except ST) that will not be matched for years.

Sure it is no longer going out on a limb to say this team is special but God damn it, this team is special. Fuck humility, lets revel in the talent and excitement of the current Green Bay Packers. They won't be good forever but I think they'll be good for a hell of a long time.

Things about this Super Bowl that made me happy.

2011-02-07T09:55:00.002-06:00

Aside from the raw emotion of the game itself, I enjoyed this game on a personal level. Anyone who reads this knows I have strong opinions on a few things:

1. Most free agent signings aren’t worth it.
2. Trading players is sometimes OK, but most trades that random people throw out there are just stupid. (I’m still glad we did not acquire Marshawn Lynch)
3. You build through the draft.
4. Running is overrated.
5. Picking Aaron was a smart move.
6. Ditching Favre was a smart move.

I’m not going to sit here and say that I’ve never questioned Ted Thompson. I have sometimes questioned Ted Thompson about specific moves, however his overall philosophy on how to build a team was and is brilliant. This Super Bowl will strike a blow against sports stupidity everywhere. Any time any rube throws out a “we never spend money” or “trade for Randy Moss” or “sign whoever to a huge contract”, the 2010 Green Bay Packers are now the immediate rebuttal. In addition,

Ben Roethlisberger is great because he “wins Super Bowls”? Nope.

You need to run to win? Nope.

Aaron Rodgers can’t win a big game? (Always a stupid thing to say.) Nope.

Super Bowl “experience” matters? Nope.

I’m sure there are more.

This Super Bowl was an amazing accomplishment. The Packers ran an absolute gauntlet of top NFL teams, almost exclusively on the road to get where they are right now. They had more significant injuries than anyone else. They had an absolutely brutal schedule. After the loss at New England they had to beat the New York Giants at home (9th overall in DVOA), the Bears at home (16th in DVOA, but always play the Packers well), Philadelphia in Philly (5th overall in DVOA), Atlanta in Atlanta (8th overall in DVOA), Chicago again, this time in Chicago, and then Pitt on a neutral field (2nd overall in DVOA). Winning all of those games is nothing short of amazing. Doing so with their depleted roster is more impressive still.

Thank you to:

Ted Thompson for assembling such an amazing team,

Mike McCarthy for coaching his best games of the year when it counted the most,

Brian Bulaga and Chad Clifton for holding up well against one of the NFL’s best front sevens,

Ryan Pickett, Cullen Jenkins, Howard Green, and B.J. Raji for keeping up the pressure despite being held on virtually every play, and especially to Green for causing that interception,

Clay Matthews for being his usual beastly self,

Jarrett Bush for his key interception,

Pat Lee for doing all that he could in a tough situation,

A.J. Hawk for delivering several big hits,

Brett Swain for his special teams pursuit,

Tim Masthay for being the best punter the team has had since Hentrich,

Jordy Nelson for making up for every drop, usually in short order,

Andrew Quarless for getting yourself open in the end zone, even if Aaron didn’t see you,

James Starks for making the most out of his carries, as several were actually of great importance,

To the interior line for getting good push up the middle for almost the entire game,

To Brandon Jackson for his always stellar pass-blocking and clutch, 14 yard reception,

To James Jones who despite the drop that everyone remembers, had a quiet 5 catches for 50 yards,

To everyone in the banged up secondary and every backup LB for stepping up,

To Sam Shields for giving it a go after what I’m fairly sure was a shoulder dislocation,

To Charles Woodson for being a great player, a great leader, and a great teacher. You could still see his influence on the field even after he left.

To Nick Collins who tackled as surely as Charles, and played a brilliant centerfield,

To Donald Driver, who gave it all physically when he could, and gave it all emotionally when he could not,

And finally to the 4 players who I think had a case to be MVP,

To Aaron Rodgers for putting up another virtuoso performance at the quarterback position. If not for a few dropped passes this performance may have rivaled the Atlanta game, and given the level of defense he was facing, it may have anyway. I don’t think he threw a bad ball all game as even his incompletions seemed to be thrown with purpose. To not even present the threat of a run against a team like the Steelers and to still repeatedly torch them is nothing short of amazing.

To Greg Jennings for always managing to work himself open despite always facing the team’s best corner plus safety help. For precise route-running near the end zone and in small spaces, and for dragging that toe. Jennings bailed them out of bad situations time after time this season. He is adept as both a deep threat and a possession guy, and everything in-between. On Sunday he caught a 31 yard deep ball, and managed to hold onto a touchdown despite being lit up by Troy Polamalu. Not a lot of guys can do both.

To Desmond Bishop who was an absolute beast all game whether he was playing at the line, in coverage, or scooping up a key fumble. He was all over the field all day, leading the LBs in tackles (6 solo, 8 total), and making several key stops.

And finally, to Tramon Williams, who has developed into one of the NFL’s top corners over the last year. He made several key stops including on the final 4th down of the game. When he lost Woodson and Shields he didn’t panic or try to do too much, he just continued to, very quietly, eliminate whoever he was defending from the game. On the last play of the game that happened to be Mike Wallace, and Ben Roethlisberger made the mistake, as so many QBs have on the last play of the game this year, of trying to go to Tramon’s man. As always, this resulted in failure for the QB.

Thank you to the entire organization for an amazing season.

After big wins, championships, etc., one of the things I enjoy most is reading every article, listening to every radio show, and watching every recap of the game. It makes me happy all over again every time I do it. This one is going to make me happy for a long time.

Cheers.

Super Bowl

2011-02-05T21:29:00.001-06:00

I have no idea how tomorrow will go. None. But regardless, this season has been a fantastic surprise, and I for one plan on enjoying it, win or lose.

What You've Been Waiting For

2011-02-03T16:00:00.002-06:00

Marcel Projections!

From Tango, of course.

How To Score on The Bear Defense.

2011-01-18T10:13:00.002-06:00

I like to think of some football concepts in baseball terms. First downs are analogous to getting on base (or if you prefer, not making an out). Picking up first downs gives your offense extra chances to score, and in general, the more first downs you pick up, the better your offense will be.

There is another way to generate offense in the NFL. This is the “big play” which I see as analogous to slugging. Even if you create a lot of outs in baseball, you can still be (somewhat) valuable if you hit a lot of HRs, essentially capitalizing on the chances you do have.

The Bears “Cover-2” scheme has a reputation for taking away the deep ball, but I believe as the Bears play it this is a misnomer. The Bears cover-2 scheme excels at stopping drives. The way to attack the Bears is with slugging, not with OBP.
The key to understanding the Bears cover-2 is to understand Brian Urlacher’s responsibilities. He is charged with taking away the middle of the field on passing plays, which allows the safeties behind him to get deep drops and take away most deep balls from most teams. I would also be remiss if I did not mention that Lance Briggs is one of the best LBs in the league as well, especially in pass coverage on TEs. Against conventional offenses and with proper personnel (which the Bears do possess) this defense is truly difficult to do anything against. Throw Julius Peppers into the mix as both a pass-rusher and a run-stopper and it’s easy to see why the Bears have excelled this season.

While the presence of Urlacher makes the deep ball hard to throw for most teams the Packers are not most teams. In the last game of the regular season, the Packers scored all 10 of their points off of bombs to Greg Jennings on the outside (he was tackled at the 1-yard line both times). The Jets receivers also had success with big gains, as did the Bills’ Stevie Johnson. Look for the Packers to try and get the ball deep using two formations in particular.

1. Play-Action

Perhaps the Packers biggest upgrade going into this game is the perception of James Starks. Starks hasn’t actually played that well overall (though he was a major factor against the Eagles) but he’s played well enough to warrant some attention. Moreover, the one thing the Bears defense does struggle with is power running. Brian Urlacher is great in side-to-side pursuit, but can be blown up in one-on-one matchups with fullbacks and TEs. Former Detroit Lion fullback Corey Schlesinger seemed to delight in bowling over the fast but undersized middle linebacker.

If the Packers can get off a few successful runs early (even if it is only 4-5 yards) they will be able to draw Urlacher up from the deep middle and attack the area behind him. Even if play action isn’t working the Packers have one more option.

2. The 4/5 WR set.

Teams simply do not score a lot on the Bears (including the Packers), but the teams that have put up points on them have something in common. The Jets have Santonio Holmes, Braylon Edwards, and Dustin Keller. The Eagles have Maclin, Jackson, Celek, and a good 3rd WR in Jason Avant. Seemingly everyone on the Patriots is a weapon.
The Bears Cover-2 becomes vulnerable when it is spread out, and faced with multiple deep threats. Greg Jennings, Jordy Nelson, and James Jones should be able to do damage down the field if they’re not dropping the ball. The 5-wide set wreaks havoc with the Bear defense for a few reasons:

a. It forces them out of their base and into Nickel or Dime. Briggs and Urlacher are at their best in zone coverage. If you put them in a position where they’re rushing the passer or, even better, chasing a WR, you are neutralizing one of their strengths.

b. It forces inferior DBs onto the field. The Bear secondary isn’t a strength, and the more backups you can force onto the field, the better it is for you.

c. Aaron Rodgers is at his best outside of the pocket in the 4/5 WR sets. There is typically more room for him to run should it come to that, and with only 4-5 rushers and a lot of space, he can also buy time. If you give Jordy Nelson 7 seconds he will come open against a Nickel defender.

Soldier Field injects a lot of randomness into Bear home games. The wind is often howling off the lake which makes it colder and more difficult to pass effectively. The field is famously terrible ad players routinely slip and fall. The Packers would like nothing more than a nice calm day. If weather makes it difficult to throw the deep ball, the Packers will be in big trouble.

Packers Still Can't Win A Close Game

2011-01-09T22:02:00.002-06:00

Sadly, Aaron Rodgers record in media-defined close games (4 points or fewer) remains a terrible 2-13.

Thank God the Packers were able to absolutely destroy, dominate and humiliate the Eagles by 5. It was nice to not have to worry about the outcome of this one.

What I Remember About Jack Morris

2011-01-04T15:06:00.004-06:00

People who want Jack Morris in the Hall of Fame (which I'm fine with as long as you include Bert) tend to throw around the notion that "you had to be there."

I was around and sentient for most of Jack Morris's career. I remember Uecker talking about Morris as a great pitcher. I also remember the Brewers beating Morris most of the time. (This was before I knew pitcher wins were a stupid stat.)

Today I checked the stats against my memory.

Jack Morris v. The Milwaukee Brewers:

18-21 (Ha!)
4.11 ERA (Meh)
1.270 WHIP (Meh)

I wonder how much of my acquired anti-Morris sentiment is just based on the fact that against my team he wasn't very good.

Why OSU Is Favored

2011-01-04T08:39:00.002-06:00

1. As Jon has pointed out, OSU is the only Big 10 school that consistently brings in top recruiting classes.

2. OSU and Wisconsin were (in my opinion) quite a bit better than the rest of the Big Ten this year, and Wisconsin basically played even with one of the top 3 teams in the country.

3. In criticizing the line, many are saying things like "have you watched the Big Ten bowl games?" Judging OSU off of Michigan and Northwestern is silly.

I'm not going to rush out and put money on them, of course. Tressel is 0-3 against SEC teams and I honestly haven't seen Arkansas play this year, but I don't think the line is as crazy as it sounds.

(If I was forced to bet, I'd take the SEC team and the points, however.)

Stupid Myths About College Football

2011-01-03T12:04:00.003-06:00

Some people apparently like "The Bowl System", or as I like to call it, the "Corporate Sponsored Exhibition Game" system. You will frequently hear these people say that in the college football regular season every game is important because if you lose one game (for most teams) or two (for the rest) your season is over.

Here is a list of college football games that don't matter.

1. 99% of non-conference games.

Because of the BCS, and because there are so many bowl games, every team has a huge incentive to get enough wins to become "bowl eligible" and to not lose a game for as long as possible. This results in teams scheduling 3-4 cream-puff games every year that are basically pre-season games. They do not matter, and are boring.

2. Every game played by any team with 2+ losses. They can no longer win the title. Contrast with the NFL where even teams with 7 losses can still win the title. Who has a meaningful regular season again?

3. Every game played by 95% or so of non-AQ schools. They are eliminated before they even play a game.

4. Every bowl game that is not the BCS Championship game.

That's a lot of games right there. The fact is that most of the college football season is interesting only because it is football, and football is always kind of interesting, but the playoff system in the NFL actually serves to keep more teams alive for a longer period of time.

The Bowl system is stupid and outdated. It's a playoff system where almost everyone qualifies but almost no one can actually win. It's almost like the Caucus Race.

Congrats To The Pack

2011-01-03T10:01:00.003-06:00

I'm very glad that I get to care about pro football for one more week.

