Fantasy Football previews should start later this week, regardless of the NBA Finals. I'm now in full FFB planning mode.
Pro-football-reference.com looks at Daunte Culpepper's record season.
Paul Newberry of the AP writes an interesting article on dog fighting.
Sad news: former Viking Orlando Thomas is suffering with ALS.
Sports Law Blog has another post on free expression for fans attending games (Having done extensive research on censorship and free speech issues, I've really enjoyed Sports Law Blog's coverage of these issues in sports).
I Dislike Your Favorite Team shows Jim Souhan's latest Viking column to contain flawed logic.
Willis McGahee is yet another NFL player expecting big things in 2007. What should we call these summer pieces, featuring interviews with players talking about why they will be great the next season?
Monday, June 11, 2007
Sunday, June 10, 2007
5,084
In 1984, Dan Marino threw for 5,084 yards, breaking Dan Fouts' record of 4,802, set in 1981.
Since then there have been 22 NFL seasons. We've seen the run-and-shoot and the Greatest Show on Turf. We've seen rule changes to benefit the passing game (at least twice).
But nobody has broken Dan Marino's yardage record of 5,084 yards.
If you look at the passing yards leaderboard, you see that some QBs have gotten close. Kurt Warner is now in second with 4,830. Other QBs (Rich Gannon, Warren Moon) have put up a good pace but ultimately fell short.
With the way offensive strategies and pass interference rules have changed in the past few decades, it's a bit amazing to see Marino's single-season yardage record still standing. In that time we've seen three running backs rush for 2,000 yards (but still fall short of Dickerson's 2,105 in 1984), Peyton Manning break the record with 49 TD passes, Warren Moon then Rich Gannon break the record for pass completions in a season (404 then 418), Warren Moon then Drew Bledsoe break the record for attempts in a season (655 then 691), the total TD record broken 5 times, Jerry Rice set the record with 22 TD receptions, Jerry Rice set the single-season record in receiving yards (1,848), the single-season receptions record broken 5 times, the rushing TD record broking four times, and the single-season rushing attempts record broken twice (Jamal Anderson with 410, Larry Johnson with 416), and the eleven greatest seasons in yards from scrimmage.
With the exception of Dickerson's rushing yards record, every other significant single-season offensive record has been broken since 1984, and many of them have been broken and re-broken.
But Dan Marino's 5,084 passing yards in 1984 stands as the record. When you see all the other single-season records broken in the last 22 years, Marino's record appears long-standing and quite impressive.
Why do you think it has lasted so long, even as every other single-season offensive record has been broken? And because of the longevity of the record, is it now one of football's most impressive--if not the most impressive--single-season records?
Saturday, June 09, 2007
Blizzard: Fantasy Football Advice and Some Viking Links
Fantasy Football Advice
1. Check the game logs.
Final numbers can be deceiving. For example, in 2006 Lee Evans had 1,292 yards and 8 TDs. But when you look at his game log, he had 265 yards and 2 TDs in one game. Take away that one game, and Evans' numbers look less impressive. In fantasy football, you want to have players that give you consistent points. I look to see how many games a particular player scored in (in Lee Evans' case, he scored in 7 of 16 games, which is solid). You'd like to see WRs on your team scoring in nearly half the games they play in (it's outstanding if a WR scores in half or more than half of the games he plays in). You also might want to set a yardage mark (for example, Lee Evans had 75+ yards in 7 of 16 games, which is also solid). If you look to the game logs, you can learn more about how effective a player is, and you can determine if he will best help your fantasy team. In the case of Evans, even though he had one massive game that boosted his numbers, he's still a solid fantasy WR because he scored a TD in 7/16 games and he had 75+ yards in 7/16 games. Big games are great, but to win over the course of a fantasy football season, you need players that get you points every week.
2. In an auction league, always raise your bids by increments of one.
I don't care--never raise more than one. If the bid is at 20 and it's your turn to bid, bid 21, even if you know the player is going to go for much more money. In our league, the elite RBs should be expected to go for 50-100 dollars. But if I start a bid on one of those RBs, I'll start at a dollar. And I'll never raise more than a dollar. This might drive some people bonkers, but I don't care. It stretches out the draft, and it ensures you will never pay more than you absolutely have to.
Viking links
From the Strib:
Rich Gannon likes the Viking QBs.
Sid talks with Brooks Bollinger about how Bollinger might still be the starting QB. I feel weird saying it, but the 2007 version of the Vikings might be better off with Bollinger than Jackson. I still fully expect Jackson under center week one.
From the Ppress:
As you might expect, Childress is happy with progress.
Some Viking defensive players say positive things about the offensive players.
And a final Viking comment
Some days I feel like smiling just knowing Pat Williams plays for the Vikings. I love the guy. He's been the best player on the team for two years, and he really sounds like a hard worker and excellent teammate. I hope they extend his contract and he plays for the Vikings as long as he can.
1. Check the game logs.
Final numbers can be deceiving. For example, in 2006 Lee Evans had 1,292 yards and 8 TDs. But when you look at his game log, he had 265 yards and 2 TDs in one game. Take away that one game, and Evans' numbers look less impressive. In fantasy football, you want to have players that give you consistent points. I look to see how many games a particular player scored in (in Lee Evans' case, he scored in 7 of 16 games, which is solid). You'd like to see WRs on your team scoring in nearly half the games they play in (it's outstanding if a WR scores in half or more than half of the games he plays in). You also might want to set a yardage mark (for example, Lee Evans had 75+ yards in 7 of 16 games, which is also solid). If you look to the game logs, you can learn more about how effective a player is, and you can determine if he will best help your fantasy team. In the case of Evans, even though he had one massive game that boosted his numbers, he's still a solid fantasy WR because he scored a TD in 7/16 games and he had 75+ yards in 7/16 games. Big games are great, but to win over the course of a fantasy football season, you need players that get you points every week.
2. In an auction league, always raise your bids by increments of one.
I don't care--never raise more than one. If the bid is at 20 and it's your turn to bid, bid 21, even if you know the player is going to go for much more money. In our league, the elite RBs should be expected to go for 50-100 dollars. But if I start a bid on one of those RBs, I'll start at a dollar. And I'll never raise more than a dollar. This might drive some people bonkers, but I don't care. It stretches out the draft, and it ensures you will never pay more than you absolutely have to.
Viking links
From the Strib:
Rich Gannon likes the Viking QBs.
Sid talks with Brooks Bollinger about how Bollinger might still be the starting QB. I feel weird saying it, but the 2007 version of the Vikings might be better off with Bollinger than Jackson. I still fully expect Jackson under center week one.
From the Ppress:
As you might expect, Childress is happy with progress.
Some Viking defensive players say positive things about the offensive players.
And a final Viking comment
Some days I feel like smiling just knowing Pat Williams plays for the Vikings. I love the guy. He's been the best player on the team for two years, and he really sounds like a hard worker and excellent teammate. I hope they extend his contract and he plays for the Vikings as long as he can.
Friday, June 08, 2007
Blizzard: are you miserable?
For more articles about the federal search of Vick's property, see the Virginia-Pilot and WAVY.
The Ppress has another report on Tarvaris Jackson's progress. I have a feeling that Tarvaris Jackson's progress and performance is going to be near the top of Minnesota sports fans' attention for a while.
Via Kansas Viking, RealFootball365 has a Q & A about the Vikings, telling us not to give up on Troy Williamson. Would I pay 1$ for Williamson in my fantasy draft? Yes I would. Would I pay 2$? Possibly--depends on when in the draft he's named. Would I pay 3$? Absolutely not.
Vic Carucci has an offseason update on the Vikes.
I recommend PFT for following this offseason's Daunte Culpepper shenanigans. Vikes Geek has a solid commentary on how Daunte's problems stem from his lack of an agent.
Civil Liberties at sporting events: the Fanhouse has a comment on frisking to get into NFL stadiums, and Sports Law Blog talks about illegal limits to free speech at baseball games.
Via I Heart KG, Jeff Gordon at Fox Sports ranks the most frustrated sports cities. Minneapolis/St. Paul ranks sixth, just behind Milwaukee. Milwaukee? Even if we ignore college sports (Milwaukee residents likely root for Marquette basketball, Badger basketball, and/or Badger football--but then, residents of Minneapolis-St. Paul may root for Gopher hockey), we shouldn't forget that people in Milwaukee, like everybody else in Wisconsin, devote much of their rooting energy to the Green Bay Packers. The Packers won a Super Bowl in the '96 season, went to the Super Bowl in the '97 season, and have won 148 regular season games in the last 15 years.
