1 New Orleans 17 KC
2 New England 18 Tennessee
3 Denver 19 Jacksonville
4 Indianapolis 20 St. Louis
5 Chicago 21 Arizona
6 Baltimore 22 Atlanta
7 San Diego 23 Cleveland
8 Philadelphia 24 Pittsburgh
9 San Fransisco 25 Minnesota
10 Houston 26 Oakland
11 Dallas 27 Tampa Bay
12 Seattle 28Washington
13 NY Jets 29 Green Bay
14 Cincinatti 30 Detroit
15 Carolina 31 Buffalo
16 NY Giants 32 Miami
Friday, May 18, 2007
Preseason AFC Rankings
AFC Champ: New England (1)
Division Champs:
East: New England
North: Batimore
South: Indy
West: Denver
Wild Cards:
San Diego
Houston (2)
The Rest, In Order:
New York
Cincinatti
KC
Tennessee
Jax
Cleveland (3)
Pittsburgh
Oakland
Buffalo
Miami
1- I have nothing to add to the national praising of New England, except this: they will lose the Super Bowl to New Orleans. The Saints have a better secondary, receiving corps, backield, and superior pass rush from the defensive line (a crucial factor, because the Siants' pass rush functions like a blitz on every play without having to leave single coverage in the secondary). The tow teams are roughly equal at quarterback, and the only area in which the Pats are superior is linebacker.
2- Yes, Houston. I don't honestly know if this will happen. I'm not enamored with MattScaub, nor am I totally soured on David Carr, but this D is damn good. Houston and Denver will both survive on their D, which means they will be more resistent to injuries to their skill players, which is a sure sign of success. The real reason I chose houston is two-fold: their are at least six teams in contention for this spot, each with excellence in some areas and flaws in others. It's the way of the NFL. Since handicpping these teams is a fool's errand anyway, I feel that by choosing Houston of the six, I am more likely to be right about the NFl's biggest surprise than anyone else. Secondly, while the team might not have existed when I lived there, I am still a sucker for the teams from my hometown.
3- I have handicapped Cleveland and Oakland because I don't know how long they'll wait until they put out their rookie QBs. I am hoping they'll wait for the player's sake, but Cleveland is closer to being able to put out Quinn than Oakland is for Russell because of their O-line. Oakland has all of the skill players, but is a draft away on the line.
4- Miami feels like they're throwing the season. Maybe that's why the Trent Green deal hasn't happened. They chose an injured WR in the first round, a pick that I like by the way, they have been purging contracts and are looking to rent a qb. This team is thinking about 08.
Division Champs:
East: New England
North: Batimore
South: Indy
West: Denver
Wild Cards:
San Diego
Houston (2)
The Rest, In Order:
New York
Cincinatti
KC
Tennessee
Jax
Cleveland (3)
Pittsburgh
Oakland
Buffalo
Miami
1- I have nothing to add to the national praising of New England, except this: they will lose the Super Bowl to New Orleans. The Saints have a better secondary, receiving corps, backield, and superior pass rush from the defensive line (a crucial factor, because the Siants' pass rush functions like a blitz on every play without having to leave single coverage in the secondary). The tow teams are roughly equal at quarterback, and the only area in which the Pats are superior is linebacker.
2- Yes, Houston. I don't honestly know if this will happen. I'm not enamored with MattScaub, nor am I totally soured on David Carr, but this D is damn good. Houston and Denver will both survive on their D, which means they will be more resistent to injuries to their skill players, which is a sure sign of success. The real reason I chose houston is two-fold: their are at least six teams in contention for this spot, each with excellence in some areas and flaws in others. It's the way of the NFL. Since handicpping these teams is a fool's errand anyway, I feel that by choosing Houston of the six, I am more likely to be right about the NFl's biggest surprise than anyone else. Secondly, while the team might not have existed when I lived there, I am still a sucker for the teams from my hometown.
3- I have handicapped Cleveland and Oakland because I don't know how long they'll wait until they put out their rookie QBs. I am hoping they'll wait for the player's sake, but Cleveland is closer to being able to put out Quinn than Oakland is for Russell because of their O-line. Oakland has all of the skill players, but is a draft away on the line.
4- Miami feels like they're throwing the season. Maybe that's why the Trent Green deal hasn't happened. They chose an injured WR in the first round, a pick that I like by the way, they have been purging contracts and are looking to rent a qb. This team is thinking about 08.
Preseason NFC Rankings
NFC Champ: Saints (1)
Division Winners:
South: Saints
North: Bears
East: Eagles
West: 49ers (2)
Wildcards:
Cowboys
Seahawks
The Rest, in order:
Panthers
Giants
Rams (3)
Cardinals
Falcons
Vikings
Buccaneers
Redskins
Packers
Lions
1-The Saints had the best offense in the NFL last year, and have only added weapons. They lost no one of significacne from last year (sorry, Joe, you were hurt) but added Eric Johnson and Robert Meachem. Johnson will be effective because of Brees' affection for TEs, while Meachem gretly improves the depth at WR. The Saints may eventually regret passing on Posluzny, especially since Keyshawn became available, and they still need help at OLB. In any case, the defense has made great strides in the secondary and lost no one. They will still have som succetiblity to the run, but the return of Roman Harper will help contain long runs, and the Saints were better up the middle with Hollis Thomas at DT last year. If the offense is working at its best, this team will not see many run plays anyway. The secondary went from one of the worst in the league to possibly the best in the conference. Inthe division, expect that no team will be able to keep up with the Saints' scoring.