That was a stellar defensive effort against a team that didn't lay down at all. I don't know why Lovie Smith let Jay Cutler take that pounding back there, but the Packers deserve a lot of credit for taking the Bears' best punch and responding in kind.

Why The Big Ten Sucked In Bowl Games

2011-01-03T09:44:00.002-06:00

I think it's important to point this out because I think the reason this year is actually different than it usually is. The Big Ten used to do poorly in bowl season because too many teams played an anachronistic style and were unprepared to stop pro-style and spread offenses. I no longer think this is true across the board as many teams have (to their credit) attempted to modernize a bit. This year the Big Ten was bad because of a mix of down years for typically solid programs, and a few injuries.

1. First and foremost, Michigan is just plain bad.

2. Michigan State overachieved in winning a share of the Big Ten Title. They were close to losing several games to bad teams, and ended up in way over their heads in their bowl game. It happens sometimes.

3. Penn State had a down year, and only narrowly lost to Florida, which also had a down year.

4. Poor Northwestern lost their good QB, and played a feisty game anyway.

5. Wisconsin played a good team and barely lost. It happens.

6. Illinois and Iowa actually won their bowl games, but as lesser Big Ten schools (in terms of record) no one cares. Iowa decided to show up after playing terribly down the stretch.

A lot of individual things went wrong for the Big Ten, but I don't think there is anything systemically wrong anymore. I suspect that after Michigan gets Harbaugh they will rebound (eventually), that Penn State should develop into a stronger team, and that OSU will keep cheating their way to national prominence.

Why Wisconsin Lost The Rose Bowl

2011-01-03T08:26:00.002-06:00

I usually don't take losses too hard. After about 30 seconds or so I'm back to normal and ready to take on the rest of the day. That said, there are two loses this year that just bugged me.

1. The Packer loss to New England.

2. The Rose Bowl.

Before I get into the Rose Bowl, I would like to say that TCU played a great game, had a great game plan, and deserves all of their wins and accolades. That Carder guy is a beast.

The reason that these two losses bug me is that I think simply making a different decision or two would have prevented the loss, or at least would have made winning much more likely. In the Rose Bowl I didn't like the game plan. I thought they ran outside too much even after it was apparent that wasn't going to work. They took too many negative plays in the passing game. I would have liked so have seen nothing but Montee Ball and John Clay running up the middle all game, but I'm not a football coach and I don't study tape, and there were probably good reasons for their game plan.

But what the hell were they thinking on their last drive?

If you are down by 8 points, you will need a minimum of 2 possessions to win the game. One of those may come in overtime, but you are going to need two. Moreover, tying the game will require a 2-point conversion, and those are good just under 50% of the time. If you do not convert the 2-point conversion, you will definitely need to get the ball back. The point is, there are a lot of good reasons to hurry up if it's late and you're down by 8. Even if you have to run the ball to move the ball, as the Badgers probably did, you should not dawdle in between plays.

Here is what you need to know about the Badgers final drive.

1. They got the ball with 7:32 left in the game.

2. They eventually scored with 2:00 left in the game and one timeout.

3. This was not the time for a 5 minute, 32 second drive.

4. John Clay had a 30-yard run on a play that started at the 7:25 mark. After this play the Badgers used their 2nd timeout, yet somehow did not snap the ball again until the 6:31 mark.

I believe that had they simply hustled more on this drive they could have saved themselves a timeout as well as another minute or two. They played this with no urgency, almost as if they were resigned to the idea of getting the TD and the two without even considering what they would do if they did not convert.

And second to this complete lack of urgency, how on earth they decided to pass on their two-point conversion attempt is still beyond me.

That game was infuriating.

Bagwell and Steroid McCarthyism

2010-12-30T11:18:00.000-06:00

This is brilliant.

(H/T Tango)

Tim Tebow? Jesus Christ…

2010-12-28T09:16:00.005-06:00

This column is amazingly bad to the point that I do not know if it is serious or not. I believe it is because it contains facts that are not facts. (Or as I call them, "lies".) Good satire uses the truth to its advantage. This is just tripe. Assuming it is serious, it's almost certainly the worst thing ever published at Fanhouse.

Look, I suppose there is some outside shot that Tim Tebow will succeed in the NFL. Maybe his big frame will let him hang in the pocket like Roethlisberger and allow his receivers extra time to get open (and extra time for his terribly slow delivery). Maybe he continues to be a weapon running the ball. It could happen.

But it probably won’t.

And anyone who thinks it will based on a few Brandon Lloyd circus catches against one of the worst pass defenses in the league is just delusional. Tebow completed just over half his passes for a lot of yards based on a few bombs that clicked. He had 1 TD and 1 pick, and added a rushing TD (although he only averaged 2.7 ypc). This was not some stellar performance, and pretending it was is just silly. Matt Cassel (201, 3 TDs, 0 picks) and David Garrard (342, 2 TDs, 0 picks) tore this team up. Mark Sanchez, who is apparently quite bad at football, looked like John Elway against Houston (315, 3TDs, 1 Pick). Donovan McNabb threw for 426 yards and a TD against them (no picks). Kerry Collins and Bruce Gradkowski put up games that were at least the equal of Tebow.

On Sunday, Tebow completed 55% of his passes. Only one other QB has completed as low a percentage as Tebow against the Texans this year: Rusty Smith. The Texans have allowed a QB to complete at least 65% of his passes on 8 occasions this year, and have allowed a QB to complete 70% of his passes 5 times. Tebow threw 1 pick and 1 TD. The only other QBs to not have a positive TD/Int ratio against the Texans are Bruce Gradkowski and Rusty Smith. The only other QBs to not throw at least 2 TD passes against the Texans are McNabb (who threw for 426 yards and no picks) and Rusty Smith.

It is difficult to oversell just how bad the Texans secondary was this year. That is what makes this piece of fanboy nonsense so completely terrible.

At the 2009 World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party, I bought and wore a teal and white, Jacksonville Jaguar colors, "Draft Tebow" T-shirt. The shirt had been for sale at a local Walgreen's -- perhaps the first time Walgreen's had been directly complicit in an NCAA violation -- and I wore it at the Georgia-Florida game to gauge fan reaction. (Read that column here.)

At that time Tebow and Florida were the defending national champions and how Tebow projected as an NFL quarterback was the single most-debated issue in the Southeastern Conference. Throw open the phone lines beneath the Mason-Dixon line and you could take calls for hours, everyone had an opinion.

Generally, the Tebow haters, and they were legion, would argue that his football glory was short-lived. That he could never win a football game in the NFL. That he would have to change positions to tight end or fullback. That Tim Tebow was a system quarterback who had no future at the position.

Just to distinguish myself as a "non-hater", I’d like to point something out. Tim Tebow’s college stats, in a vaccuum, absolutely look like they should translate to NFL success. He started a lot of games and he had a very high completion percentage. We’re not talking about a Kyle Boller-esque combine darling here.
The reasons that people are skeptical of Tebow are almost entirely based on scouting.

He has a funky delivery (and not in the good, Philip Rivers way), and he has trouble with the accuracy of certain throws. He was bigger than many college linebackers (but not professional linebackers), and he’s not terribly fast. And people overrate him because of his stupid moralizing. OK, so maybe I’m a bit of a hater.

Anyway, Tebow sort of reminds me of Ron Dayne. I think most people knew that Dayne wouldn’t succeed as a pro. He was just too slow, and his size advantage would only work in college. He had physical gifts, they just stopped working when the competition got better. Anyway…

I always argued otherwise, thinking back to the lasers I'd seen a freshman Tebow throwing in warm-ups at the Swamp in 2006. I had faith in Tebow's pro potential, argued that any team that didn't consider drafting him was foolish. And after I saw Tebow dismantle the Sugar Bowl record books en route to a 31-for-35 passing performance for 482 yards in a romp over Cincinnati. He also tossed in 51 yards rushing.

How could anyone have any doubts?

Cincinnati? Dude, have you seen the Big East lately? That Cinci team allowed Illinois to score 39 points. Pitt scored 44 on them. An unranked UConn team scored 45 on them. I would hope that Tim Tebow would at least put up better numbers than Juice Williams.

But Tebow's domination of the Sugar Bowl record book was in the future on that October day at the Cocktail Party. On that day Florida fans saw the Draft Tebow shirt and did the Gator chomp. They'd seen the Tebow, had faith in his ability to overcome any challenge.

These were in the ancient days before Tebow's statue was complete in Gainesville and before there was a plaque outside the wall featuring the speech Tebow gave after the loss to Ole Miss. "The Promise." But Georgia fans were not as enamored of Tebow. "He's a f---- fullback," screamed one fan. "He's a tight end," screamed another. "Tebow's a f---- p--y," catcalled an elegant female Bulldog.

Love him or hate him, already, Tebow was legend.

None of this has anything to do with Tebow’s ability to play in the pros. We know about all of this garbage. Announcers talked about nothing else during every Florida broadcast. The auditory fellatio directed at Tebow by announcers was also legend.

The question remained: would Tebow's game translate at the next level? Could he become a winning quarterback in the NFL? His jerseys flew off the shelf, becoming the best-selling jersey in the NFL. But Tebow stayed on the sideline. Then the head coach who'd risked his coaching future on drafting him, Josh McDaniels, was fired. At long last, Tebow took the field.

I would just like to point out that Kyle Orton actually played pretty well, especially early. And it’s quite possible that had the Broncos stayed healthy, and not been run by morons, or had some kind of defense, that Orton could very well have kept it up. Later, we will be talking about "300 yard games" for no good reason. Just keep in mind that Orton threw for over 300 yards in 4 of the Broncos first 5 games this year.

He lost his first game as a starter, against the Oakland Raiders,

8/16 for 138 yards and 1 TD. Half of those went to Brandon Lloyd.

but on Sunday Tebow took the field as a starter for a second time. And Tim Tebow vanquished the doubters who claimed he'd never be a winning quarterback at the NFL level.

By completing just over 50% of his passes against the worst secondary in the NFL. Well, I’m silenced. Oh, wait, no I’m not, because I watch NFL games and know about the Texans and follow Steph Stradley on Twitter.

Throwing for 308 yards against the Houston Texas, Tebow rallied his Denver Broncos team from a 17-0, second-half deficit and snatched a victory many never believed would come, a 24-23 triumph.

Really? Houston is basically famous for blowing second-half leads at this point. They’ve blown some truly amazing leads. They lost on a pick-6 in OT 2 weeks before this. 3 weeks ago they blew a big lead against the Eagles. In week 11 they let the Jets go all the way down the field with no timeouts and under a minute to go in only 2 plays to blow what should have been a sure victory.

The Texans do this all the time.

It wasn't just that Tebow won, it's the fact that his game clearly translates to the next level.

Did he improve his accuracy? Speed up his delivery?

Tebow's emotional embrace of the gridiron, his infectious enthusiasm, it's all there, working on an NFL sideline just like it worked in college. Just the way that his critics long contended it wouldn't. The anti-Tebow contingent was flat out wrong, but they won't admit it yet.

Oh. So…he’s a cheerleader. I’m glad Brandon Lloyd started playing better after Tebow started inspiring him. Oh, wait, he was awesome even when the kind of mopey-looking Neckbeard was QB. So, who is being enthused by Tebow exactly?

Already, the Tebow haters are retrenching their criticisms now that he is a winning quarterback in the NFL.

Because he won a game? Like, 1 game? So John Skelton is also a “Winning Quarterback”?

Tebow, in throwing for 300 yards in just his second start as a rookie, has managed a feat that neither Peyton nor Eli Manning could accomplish in their rookie seasons.

Eli Manning, nice QB, not that great. Peyton Manning was drafted #1 overall. When you are drafted #1 overall the team that drafts you is terrible as a rule (barring a trade, I suppose). Also, the Texans secondary doesn’t come around very often, and as previously pointed out, everyone has torched them. Also, raw yardage is a stupid measure.

There must be a reason why they were wrong. The Tebow haters are circling, nervous, still unwilling to give up the hateful fight. They point to the Houston Texans' pass defense, currently ranked 32nd in the league.

Uhm..yes. Though I’m not sure last really captures their terribleness completely. I mean, you can’t be worse than 32nd. You can’t fall off the floor, as they say.
Want to read a whole bunch of straw man arguments all in a row?

The same people who said that Tebow would never win an NFL game,

Basically, no one said this. Tons of awful QBs have “won” NFL games.

wring their hands and argue that this is too small of a sample size to prove anything.

Yes, one game is too small of a sample size to prove anything. That is correct. But they will not “wring their hands” as they are correct.

And even if it does prove anything, the Texans are awful. So what, you know, if the Broncos are also awful. That's why the Texans were favored to win this game.