Minneapolis-St. Paul has seen exactly two professional championships (the '87 and '91 Twins) since the Lakers moved to L.A. (and since the Lakers did move, we don't really often get to revel in the Minneapolis Lakers' legacy of 5 championships). The Vikings have never won a Super Bowl and haven't been to the Super Bowl since the 1976 season. The Timberwolves have won two playoff series in their existence. The North Stars never won a championship in Minnesota and then moved to Dallas, and the Wild hasn't won a championship yet. Cleveland and Buffalo, I'd agree: you people must be miserable. I'd put Minneapolis-St. Paul pretty even with everybody else on Gordon's list, but I think Milwaukee isn't so miserable as all that.
The Ppress has another report on Tarvaris Jackson's progress. I have a feeling that Tarvaris Jackson's progress and performance is going to be near the top of Minnesota sports fans' attention for a while.
Via Kansas Viking, RealFootball365 has a Q & A about the Vikings, telling us not to give up on Troy Williamson. Would I pay 1$ for Williamson in my fantasy draft? Yes I would. Would I pay 2$? Possibly--depends on when in the draft he's named. Would I pay 3$? Absolutely not.
Vic Carucci has an offseason update on the Vikes.
I recommend PFT for following this offseason's Daunte Culpepper shenanigans. Vikes Geek has a solid commentary on how Daunte's problems stem from his lack of an agent.
Civil Liberties at sporting events: the Fanhouse has a comment on frisking to get into NFL stadiums, and Sports Law Blog talks about illegal limits to free speech at baseball games.
Via I Heart KG, Jeff Gordon at Fox Sports ranks the most frustrated sports cities. Minneapolis/St. Paul ranks sixth, just behind Milwaukee. Milwaukee? Even if we ignore college sports (Milwaukee residents likely root for Marquette basketball, Badger basketball, and/or Badger football--but then, residents of Minneapolis-St. Paul may root for Gopher hockey), we shouldn't forget that people in Milwaukee, like everybody else in Wisconsin, devote much of their rooting energy to the Green Bay Packers. The Packers won a Super Bowl in the '96 season, went to the Super Bowl in the '97 season, and have won 148 regular season games in the last 15 years.
Minneapolis-St. Paul has seen exactly two professional championships (the '87 and '91 Twins) since the Lakers moved to L.A. (and since the Lakers did move, we don't really often get to revel in the Minneapolis Lakers' legacy of 5 championships). The Vikings have never won a Super Bowl and haven't been to the Super Bowl since the 1976 season. The Timberwolves have won two playoff series in their existence. The North Stars never won a championship in Minnesota and then moved to Dallas, and the Wild hasn't won a championship yet. Cleveland and Buffalo, I'd agree: you people must be miserable. I'd put Minneapolis-St. Paul pretty even with everybody else on Gordon's list, but I think Milwaukee isn't so miserable as all that.
The Passive Sentence and Vague Attribution: Ian Thomsen
Wages of Wins directed my attention to a statement by SI's Ian Thomsen about the NBA Finals:
"I'm not going to say that the Cavaliers are incapable of upsetting the Spurs--not after watching them put down the supposedly unbeatable Pistons."
It's an odd statement: were the Pistons "supposedly unbeatable"? Who was calling the Pistons "unbeatable"? While the majority of people may have predicted the Pistons to win (I'm not sure), I don't recall seeing anybody claiming the Pistons were actually unbeatable. That's a vague attribution.
But wait: let's see what Thomsen wrote about the Pistons on April 25th:
And then on June 5th, after the Pistons have been defeated, Thomsen calls the Pistons "supposedly unbeatable."
Which is it? Were most people overlooking the Pistons and expecting them to lose, or were most people viewing Detroit as "unbeatable"?
Thomsen is presenting a supposedly widely held idea without actually attributing it to anybody. Writers will often do this with the use of passive sentences. A passive sentence puts the verb in front of the subject ("The game was won by me"), or removes the subject entirely ("The team was thought to be bad"). When the subject is removed, there is a vague attribution to nobody in particular, and this often implies a large or universal subject. For example, if I say "John thinks Bill is a thief," that is very direct: John thinks Bill is a thief. However, if I say "Bill is perceived to be a thief," that is vague. Since there is no specific subject noted, the subject could be anybody...or everybody. When I say "Bill is perceived to be a thief," I'm implying that there might be a large number of people that believe Bill is a thief.
Thomsen uses at least two such passive sentences in the April 25th column: "his Pistons are being written off," which is clearly passive (written off by whom?), and "Speculation has it that...," which turns "speculation" itself into a subject so that no person doing the speculating is identified. Since no specific subject is listed, you are free to assume that everybody, or a majority, or at least a large group of people is writing off the Pistons or speculating their demise.
The presentation of a supposedly widely held idea without actual attribution is bothersome enough. But over the course of a little over a month, Thomsen reverses his vague attribution. He had written about a vague entity that supposedly underrated the Pistons; now he writes about a vague entity that supposedly believed the Pistons were unbeatable.
Not only does Thomsen use passive sentences and other vague syntax to make a claim that he doesn't verify, but he actually switches from one vaguely attributed perception to a completely opposite vaguely attributed perception.
"I'm not going to say that the Cavaliers are incapable of upsetting the Spurs--not after watching them put down the supposedly unbeatable Pistons."
It's an odd statement: were the Pistons "supposedly unbeatable"? Who was calling the Pistons "unbeatable"? While the majority of people may have predicted the Pistons to win (I'm not sure), I don't recall seeing anybody claiming the Pistons were actually unbeatable. That's a vague attribution.
But wait: let's see what Thomsen wrote about the Pistons on April 25th:
“No team with a better chance of winning the championship is more ignored or less appreciated than the Pistons.”
“Now his Pistons are being written off for their failure to pummel Orlando in their current first-round series. […] Such is the evidence that Detroit is headed down the same ambivalent alley as last year. Speculation has it that Chicago, Miami, Cleveland or New Jersey will be able to exploit the Pistons’ telltale failure to finish games early and often.”
“A year ago they were everybody’s favorite; now they’re an afterthought.”
Hmm. A month ago, Thomsen wrote about how the Pistons were underrated, overlooked, written off, and underestimated. The general perception, according to Thomsen, is that the Pistons aren't that good, or at the very least, that they're not getting attention for being good.And then on June 5th, after the Pistons have been defeated, Thomsen calls the Pistons "supposedly unbeatable."
Which is it? Were most people overlooking the Pistons and expecting them to lose, or were most people viewing Detroit as "unbeatable"?
Thomsen is presenting a supposedly widely held idea without actually attributing it to anybody. Writers will often do this with the use of passive sentences. A passive sentence puts the verb in front of the subject ("The game was won by me"), or removes the subject entirely ("The team was thought to be bad"). When the subject is removed, there is a vague attribution to nobody in particular, and this often implies a large or universal subject. For example, if I say "John thinks Bill is a thief," that is very direct: John thinks Bill is a thief. However, if I say "Bill is perceived to be a thief," that is vague. Since there is no specific subject noted, the subject could be anybody...or everybody. When I say "Bill is perceived to be a thief," I'm implying that there might be a large number of people that believe Bill is a thief.
Thomsen uses at least two such passive sentences in the April 25th column: "his Pistons are being written off," which is clearly passive (written off by whom?), and "Speculation has it that...," which turns "speculation" itself into a subject so that no person doing the speculating is identified. Since no specific subject is listed, you are free to assume that everybody, or a majority, or at least a large group of people is writing off the Pistons or speculating their demise.
The presentation of a supposedly widely held idea without actual attribution is bothersome enough. But over the course of a little over a month, Thomsen reverses his vague attribution. He had written about a vague entity that supposedly underrated the Pistons; now he writes about a vague entity that supposedly believed the Pistons were unbeatable.
Not only does Thomsen use passive sentences and other vague syntax to make a claim that he doesn't verify, but he actually switches from one vaguely attributed perception to a completely opposite vaguely attributed perception.
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Third Quarter Blizzard
Weren't we supposed to not want Detroit in the Finals because it would be boring? This is pretty dull. I've found myself sorting through sports cards and surfing the internet. Here are some of the things I've looked at.
Via PFT, WVEC and the AJC report on federal authorities doing an independent investigation of the Vick/dog fighting case and searching the property.
Bill Russell has been blogging the NBA playoffs. 11 championship rings Bill freaking Russell has been giving his thoughts on the basketball goings on.