2-Expect the Niners to look good this year. Alex Smith, Frank Gore, and Nate Clements give this team a strong core, and Seattle is getting older. If the secondary looks like it did last year in Seattle, this will be the year they are finally dethroned.
3- This is where it gets confusing. No one in the NFC is without their flaws, but these three teams have a lot of questions. The Rams have all of the talent, but seemed to give up on themselves last year, I never trust the Cardinals, no matter how good they look on paper, the Falcons could lose Michael Vick to suspension, and if they do that could be better or worse. I may be the last Joey Galloway fan there is. I would rather have him than Michael Vick, although that team is not really set up for him. The Buccaneers could be very good or very bad depending on how much Jeff Garcia has in the tank and whether Gaines Adams can contribute right away. I would expect that what will hold all of these teams back is the talent in their divisions. The Tampa defense will really be troubled by New Orleans and Carolina, the Falcons can't seem to figure out New Orleans, and Zona and St. Louis are stuck with SF and Seattle.
Division Winners:
South: Saints
North: Bears
East: Eagles
West: 49ers (2)
Wildcards:
Cowboys
Seahawks
The Rest, in order:
Panthers
Giants
Rams (3)
Cardinals
Falcons
Vikings
Buccaneers
Redskins
Packers
Lions
1-The Saints had the best offense in the NFL last year, and have only added weapons. They lost no one of significacne from last year (sorry, Joe, you were hurt) but added Eric Johnson and Robert Meachem. Johnson will be effective because of Brees' affection for TEs, while Meachem gretly improves the depth at WR. The Saints may eventually regret passing on Posluzny, especially since Keyshawn became available, and they still need help at OLB. In any case, the defense has made great strides in the secondary and lost no one. They will still have som succetiblity to the run, but the return of Roman Harper will help contain long runs, and the Saints were better up the middle with Hollis Thomas at DT last year. If the offense is working at its best, this team will not see many run plays anyway. The secondary went from one of the worst in the league to possibly the best in the conference. Inthe division, expect that no team will be able to keep up with the Saints' scoring.
2-Expect the Niners to look good this year. Alex Smith, Frank Gore, and Nate Clements give this team a strong core, and Seattle is getting older. If the secondary looks like it did last year in Seattle, this will be the year they are finally dethroned.
3- This is where it gets confusing. No one in the NFC is without their flaws, but these three teams have a lot of questions. The Rams have all of the talent, but seemed to give up on themselves last year, I never trust the Cardinals, no matter how good they look on paper, the Falcons could lose Michael Vick to suspension, and if they do that could be better or worse. I may be the last Joey Galloway fan there is. I would rather have him than Michael Vick, although that team is not really set up for him. The Buccaneers could be very good or very bad depending on how much Jeff Garcia has in the tank and whether Gaines Adams can contribute right away. I would expect that what will hold all of these teams back is the talent in their divisions. The Tampa defense will really be troubled by New Orleans and Carolina, the Falcons can't seem to figure out New Orleans, and Zona and St. Louis are stuck with SF and Seattle.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Saints Draft
For those of you keeping score at home, now that the Saints have added free agent rookies, they have signings from:
Wingate, Eastern Washington, Akron, Towson, Clark-Atlanta, Northwest Mississippi Community College, Kent State, and U of Alberta. As in Canada. Huh.
Suddenly my degree from Southeastern Louisiana doesn't seem so obscure.
Wingate, Eastern Washington, Akron, Towson, Clark-Atlanta, Northwest Mississippi Community College, Kent State, and U of Alberta. As in Canada. Huh.
Suddenly my degree from Southeastern Louisiana doesn't seem so obscure.
NBA Racism?
A Professor at Penn and a Grad Student at Cornell have released a study showing that White NBA refs call fouls at a higher rate on black players than whites, and vice versa. The white refs have ahigher rate of correlation. They conclude that if talent were the same, a team could pick up a few games a season by tailoring its team's racial composition to the referees. Commissioner David Stern did his own study, finding no problem, but the New York Times showed both studies to a group of academics, who unanimously prefferred the Penn study.
I have not read the study, but by the end of the day I will.
NBA players who have also not read the study are calling it ridiculous, using anecdotal evidence in support of a race-free NBA and resorting to cliches like "statistics can say anything you want them to". This is asinine. The study in all likelihood uses a technique called statistical regression, which determines correlation by removing outside factors, and was the primary basis for the book Freakonomics.
No one is saying that race is acting on a conscious level.
However, David Stern owes every fan this: do the study again, and do it right. You have the information and the money, and some statistics are only available to you. (Who gets disciplined, who made which call). Sort this out, David. Do it now.