No , no, no. The Texans are not awful. The Texans’ offense is very good. This is why the Texans are in almost every game they play. Their defense, however, is so bad that even Tim Tebow looked OK against it.

Of course, those Tebow haters have already been proven wrong so now they have to move their targets, have to argue that Tebow can't do it again.

Now I'm not really not sure if this is parody or not. I’m not that acquainted with Clay Travis's writing, but this sounds so meatball-y that it is difficult to believe it was published. Actually, I take that back. This is the kind of tripe I might expect from an old-timey columnist, so I guess my main surprise is that an online magazine published this. It might be Tebow-baiting.

When he does, they'll argue that he can't beat a team with a winning record, that he can't beat a 3-4 defense, that he can't win a playoff game, that he can't win a Super Bowl. You get the picture. Tebow haters gonna hate. And keep shifting the argument every time Tebow proves them wrong. Tebow haters will begin every sentence with, "Yeah, but..."

You did see his game against the Raiders last week, right? Where he completed 8 passes? And it was only the Raiders. I mean, we’re dealing with a small sample size here to start, the least you could do is not ignore half of the sample size.

But every time they adjust their argument Tebow moves further down the field, powering through his haters like they stood between him and the goal line. Already the college debate that lasted for three years -- could Tebow win in the NFL?-- has shifted to, how many games can Tebow win in the NFL? The answer? A ton. Make no mistake about it, quarterbacks passing for 300 yards in their rookie season are rare, no matter who the NFL competition is.

This is not true, and it is not true that 300 yard games against the Texans are rare. And “300 yards” is one of those annoying, arbitrary round number bench marks. Sticking to the 300 yard thing ignores that fact that Tebow wasn’t very accurate in this game, and was actually picked off by a defense that only had 8 non-Rusty interceptions all season.

In fact, here's a list of Super Bowl winning NFL quarterbacks who didn't manage that feat in their first year: Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees and Brett Favre.

First, I hate the inclusion of Eli Manning in this list. Second, Drew Bledsoe did it. So did Marc Bulger (453). And Kevin Kolb (391). And Peyton Manning (302), and Peyton Manning (309), and Peyton Manning (357), and Peyton Manning (335). Wait. Hold on. Didn’t he just claim that Peyton had never done this? Let’s rewind…

Make no mistake about it, quarterbacks passing for 300 yards in their rookie season are rare, no matter who the NFL competition is.

In fact, here's a list of Super Bowl winning NFL quarterbacks who didn't manage that feat in their first year: Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees and Brett Favre.

Not only did Peyton Manning do this, he is the all-time rookie leader in 300 yard passing games. Good lord. It’s one thing to make a stupid argument. It’s another thing entirely to be so lazy in researching your article that you get a counting stat about Peyton Manning not only wrong, but really really wrong. Opposite wrong. This article must be satire.

Here's a list of Super Bowl winning quarterbacks from the past 20 years who threw for 300 or more yards in their second career start.

That would be zero.

For the record, Peyton did it in his first career start. Also, it doesn’t really matter.

Not a one.

I mean, really? By the way, while I’ve been writing this I’ve been researching how rare 300 yard games by rookie QBs actually are. In 2002 it happened 6 times, 3 by Bulger, and 1 each by Joey Harrington, Patrick Ramsey, and Chad Hutchinson. Truly the elite of the QB world. By the way, Patrick Ramsey did it in his second career game. Did you do any research at all for this article?

And, oh by the way, Bronco fans, need a guy who also threw for 300 yards in the second-to-last game of his rookie season? Guy by the name of John Elway. Pretty good company, right?

John Elway – 15 year career, 5 Super Bowl appearances, 2 Wins, #1 overall pick, 9-time pro-bowler, multiple passing record holder, former MVP, great athlete, huge arm, quick release, extremely accurate.

Tim Tebow – controversial 1st-round pick, slow, ugly delivery, questions about his ability to make several NFL throws, has only played two games and completed just over 50% of his passes. Also, circumcises kids in the offseason.

Not similar.

Mine eyes have seen the Tebow and as much as it drives his haters crazy, you ain't seen nothing yet. But what you have seen is something the haters said you'd never see, Tebow with a win as a starting quarterback in the NFL.

No one said that. This column is nothing but a fanboy collection of straw men and non-facts. If it’s parody it commits the sin of not being funny, but I sure hope it’s parody, because if it’s not, it’s Bleacher Report bad.

This author is from Tennessee, which led me to believe this was satire as he probably isn't a big Florida fan and annoyed by Tebow hagiography, and he got stats about Peyton Manning just wrong, which a Tennessean probably shouldn't do. But then we have this on Twitter:

Hundreds of emailers told me I was a fool for believing in Tebow's NFL future for the past three years. Early validation for Tebow fans.

I'm really not sure, but I think it's terrible either way.

Quote of the Day

2010-12-22T13:54:00.001-06:00

From Tango:

Note to mothers: Craig Counsell throws with his right hand and hits from the left side. That’s exactly how you should bring up your kids.

I couldn't agree more.

When the Packers lost the game

2010-12-20T08:49:00.002-06:00

Yes, the offensive lineman running for 71 yards without being touched was awful and embarrassing, but they lost the game here:

4-1-NE 1 (13:52) 2-M.Crosby 19 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-61-B.Goode, Holder-8-T.Masthay.

I hate 19 yard FGs. Unless you are trailing by 2 or less and time is running out, they're always a bad idea, but this was a particularly bad decision. I'll never understand why coaches do not think in terms of possessions. Being up by 7 is good. Being up by 9 or more is great. When your opponent needs two offensive possession to beat you instead of one, you are far more likely to win the game.

Being up by 10 on the Pats is simply far more valuable than being up by 6, and it was well worth the risk. Moreover, even if the Packers were stopped the Pats likely could not have gone the length of the field starting from the 1.

That was a terrible decision, and cost them the game as much as anything.

Meet Your New (Real) Ace

2010-12-20T07:57:00.003-06:00

http://www.thedashow.com/mp3/da-greinke.mp3

http://www.thedashow.com/mp3/THURS%20REWIND%20-%20GREINKE.MP3

These are the greatest interviews with an athlete I have ever heard. It's not even close. His reaction to the Pitt/Anniston break up reminds me of my reaction to Zack and Kelly.

Here is a great thread by Royals fans combining his best quotes.

(After searching for these interviews I realized I first heard them on Deadspin back in 2007. Man, that site really used to be a less embarrassing place).

Greinke

2010-12-19T00:58:00.004-06:00

It appears that Zach Greinke is now a Brewer. Still not confirmed, and not sure on the details. My opinion on the deal hinges greatly on whether Jake Odorizzi was included.

ESK edit: deal confirmed

Brewers get: Zack Greinke, Yuniesky Betancourt, $2 million to buy out Betancourt

Royals get: Cain, Escobar, Odorizzi, Jeffress (PTBN instead of Jeffress)

I'm smitten

Paul Edit

After thinking it over, screw Odorizzi. Love the deal. Love it.

The Bears Continued Luck

2010-12-16T10:19:00.003-06:00

If the Bears win on Monday, and if Joe Webb starts for the Vikings, the Bears will have 5 of their ten wins against the following backup (or worse) QBs:

Shaun Hill

Jimmy Clausen

Tyler Thigpen

Drew Stanton

Joe Webb

Joe Webb

2010-12-16T09:52:00.003-06:00

For the Packers to have a shot at winning the North, the Vikings must beat the Bears this week on Monday Night. Therefore, it is not good that the Vikings are likely to start a player I have literally never heard of before.

Sins Committed by Mike, Mike, and Mark Schlereth this morning:

2010-12-16T08:42:00.001-06:00

1. Claiming that a high number of rushing attempts causes your team to win. (Check)

2. Blaming Mark Sanchez’s struggles on bad weather. (Check)

3. Going on ad nauseum about the Jets. (Check)

4. Claiming that “After Aaron Rodgers went out last week the offense was anemic”. (Check, and while technically true, ignored the fact that it was just as bad before he went out.)

5. Claimed that a team needs to “find its identity” to be good. I don’t know what that means. (Check)

6. Showtunes, sung by the Mikes. (Check)

7. Citing Darius Rucker's approval of said showtunes. (Check)

8. Misstatement of NFC North playoff scenario. (Check – Claim that a Packers loss eliminates them from contention. This is only true if the Bears win as well.)

9. Advertisements now integrated into the show, accompanied by annoying background drum machine. (Check)

10. Mark Schlereth – “I don’t have much use for statistics, but the one I like to look at is rush attempts”. (Check. And Good Lord.)

I think they made it worse. I did not think it was possible. And this didn’t even feature Ditka.

Our Long National Nightmare is Over

2010-12-13T17:01:00.001-06:00

They Are Legend. Legendarily Stupid.

2010-12-13T11:33:00.004-06:00

The Big Ten is splitting into divisions next year so that they can have a football championship game and accommodate Nebraska. They just picked the names for their divisions. They are...wait for it...
The Legends

The Leaders

As Moe the bartender once said, that's the worst name I ever heard.

ESK (I didn't want to make a new post, but this sums up my thoughts on the names, the logo and the whole shebang):

Can the Packers still make the playoffs?

2010-12-13T09:23:00.001-06:00

Probably not, but let’s take a look at what needs to shake out, what you need to root for, etc.

First and foremost, you absolutely want the Vikings to beat the Giants tonight. Doing so would create a 3-way tie for the last wild card spot between GB, TB, and the Giants. Of those teams, the Packers have the worst Conference record but I doubt that will end up mattering for a few reasons:

1. The Packers still play against the Giants, so that tiebreaker will end up being head to head.

2. To make the playoffs I figure the Packers can at maximum lose one more game (and that’s a stretch) and that game would have to be an out of division game to the Patriots.

3. Every remaining Bucs game is against the NFC. The Bucs are 6-3 and the Packers are 6-4. I believe the Pack will have to win all of their remaining conference games to make the playoffs (8-4) and any Bucs loss will put them in a tie for that tiebreaker. If the Bucs can win out, they will win the tiebreaker.

The Packers have 2 possible ways to get into the playoffs.

1.Catch the Bears.

2.Win the Wild Card.

1. Catch the Bears

The Bears sit a game up on the Packers with a head-to-head win in their possession. In order to catch the Bears it is extremely likely that the Packers will have to win the head to head matchup, and in the event that they end up in a tie, the Bears will still probably win the tiebreaker. Why? Division record. The Packers currently sit at 3-2 within the division with 1 game left (against the Bears). The Bears are 4-0 with 2 games left (next week at Minnesota if they can fix their stadium in time, and against the Packers). If the Bears beat Minnesota next week they effectively lock up the tiebreaker. This means that to win the division, the Packers will have to win one more game than the Bears, and if the Bears beat Minnesota, that would meant the Packers would have to, at minimum, go 11-5.

In short, if the Bears win at Minnesota next week, and the Packers lose in Foxboro next week (like everyone has for the last 20 consecutive games or so), the Bears will wrap up the division. That is exceedingly likely to happen.

If the Bears lose next week things become much more plausible. If you assume an equally (at least) plausible GB loss to New England, that would put the Bears at 9-5 and the Packers at 8-6 with 2 games to play. In this scenario a Packer win against Chicago would put the teams even in the first 2 tiebreakers moving us to common games. The Packers and Bears have 12 games in common, and each team is currently 7-3 in those games with 2 yet to play. For the Bears, those games are Minnesota and the NYJ. For the Pack it’s New England and the Giants. If you will recall, to even make this scenario plausible we had to assume a Bear loss to Minnesota, and if the Packers somehow did manage to force a tie in this scenario, they probably win with either the common opponents tiebreaker or the Conference Record tiebreaker. Of course beating the Giants is no easy task and that game can also make this whole thing moot.

If the Vikings can somehow pull their game out next week, we’ll reexamine further, but if the Bears win it’s basically over.

2. The Wild Card.

This whole analysis is probably academic for one simple reason. The Packers, a team that just lost to the Detroit Lions and did not look good doing it, have an extremely difficult final three games and they have to win a high percentage of those games, and possibly all of them.

The Saints basically have the 1st Wild Card slot locked up, and should they happen to catch Atlanta, then Atlanta would similarly have it locked up. There are 4 teams in play for the final Wild Card spot; whoever does not win the NFC East (Eagles of Giants), the Bucs, and the Packers. The Giants have yet to play this week @Minnesota/Detroit, and sit ½ game up at 8-4. After the game tonight, they will finish up at home against Philly, and then on the road at GB and @Washington. Green Bay will almost certainly need to win the head-to-head matchup with the Giants to have any chance at the wild card both because they need the win, and probably, the tiebreaker.