I really appreciate the websites out there doing rigid statistical analysis of sports; they offer us some firmer understanding of the games we watch. Though I share Dostoevsky's skepticism about rational systems for human behavior and reality (see Notes from the Underground), and I don't always agree with the way such studies can be presented (as infallible and final), I utilize such studies to understand the games better. Such statistical analysis does give us a more accurate understanding of what is going on. The Wages of Wins, one such statistical website, has two more looks at the NBA Finals, here and here.
11 point Spurs lead? This is getting worse before it's getting better. Oh, well: LeBron is a legend for what he did last week to the Pistons, but we remember what he did (and didn't do) in game one of that series.
The Spurs can actually be fun to watch, though. Duncan is not as boring as I once thought, and both Parker and Ginobli really drive the lane pretty well. But to paraphrase a guy I (unfortunately) occasionally watch during the day: "Game One, I'm just not that into you."
Via PFT, WVEC and the AJC report on federal authorities doing an independent investigation of the Vick/dog fighting case and searching the property.
Bill Russell has been blogging the NBA playoffs. 11 championship rings Bill freaking Russell has been giving his thoughts on the basketball goings on.
I really appreciate the websites out there doing rigid statistical analysis of sports; they offer us some firmer understanding of the games we watch. Though I share Dostoevsky's skepticism about rational systems for human behavior and reality (see Notes from the Underground), and I don't always agree with the way such studies can be presented (as infallible and final), I utilize such studies to understand the games better. Such statistical analysis does give us a more accurate understanding of what is going on. The Wages of Wins, one such statistical website, has two more looks at the NBA Finals, here and here.
11 point Spurs lead? This is getting worse before it's getting better. Oh, well: LeBron is a legend for what he did last week to the Pistons, but we remember what he did (and didn't do) in game one of that series.
The Spurs can actually be fun to watch, though. Duncan is not as boring as I once thought, and both Parker and Ginobli really drive the lane pretty well. But to paraphrase a guy I (unfortunately) occasionally watch during the day: "Game One, I'm just not that into you."
Blizzard: NBA Finals Tonight
I don't think LeBron and a mediocre team have a chance against a team as deep and good as the Spurs. But I will watch every game hoping for something special. In 1962, the Celtics outlasted the Lakers in 7 games, but that doesn't make Elgin Baylor's 61 point game 5 any less extraordinary.
Via PFT, the AP reports the sheriff who is described as "leading the investigation" into dogfighting at the Vick property says there are informants linking Vick himself to dogfights.
The Strib reports on Chad Greenway's recovery from his knee injury. His performance in 2007 is going to be key to the defense. Last season E.J. Henderson was an excellent outside linebacker, but with the loss of Napoleon Harris, Henderson is moving to middle linebacker. If Henderson can perform as well at MLB as he did at OLB, and Greenway step up successfully as the OLB, the defense may be able to maintain its dominance from last season.
Access Vikings reports on how Sidney Rice is handling the NFL.
Wages of Wins gives a brief preview of the NBA Finals.
NFC-North.com suggests Adrian Peterson is going to be "the man" at RB, and Chester Taylor is delusional.
Blue Viking Devil is working out ways for the Timberwolves to trade Kevin Garnett.
The Big Picture interviews Bethlehem Shoals of Free Darko.
Last week Phil and I discussed the merits of the NBA MVP; at Double-Nickel, Phil takes a closer look at the meaning of NBA MVP.
10,000 Takes gives us the underrated things about being a Minnesota sports fan. I think the most underrated parts are the anxiety, self-loathing, and despair.
VikingsCards.com is an interesting site if you are a Viking fan and have any interest in football cards and memorabilia.
One of the earliest readers of this blog was Jetsgrumbler, who wrote a very entertaining blog of his own. He slowly faded out of blogging, but is back at a new blog, HalfTurn.
Via PFT, the AP reports the sheriff who is described as "leading the investigation" into dogfighting at the Vick property says there are informants linking Vick himself to dogfights.
The Strib reports on Chad Greenway's recovery from his knee injury. His performance in 2007 is going to be key to the defense. Last season E.J. Henderson was an excellent outside linebacker, but with the loss of Napoleon Harris, Henderson is moving to middle linebacker. If Henderson can perform as well at MLB as he did at OLB, and Greenway step up successfully as the OLB, the defense may be able to maintain its dominance from last season.
Access Vikings reports on how Sidney Rice is handling the NFL.
Wages of Wins gives a brief preview of the NBA Finals.
NFC-North.com suggests Adrian Peterson is going to be "the man" at RB, and Chester Taylor is delusional.
Blue Viking Devil is working out ways for the Timberwolves to trade Kevin Garnett.
The Big Picture interviews Bethlehem Shoals of Free Darko.
Last week Phil and I discussed the merits of the NBA MVP; at Double-Nickel, Phil takes a closer look at the meaning of NBA MVP.
10,000 Takes gives us the underrated things about being a Minnesota sports fan. I think the most underrated parts are the anxiety, self-loathing, and despair.
VikingsCards.com is an interesting site if you are a Viking fan and have any interest in football cards and memorabilia.
One of the earliest readers of this blog was Jetsgrumbler, who wrote a very entertaining blog of his own. He slowly faded out of blogging, but is back at a new blog, HalfTurn.
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Blizzard: we love Teen Wolf
We've always straddled the line between being a Viking blog and a general sports blog. Our focus shifts on the stories and the time of year: we write about whatever interests us in the sports world, but it's usually the Vikings that do interest us. When the football season comes, almost every post will be about the NFL and many of them will be about the Vikings. Viking fans can check out our most recent Viking-centric posts: "Tom Powers will be rooting against the Vikings" and "Is 9-7 to 6-10 Brad Childress's Fault?".
After the NBA Finals, we'll be doing team-by-team fantasy football previews entitled "You wouldn't throw up if you have to start this guy week one." We'll look at which players on each team are legitimate fantasy starters for week one.
On to some links.
The Ppress reports on off-season workouts, specifically CB Marcus McCauley's work. The Ppress also looks at the progress of the Vikings' offensive line.
The Starting Five interviews David Aldridge.
We'll keep citing off-season lovefest features on offensive players that are supposedly going to be great in 2007. We love it. From Pete Prisco, the latest to get the love is Packer RB Vernand Morency.
Leave the Man Alone wants Kobe Bryant on the Hawks.
The Vick dogfighting story is odd to follow. From the Daily News (via PFT), Gerald Poindexter now says he was mistaken when he said there was evidence linking Vick to dogfighting. I'm really leaning toward the conclusion that a local rural official might not be the best equipped person to deal with this case. So what do we know now? The evidence is very strong that dog fighting occurred on Vick's property. Though there have been many claims, as of yet there is no clear evidence linking Vick directly to these activities. At this point, all we have is reasonable suspicion (and I would argue suspicion is very reasonable--it is merely the acceptance of the reasonable possibility that Vick was involved). We'll continue to follow it closely.
While we're on pseudo-sports involving the torture of animals, check out this Time article on bullfighting in Mexico.
The Wages of Wins lauds praise on Bill Laimbeer.
Via I Heart KG, NBA.com looks at prospects the Timberwolves are working out. I think Joakim Noah is the best case scenario: I would like to see him playing in the frontcourt with Kevin Garnett. If the Wolves draft a guard, I will never watch them again until Kevin McHale is fired.
The Hater Nation gives some kudos to the basketball coach in Teen Wolf. We love that guy: his complete indifference to his job and the students he coaches carries that movie. His story about the personal struggles of the bench player that he didn't need on the team anyway is classic; is there any fictional coach that gives better advice to confused young men than Bobby Flinstock?
After the NBA Finals, we'll be doing team-by-team fantasy football previews entitled "You wouldn't throw up if you have to start this guy week one." We'll look at which players on each team are legitimate fantasy starters for week one.
On to some links.
The Ppress reports on off-season workouts, specifically CB Marcus McCauley's work. The Ppress also looks at the progress of the Vikings' offensive line.
The Starting Five interviews David Aldridge.
We'll keep citing off-season lovefest features on offensive players that are supposedly going to be great in 2007. We love it. From Pete Prisco, the latest to get the love is Packer RB Vernand Morency.
Leave the Man Alone wants Kobe Bryant on the Hawks.
The Vick dogfighting story is odd to follow. From the Daily News (via PFT), Gerald Poindexter now says he was mistaken when he said there was evidence linking Vick to dogfighting. I'm really leaning toward the conclusion that a local rural official might not be the best equipped person to deal with this case. So what do we know now? The evidence is very strong that dog fighting occurred on Vick's property. Though there have been many claims, as of yet there is no clear evidence linking Vick directly to these activities. At this point, all we have is reasonable suspicion (and I would argue suspicion is very reasonable--it is merely the acceptance of the reasonable possibility that Vick was involved). We'll continue to follow it closely.