While you're at it, here are a few ideas:
Get all of the facts. Take about ten years of games, know who called which foul, and then take it a step further. Isolate for all the factors. I suggest each player have the following categories: race, position, nationality, years in the league, and all-star berths. The last one would be a boolean variable (yes/no) and once a player has been an all-star, then they get yes for the rest of their carreers. Next, eliminate the fouls that don't count. Intentional fouls at the end of the game can have no racial motivation, and neither can fouls after which a player self-identifies. Finally, know the refs' age, race, sex, experience, and marital status. Now on each foul there is a matrix working three ways: The player, the refs, and his or her peers.
Now you can use regression software available on every campus in America. You can find the individual tendencies of every ref, and find out overall trends too. Is it race? how about nationality? Are white refs even friendlier to white americans? What about when you exept centers, who traditionally get more fouls? Now try it for starters, since they're less likely to hack-a-shaq. Do superstars get star treatment, and is that exacerbated by years in the league?
Until that report comes out, the NBA is turning a blind eye, and are complicit in whatever bias the refs have.
I have not read the study, but by the end of the day I will.
NBA players who have also not read the study are calling it ridiculous, using anecdotal evidence in support of a race-free NBA and resorting to cliches like "statistics can say anything you want them to". This is asinine. The study in all likelihood uses a technique called statistical regression, which determines correlation by removing outside factors, and was the primary basis for the book Freakonomics.
No one is saying that race is acting on a conscious level.
However, David Stern owes every fan this: do the study again, and do it right. You have the information and the money, and some statistics are only available to you. (Who gets disciplined, who made which call). Sort this out, David. Do it now.
While you're at it, here are a few ideas:
Get all of the facts. Take about ten years of games, know who called which foul, and then take it a step further. Isolate for all the factors. I suggest each player have the following categories: race, position, nationality, years in the league, and all-star berths. The last one would be a boolean variable (yes/no) and once a player has been an all-star, then they get yes for the rest of their carreers. Next, eliminate the fouls that don't count. Intentional fouls at the end of the game can have no racial motivation, and neither can fouls after which a player self-identifies. Finally, know the refs' age, race, sex, experience, and marital status. Now on each foul there is a matrix working three ways: The player, the refs, and his or her peers.
Now you can use regression software available on every campus in America. You can find the individual tendencies of every ref, and find out overall trends too. Is it race? how about nationality? Are white refs even friendlier to white americans? What about when you exept centers, who traditionally get more fouls? Now try it for starters, since they're less likely to hack-a-shaq. Do superstars get star treatment, and is that exacerbated by years in the league?
Until that report comes out, the NBA is turning a blind eye, and are complicit in whatever bias the refs have.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Final Post of the Night
The odds of Minnesota-Chicago 1-2 are about 1 in 1000 (.053 x .019=.001007)
Rephrasing: GS lost, and they will not have a better chance than tonight. Dallas is feeling good, but they head back west on friday.
If the Lakers were playing the Clippers, would they still get a night off to travel when all seven games are in the same arena?
good night.
Rephrasing: GS lost, and they will not have a better chance than tonight. Dallas is feeling good, but they head back west on friday.
If the Lakers were playing the Clippers, would they still get a night off to travel when all seven games are in the same arena?
good night.
Golden State
1 point with 96 seconds left. Remember what I said. Also, Blogging is wonderful, because you don't have to remember. I will point it out ad nauseum.
Late Nite
Sorry about the grammar in the last post, late night. BTW-the post times are never right on this blog.
Nine points with three minutes to go: if the Warriors lose tonight, they lose the series.
Nine points with three minutes to go: if the Warriors lose tonight, they lose the series.
Golden State, Curry, the draft
Indy and Golden Stae's midseason deal is the most lopsided trade in recent memory not involving Isaiah Thomas.
Here's a Kookie thought:
What If the ping-pong balls come up with Minnesota then Chicago? The Wolves could take Durant, trade KG for Gordon and #2, which the Bulls might do because it would give them a near-guaranteed title, and they already have Big Ben. This would also give Minnesota about a $12 million exception. Who knows who they could get. Rashard Lewis maybe? Darco Milicic?
Their opening day lineup would then be: Randy Foye, Ricky Davis, Kevin Durant, Lewis/Milicic/other, Greg Oden, and Ben Gordon off of the bench.
Throw in one more good lottery pick in '08 while they figure some things out and that is an amazing team.
Here's a Kookie thought:
What If the ping-pong balls come up with Minnesota then Chicago? The Wolves could take Durant, trade KG for Gordon and #2, which the Bulls might do because it would give them a near-guaranteed title, and they already have Big Ben. This would also give Minnesota about a $12 million exception. Who knows who they could get. Rashard Lewis maybe? Darco Milicic?
Their opening day lineup would then be: Randy Foye, Ricky Davis, Kevin Durant, Lewis/Milicic/other, Greg Oden, and Ben Gordon off of the bench.
Throw in one more good lottery pick in '08 while they figure some things out and that is an amazing team.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)