Tampa Bay escaped this weekend on a missed extra point by the Redskins. They have a relatively easy schedule at home against Detroit, at home against Seattle, and @ New Orleans. It is exceedingly likely that New Orleans will have their spot locked up in week 17 and give Tampa a healthy dose of Chase Daniels.

One thing the Packers do have going for them is their win over the Eagles. Should the Giants beat Minnesota tonight and Philly next week, they will put the Eagles into the Wild Card mix, where the Packers already own the head-to-head tiebreaker.
The Packers appear to have the most difficult road to the playoffs of these four teams. One strange thing: Minnesota will play a prominent role no matter what. They play the Giants tonight, the Bears next week, and the Eagles in week 16. The Packers are in the strange position of hoping for a 3-game Viking winning streak to end the season.

Without doing any math of any kind, I’d put the Packers’ odds of making the playoffs at something around 25%. Probably a bit worse. Still, stranger things have happened.

The classic win-win

2010-12-06T07:46:00.002-06:00

What is coming over me? I sat in front of twitter, various message boards, the urinal's web site, email clients and my phone...all waiting to praise Doug Melvin? This can't be true. My desire to praise the mustache even drew my attention away for brief moments from one of the best football games of the year. (Polamalu showing he's a God awful defensive back but a stunning linebacker yet again).

The deal (as of now):

Toronto gets: Brett Lawrie

Milwaukee gets: Shaun Marcum

I love the deal. I know many, many people are high on Lawrie but honestly, the experts really aren't. After last season most who have seen him play agree Lawrie is destined for a corner spot. As a 2B Lawrie has an absolute ton of upside and his bat makes him a clear blue chipper. As a corner outfielder? I don't see it. A .795 OPS at the AA level isn't something to get me worked up from a corner outfielder. His K rate is over 20% and he doesn't hit for power. It could be that I'm naturally sand bagging him because I like the deal, but I really don't see a whole lot there to get me excited, assuming his glove moves him to right. BrewerFan.net loved him in September (seemingly suggesting trading Weeks or Hart to clear room for him).

As to Marcum, find me a glaring issue? He's back from Tommy John (an injury unlikely to recur and a surgery that restores past durability), was playing in the AL bEast for a team in contention (if that sort of thing matters to you), was considered the team ace (pitched opening day) and pitched well, posting a better WHIP than Gallardo. His 3.5 WAR, when you assume he's replacing someone below replacement level, is a massive upgrade. I've read suggestions that hoping he'll put up similar numbers is wishful thinking, but he'll come to Milwaukee without any of the pressures he had in Toronto and more importantly, without having to face the Yankees or Red Sox. But wait, there is more....the Brewers control him for at least two more seasons. I think Jack Moore in his post at FanGraphs sums it up well:

With Lawrie coming off a very impressive .361 wOBA season as a 20 year old at AA Huntsville, it’s hard to imagine his value at a higher point in the near future. The Brewers had a large roster hole to fill, and due to the concerns about Lawrie’s position, Milwaukee GM Doug Melvin decided to capitalize on Lawrie’s high prospect stock. By most accounts, this deal was fair to both sides. The Brewers filled a need and the Jays dealt from a position of surplus. The Brewers win in the short term, and, if Lawrie develops in accordance to his top prospect status, the Jays should enjoy a solid long term return.

So where does the rotation fall? I'm guessing it will look like Gallardo, Wolf, Marcum, Rogers, Narveson. The Brewers might give Jeffress and others a shot to compete for that last spot in the Spring and I expect Melvin to bring in some crafty, assy Veteran innings eater to foul the whole thing up...

Sidenote, the notorious Brewer hater Jon Heyman thinks this is a lousy deal for the Brewers. I'm stunned.

First Mock Draft (that I've seen)

2010-12-03T10:59:00.002-06:00

http://www.draftcountdown.com/sub/Mock-Draft-B.php

Couple things:

1. Von Miller would be an excellent pick for the Packers. I know everyone in the world is going to be screaming for a running back, but there isn't a lot of first round talent at the position. A 3-4 defense with two pass rushers on the outside with the d-back abilities of Williams, Collins and Woodson? Goodness can you imagine what a genius like Capers could cook up (please don't leave, Dom).

2. TWO BADGERS PROJECTED FIRST ROUND!......please don't leave JJ.

What’s the worst part about the new Soldier Field? I mean the inside, not the space toilet-y outside.

2010-11-23T08:46:00.002-06:00

I attended the Bears-Vikings game a few weeks ago, just to cross a stadium off the list. Also, it's kind of fun to boo everyone. Anyway, I was not impressed. Why?

Well, the single worst thing is...

1. BEAR DOWN!

I have no problem with cheesy theme songs in theory, and all Chicago teams have them. (Go Cubs Go, Here come the Hawks, the Go-Go White Sox thing), but there is a time and a place for these things, and that time and place is not after every Field Goal. Imagine if, at Wrigley Field, the Cubs played Go Cubs Go after every run. That’s what it’s like at Soldier.

NO ONE IS AFRAID OF YOUR T-FORMATION. That’s the worst part of the song other than all of the other parts. I know the Wing-T was standard football back in the day and perhaps the Bears had some fearsome people running the thing, but the formation itself isn’t scary. It’s just weird. Like, if a terrible team would just line up their backfield in the T, all of a sudden the opposing defense would start cowering.

2. The second worst thing is that they try to label the fans as “Phase 4” (offense, defense, and special teams being the other 3 phases). I appreciate that everyone has the 12th man and the Packers have the G-Force thing and you want to be original, but once again, this doesn’t make any sense.

“Hey, Frank, are we on offense or defense?”
“We’re on “Fans”. You know, Phase 4.”
“Oh, in that case I’m going to the bathroom.”

See what I mean? No sense at all.

3. The 3rd worst part is that beer costs 8 bucks.

4. The 4th worst part is that the field itself is perpetually in terrible shape. When you drive from the North side of Chicago to the South side, you commonly take Lakeshore Drive. Once you pass downtown on a nice summer day, you might be shocked to find that the median as well as the sides of the road have absolutely beautiful flower gardens growing on them, courtesy of the city. I will never understand how the middle of a highway is more well-manicured than the multi-million dollar football stadium next to said highway.

5. The 5th worst part is that when there is a timeout, the announcer says “Timeout”, and everyone in the stands yells “Where?”, and then the announcer says “on the field”, and the crowd yells “Oh.” It’s weird.

6. The 6th worst part is the Bear growl. While they do exercise some restraint, unlike the hornblower in Minnesota or the Wildcat noise at Northwestern, it’s still too often for my taste.

7. The 7th worst part is that while the inside is definitely nicer than the outside, it’s still not nearly as nice as most new stadiums including the refurbished Lambeau Field.

Actually, I’m just kidding. The worst part is that you have to watch the Bears play.

The Chicago Bears are Frauds

2010-11-23T08:42:00.002-06:00

There has been far too much talk lately involving the phrase "you are what your record says you are." This is a vast oversimplification which we can disprove with a quick look at the Chicago Bears.

First of all, while the Bears are tied with the Packers after their win against Miami’s backups, it’s worth pointing out that the Bears do not in fact hold a head to head tiebreaker over the Packers. People say it, but it’s not true. The reason it’s not true even though the Bears do have a head to head win against the Packers, against teams in your own division you have to beat them twice to gain that tiebreaker. This is obvious. The Bears will not have an opportunity to secure said tiebreaker until the last game of the year, and who knows what the situation will be for that game.

As for why the Bears are frauds:

1. Win v. Detroit, on nonsense Calvin Johnson rule. After the Bears knocked Matthew Stafford from the game. In a game in which the Bears turned the ball over 4 times and actually lost the turnover battle.

2. Win v. Dallas Cowboys, one of the worst teams in the league even when they still had Romo.

3. Win v. Green Bay Packers – In this game, the Packers set their franchise record for penalties, which is strange in retrospect because this Packer team actually hasn’t been penalized that much. It’s also worth pointing out that many of those penalties were both game-changing and bullshit. Jay Cutler and the Bear offense were basically terrible, but they capitalized on a Devin Hester punt return and good field position (penalties) to eek out a win over a much better team. The Bears were outgained by over 100 yards in this game.

4. Win v. Carolina Panthers, one of the 2 or 3 teams worse than the Dallas Cowboys. The Quarterbacks in this game were Todd Collins, Caleb Hanie, Matt Moore, and Jimmy Clausen. The Bear QBs were 8-19 for 51 yards. Against any other opponent this is almost certainly a loss, but a rare big day by Matt Forte bailed them out.

5. Win v. Buffalo, one of the 2 or 3 teams worse than the Dallas Cowboys. Despite being completely inept the Bears won this game on the strength of a missed PAT and a subsequent missed 2-pt conversion to make up for it. That is the margin of victory.

6. Win v. Minnesota. A rare good performance by the Bears, but even this win is suspect as it came against a team in complete turmoil after the Randy Moss fiasco, with no Sidney Rice and without Percy Harvin for an extended period. With no threat in the passing game the Bears were able to bottle up Adrian Peterson, and get a few tipped interceptions. It was the best possible time to play against the Vikings.

7. Win v. Miami. The Dolphins were playing without their first and second string QBs, a severely injured all-pro left tackle, and they lost their best WR and center early in the game. Oh, and since it was a short week their third string QB only had one day to get ready.

So yeah. They’re lucky. They’ll probably make the playoffs, but they’re truly not very good. It happens sometimes.

Let's Run Half Court

2010-11-19T10:26:00.002-06:00

They have played football in Wrigley Field many, many times. Yet somehow, they still screwed it up:

Only one end zone will be used at Wrigley Field on Saturday for the Illinois-Northwestern game because of safety concerns, Illinois sports information director Kent Brown said Friday.

The east end zone is feet away from the right-field wall, and although there is padding, there was still concerns that injuries could take place. Northwestern coach Pat Fitzgerald had said he would have different game plans for the different end zones to avoid the possibility of injury.

God I Hate The Bears

2010-11-19T08:37:00.001-06:00

They are truly the luckiest team ever. When Brandon Marshall went down, that game was over.

Running Up the Score: An IU Perspective

2010-11-15T17:44:00.002-06:00

"Who can we blame but ourselves?"

That was the reaction to the final score from my wife, an IU alum and die hard. It was clear Indiana was not ready for this game. The coaching staff was not ready, the offense was not ready, and the defense was most certainly not ready for what they faced on Saturday.

I like the Indiana program. Not real reason why, I just really liked what Hoepner was doing with them before he passed. It's a shame to see his work and dedication pissed away so quickly by incompetence and indifference.

I was listening to the second half (it was clear watching was no longer required) and Indiana's color guy did get pretty pissed off when White was running the ball in the 4th (I agree, that was not smart from a risk perspective) but other than that little niggle the rest of Hoosier country is more embarrassed than angry, and if they are angry it certainly isn't at the Badgers. My favorite comment (from the Indiana radio play-by-play):

"I wonder what Bielema's card calls for with up 57?"

At least the folks down here maintain their sense of humor.

Rick Peterson

2010-11-15T14:23:00.000-06:00

Is no longer the Brewers' pitching coach.

Peterson officially out as #Brewers pitching coach. Has one more year on contract. Teams still with openings: #Pirates, #Mets, #Yankees #MLB

Jeff Potrykus, of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

2010-11-15T12:08:00.001-06:00

I agree with this completely:

And one last editorial comment on the Indiana game.

The only way the Badgers could have avoided scoring Saturday would have been to kneel down on just about every offensive play from late in the third quarter until the final minute.

To me, that would have been an insult to the Indiana coaches and players.

But what do I know? I'm just a reporter who covered the game and saw the effort of the Indiana defenders sag dramatically as the game progressed.

(So, any problem with Wisconsin running up the score?)

2010-11-15T10:31:00.002-06:00

No, not really.

(Why not?)

Bret Bielema is a lot of things. “Kind of a dick” is probably one of them. But so is “cold and calculating.” I will remind you of his abuse of the new kickoff rules against Penn State a few years ago that almost caused Joe Paterno to have a heart attack. I like that the coach of the Badgers cares enough to understand the subtleties of certain rules, and has the fortitude to abuse those rules where they can be abused.

The fact is that the BCS has the Badgers behind several other one-loss teams, and the nonsensical “computer” part isn’t going to give them any help. Their only hope is to move up in the equally nonsensical polls, and the polls care about margin of victory even if they pretend not to. Moreover, the controversial move has garnered the program far more attention this morning than they normally get, and as they say, all publicity is good publicity.

(But really, what’s the difference between 83 and like, 56?)

At 56 you’re just another team. Teams routinely put up 56. Scoring more really helps you a lot. Much of the way we look at Oregon is based on some outlandish scores (72-0 over New Mexico, 60-13 over UCLA, plus a few 53 and 52s). If you have a few of those huge games, suddenly people start viewing you as an offensive juggernaut and the pollsters respond accordingly. Running up the score often makes logical sense.