While we're on pseudo-sports involving the torture of animals, check out this Time article on bullfighting in Mexico.
The Wages of Wins lauds praise on Bill Laimbeer.
Via I Heart KG, NBA.com looks at prospects the Timberwolves are working out. I think Joakim Noah is the best case scenario: I would like to see him playing in the frontcourt with Kevin Garnett. If the Wolves draft a guard, I will never watch them again until Kevin McHale is fired.
The Hater Nation gives some kudos to the basketball coach in Teen Wolf. We love that guy: his complete indifference to his job and the students he coaches carries that movie. His story about the personal struggles of the bench player that he didn't need on the team anyway is classic; is there any fictional coach that gives better advice to confused young men than Bobby Flinstock?
Tom Powers will be rooting against the Vikings
Antoine Winfield is one of my favorite Vikings: I don’t think he’s doing anything wrong by skipping voluntary workouts, and as of yet his expressions of discontent about the offense haven’t verged toward being a bad teammate.
But when I saw the Pioneer Press headline “Note to Winfield: Right on, Antoine!,” I just knew Tom Powers was going to use it as another opportunity to gleeful rip Brad Childress and the Viking offense.
Hey, any objective observer would conclude that the 2006 Viking offense was poor. I think it was a personnel problem more than a coaching problem (and so it's valid to wonder if the Vikes have done enough to upgrade that personnel), but there’s validity to criticism of Childress. But I’m a little disturbed by the glee and vitriol with which Tom Powers enjoys criticizing Childress and the offense. What gives? Is he that miserable watching the games that he just has to take out his quasi-witty aggression against Childress? An objective observer would note the Viking offense was bad; an openly hostile observer will take mean-spirited pleasure in doing so.
Among the lowlights, Powers writes:
“The Vikings' offense was horrible last season. Other than drafting Adrian Peterson and his clavicle, the team hasn't done much of anything to improve it.”
It’s true that the Vikings’ offense was horrible last season. But Powers can’t even bring up main thing the Vikes have done to improve that offense without bringing negativity, too (“Adrian Peterson and his clavicle”). And the Vikings have brought in a vast quantity of WRs to try improve, but Powers qualifies his statement that the team "hasn't done much of anything" to improve" (emphasis mine). Qualifiers make it less likely you'll be wrong.
“I'm puzzled by some of the reaction to Winfield's comments, however. A good chunk of people appear to be taking the attitude that, hey, if he doesn't like it here, let him go someplace else…. But that's exactly what Vikings fans don't want. The guy is too good. They need him here.”
The sure sign of a lousy columnist is when he talks about what “a good chuck of people appear” to be saying. For all we know, Powers is making up this reaction; more likely this "good chunk of people" does exist, but even a good chunk can still be a small minority of fans. I know I don‘t think Winfield should be let go. There’s no question Winfield is a very good player that can help the team; Powers isn’t being unique, insightful, or contrarian to say so.
(note: in my previous post, I talked vaguely about what I’ve heard Viking fans talking about; I did so out of a desire not to call out particular Viking fans or bloggers).
"he is violating the cardinal rule of the Brad Childress regime: Thou shalt not criticize the organization."
Yes, we know: Childress is an insecure tyrant laying down God-like commandments. Har Har.
“You can argue--and I'm sure the Vikings' brass will--that with a year of experience, a year of familiarization, the offense should be somewhat improved. But somewhat improved won't make much difference with that group. It's like a fellow going around with a feather duster, trying to clean up after a nuclear attack. It's just not going to cut it.”
Look, if you predict bad things for a sports sports team, most of the time you are going to be right. As A. E. Housman writes,
Therefore, since the world has still
Much good, but much less good than ill,
And while the sun and moon endure
Luck’s a chance, but trouble’s sure,
I’d face it as a wise man would,
And train for ill and not for good.
When Tom Powers predicts bad things for the Vikings, he is most likely going to be right. He’s simply making the best wager. And Tom Powers, if nothing else, wants to be right. And so, since he’s predicted bad things for the Vikings, he’s rooting for those bad things to happen. He wants the Vikings to do poorly because he has predicted the Vikings will be bad. He doesn’t want to be proven wrong; he doesn’t want the organization to be right that “with a year of experience, a year of familiarization, the offense should be somewhat improved.” That would mean he’d be wrong, and he doesn’t want that (besides, it's easy to create a hypothetical argument and argue against it. In Powers' hypothetical argument, the Vikings will only be "somewhat improved," and he says that won't be enough. The hypothetical argument could claim the offense will be more than merely "somewhat improved," but since Powers is making up the hypothetical argument, he can make it say whatever it is he'd most like to argue against). He wants the Viking offense to be bad so that the predictions he's been making (since at least last preseason) can be right, and he can look smart.
Just know that, Viking fans. If you want to read Tom Powers, you may as well go read Packer blogs, too. If you want to read the commentary of somebody that is openly rooting against your team, that’s fine. Doing so might give help balance your perspective. But don’t be mistaken: Tom Powers doesn’t want the Vikings to win.
But when I saw the Pioneer Press headline “Note to Winfield: Right on, Antoine!,” I just knew Tom Powers was going to use it as another opportunity to gleeful rip Brad Childress and the Viking offense.
Hey, any objective observer would conclude that the 2006 Viking offense was poor. I think it was a personnel problem more than a coaching problem (and so it's valid to wonder if the Vikes have done enough to upgrade that personnel), but there’s validity to criticism of Childress. But I’m a little disturbed by the glee and vitriol with which Tom Powers enjoys criticizing Childress and the offense. What gives? Is he that miserable watching the games that he just has to take out his quasi-witty aggression against Childress? An objective observer would note the Viking offense was bad; an openly hostile observer will take mean-spirited pleasure in doing so.
Among the lowlights, Powers writes:
“The Vikings' offense was horrible last season. Other than drafting Adrian Peterson and his clavicle, the team hasn't done much of anything to improve it.”
It’s true that the Vikings’ offense was horrible last season. But Powers can’t even bring up main thing the Vikes have done to improve that offense without bringing negativity, too (“Adrian Peterson and his clavicle”). And the Vikings have brought in a vast quantity of WRs to try improve, but Powers qualifies his statement that the team "hasn't done much of anything" to improve" (emphasis mine). Qualifiers make it less likely you'll be wrong.
“I'm puzzled by some of the reaction to Winfield's comments, however. A good chunk of people appear to be taking the attitude that, hey, if he doesn't like it here, let him go someplace else…. But that's exactly what Vikings fans don't want. The guy is too good. They need him here.”
The sure sign of a lousy columnist is when he talks about what “a good chuck of people appear” to be saying. For all we know, Powers is making up this reaction; more likely this "good chunk of people" does exist, but even a good chunk can still be a small minority of fans. I know I don‘t think Winfield should be let go. There’s no question Winfield is a very good player that can help the team; Powers isn’t being unique, insightful, or contrarian to say so.
(note: in my previous post, I talked vaguely about what I’ve heard Viking fans talking about; I did so out of a desire not to call out particular Viking fans or bloggers).
"he is violating the cardinal rule of the Brad Childress regime: Thou shalt not criticize the organization."
Yes, we know: Childress is an insecure tyrant laying down God-like commandments. Har Har.
“You can argue--and I'm sure the Vikings' brass will--that with a year of experience, a year of familiarization, the offense should be somewhat improved. But somewhat improved won't make much difference with that group. It's like a fellow going around with a feather duster, trying to clean up after a nuclear attack. It's just not going to cut it.”
Look, if you predict bad things for a sports sports team, most of the time you are going to be right. As A. E. Housman writes,
Therefore, since the world has still
Much good, but much less good than ill,
And while the sun and moon endure
Luck’s a chance, but trouble’s sure,
I’d face it as a wise man would,
And train for ill and not for good.
When Tom Powers predicts bad things for the Vikings, he is most likely going to be right. He’s simply making the best wager. And Tom Powers, if nothing else, wants to be right. And so, since he’s predicted bad things for the Vikings, he’s rooting for those bad things to happen. He wants the Vikings to do poorly because he has predicted the Vikings will be bad. He doesn’t want to be proven wrong; he doesn’t want the organization to be right that “with a year of experience, a year of familiarization, the offense should be somewhat improved.” That would mean he’d be wrong, and he doesn’t want that (besides, it's easy to create a hypothetical argument and argue against it. In Powers' hypothetical argument, the Vikings will only be "somewhat improved," and he says that won't be enough. The hypothetical argument could claim the offense will be more than merely "somewhat improved," but since Powers is making up the hypothetical argument, he can make it say whatever it is he'd most like to argue against). He wants the Viking offense to be bad so that the predictions he's been making (since at least last preseason) can be right, and he can look smart.
Just know that, Viking fans. If you want to read Tom Powers, you may as well go read Packer blogs, too. If you want to read the commentary of somebody that is openly rooting against your team, that’s fine. Doing so might give help balance your perspective. But don’t be mistaken: Tom Powers doesn’t want the Vikings to win.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Is 9-7 to 6-10 Brad Childress's Fault?
I've heard Viking fans cite the '05 Vikes' 9-7 record and the '06 Vikes 6-10 record as clear evidence that Brad Childress is responsible for the Vikings' decline in wins. That's easy to say if you are unwilling to look closer. But let's look at the '05 Vikes more closely to see if Childress is responsible for a 3-game regression.
The 2005 Vikings
W1: 33-16 v. Saints
This was a shellacking of a team that was unstable after Hurricane Katrina.
W2: 23-20 v. Packers
The Vikes won on a last second field goal. Koren Robinson had a key kick return late in the game that made a desperation field goal attempt possible.
W3: 27-14 v. Lions
The Vikes always beat the Lions
W4: 24-21 v. Giants
The Vikes didn't score an offensive TD: they won on an interception return by Darren Sharper, a punt return by Mewelde Moore, and a kick return by Koren Robinson.
W5: 20-17 @ Packers
The Vikes won on a last-second field goal; Koren Robinson had the key reception to set up the game winning field goal.
w6: 24-12 v. Browns
The Browns were bad.
w7: 21-16 @ Lions
The Vikes could have blown this game late but didn't. They started the game with an 80 yard TD pass to Koren Robinson.
w8: 27-13 v. Rams
Ryan Fitzpatrick started at quarterback for the Rams.
w9: 34-10 v. Bears
Having clinched everything, the Bears rested their starters and did not even try to win this game.
So, what do you see in the 9-7 team coached by Mike Tice? In four of the Viking wins, Koren Robinson was a difference maker--his big plays directly helped the Vikes to victory. It's not that Robinson was a legendary performer, but his big plays were x-factors responsible for at least three and possibly four Viking wins; take Robinson off the '05 Vikes, and I believe they are a 6-10 team. And, as everybody knows, Robinson was not on the '06 Viking team that went 6-10.
But look further. The Vikes got an early win against a Saints team in turmoil and playing its third consecutive road game. They also got a win against a Ram team starting a third-string rookie QB. They also got a week 17 win against a Bear team that was playing all of its backups.
The '05 Vikings were a clinched team resting its starters away from being an 8-8 team. They were a few plays away from being a 6-10 team. They were one player away from being a 5-11 team. They were a few scheduling breaks away from being a 4-12 team.
We can romanticize the '05 Vikes as a gutty 9-7 team, but the reality is that the team simply wasn't that good. Let's not forget, the '05 Vikings also lost some games by scores like 37-8, 30-10, 28-3, 38-13, and 18-3. They won close games against bad teams and got absolutely slaughtered against good teams.
So, can you really blame Brad Childress for turning a 9-7 team into a 6-10 team? I don't believe you can. Not when the '05 Vikings were worse than their record indicated (through luck more than Mike Tice's coaching). Not when the '06 Vikes played without '05 gamebreaker Koren Robinson. Not when the team Childress took over was also the team that was blown out by nearly every decent opponent the prior year. Not when the '06 Vikes both won and lost some freaky close games (take away Chester Taylor's fumbles in the fourth quarter against Chicago and Miami, and the 2006 Vikings are very likely an 8-8 team. Can you possibly blame Brad Childress for those two Chester Taylor fumbles?).
Of course wins and losses are all that matters. And if all you look at is 9 versus 6, it looks like Brad Childress led the Vikings to a decline in 2006. But a closer look reveals that's simply not true. The Vikings may or may not improve in 2007, but Brad Childress is not the reason the Vikings fell from 9 to 6 wins between '05 and '06. The Vikes fell from 9 to 6 wins because of the loss of Koren Robinson, a few scheduling quirks, a few plays, a few fumbles, and a few unlucky breaks.
The 2005 Vikings
W1: 33-16 v. Saints
This was a shellacking of a team that was unstable after Hurricane Katrina.
W2: 23-20 v. Packers
The Vikes won on a last second field goal. Koren Robinson had a key kick return late in the game that made a desperation field goal attempt possible.
W3: 27-14 v. Lions
The Vikes always beat the Lions
W4: 24-21 v. Giants
The Vikes didn't score an offensive TD: they won on an interception return by Darren Sharper, a punt return by Mewelde Moore, and a kick return by Koren Robinson.
W5: 20-17 @ Packers
The Vikes won on a last-second field goal; Koren Robinson had the key reception to set up the game winning field goal.
w6: 24-12 v. Browns
The Browns were bad.
w7: 21-16 @ Lions
The Vikes could have blown this game late but didn't. They started the game with an 80 yard TD pass to Koren Robinson.
w8: 27-13 v. Rams
Ryan Fitzpatrick started at quarterback for the Rams.
w9: 34-10 v. Bears
Having clinched everything, the Bears rested their starters and did not even try to win this game.
So, what do you see in the 9-7 team coached by Mike Tice? In four of the Viking wins, Koren Robinson was a difference maker--his big plays directly helped the Vikes to victory. It's not that Robinson was a legendary performer, but his big plays were x-factors responsible for at least three and possibly four Viking wins; take Robinson off the '05 Vikes, and I believe they are a 6-10 team. And, as everybody knows, Robinson was not on the '06 Viking team that went 6-10.
But look further. The Vikes got an early win against a Saints team in turmoil and playing its third consecutive road game. They also got a win against a Ram team starting a third-string rookie QB. They also got a week 17 win against a Bear team that was playing all of its backups.
The '05 Vikings were a clinched team resting its starters away from being an 8-8 team. They were a few plays away from being a 6-10 team. They were one player away from being a 5-11 team. They were a few scheduling breaks away from being a 4-12 team.
We can romanticize the '05 Vikes as a gutty 9-7 team, but the reality is that the team simply wasn't that good. Let's not forget, the '05 Vikings also lost some games by scores like 37-8, 30-10, 28-3, 38-13, and 18-3. They won close games against bad teams and got absolutely slaughtered against good teams.
So, can you really blame Brad Childress for turning a 9-7 team into a 6-10 team? I don't believe you can. Not when the '05 Vikings were worse than their record indicated (through luck more than Mike Tice's coaching). Not when the '06 Vikes played without '05 gamebreaker Koren Robinson. Not when the team Childress took over was also the team that was blown out by nearly every decent opponent the prior year. Not when the '06 Vikes both won and lost some freaky close games (take away Chester Taylor's fumbles in the fourth quarter against Chicago and Miami, and the 2006 Vikings are very likely an 8-8 team. Can you possibly blame Brad Childress for those two Chester Taylor fumbles?).
Of course wins and losses are all that matters. And if all you look at is 9 versus 6, it looks like Brad Childress led the Vikings to a decline in 2006. But a closer look reveals that's simply not true. The Vikings may or may not improve in 2007, but Brad Childress is not the reason the Vikings fell from 9 to 6 wins between '05 and '06. The Vikes fell from 9 to 6 wins because of the loss of Koren Robinson, a few scheduling quirks, a few plays, a few fumbles, and a few unlucky breaks.
Playoff Legacy Watch: the Cavs and the Spurs
The Cleveland Cavaliers
Last year, I examined every NBA champion since 1957 to find the team's second best player. I found that most NBA champions had a Hall of Fame quality second best player. Many NBA champions had even more Hall of Fame quality players. Nearly all NBA champions had a very good second best player, and/or a deep team. I found it is impossible to claim that any individual player "carries" his team to the title, as every individual who has won a title had at least one very good teammate to help him, or had several very productive teammates helping him.
If there is one possible exception, it is the 1975 Warriors. Rick Barry averaged 30.6 ppg in the regular season; the second leading scorer was rookie Jamaal Wilkes with 14.2 ppg (but the team did have two other scorers in double figures, and one double figure rebounder). Barry also led the team with 6.2 apg. In the playoffs, Barry averaged 28.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, and 6.1 apg. Wilkes averaged 15-7, but other than that, you don't see a lot of great playoff contributions on the Warriors. It's a team of role players around Barry.
If LeBron James leads the 2007 Cleveland Cavaliers to the NBA championship, his accomplishment would outdo Barry's. LeBron would be the closest player to ever carry a team to a title. Which is also why I don't think he will.