(Didn’t they take “margin of victory” out of the BCS equation?)

To the contrary, they’ve increased the importance of “margin of victory” over time. Every time the “computers” spit out something that differs significantly from the polls, the evil BCS committee changes the equation to give more weight to the polls, and voters do care about “margin of victory.”

(Don’t you feel bad for those kids at Indiana?)

In my experience, while losing sucks, and getting blown out sucks, at some point while getting blown out you just sort of stop caring. Moreover, this isn’t Austin Peay. Indiana is a Big Ten football program that should have beaten Iowa last week. If they want to stop getting blown out by Wisconsin and the rest of the Big Ten, they should try a little harder to build a program.

(So you think this will be good for the Badgers?)

Absolutely. If nothing else they are now an attractive villain. They’re on the national radar. I don’t think I’ve ever heard Mike and Mike talk about the University of Wisconsin before, but they were all over them this morning. Everyone is going to want to see them get embarrassed by someone else, and maybe they will. Michigan can put up some points and maybe they’ll steamroll the Badgers. Who knows? But if they can keep winning, this will only help them.

(So you don’t think that coaches should “call off the dogs” at some point?)

I actually find the whole idea offensive to some extent. You don’t have any duty to the other team. If you start destroying someone I don’t know why every team doesn’t use that as an opportunity to run their 2nd string and 3rd stringers out there for some real live game work. Golic this morning said that “this wasn’t the time for that.” That’s stupid. There is no other time for that. Let me ask you some questions.

(Uhm, ok.)

Do you think Wisconsin should have just gotten in the V formation for every play after halftime and then punted?

(Well, no, but you don’t have to keep passing.)

So you want them to just run.

(Yes.)

You know, they were running pretty well too. They were averaging 7.2 yards per carry.

(Well, they don’t have to run that hard. They could just run basic plays.)

So you want them to run plays, but you don’t want them to try to score?

(I suppose.)

To what end?

(Well, they should still play football.)

It sounds to me like you want them to just pretend to play football. Isn’t that more insulting to Indiana? How is that different from just lining up in the V?

(…)

It’s a stupid fiction that you should “call off the dogs.” Bret did what was best for his team. He put them in the best position he could. What more can you ask of a coach?

Gold Glove

2010-11-09T14:58:00.002-06:00

Congrats to Derek Jeter on winning his Nobel Peace Pri...What?...Gold Glove?!

That's asinine!

Al Harris's Finest Hour

2010-11-08T13:46:00.000-06:00

Al Harris

2010-11-08T09:41:00.002-06:00

I couldn't agree with ESK more. I like Al, I'm sad to see Al go. For a brief period 4-5 years ago Al Harris may have been the best cornerback in football. But that was 4-5 years ago.

Al was never fast. He was a technique guy, which is why he has lasted as long as he has at such a high level, but that's a double-edged sword. When you don't start out fast you also do not have much speed to lose.

Al had also been declining noticeably even before the injury, and that knee injury was absolutely catastrophic. It is extremely unlikely that Al Harris will ever possess the speed to be an effective starting cornerback again.

I always thought he would end up at safety in the Leroy Butler mold. Leroy also never had blazing speed (he always looked more like a small linebacker to me) and Al had the instincts and the run support ability to play the position, but the Packers look to be in good shape there as well.

I also have no doubt that the locker room will not take this well. Everything I here about Al Harris off the field is hugely positive. He's a nice guy, a leader, and a true professional. The Packers on Twitter (Finley, Grant, etc.) were pretty pissed off, and surprised, and I suppose I'm surprised too, but mainly because I didn't think the organization would have the guts to make a move like this.

The Harris/Roenicke Barometer

2010-11-08T08:33:00.002-06:00

Sometimes sports fans are gifted with polarizing events that separate the wheat from the chaff. The intelligent fan from the fanatic. The Paul Ryan from the Christine O'Donnell.

This week, Wisconsin sports fans were gifted with two such events.

The first was newly minted Brewers manager Ron Roenicke expressing his love for the "small ball." At his press conference he clearly showed that moving up a base if worth giving up an out. An impatience that only old-school baseball fans (and people who think Carlos Gomez is "exciting") could love.

"At times, you're going to say why are you running so much? That's the style I like to play. I've seen it win a lot of games over the years. At times we're going to get thrown out. But over the course of the season we're going to score more runs by being aggressive."

Speaking of Carlos Gomez, I find it hard to believe our new manager will jettison the excitingly fasty small-bally player. I mean, maybe he makes some out but by God is he aggressive! Last year Brewers bemoaned the fact that the vast majority of Fielders home runs were solo shots. This year they applaud the fact that Fielder will have fewer opportunities to hit multi-run bombs thanks to a managers fundamental inability to properly calculate risk/reward.

94% of fans in a recent Journal poll support trading outs for bases.

As of yet there is no poll on the Packers apparent decision to jettison Al Harris, the 36 year old cornerback who destroyed every part of his knee last season. Harris, despite not being activated, has practiced the last three weeks with the Packers. I repeat, Al Harris has been practicing for three solid weeks and has not been activated.

Folks, this is a pure performance issue. Al Harris is simply not as good as the other options on this football team. He is no longer the starting cornerback, and a nickel back who can't play special teams simply does not belong on the roster. The big worry is that Al Harris will end up on the Vikings. So what? The Vikings are a terrible football team with three wins against other terrible football teams. I hope Harris does end up in Minnesota because it will mean he won't be relevant this year.

The point is that these are simple head v. heart issues. I love to see a stolen base. It's fun. Runner v. pitcher and catcher in a battle of wits, speed and deception. In a vacuum a stolen base is cool. Stealing bases as a philosophy to score more runs is stupid. It's stupider when you look at the Brewers lineup. The Brewers scored 750 runs last year. The Cardinals score 736. Small bally San Diego scored a paltry 665 (woohoo PetCo). The Brewers are built to mash. Five players had more than 23 home runs last season, when you look at every player on the roster (starters, pitchers, backups, Zaun) the Brewers still slugged a whopping .424. That is third best in the NL.

In 2010 the Brewers had the second most home runs, 4th highest OBP, 3rd highest OPS, 4th in runs and second most total bases in the national league. The also led the league in at0bats, a stat that is sure to plummet once we start giving away outs. HITTING WAS NOT THE PROBLEM! There is zero reason to change the Milwaukee approach to offense. Offense did not lose the Brewers games. The Brewers are a power team that has no problem scoring runs from first. If you disagree you're an illogical fan who likes speed more than winning.

Right now the Packers have the 3rd best pass defense in football. Al Harris is an unnecessary risk that cannot contribute anything to stopping the run or more important to special teams. Sorry, I love him, but he is superfluous and activating him makes the Packers worse. If you disagree you're listening to your heart and not your head. I hope Al Harris finds success somewhere, but he has no place on the 2010 Packers roster.

In short, if you like Ron Roenicke's base-running philosophy for a team that is already scoring runs by the boatload, or if you think Al Harris should be kept because he's been on the team so long you are probably a witch...I mean irrational.

Injuries or no

2010-10-17T13:14:00.001-05:00

AJ Hawk needs to be benched. Preferably cut.

Fun With Easily Accessible Numbers

2010-10-12T09:16:00.002-05:00

1. Top 10 Scoring Teams In the NFL

1. San Diego
2. Indy (How much have you heard about Peyton Manning’s down season?)
3. New York Jets
4. Titans
5. Patriots (Note: Only 4 games so far)
6. Detroit (Note: All teams above the Lions are from the AFC, meaning the Lions have scored more points than any team in the NFC. Interesting, no?)
7. Philly
8. Green Bay
9. Houston
10. Atlanta

Except for the highest scoring team in the league, and the poor Lions, every team on this list has a winning record. #11 is Oakland, by the way.

2. Top 10 in Point Differential

1. NY Jets (54)
2. Atlanta Falcons (43)
3. Tennessee Titans (37)
4. Pittsburgh Steelers (36, only 4 games, all without their starting QB)
5. New England Patriots (35, only 4 games, and tied with…)
6. Indianapolis Colts (35)
7. San Diego Chargers (34)
8. Green Bay Packers (30)
9. Baltimore Ravens (20)
10. Kansas City Chiefs (20)

The Bills are far and away the worst team at -74, but I could see the Panthers making a run at them, sitting in 2ns with -58. The 49ers, who seem to believe they’re actually a good team, are only 4 points ahead of the Panthers. All three of the aforementioned are 0-5. Strangely rounding out the bottom 5 are Arizona (-30) and Jacksonville (-30), both of which have winning records. Oh, what a wacky league.

3. The Packers have yet to play on artificial turf.

4. The Packers would be tied for first place in the AFC South.

5. The Packers would be tied for last place in the AFC South.

6. NFC North – Next 5 opponents and where they rank in Point Differential

Green Bay:

Miami – 27th (-26)
Minnesota - 19th (-4)
NYJ – 1st (54)
Dallas – 21st (-6)
Minnesota again 19th (-4)
Average Rank – 17.4

Chicago

Seattle – 15th (-2)
Washington - 18th (-3)
Buffalo – 32 (-74)
Minnesota – 19th (-4)
Miami – 27th (-26)
Average Rank – 22.2

Minnesota

Dallas – 21st (-6)
Green Bay – 8th (30)
New England – 5th (35)
Arizona – 29th (-50)
Chicago – 12th (18)
Average Rank – 15

Detroit

NY Giants – 14th (8)
Washington – 18th (-3)
NY Jets – 1st (54)
Buffalo – 32nd (-74)
Dallas – 21st (-6)
Average Rank – 17.2

Parity!

2010-10-10T15:43:00.000-05:00

The Packers are just as shitty as every other NFL team.

The Human Element

2010-10-08T08:19:00.012-05:00

If memory serves the umpires screwed up the baseball playoffs last year too. Here are some things that that "Human Element" was responsible for yesterday.

1. Providing the San Francisco Giants with the winning run by not calling Buster Posey out trying to steal second.

2. Providing New York with the lead runs by not calling Lance Berkman out on strike 3.

3. Possibly denying us a few extra games as the Yankees are now exceedingly likely to sweep the Twins.

4. Costing Major League Baseball millions of dollars in revenue by (possibly) shortening the Twins series.

Hunter Wendelstedt called an awful game last night. It's never a good sign when even the announcers are complaining about the officiating. He was all over the map with his zone. He noticeably tightened up the zone with 2 strikes. He was a huge factor in the outcome of the game.

What is this, the NBA?

ESK edit: Hunter's strikezone...visual evidence:

Rob Neyer on Bob Brenly

2010-10-06T12:32:00.002-05:00

From The Big Book of Baseball Lineups:

“Because Bob Brenly probably did as many stupid things as you can do as a manager and still win the World Series. One of the odd things about the Series was this: Brenly made two terrible moves with his pitching staff, and yet he got blasted by the baseball writers just once…and that was for a move that actually made sense.

Going into the Series against the dynastic Yankees, the big question was, would Brenly get four starts from his aces, or five? Actually, there was another big question too.: if Brenly would ask Randy Johnson or Curt Schilling to start three games, which one. They totaled virtually the same number of innings during the regular season, and Johnson’s ERA was significantly better during the regular season. But where Johnson was number one in the National League, Schilling was number two. Both were well rested; the Diamondbacks had knocked out the Braves on October 21, six days before the first game of the World Series. Brenly chose Schilling for the opener. It was a questionable decision, but Brenly probably deserved the benefit of the doubt on that one; presumably, he knew which of his aces was better equipped to start twice on three days rest.

Schilling was great in Game 1, the Yankees weren’t. After four innings, the Diamondbacks led 9-1. After fice innings, the Diamondbacks led 9-1. Schilling had his W in the bag. Time to turn this one over to the pen, and get an early start on resting up for game 4. But Schilling pitched on.

After 6 innings, the Diamondbacks still led 9-1.

And Schilling pitched on.

Finally, in the bottom of the seventh, Brenly did what he should have done in the bottom of the fifth; he replaced his starter with a pinch hitter. Curt Schilling left the game after throwin 102 pitches.

Johnson started Game 2 and fired a three-hit shutout. Brian Anderson and a pair of relievers pitched well in Game 3, but Roger Clemens and Mariano Rivera pitched better.

So three days after game 1 it’s Schilling’s turn again in Game 4. He was great…but after seven innings he was also gassed. Brenly took him out, the game tied at one run apiece. Arizona took a 3-1 lead in the top of the eight, but then with two outs in the bottom of the ninth, Tino Martinez tied the game with a two-run homer off Byung-Hyun Kim. The Diamondbacks didn’t score in the tenth. And then, with two outs (of course) in the bottom of the tenth, Derek Jeter hit another homer off Kim to end the game.

The Media jumped on Brenly for taking Schilling out of the game. That wasn’t fair; Brenly had ample evidence that Schilling was indeed tiring. A smaller portion of the media jumped on Brenly for sending Kim out for thenth, his third inning. That might have been fair; he’d pitched three full innings in a game just once all season, and that was way back on May 18th.

But what everybody somehow missed was Brenly’s big mistake, which was letting Schilling pitch seven innings in Game 1. If Schilling had pitched just five or six innings in the opener, isn’t I tlikely that he could have gone more than seven innings in game 4? If Schilling had lasted eight innings in game 4, isn’t it likely that Kim would have finished off the Yankees in the ninth? Kim retired five of the first six Yankees he faced, four of them on strikeouts. (Of course, all of this assumes that Schilling couldn’t have pitched the ninth inning himself. And if he’d thrown twenty-five or thirty fewer pitches in Game 1, maybe he could have. )
Okay, so Brenly screwed up. He didn’t rest his pitcher when he had the chance, and it probably cost him a World Series game. But Brenly’s a smart fellow; so he learned from his mistake, right?

Nope. Brenly made almost the exact same mistake in Game 6.

The last paragraph is probably the most damning:

“Bob Brenly madetwo great decisions in the 2001 World Series. He chose Curt Schilling to start three games, and he sent Randy Johnson to the bullpen in Game 7. But those great decisions were nearly undone by his ridiculous obeisance to the notion that it’s somehow unmanly for a starting pitcher to come out of a game simply because his team has a huge lead.”

JJ Hardy

2010-10-06T10:47:00.001-05:00

Carlos Gomez was a disaster, of course. Here's Jack Moore on JJ:

The fantastic range is why Hardy is rated highly by every defensive metric available today. Over about 4.5 full seasons, UZR rates Hardy as a +41 SS, DRS rates him as +38, and TotalZone rates him at +23. Regardless of which one you choose, Hardy has provided fantastic value as a solid glove shortstop, and both the scouting reports and the eye test back that up.

Hardy might not have been as good as his +8 UZR suggests in such a small sample, but the fact that he put up 1.6 WAR in 375 plate appearances before factoring in defense is enough to merit a look. Throw in the fact that a +8 UZR in that sample is legitimately attainable for somebody with Hardy’s defensive prowess, and you have a shortstop that could arguably be the best remaining in the playoffs.

Bob Brenly Sucks

2010-10-06T10:37:00.003-05:00

Update: They're not (yet) hiring him, per Haudricourt:

'Melvin had this to say about Brenly rumor: "Unless somebody else has been doing the hiring process, that's not true."'

Bob Brenly may very well be your next Brewer manager. I just want to make it known that Bob Brenly sucks. He's never seen a bunt he didn't like. He likes the "little things that win games" that actually lose games. He's into being a touch guy and not coddling players. He's (debatably) advocated hitting Ryan Braun for the sin of looking at Ryan Dempster funny.

I think basically all baseball managers are bad. Brenly strikes me as extra bad.

I Couldn't Catch A Cold, So Throw To Me More!!

2010-10-05T07:17:00.003-05:00

I officially dislike Nick Toon:

"It was frustrating," Toon said. "I feel like I could have contributed a little bit more but that's just the way the plays were called today. That's how it is some days. It is what it is . . .

"I just think the main issue was I just didn't get enough opportunities to make plays."

Strange comments coming from a guy who single-handedly killed two drives by dropping simple passes. I feel like you could have contributed a lot more as well, Nick...by not playing like absolute garbage.

Why Wisconsin Was Overrated

2010-10-03T08:45:00.003-05:00

All the talent in the world cannot overcome a completely incompetent head coach in college football.

I doubt he cares much. Long as he keeps getting into the Capital One Bowl he'll keep Barry happy and never have the pressure of high expectations.

Disgraceful coaching performance yesterday, absolutely atrocious.

Good season, Bret. Now you get to booze it up til that late December third-tier bowl game!

POTUS? More Like FIB

2010-09-30T09:39:00.003-05:00

You son of a b......!

http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/obama-reportedly-takes-pot-shot-at-green-bay-packers

Felix Hernandez Makes Everyone Smarter

2010-09-30T09:06:00.001-05:00

Paraphrase of Tim Kurkjian on Mike and Mike this morning:

“I still believe wins to be very important, but you have to look at Felix Hernandez in context. Look at his ERA. I still think ERA is the single best way to judge a pitcher, and his ERA si a full run better than Sabathia.”

Paraphrase of Cal Ripken on Mike and Mike, yesterday:

“Billy (Ripken) and I have been going back and forth on this, and…I finally convinced Billy, I mean, I think you still need wins because at some point you have to hold pitchers accountable, but in like 9 of Felix Hernandez’s 12 losses he has gotten 0 or 1 run of run support. You can’t hold him responsible for that.”

Now, there’s still a whole lot of stupid in both of those quotes, but look what Felix and the Mariners did. He pitched so brilliantly, and they were so very terrible on offense, that they managed to shine a blinding, all-revealing light on the dreaded “win” statistic. They showed everyone in completely unmistakable, inexcusable clarity just how much the rest of your team matters towards getting a “win.”

I think there is always this fallback notion among the dumber baseball pundits that if your team scores like 3-4 runs that you should be able to use your superhuman power-up abilities to pitch a great game and only allow 2-3 runs, and conversely, if your team scores 7-8 runs that you can just take it easy, save your arm, and allow 5-6 runs. Call it the Jack Morris Hypothesis. No one can claim that Jack Morris hypothesis applies to King Felix.

Just how bad were the Mariners? Read this whole column by the always brilliant Joe Posnanski. Here’s a snippit, but really, read it all.

Their batting splits are a smorgasbord of goodies (or baddies) such as these treats:

-- Mariners' No. 3 hitters are hitting .227 ... which is actually BETTER than their No. 5 hitters (.209).

-- Mariners second basemen, shortstops and catchers combined are slugging .301.

-- The Mariners as a team are hitting .234. The Mariners as a team minus Ichiro are 10 points worse.

The Mariners are historically terrible. And because of their terribleness, it’s possible that in the future the Cy Young award voters will continue to move away from “wins” and towards actual good statistics. Greinke was progress last year. Felix, if he wins this year, will become a benchmark. Any pundit arguing for a low-win candidate in the future will be able to point to Felix and his 13-12 mark.

I’m still a bit concerned that the writers will settle on David Price as a sort of “compromise” candidate, but I don’t think it’s too likely. So here’s to the Mariners and King Felix, for providing a real-world example of what probably should have remained hypothetical.

What would happen if the best pitcher in the league was on a team with the worst offense of the last half-century or so?

All Tactics and No Strategy

2010-09-29T10:02:00.003-05:00

In a nutshell, I think this is what plagues most NFL coaches. Many coaches are former players or “football men.” Most can teach you correct blocking technique, footwork, mechanical issues, etc. Most can break down tape and see what individual players are doing wrong on the field. And most coaches can make adjustments on the fly, at least to some extent. All of these skills are extremely useful, but I think most coaching staffs lack someone with broader strategic thinking.

I think that Bill Belichik is the exception that proves the rule. When I watch a Patriots game and there comes a time for a “controversial” decision, I feel like Belichik’s decision is always the one that the other team did not want him to make. If they think they’ve stopped the Patriots at midfield on a 4th and 1, Belichik frequently goes for it, gets it, and just deflates the defense. He is as responsible as anyone for the pass-happy NFL. He runs for a purpose, not just to “establish the run” or some such nonsense. And you rarely hear about clock management issues in New England. These are all big-picture strategy issues. 4th down philosophy has nothing to do with instituting discipline or teaching zone blocking.

Take a look at Mike McCarthy’s recent comments:

~ The offensive line, we knew we were going to put stress on the tackles. We tried to help them out some. Penalties directly affected our point production. That's what cost us. The tackles didn't just draw the penalties, the interior linemen did as well. The tackles graded just OK, but we knew they were going to be stressed out in a loud environment and against a prime player facing Julius Peppers.

~ How do you evaluate the run game. The run game? Depends. What's the definition of a run game? We went in to the game with a specific run plan. I felt the running backs were productive. Brandon and John played well with the opportunities they were given. They played us a certain way... The number of attempts is not always the most important factor. I thought the run production was a positive. Would not be smart to run Brandon Jackson or John Kuhn 25 times a game anyway.

~ We did not win the special teams battle. One of the key objectives was...the team that made the big play in special teams would be a big factor in the game. They made three with two big punt returns and a blocked field goal. We did not do a good job with the fundamentals. We were challenged last week on our depth chart with changing special teams personnel.

These strike me as tactical issues, and I think McCarthy’s answers on these questions are fine. The first gives you son insight into how the play of the interior line can affect the ends. His run game comments show a good understanding of the Bears’ strengths and how to properly attack them. Now let’s look at some “strategic” comments:

On the Jones fumble challenge: "I was standing right there. I had a pretty good indication of what happened. I did see the defensive back's foot swing out of bounds. I was just hopeful that the officials, maybe, you know, saw that his foot may have hit. With 2:18 and two challenges left, you know, that's obviously a huge play in the game, maybe it could swing our way."

This shows a real lack of understanding of your situation in the game. If you do see evidence that Jennings (the Bear, not the Packer) stepped out or was out when recovering the fumble, then this is a fine challenge, but given your situation you have to be absolutely sure because the timeout you will lose if you are wrong is absolutely precious. The Bears were nearly in field goal range already and it was exceedingly likely that they would at least have the opportunity to kick a field goal if nothing else. You have to be thinking about getting the ball back at that point.

On whether he considered letting Bears score at the end: "No, I did not. I did not consider letting them score at the end. I felt they missed a field goal in the game...There was talk about it, but it was not the decision we made."

We have talked about this one already, but isn’t it amazing? “I did not consider letting them score at the end.” Such a meat-head thing to say. No one thinking about what it would take to actually win the game would ever say that.

More teams could use a General. Someone with a vision of what it takes to win (or at least stay in the game) in every situation. Someone who understands that when you are killing the clock, adding another set of downs is often more important than running off 40 seconds on a hopeless running play. Someone who understands when to go for it and when to punt. Someone who understands that when you are down by two scores late in a game you not only need to score, you need to score fast.

This inefficiency could be exploited very easily and very cheaply by any NFL team that cared to do it. It’s almost unfathomable that in the multi-billion dollar business that is the NFL, a head coach would not know that sometimes you need to get the ball back to win, and the only way to get it back sometimes is to let the other team score. All tactics, no strategy.

Dear Mike McCarthy,

2010-09-28T08:57:00.002-05:00

So you never considered letting the Bears score? With under 2 minutes to play and only 1 timeout? That makes you an idiot.

Look, some things are debatable, but this is not one of them. All morning on the radio, on the internet, and in the real paper I’ve read about the “debate” of whether you should let the other team score in this situation, but those people are all idiot pundits (and by the way, shame on Wayne Larivee for ducking the question on the radio this morning). You coach a professional football team, and your job is to win games. By not allowing the Bears to score, you completely destroyed your team’s admittedly small chance of winning. Don’t believe me? Let’s do some math.

Robbie Gould has been in the league for 5 years, and in that time he has attempted 210 kicks of less than 30 yards (180 PATs and 30 FGs). He has missed exactly once, on a PAT 5 years ago. The odds of Robbie Gould missing the field goal that you were counting on him to miss are so close to 0 as to basically be 0. By giving the Bears a field goal with less than 10 seconds remaining you essentially conceded the game.

If you allow the Bears to score (which, by the way, they were stupidly attempting to do) you find yourself down 7 with about 1:45 to go, with the ball probably around the 20 yard line. I can’t seem to find the exact statistic, but if memory serves I believe an average NFL team scores a touchdown when starting from their own 20 yard line about 1/6 (or about 15%) of the time. I’m sure you have someone who can tell you the exact statistic since you coach an actual NFL football team and presumably employ people to keep this information. If I happen to be off by a few percentage points you can just plug in your numbers.

With a timeout and 1:45 to go, I don’t really think the clock would be much of a factor, but just to make you feel better we will ding them 5% and say that the Packers have about a 10% chance of scoring upon getting the ball back. Should they manage to score they would then need to either go for 2 or win in overtime, both of which are roughly 50/50 propositions.

All in all, if you allow the Bears to score your odds of winning the game go from 0, to about 5-7.5%. Your odds aren’t great, but the smart way is at least possible.

You are terrible at managing the clock. You should hire someone just to manage the clock for you so that you don’t look like such a moron. Please address this before the end of the season. This isn’t rocket science, it’s basically telling time. I have more complaints about the game, but again, there is a right and a wrong answer on this issue, and on this issue you are even stupider than Mike and Mike, and they are, as far as I can tell, the two dumbest people in the world.