Note: I also considered the '94 Rockets. But after Hakeem Olajuwon, the Rockets did have 14-10 Otis Thorpe, and in the playoffs had five players average between 9.4 and 13.8 ppg to compliment Hakeem's 28.9-11 masterpiece.
The San Antonio Spurs
The Spurs are attempting to win 4 titles in 9 years, but Tim Duncan is the only player still around from the 1999 team. But the nucleus of Duncan-Parker-Ginobli was intact for the 2003 and 2005 title teams. If the 2007 Spurs win the title, then, we can say this nucleus has won 3 titles in 5 years.
Here is the list of other teams that have won 3 NBA championships in a 5 year span.
The Minneapolis Lakers (5 of 6 from '49-'55)
The Boston Celtics (11 of 13 from '57-'69)
The Los Angeles Lakers (3 of 5 from '85-'88)
The Chicago Bulls (6 of 8 from '91-'98)
The Los Angeles Lakers (3 of 3 from '00-'02)
Winning 3 championships in 5 years would have to cement the Spurs as one of the great teams of all-time.
Last year, I examined every NBA champion since 1957 to find the team's second best player. I found that most NBA champions had a Hall of Fame quality second best player. Many NBA champions had even more Hall of Fame quality players. Nearly all NBA champions had a very good second best player, and/or a deep team. I found it is impossible to claim that any individual player "carries" his team to the title, as every individual who has won a title had at least one very good teammate to help him, or had several very productive teammates helping him.
If there is one possible exception, it is the 1975 Warriors. Rick Barry averaged 30.6 ppg in the regular season; the second leading scorer was rookie Jamaal Wilkes with 14.2 ppg (but the team did have two other scorers in double figures, and one double figure rebounder). Barry also led the team with 6.2 apg. In the playoffs, Barry averaged 28.2 ppg, 5.5 rpg, and 6.1 apg. Wilkes averaged 15-7, but other than that, you don't see a lot of great playoff contributions on the Warriors. It's a team of role players around Barry.
If LeBron James leads the 2007 Cleveland Cavaliers to the NBA championship, his accomplishment would outdo Barry's. LeBron would be the closest player to ever carry a team to a title. Which is also why I don't think he will.
Note: I also considered the '94 Rockets. But after Hakeem Olajuwon, the Rockets did have 14-10 Otis Thorpe, and in the playoffs had five players average between 9.4 and 13.8 ppg to compliment Hakeem's 28.9-11 masterpiece.
The San Antonio Spurs
The Spurs are attempting to win 4 titles in 9 years, but Tim Duncan is the only player still around from the 1999 team. But the nucleus of Duncan-Parker-Ginobli was intact for the 2003 and 2005 title teams. If the 2007 Spurs win the title, then, we can say this nucleus has won 3 titles in 5 years.
Here is the list of other teams that have won 3 NBA championships in a 5 year span.
The Minneapolis Lakers (5 of 6 from '49-'55)
The Boston Celtics (11 of 13 from '57-'69)
The Los Angeles Lakers (3 of 5 from '85-'88)
The Chicago Bulls (6 of 8 from '91-'98)
The Los Angeles Lakers (3 of 3 from '00-'02)
Winning 3 championships in 5 years would have to cement the Spurs as one of the great teams of all-time.
Monday, June 04, 2007
Blizzard: Fantasy Planning
Yesterday I began strategizing in earnest for the August 17th Fantasy Auction Draft, and now I'm going to continue to rally for Fantasy Football Revolution.
Head-to-Head Competition is for suckers. A few years ago, Blue Viking Devil and I figured out how stupid head-to-head scheduling is for fantasy football: it's a system that consistently allows inferior competitors to finish above superior finishers. But we didn't want to just use total score, either: that makes it pointless to follow football on a weekly basis. So we borrowed from our experience running cross country, and devised a standings system that puts every fantasy manager head-to-head with every other fantasy manager every week. It's much more competitive, and much fairer.
If you're in a league of 10, you are competing each week against every other team in the league. If you finish with the best score for the week, you beat all 9 people, so after one week, your record is 9-0. If you have the second best score for the week, you had 8 wins and 1 loss, so your record is 8-1. And on down the line.
It is far superior--and I've explained why here.
I also believe snake drafts are for cowards (the Revolution requires inflammatory language). An auction draft is the way to go. If you compete in an auction, you have far more control than if you compete in a snake draft. Rather than being stuck in your alloted draft slot, you have control over which players you want to target. The snake draft is an equalizer--the auction forces you to be savvy. It also makes the actual draft experience far more fun, and isn't that what it's actually all about? Instead of sitting around naming off picks, you're actively bidding against each other (we use a cup flipping system. Somebody names a player, and you go around the table. If it comes to your turn, you either have to raise the bid, or you flip your cup. Flipping your cup is like folding in poker--you're out, and you can't come back in. So you go around, and those still in the bidding up each other's bid until one person is left). It can be intense, heated, loud, and always fun.
We use the arbitrary sum of 265 dollars to spend on 16 rosters. I don't recommend such an arbitrary sum, but I don't recommend 100 dollars, either (you want to have a lot of increments to bid--at 100 dollars, there is less bidding, meaning less fun. At even 200 dollars, there is a lot of fun bidding--you can go up by one quite a ways, and later in the draft people still have money to bid).
Join the Revolution. Compete in an auction league, and give the cross-country scoring system a try.
Now on to some links.
In his latest basketball blog, Bill Simmons continues to make jokes about people that make less money than him: "if Roger can produce anything I've ever written that called him LeBron an "overhyped fraud," I will send him a $200 check to double the salary that the News-Herald is paying him every week." Classy.
The Strib reports on Viking veterans' feelings about where the team is at.
The Strib notes that Antoine Winfield will attend what is mandatory, and that's it. As a veteran DB, I'm not sure there's a lot he'll miss. As long as he shows up for training camp and enters the season ready to play, I don't care. But he's a joy to watch, so I hope he is not terribly dissatisfied with the organization.
The Ppress reports on Tarvaris Jackson's practice performance.
Vikings.com looks at Cedric Griffin's progress.
Via Fanhouse, The Virginia-Pilot looks closely at Gerald Poindexter.
Pro-football-reference.com looks at the potential effect losing Tiki Barber will have for the Giants.
The Return of the Chronicle of Cliche: Peter King
It's been a long time since we've chronicled any cliches, but Peter King's latest MMQB is so full of them we have to resurrect it...er, bring it back to life...er, do it again. Remember, In "Politics and the English Language," George Orwell's first rule of good English usage is "Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print." We consider it worth the effort to chronicle the overused metaphors of particularly bad writers.
As usual, we're focusing on overused cliches, so we ignore basic overused idioms (such as "face it" or "there's no end in sight") and we ignore metaphoric language that shows some creativity. We chronicle overused metaphors, and Peter King gives us plenty.
"buck the trend" (King will not, however, buck any trend involving a cliche).
"take the pulse of"
"Worked like a charm"
"can stand toe-to-toe with"
"My NFC darkhorse" (Are there real darkhorses? Were there ever?)
"go out on a limb"
"brain drain"
"they have the linebacking backbone"
"Memo to" (Memo to aspiring writers: the phrase "memo to" is a hackneyed cliche).
"calling you every name in the book"
"you sounded like a sledgehammer"
"beating this dogfighting rap."
"I'd bet you a lot of money that"
"pulled the trigger on"
"will be as Herculean a task" (I'm starting to feel that chronicling King's cliches is an Herculean task).
"pushing aside the mountain of stuff they have on their plates" (they have metaphorical mountains on their metaphorical plates. We're quite removed from direct language here).
"the entrepreneurial spirit will be alive" (Is the entrepreneurial spirit any relation to the spirit of fantasy football?)
"some deep-pocketed people"
"It's a heck of a hill to climb"
"If he had let it die"
"a no-harm, no-foul incident"
"I guess I should have a scintilla of interest in Cleveland-San Antonio, but I don't." (I've never heard the word "scintilla" used outside of hyperbole. It's usually only used, as King uses it, to say that there is not even a scintilla. I don't hear people speak of actual scintillas, whatever they may be, but only the absence of scintillas).
"the occasional 163-158 Nets-Suns barnburner" (A barn burner like Abner Snopes?)
"this sea-change."
Overuse of metaphor is a sure sign of a lazy, uncreative, or bad writer. Overuse of criticism of overuse of metaphor is, without a doubt, a sure sign of a prickly English professor.
As usual, we're focusing on overused cliches, so we ignore basic overused idioms (such as "face it" or "there's no end in sight") and we ignore metaphoric language that shows some creativity. We chronicle overused metaphors, and Peter King gives us plenty.
"buck the trend" (King will not, however, buck any trend involving a cliche).
"take the pulse of"
"Worked like a charm"
"can stand toe-to-toe with"
"My NFC darkhorse" (Are there real darkhorses? Were there ever?)
"go out on a limb"
"brain drain"
"they have the linebacking backbone"
"Memo to" (Memo to aspiring writers: the phrase "memo to" is a hackneyed cliche).
"calling you every name in the book"
"you sounded like a sledgehammer"
"beating this dogfighting rap."
"I'd bet you a lot of money that"
"pulled the trigger on"
"will be as Herculean a task" (I'm starting to feel that chronicling King's cliches is an Herculean task).
"pushing aside the mountain of stuff they have on their plates" (they have metaphorical mountains on their metaphorical plates. We're quite removed from direct language here).
"the entrepreneurial spirit will be alive" (Is the entrepreneurial spirit any relation to the spirit of fantasy football?)
"some deep-pocketed people"
"It's a heck of a hill to climb"
"If he had let it die"
"a no-harm, no-foul incident"
"I guess I should have a scintilla of interest in Cleveland-San Antonio, but I don't." (I've never heard the word "scintilla" used outside of hyperbole. It's usually only used, as King uses it, to say that there is not even a scintilla. I don't hear people speak of actual scintillas, whatever they may be, but only the absence of scintillas).
"the occasional 163-158 Nets-Suns barnburner" (A barn burner like Abner Snopes?)
"this sea-change."
Overuse of metaphor is a sure sign of a lazy, uncreative, or bad writer. Overuse of criticism of overuse of metaphor is, without a doubt, a sure sign of a prickly English professor.
Saturday, June 02, 2007
NBA Legacy Watch: Daniel Gibson
Tonight rookie Daniel Gibson reminded me of...
rookie Sam Cassell helping the Rockets to a championship in the '94 Finals.
Except Cassell as a rookie had this sort of chaotic speeding madness, whereas Gibson's three-point stroke was calm beautiful perfection.
rookie Sam Cassell helping the Rockets to a championship in the '94 Finals.
Except Cassell as a rookie had this sort of chaotic speeding madness, whereas Gibson's three-point stroke was calm beautiful perfection.
Friday, June 01, 2007
Playoff Legacy Watch: LeBron James
The hyperbole is already everywhere, but the thing is, it might not be hyperbole. It might all be justified.
But let's look beyond LeBron's immediate playoff performance for a moment to examine his legacy.
In basketball, there are three career accomplishments that stand out above all others. There are single game and single season accomplishments that are grand, too--however, these three players' cumulative achievements are simply epic in NBA history, and I don't see anything close.
Is LeBron James capable of matching any of these accomplishments?
10 Scoring Titles (Michael Jordan)
It's possible that in another year or two, LeBron is going to be by far the best scorer in the league. But I don't see him getting to 10--Jordan's accomplishment in that regard is almost insurmountable.
11 NBA Championships (Bill Russell)
I would like to say there is no chance of another individual player winning 11 championships. But if somehow LeBron wins a championship this year, with this Cleveland team, I put no ceiling on what he will do. Someday he might get onto a good team that will win 73 games. I would still say he's not getting to 11, though.
6 MVPs (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar)
This is LeBron's record to break. I think soon, possibly next season or maybe the year after, LeBron will win his first MVP trophy. He'll likely be deserving of MVP every year after that (though you never know what voters might do). I think LeBron will eventually win six or more MVP awards.
But let's look beyond LeBron's immediate playoff performance for a moment to examine his legacy.
In basketball, there are three career accomplishments that stand out above all others. There are single game and single season accomplishments that are grand, too--however, these three players' cumulative achievements are simply epic in NBA history, and I don't see anything close.
Is LeBron James capable of matching any of these accomplishments?
10 Scoring Titles (Michael Jordan)
It's possible that in another year or two, LeBron is going to be by far the best scorer in the league. But I don't see him getting to 10--Jordan's accomplishment in that regard is almost insurmountable.
11 NBA Championships (Bill Russell)
I would like to say there is no chance of another individual player winning 11 championships. But if somehow LeBron wins a championship this year, with this Cleveland team, I put no ceiling on what he will do. Someday he might get onto a good team that will win 73 games. I would still say he's not getting to 11, though.
6 MVPs (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar)
This is LeBron's record to break. I think soon, possibly next season or maybe the year after, LeBron will win his first MVP trophy. He'll likely be deserving of MVP every year after that (though you never know what voters might do). I think LeBron will eventually win six or more MVP awards.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
LeBron James owns the game of basketball.
LeBron playing basketball is like a pro golfer playing a course that he designed.
Talking about him is like talking about Michelangelo: you're not really talking about the man, but an infallible spirit that dominates his age and his art. To question the creator of such masterpieces is beyond futile: it is the beauty and perfection of the art itself that matters to the ages.
Everything Comes Up Milhouse in the NFL Offseason (A Football Blizzard)
You've got to love summer if you're an NFL fan. Mediocre running backs talk openly about how they feel ready for a 2,000 yard season. Every team with a stiff at quarterback talks about how the team is confident in said stiff. Every player who sucked the previous year is talking about why next year will be different. It's all optimism, excitement, hope. Every new defensive coordinator preaches an aggressive attitude, and his players mimic it; every new offensive coordinator has the reason the offense will be better next year. Every team is excited about its new free agents; every new free agent is excited about his new team.
So Byron Leftwich will be better because he lost weight. There are all sorts of reasons Ben Roethlisberger will be better in '07. Hines Ward will face less double-teams as the offense moves him around. Every team and almost every player is going to have a feature this summer that focuses on why this team and/or player is ready for big things in 2007. I love it and you love it. It's all bullshit and it's all just what we need.
And I'm about ready to start my own fantasy football spreadsheets (my league's draft is August 17th--it's time to get cracking). In a few weeks I'll start posting and linking to more fantasy football stories and projections.
I think the USA Today headline writers played a joke on Matt Pitzer: "Keeper strategy: don't hold onto your kicker." That's a novel approach: don't use your keeper on your kicker.
ESPN debates whether Steve Smith or Marvin Harrison is the best WR in the league. Michael David Smith says he'd take Chad Johnson over either. I'd have trouble passing on Torry Holt, myself.
Might I suggest Marshawn Lynch for your fantasy team?
CHFF thinks the NFL is lame for banning alcohol at team activities. It is sort of odd to make millions of dollars in beer commercials and beer sales but then say alcohol is bad.
Football Outsiders looks at Dave Hampton's struggles near 1,000 yards.
Bucky Brooks looks at five offensive trends and five defensive trends in pro football.
An NFL study finds concussions are linked to depression.
There are several informants willing to place Michael Vick at dog fights. George Dohrmann looks at the "Complex Case."
So Byron Leftwich will be better because he lost weight. There are all sorts of reasons Ben Roethlisberger will be better in '07. Hines Ward will face less double-teams as the offense moves him around. Every team and almost every player is going to have a feature this summer that focuses on why this team and/or player is ready for big things in 2007. I love it and you love it. It's all bullshit and it's all just what we need.
And I'm about ready to start my own fantasy football spreadsheets (my league's draft is August 17th--it's time to get cracking). In a few weeks I'll start posting and linking to more fantasy football stories and projections.
I think the USA Today headline writers played a joke on Matt Pitzer: "Keeper strategy: don't hold onto your kicker." That's a novel approach: don't use your keeper on your kicker.
ESPN debates whether Steve Smith or Marvin Harrison is the best WR in the league. Michael David Smith says he'd take Chad Johnson over either. I'd have trouble passing on Torry Holt, myself.
Might I suggest Marshawn Lynch for your fantasy team?
CHFF thinks the NFL is lame for banning alcohol at team activities. It is sort of odd to make millions of dollars in beer commercials and beer sales but then say alcohol is bad.
Football Outsiders looks at Dave Hampton's struggles near 1,000 yards.
Bucky Brooks looks at five offensive trends and five defensive trends in pro football.
An NFL study finds concussions are linked to depression.
There are several informants willing to place Michael Vick at dog fights. George Dohrmann looks at the "Complex Case."
Blizzard: Spurs Go on to the Finals
The Spurs easily beat the Jazz to move on to the NBA Finals. You can read takes from Marc Stein, Howard Beck, or The Feed. You can also read Ian Thomsen's feature on Tim Duncan.
But here's what I want to know: the Washington Bullets changed their name to the Wizards to remove the violent image of a bullet, but the Spurs are named after a device used to stab at horses to make them run fast. Where is the outrage, people!?! Of course I'm kidding.