Sincerely,

Paul Noonan

PSA: Fire Joe Morgan Reunion Today

2010-09-22T08:16:00.001-05:00

Ken, Dak, and Junior are back again for one day only on Deadspin.

Russell Branyan Understands Russell Branyan

2010-09-20T16:55:00.000-05:00

From BP:

DL: You’ve grounded into fewer than 30 double plays in over 3,000 plate appearances. How meaningful is that to you?

RB: I can’t stand hitting into double plays. I pride myself on hitting the ball in the air. We recently had a series in New York where I made one, maybe two, outs on the ground. That was a three-game set. I pride myself on getting a good pitch to hit and driving it. I want to hit the ball in the air, because that’s where I’m going to do my damage—hitting balls that land on the outfield grass or land in the seats. I’m not going to do any damage hitting the ball on the ground, to the infield, because with my speed I’m just not going to beat out those ground balls.

I think that’s basically my style. A coach once told me that with a strikeout, you stay out of the double play. I don’t think it’s that simple, but it’s definitely a plus when you have a guy up there in a certain situation and you know there is a high [probability] that he’s going to stay out of a double play. He’s going to keep the inning going and allow the next guy to hit, even if he makes an out. Double plays… there are only 27 outs and those are precious outs. If you make two on one swing of the bat, it’s obviously not a good thing.

Why Wisconsin Probably Isn’t Overrated Despite Looking Bad On Saturday

2010-09-20T09:49:00.001-05:00

I’ve seen this idea picking up steam after the semi-debacle on Saturday which the Badgers frankly had no business winning. I’ve also seen some revisionist history going around about the San Jose State game which was completely dominated by the Badgers, but ended up looking close-ish on the scoreboard. Let’s keep a few things in mind:

1. Nick Toon did not play on Saturday, nor did he play last week against SJSU.

2. Nick Toon is the best WR on the team.

3. David Gilreath did not play at all on Saturday, and missed most of last week after stupidly not calling for a fair catch.

4. David Gilreath, aside from being their 2nd best WR, is also an excellent special teams player.

5. Montee Ball isn’t very good, which the coaching staff finally seems to have figured out.

6. John Clay had off-season ankle surgery, and part of the game plan has been to use him sparingly. Montee Ball not being very good has compounded this problem.

7. J.J. Watt spent most of the game injured.

Wisconsin has been operating with a skeleton crew on offense all season, and some struggles were to be expected. The popular idea is that the ASU offense was far better than the Wisconsin offense on Saturday, but it’s actually pretty hard to make that case.

Steven Threet – 63%, 6.4 yards per pass, 0 TD, 0 INT

Scott Tolzien – 76%, 9.8 yards per pass, 1 TD, 0 INT

ASU RBs – 7.5 YPC

Wisconsin RBs Not Named Montee Ball – 5.8 YPC

There is no way to sugarcoat allowing 7.5 yards per carry, but the Badgers were almost as good when Montee wasn’t in the game, and the defense was fighting injuries all day. That said, Steven Threet wasn’t able to capitalize on his fantastic running attack with effective passing (though the refs admittedly helped out a little) while Tolzien and Kendricks used play-action with great effectiveness.

The previous Saturday, the San Jose State game was only close at all because James White fumbled the ball through the end zone when going in for a score. Statistically Wisconsin dominated that game, especially running, where they outgained SJSU 212 to 55 while averaging almost an extra 2 yards per carry. Tolzien again outplayed his competition outgaining the SJSU QBs 8.7 to 8.4, but the run game made a comeback impossible.

Rather than being overrated, it would be more accurate to say that the Badgers have weathered injuries early in the season. They should get Toon and Gilreath back for the start of the Big Ten schedule, which should open up the offense more. James White, I suspect, will move into the Terrell Fletcher role opposite John Clay’s Brent Moss. Tolzien will continue to be his extremely efficient self, and Lance Kendricks will continue to be one of the nation’s best TEs.

There are questions on defense, but when healthy they have looked pretty good. Rather than relying on what are essentially 3 preseason games to judge them, I’d rather take the long view of a team that was very good last season potentially becoming great with another year of experience. No one will know for sure until the Big Ten season actually gets underway, but calling them overrated at this point is premature.

Packers - Bills NFL Week 2 Thread

2010-09-19T09:34:00.003-05:00

I found myself incredibly annoyed yesterday because I didn't have a place to complain about the Badgers play-calling (averaging 7+ yards per carry, WHY RUN END AROUNDS) so I wanted to make sure I had somewhere to bitch and moan to fellow bitchnmoaners.

I don't expect a lot of trouble and I expect this game to kill any thoughts of a Lynch to the Packers trade. Jackson is gonna step up, Rodgers is going to be firing on all cylinders, and no one will care. ESPN/NFLN will be far too busy strapping on knee pads while praising Favre's 500th TD pass.

Why The Bills Scare Me, Just A Little

2010-09-16T08:52:00.002-05:00

Don't get me wrong, I think the Packers will probably wipe the floor with the hapless Bills. That said, I find the following facts troubling:

1. The Bills are good at 1 thing: pass defense.

2. Our best RB is newly out for the year, and this is the kind of game where he probably would have shined.

I just hope they don't get into a situation where the Bills have managed to keep it within a score, it's late, and they're forced to pass every down.

Paul's Picks

2010-09-13T08:37:00.002-05:00

I've been on vacation, and returned just in time for football. This is a bit late I realize, but I'll keep it to what I thought before Week 1 was actually played. I am very happy about the Packers first win as I had that game mentally chalked up as a probably loss, and I find the ensuing QB controversy in Philly to be hilarious.

Anyway:

NFC

NFC North - Vikings

NFC East - Giants

NFC West - 49ers

NFC South - Saints

Wild Cards - Eagles, Cowboys

AFC

AFC North - Ravens

AFC East - Jets

AFC West - Chiefs, I suppose

AFC South - Colts

Wild Cards - Titans, Patriots

Siperbowl - Saints v. Ravens, Ravens winning.

Obviously a lot of this looks stupid given the weekend results. To be honest, I have no idea who will win the two Western divisions. I thought the 49ers would at least play some defense even if they do have a terrible quarterback, but someone has to win that division and everyone but the Seahawks has a terrible quarterback. In the AFC West the Chargers are probably still the class of the division, but they've had a tumultuous off-season. A friend talked me out of the Raiders, thankfully, but I'm already regretting that Chiefs pick.

ESK's 2010 NFL Predictions

2010-09-10T16:06:00.002-05:00

AFC East: Patriots

AFC North: Bengals

AFC South: Colts

AFC West: Chargers

Wildcard: Broncos, Jets

NFC East: Giants

NFC North: Packers (12-4)

NFC South: New Orleans

NFC West: 49ers (win the division at 7-9)

Wildcard: Atlanta, Dallas

Super Bowl: Bengals v. Packers

Maybe I am reading too much into the preseason (and last night) but I don't think there are any great teams left. 12 wins will be the most for any team in the league, and a handful of teams will get there. We always say "there are no perfect teams" but I think this year there aren't even any teams with both an above average offense and defense, much less the complete package.

As far as the Packers, I've actually gotten more bullish on the team the more I have seen and heard of Morgan Burnett. There is a very, very real chance that Burnett is a significant upgrade in coverage over Bigby.

Also, while the Packers do have a pretty tough schedule on paper, they do not face a great quarterback until December, and Brady is the only one they face all year long. Obviously there are some good ones in there; Matt Ryan and Tony Romo certainly have the weapons to be great and there is a chance, I suppose, that Favre gets younger than he was Thursday as the season goes on. When the biggest weakness is an unproven secondary, not facing the best QB's in the league is a serious plus and negates some of my concern about that unit.

Therefore I am saying 12-4. They'll go 5-1 in the division, lose at New England, lose at Atlanta and shit the bed somewhere else (maybe benching Rodgers for some of the last game).

Fire Brad Fischer

2010-09-06T15:50:00.001-05:00

Do not let him onto the field for the 9th. Disgraceful.

Packers Are Boned

2010-09-03T10:06:00.004-05:00

NFL.com Predictions

Every single NFL.com "expert" picks the Packers to be in the Super Bowl. Even Pat Kirwin, who picks the Vikings to win the division, still has the green and gold making it to the Super Bowl. Aaron Rodgers is not only the most oft chosen OPoY but also gets the most number of MVP nods.

I now predict an 8-8 season.

(Not really, I'll be back before Thursday to give real predictions, when I see the final cuts).

Where for art thou Carlos Gomez?

2010-08-29T11:39:00.002-05:00

Looking at today's starting lineup and I see Dickerson and Inglett in the starting lineup. I assume this is to get more left handed bats into the lineup, but really...it's Charlie Morton. The splits are somewhat different but it's kind of meaningless when both righties (.908 OPS) and lefties (1.093) absolutely mash against the guy.

I had no internet or cell service in Yosemite this past week so I didn't catch any of the games til yesterday. Has Carlos Gomez gotten any at-bats since returning to the team? It looks like he has most certainly not started at all. Lorenzo Cain is obviously proving himself the starting center fielder of the future and Dickerson is a better 4th option since he has some offensive potential.

So, where does this put Gomez? I'd like to think that Melvin will be able to move Gomez for a bullpen arm as the team rebuilds the entire staff (yet again...) but I'm not hopeful.

For those that think I was too harsh in ridiculing Gomez's incredibly limited intelligence...well.

As for my trip, it was amazing, thank you for asking.

Just A Reminder

2010-08-27T08:50:00.002-05:00

Even thought the Packers looked fantastic last night, I thought this would be a good time to remind everyone that pre-season games don't mean much of anything, and that everyone should keep their expectations in check.

While I think this team has the potential to be elite, and somewhere in the neighborhood of 12-4, they also have a much tougher schedule than last year* and I can easily imagine them going 8-8 (or worse) and missing the playoffs. And if that happens it's entirely possible that they are still a good team.

*I've told this to a lot of people and I invariably get back a response to the effect of "How do you know? The NFL is really unpredictable and while this looks like a tough schedule now it may not by the end of the season."

It's true that this schedule may not be as tough as I think it will be, but I feel like people are ignoring last year's schedule, and we do know concretely that that was a truly simple schedule. Perhaps the schedule this year will not be "difficult", but it is hard to imagine a schedule including the Jets, Patriots, Giants, Falcons, Cowboys, Eagles and Redskins will be as putrid as a schedule that included St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Cleveland, and Seattle. (And a resting Arizona Cardinals team.) Detroit will also almost certainly be better (as they say, you can't fall off the floor). So Buffalo is terrible, and maybe the 49ers will regress since Alex Smith is still awful, and maybe the Falcons aren't as good as people think, and maybe either Kevin Kolb or Donovan McNabb struggles, and maybe Chad Henne kills Miami, and Maybe Revis misses the first 8 games.

These things are all possible, but while there was very little chance of St. Louis or Cleveland or Seattle or Tampa Bay (even though they won, they were still terrible) putting together a decent team, there is a good chance the several of the 2010 group will.

Why Defense in Baseball Might Be Overrated

2010-08-11T09:53:00.000-05:00

I say “might” because a lot of the people behind stats like UZR and FRAA and whatnot are very good at math and have put far more thought into this than I did driving to work this morning. Defense is a hot topic, and quite a few smart GMs (including Theo Epstein) have made defense a point of emphasis this year in their player acquisitions. This does not seem to be working. Seattle has basically been destroyed by focusing on defense to the detriment of offense. I’ve always been offensively-minded and I enjoy watching players like Adam Dunn and Russell Branyan, which is the mindset that these GMs were trying to cash in on, I suppose. That said, it seems to me that there is a good argument to be made that defense really is far less important than offense. There may be obvious holes in a few of these points (and feel free to point them out), but they seem to make sense to me.

1. The Zero Bound

You cannot hold a team to fewer than 0 runs. Think about a team made up of average pitchers, 5 Ozzie Smiths (assuming that Ozzie would be brilliant defensively at every position. And let’s leave catcher out of this for now.) and 4 average defenders. Say Ozzie plays 3rd, SS, 2b, CF, and RF, and Mr. Average plays 1st, LF, Catcher, and DH (say we’re in the AL). Already this is a brilliant defensive team. Ozzie in center will cover for most of the deficiencies of the LF, and 1B just isn’t that important a position to defend. Maybe this team gives up 2 runs a game where your normal defensive team gives up 3. Maybe a bit better than that, and maybe a bit worse. Now add another Ozzie. Put him in LF.

How much better did you make the team? The CF Ozzie was already helping Mr. Average LF a lot. Most of the field was covered by brilliant defenders. Most bloop hits were caught. Most plays deep in the hole were being made. Now add another Ozzie at 1st base. How this arguably helps even less. On defense, I would argue that except for catcher each additional investment you make helps you less and less. You are in a situation where you are realizing diminishing returns.

Now take a team of 5 Albert Pujols and 4 average batters. So far this year Albert has been worth about .456 runs per game better than a replacement level player. Average does not equal replacement level, but let’s assume that the replacement level 1st baseman (which is Albert’s baseline when calculating his VORP) is about the same as the average player in general. This may not be true, but let’s go with it. If we sub in another Albert for one of the average batters, we add another .456 runs per game. The Alberts do not cannibalize each other. In fact, by creating fewer outs they may actually help each other slightly. In short, adding offense does not have the same problem of diminishing returns as adding defense. You get more bang for your buck.

2. Balls in Play.

Defense is only effective on balls in play. Over the course of a game of baseball it is entirely possible that very few balls will actually enter a defensible part of the field. There will be home runs, walks, strike-outs, hit batsmen, and the occasional balk. In any given game the defense is probably involved in about half of all plays in any serious way. I think there have even been a few games in history where the only plays in the field were taken by the first baseman, unassisted.

3. Even when the ball is in play, most plays are routine.

Lazy flyballs are easy for almost everyone, and make up a large percentage of flyballs. Sharp line drives are usually hits, and are not catchable by almost anyone. Many grounders are soft, and right at players. Sometimes players his harmless pop flies.

4. Not every ballpark is conducive to great defense.

If you play in Fenway, there is no point in paying your LF for his defense. If you pay your LF for his defense and then play a road game in Fenway, you are at a disadvantage. Albert Pujols’ bat plays anywhere.

5. Defensive metrics are still more of an art than a science.

In short, even though great defense will only have an impact on a small number of plays per game, we’re still not that good at measuring that impact. We’re better than we used to be, and at least we understand the concept that being able to get to a ball and possibly committing an error is better (or at least about the same) as not being able to get to a ball and allowing a “hit”. But we still don’t have that one good defensive number.

I think this is right. I think offense is far and away the more valuable commodity and that a smart GM will wedge good hitters into whatever position he can if their bat is good enough. I think the focus on defense is especially ill-conceived for a big money team like the Red Sox who should be spending their money on guys who can hit. And I think Seattle might be bad for a long time.

Fangraphs Likes The Edmonds Trade

2010-08-10T08:56:00.000-05:00

Here:

Overall, this wasn’t that poor of a trade for either team, although Cincinnati may have slightly overpaid for an outfielder who could see serious regression while giving up a much younger outfielder who could be useful in the future, maybe even now. They’re clearly going all out in the NL Central race, which they should, but I wonder if this move was necessary for them, or if the asking price for Edmonds was really as high as Dickerson. Milwaukee comes away with a big plus, acquiring a solid outfielder just because they offered a Spring Training invite to an older outfielder who hadn’t played pro ball in over a year.

Brewers Sell High On Edmonds

2010-08-09T13:32:00.001-05:00

He is now a member of the Cincinnati Reds.

The Brewers got some guy named Chris Dickerson for him.

Framing a holdout

2010-08-05T08:08:00.002-05:00

It's all about public relations and perception. Favre is apparently absolutely brilliant at playing the PR game. Favre on Javon Walker's hold out in 2005:

“If Javon wants to know what he quarterback thinks, and I would think he might, I’d tell him he’s going about this the wrong way,” Favre told the Green Bay Press-Gazette. “When his agent tells him not to worry about what his teammates think and all that stuff, I’d tell him I’ve been around a long time and that stuff will come back to haunt you.”

Apparently by "going about it the wrong way" Favre meant Walker should have pretended to be injured and leverage an impending retirement and atrocious back-ups to get more money, instead of being honest and saying "I am worth more than you are paying me."

Of course, Walker didn't have friends like Mariucci and Peter King to cover for his every move. JFK could only dream of this kind of media protection.

Terrell Owens nails it: @terrellowens How come Favre isn't a attention whore but we get hell for having fun but he makes a spectacle about coming back its cool? Wtf ..... Child Please!

The Role Of Luck

2010-08-02T13:31:00.000-05:00

Nice post by Tangotiger today.

Old Hoss on Corey

2010-08-02T11:55:00.000-05:00

From OldHossRadbourn:

Brewers sign C. Hart to an extension, making him the first Neandertal to be so rewarded. He can finally afford a new atlatl and flint tools.

Extending Corey Hart?

2010-08-02T10:42:00.002-05:00

This weekend the Brewers played one of the five most depressing baseball series I’ve ever seen. Faced with a Houston club that just traded away their two best players and who had every incentive to throw in the towel, the Brewers managed to score only 2 runs. They saw their own pitching staff get lit up. They saw Carlos Gomez continue to prove that he is the dumbest person in the world.

And to top it all off they gave a 3 year contract extension to Corey Hart. On the surface it doesn’t look too terrible. Hart is playing well and his new deal allegedly pays him about $8.5 million per season.

Well, it is terrible. First of all, you never want to buy high, you want to sell high. The Brewers bought high on Hart. This season is built largely on an unsustainable HR/FB ration (see Jim Breen’s analysis) and Hart is likely to decline back into average (or worse) production from here on out.

But even if he doesn’t, it’s still a terrible deal. The Brewers first and foremost need pitching, and Hart could have brought you pitching if not now, then in the offseason. Moreover, this move sets the Brewer corner outfield positions in stone for 3 years. You have a prospect in Mat Gamel who is going to need one of those corner slots to play in the majors as it looks like there is no chance he can hold down 3rd base at any level. Therefore, this move doesn’t just remove Hart as potential trade bait; it also indirectly hurts Gamel’s trade value by blocking him from the big club.

Hart is a decent enough player. His OPS+ is generally 100 or better and at 28 he is certainly not over the hill, but the Brewers are in desperate need of pitching prospects. Medium-talent players (like Hart) having career years are the perfect trade deadline tools, and choosing to not only not trade him, but also to extend him, hurts the team in the long run.

FJM Returns Again

2010-07-21T13:26:00.000-05:00

A one day show on September 22nd. So says Mr. Tremendous:

Attention, Fire Joe Morgan fans: happy to announce that FJM will ride again, this September 22, on Deadspin. #FJM

Saw that "Interception" movie this week.

2010-07-19T09:17:00.001-05:00

People sneak into Brett Favre's brain, try to convince him to retire. It was brilliant.

Ah Crap.

2010-07-16T14:52:00.000-05:00

From Bedard on Twitter:

Packers DE Johnny Jolly is suspended by the NFL indefinitely. Will miss at least the 2010 season.

Melvin's 2010 Moves: FA Additions

2010-07-13T08:12:00.003-05:00

At the half way point of the season, it's worth taking a look at how Melvin's big additions (and subtractions) have panned out for the Crew in this dismally predictable season. (For simplicity sake I'll focus on WAR when comparing players.)

Additions:

George Kottaras (0.7 WAR) - A significant upgrade at catcher, to be sure. He is playing better than Kendall or Rivera. Rivera is muddling around the minors somewhere and Kendall is sporting a 0.5 WAR compared to Kottaras at 0.7. A better, younger player with a ton more pop for cheaper? Win. B

Greg Zaun (0.6 WAR) - Bad. I understand that the Brewers didn't want to rush up Lucroy or Salome but Zaun (even before his injury) was a flat bust. He was contributing about at a Kottaras level (0.6 WAR) but was making $2 million more and keeping the cheaper player on the bench. It might be a little unfair to call him a total mistake though, had the Brewers been in contention I can see the value of a solid signal caller. The signing made sense if you thought the Brewers would be good. C-

LaTroy Hawkins (0.1 WAR) - Atrocious because of the contract. 2 years and $7.5 million and Hawkins is sporting a 44 ERA+. He's been unlucky (BABIP is over .400) but he's also been very, very bad. The Brewers will be saddled with his $4 million contract next season as well. Terrible. The best the Crew can hope for is continued injury rendering him unable to pitch. F

Randy Wolf (-0.7 WAR) - 1.504 WHIP, 84 ERA+, 1.6 HR/9, 9+ H/9, 6 inning per start. 3 years $30 million. In 2009 Jeff Suppan pitched his way to constant boos and derision. He sports a -0.7 WAR. Doug Melvin extended the "Suckpan" legacy for 3 years and $30 million. F-

Kameron Loe (0.4 WAR) - Smart signing. This is what Melvin made his reputation on. Junk heap has-been or never-was relievers. The best part about Loe? 19 appearance, 22.2 innings pitched. Macha has not been afraid to keep him out there and Loe has, for the most part, delivered. As a middle reliever brought up after the season was essentially over, however, his impact has been minimal. B

Doug Davis (0.0 WAR) Yep, Doug Davis is hurting the team less than Randy Wolf. He is sporting a sparkling-in-comparison 53 ERA+. It's also pretty clear that the only reason for this is that he has not had as many starts. Davis is atrocious this season. He is averaging under 5 innings a start. Yes, this season he is not averaging enough innings per start to be considered for a win. Not that it really would matter. He cost the Brewers $5.25m this season and his buyout will be another million next year. F

Joe Inglett (1.0 WAR) - Based on performance (remember when Melvin tried to claim performance was the only thing he looked at...why was Wolf never considered for bullpen duty?) there is no reason Carlos Gomez should ever see the field. In absurdly spotty duty, Inglett is sporting a .923 OPS (.416 OBP/.507 SLG). Gomez has been a liability in the field and at the plate, yet Inglett gets zero chances to perform. Hopefully Melvin's pride cometh before the firing. Inconclusive

Jim Edmonds (1.4 WAR) - Excellent signing. A one year deal for under a million. Melvin was able to find real value here. His performance is likely keeping Inglett off the field (both lefties) but you can't really complain about that. When the Brewers trade Fielder I would love for the next GM to resign Edmonds and play him at 1B and RF in 2011 unless, of course,they sign an actual bat at first which is doubtful since they will yet again need to rebuild the pitching staff for 2011. A

Overall (excluding the Inglett incomplete) that gives Melvin an excellent GPA of 1.66, or a C-. Of the free agent acquisition, only four were signed with the idea of having an every day type of impact. Zaun, Hawkins, Davis and especially Wolf were brought in to make a young underachiever into a real contender. Each signing has been, for one reason or another, a miserable failure. Obviously three of those players got injured, but based on their performance to that point their subtraction from the lineup was a GOOD thing. Yes, the best outcome for high-priced Doug Melvin free agent signings in 2010 is that they get hurt so they can no longer hurt the club.

Pathetic. I'm a strong proponent of having a stronger alternative before firing a guy. Based on his recent performance, however, I am not sure how a guy could do worse! I ask you, had Attanassio simply thrown darts at a board with free agent names on it and signed random players, would they have been worse? Are there two multi-million dollar free agent pitchers who are performing worse than Davis and Wolf? Where is Chris laughing at Bean for signing Ben Sheets (he of the 137 ERA+ and high trade value at the break?) The 2010 off-season acquisitions have been an absolute train wreck where it matters. Doug Melvin is completely unable to evaluate starting pitching, and it has crippled this franchise at a time when they have some of the most promising young offensive talent in all of baseball. It's an outright travesty and every day Melvin is allowed to steer this sinking ship is a slap in the face to Brewers fans everywhere.

Later on I'll look at the sole trade that has impacted this squad and how the jettisoned players are performing in their new digs. (LOL whiny bitch Scott Schoenweis)

Bulls + Carlos Boozer + Max Deal = Hilarity

2010-07-07T08:25:00.003-05:00

1. By all accounts (and this has already changed like 15 times, but let's just go with it) Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade are going to sign with Miami.

2. Since Lebron James declared that he will announce his new team on Thursday at 9:00 in a 1 hour ESPN special, which, by the way, is asinine, he is telegraphing that he will re-sign with Cleveland. From Tyler Cowen:

The firm announcement date means that LeBron will re-sign with Cleveland, and intrade.com spiked up to 65.0 (+24.9) for that event.

3. Joe Johsnon, who isn't very good anyway, is signed.

4. Amare Stoudamire is signed.

5. The Chicago Bulls look very likely to end up as the big losers in this thing. If you are anything like me, this is good news. I heard some pundit in town mention that maybe David Lee and Ray Allen wouldn't be so bad. Ha!

Where should Lebron James Go?

2010-07-06T08:33:00.001-05:00

This is my favorite opinion so far.

Year of the Ump Exhibit 1,447,988

2010-06-29T21:26:00.005-05:00

Nice of the ump to rub it in by barking at Fielder after ringing him up on a pitch 3 feet outside.