Via PFT, The NY Times has a story about concussions in football. Sports Talk Daily also comments on football head injuries.
If I'm going to follow the goings on at Topps, I'm going to have to get educated on business. What I get out of this story is that one executive at Topps wrote a strongly worded letter (a la GOB Bluth) to other executives at Topps to say they have a conflict of interest.
Randball gives 10 rules for Minnesota sports fans to be happier. Here's the problem: when two of your rules involve ignoring the Vikings/Falcons NFC Championship game, you've sort of done a lot to remind us about it.
Via Vikingbuzz.com, Michael Fabiano addresses the fantasy implications of Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor.
Here is the AJC's latest on the Vick/dog fighting story.
The Daily Norseman interviews Football Outsiders' Ned Macey.
Sports Law Blog comments on the latests goings on with the NFL personal conduct policy.
Wages of Wins looks at Chris Paul and Deron Williams (I like rigid statistical analysis, but I'd also direct you to What was that bang?'s comment on statistical systems--or, I guess, my own).
But here's what I want to know: the Washington Bullets changed their name to the Wizards to remove the violent image of a bullet, but the Spurs are named after a device used to stab at horses to make them run fast. Where is the outrage, people!?! Of course I'm kidding.
Via PFT, The NY Times has a story about concussions in football. Sports Talk Daily also comments on football head injuries.
If I'm going to follow the goings on at Topps, I'm going to have to get educated on business. What I get out of this story is that one executive at Topps wrote a strongly worded letter (a la GOB Bluth) to other executives at Topps to say they have a conflict of interest.
Randball gives 10 rules for Minnesota sports fans to be happier. Here's the problem: when two of your rules involve ignoring the Vikings/Falcons NFC Championship game, you've sort of done a lot to remind us about it.
Via Vikingbuzz.com, Michael Fabiano addresses the fantasy implications of Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor.
Here is the AJC's latest on the Vick/dog fighting story.
The Daily Norseman interviews Football Outsiders' Ned Macey.
Sports Law Blog comments on the latests goings on with the NFL personal conduct policy.
Wages of Wins looks at Chris Paul and Deron Williams (I like rigid statistical analysis, but I'd also direct you to What was that bang?'s comment on statistical systems--or, I guess, my own).
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
A whole notch
via PFT, WAVY-10 reports that Gerald Poindexter has more to say about the rejected search warrant, and said for the first time that there is evidence linking Michael Vick himself to the dog fighting.
On the rejected search warrant:
"'Deputy Brinkman made a mistake. He should have gotten some legal advice during the affidavit for the search warrant,' said Poindexter.
Poindexter called it the domino effect. If one search is determined unconstitutional, searches after that could be illegal too and the case could fall apart.
Yesterday I said I wanted more information; I'm satisfied with Poindexter's explanation. Perhaps I will send him a letter letting him know that his explanation satisfied me, as I'm sure Poindexter's primary concern is the perspective of a blogger in Minnesota.
On whether Vick is involved in dogfighting:
"When asked, 'At this moment in time, do we have any evidence that puts Vick at dog fighting?' Poindexter replied, 'Yes.'
Poindexter said there are people who will make those claims. 'We have informants. We have people who are volunteering to make those allegations.'"
This is the big news. You've heard plenty of reporters and sources claim Vick was directly involved in dog fighting. However, this is the first time Poindexter himself stated that there is any evidence at all linking Vick to dog fighting. Ultimately, what anonymous sources are willing to say to sportswriters won't amount to much; it's what somebody is willing to testify to in a court of law that is going to determine legal guilt or innocence. Investigators and experts have repeatedly claimed the evidence points to dog fighting activities occurring on the property; this is the first time, however, an investigator involved in the case has suggested any individual might be linked to it.
WAVY-10 does provide video clips of their news coverage of this story. I don't much care for local news broadcasts, but watching WAVY-10's videos is much more informative and interesting than merely reading the text. There are more direct quotes from Poindexter in the videos than there are in the text.
In the previous clip I watched at WAVY-10, Poindexter was in a Hawaiian shirt standing outside a rural building with a hostile attitude toward the reporter (but local TV reporter's have a way of framing hostile questions). In these clips, Poindexter appears casual, but he's wearing a suit coat and answering questions deliberately and thoughtfully. He seems thorough, gives clear explanations, and talks passionately about getting the case right.
But I have to examine my own biases. Do I have negative connotations for Hawaiian shirts? I doubt it: I used to wear them all the time, and still do occasionally; furthermore, the loan officer on my home wore Hawaiian shirts every day, and I liked him fine. I think it's time to move discussion of this case into what really matters: what is your perception of Hawaiian shirts?
On the rejected search warrant:
"'Deputy Brinkman made a mistake. He should have gotten some legal advice during the affidavit for the search warrant,' said Poindexter.
Poindexter called it the domino effect. If one search is determined unconstitutional, searches after that could be illegal too and the case could fall apart.
Yesterday I said I wanted more information; I'm satisfied with Poindexter's explanation. Perhaps I will send him a letter letting him know that his explanation satisfied me, as I'm sure Poindexter's primary concern is the perspective of a blogger in Minnesota.
On whether Vick is involved in dogfighting:
"When asked, 'At this moment in time, do we have any evidence that puts Vick at dog fighting?' Poindexter replied, 'Yes.'
Poindexter said there are people who will make those claims. 'We have informants. We have people who are volunteering to make those allegations.'"
This is the big news. You've heard plenty of reporters and sources claim Vick was directly involved in dog fighting. However, this is the first time Poindexter himself stated that there is any evidence at all linking Vick to dog fighting. Ultimately, what anonymous sources are willing to say to sportswriters won't amount to much; it's what somebody is willing to testify to in a court of law that is going to determine legal guilt or innocence. Investigators and experts have repeatedly claimed the evidence points to dog fighting activities occurring on the property; this is the first time, however, an investigator involved in the case has suggested any individual might be linked to it.
WAVY-10 does provide video clips of their news coverage of this story. I don't much care for local news broadcasts, but watching WAVY-10's videos is much more informative and interesting than merely reading the text. There are more direct quotes from Poindexter in the videos than there are in the text.
In the previous clip I watched at WAVY-10, Poindexter was in a Hawaiian shirt standing outside a rural building with a hostile attitude toward the reporter (but local TV reporter's have a way of framing hostile questions). In these clips, Poindexter appears casual, but he's wearing a suit coat and answering questions deliberately and thoughtfully. He seems thorough, gives clear explanations, and talks passionately about getting the case right.
But I have to examine my own biases. Do I have negative connotations for Hawaiian shirts? I doubt it: I used to wear them all the time, and still do occasionally; furthermore, the loan officer on my home wore Hawaiian shirts every day, and I liked him fine. I think it's time to move discussion of this case into what really matters: what is your perception of Hawaiian shirts?
The business at Topps
There's some big corporate fighting going on over Topps, my favorite sports card company. You can read about it at the Cincinnati Post, Crain's New York Business, and Forbes.
I'm not in the habit of giving investment advice. In fact, my training in interpreting literature and career teaching writing leaves me completely unqualified to even understand the business world. I still don't understand why they allow bears and bulls to roam free on Wall Street. I did take accounting classes in high school, but I usually read novels during class. But I did watch Trading Places when I was in elementary school, so I do know there is some sort of market going on. So if you take my advice, you are an utter idiot.
But here's my advice: invest in Topps. They say the business is struggling, yet the takeover bids are for around $400 million: how bad could business be? If I understood anything at all--and I mean ANYTHING AT ALL--about the stock market, I might buy 2 or 3 shares of Topps just for fun. But that's my completely unqualified, completely incompetent, absolutely uneducated and uninformed advice: invest in Topps.
In good news for Topps, Greg Oden has signed with the company.
I'm not in the habit of giving investment advice. In fact, my training in interpreting literature and career teaching writing leaves me completely unqualified to even understand the business world. I still don't understand why they allow bears and bulls to roam free on Wall Street. I did take accounting classes in high school, but I usually read novels during class. But I did watch Trading Places when I was in elementary school, so I do know there is some sort of market going on. So if you take my advice, you are an utter idiot.
But here's my advice: invest in Topps. They say the business is struggling, yet the takeover bids are for around $400 million: how bad could business be? If I understood anything at all--and I mean ANYTHING AT ALL--about the stock market, I might buy 2 or 3 shares of Topps just for fun. But that's my completely unqualified, completely incompetent, absolutely uneducated and uninformed advice: invest in Topps.
In good news for Topps, Greg Oden has signed with the company.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)