Sports Central | Articles and Columns

« February 2009 | Main | April 2009 »

March 31, 2009

The NCAA Tournament in Stats

So I'll just get come right out and say it: I got my ass handed to me this year.

To recap a few of my Roundball Roundtable picks:

Top team to fall: Xavier to Portland State, first round.

Xavier made the Elite Eight.

(Kudos to Jonathan Lowe and Jean Neuberger for taking Cleveland State over Wake Forest and Ross Lancaster for taking Western Kentucky over Illinois.)

This year's Davidson? Arizona State.

Waxed by Syracuse in the second round.

(Extra credit for me for saying the world was about to find out how great ASU sophomore James Harden is. All he did was completely mail it in with 19 points combined on 3-of-18 shooting.)

Final Four: Louisville, Memphis, Pittsburgh, Arizona State.

What do they call it in baseball when you strike out four times in a game? Oh yes. The Golden Sombrero.

Vamanos, amigos!

So now that we've established my credentials at predicting the future, let's leave the Final Four prognosticating to somebody else. Rather, I'm going to put my true talents to test in figuring out the solution to a very important question:

What the hell just happened here?

I've broken down all the stats I could find, looking for not only some sort of explanation of what has happened so far in the tournament, but also looking for a leg up on next year's competition.

The major headline: it's all about the offense.

Thus far, there have been 60 games, not including the play-in. Teams that came in averaging more points per game are 42-18. Teams that came in with a better scoring defense went just 28-32 and teams with the better field goal percentage defense went just 29-31.

But offense isn't just scoring. It's also how you score. Are you overly reliant on dribbling to create a shot, or are you more of a passing team? And if you are a passing team, how good are you?

Teams with a higher assist total are 39-20 and teams with a higher assist-to-turnover went 41-17. That's not to say that the team the turns over the ball the least wins, because those teams are only 27-29. It's more of how many turnovers you have in relation to how many assists you have.

And of course there's what you do if you miss a shot. Teams with the better rebounding margin are 43-17, the single most dominant statistic of them all.

Those stats are all well and fine, but they're not winning your bracket pool. Even if you took the rebounding margin all the way through, you'd still have 17 "X" marks on your sheet. Unless you're in a pool with a bunch of morons, that's not good enough.

So I dug deeper.

Using the rebounding margin totals and adding in scoring margin as an additional variable, you get a 31-8 success rate. Add in more assists per game and it's 22-4. Now there's a winning percentage you can hang your hat on.

Slice it a different way and add assists per game to points per game and you're at 31-10. Add in field goal percentage and you're at a very nice 23-6.

One thing I found out was that different statistics changed in importance as the tournament progressed. For instance, teams with a higher free throw percentage went 21-17 during the first two rounds. But during the Elite Eight games on Saturday and Sunday, the team with the higher free throw percentage went a perfect 4-0.

Conversely, PPG, as I mentioned, was a great harbinger of success in the first round at 23-9. But those teams went just 1-3 in the Elite Eight.

Really, the only stat that carried its success through every level so far is rebounding margin: 21-11 in the first round, 12-4 in the second, 7-1 in the Sweet 16, and 3-1 in the Elite Eight. (If that carries forward, it's good news for Michigan State and North Carolina.)

In order to help make sense of it all, here are the top indicators by round (broken into single category and combo stats).

First Round Single Category

Points per game: 23-9
Assist-to-turnover ratio: 22-9
Rebounding margin: 21-11
Scoring margin: 21-11

First Round Combos (Two)

Points per game + Points per game allowed: 9-2
Scoring margin + Rebounding margin: 17-6
Points per game + Assists per game: 17-6

First Round Combos (Three)

Assists per game + Points per game + Field goal percentage: 11-3
Assists per game + Scoring margin + Rebounding margin: 11-3
Points per game + Field goal percentage + Three-point field goal percentage: 11-4

Second Round Single Category

RPI: 14-2 (I know it's not a stat, but I tracked it with the intent of mocking the performance of higher-rated RPI with a look toward discrediting the whole system next season. Whoops.)

Field goal differential (Difference between own field goal percentage and field goal percentage allowed): 14-2

Points per game: 13-3
Scoring margin: 13-3

Second Round Combo (Two)

Scoring margin + Rebounding margin: 9-0
Assists per game + Points per game: 9-0
Assists per game + Assist-to-turnover ratio: 11-3

Second Round Combo (Three)

Assists per game + Points per game + Field goal percentage: 8-0
Points per game + Field goal percentage + Three-point field goal percentage: 8-0
Assists per game + Scoring margin + Rebounding margin: 7-0

Sweet 16 Single Category

Rebounding margin: 7-1
RPI: 6-2
Assist-to-turnover ratio: 6-2
Assists per game: 6-2

Sweet 16 Combo (Two)

Assists per game + Assist-to-turnover ratio: 5-1
Scoring margin + Rebounding margin: 4-1
Assists per game + Field goal percentage: 4-1

Sweet 16 Combo (Three)

Assists per game + Scoring margin + Rebounding margin: 3-0
Assists per game + Points per game + Field goal percentage: 3-1
Assists per game + Field goal percentage + Three-point field goal percentage: 2-1

Elite Eight

Free throw percentage: 4-0
Rebounding margin: 3-1

Those were the only two stats worth mentioning. None of the single stats or combos went better than even, and most (15 of the remaining 28) went worse than .500, including points per game allowed + field goal percentage allowed + three-point field goal percentage allowed at 0-3 and three-point field goal percentage allowed as a stand-alone at 0-4.

Now for one last question: will this or won't this help me fill out my bracket next year?

Yes.

Now whether or not it will be any better than this year's is another matter entirely.

Posted by Joshua Duffy at 11:56 AM | Comments (0)

Tiger's Win Overshadows Masters Contenders

In case you hadn't seen or heard, Tiger Woods won the Arnold Palmer Invitational last Sunday with a dramatic 16-foot birdie putt on the final hole of the tournament. In Tiger's third "comeback" event — the comeback in which he was the defending champion — he ended any murmurs of doubt about his ability.

With the completion of the five-stroke comeback in the final round, Woods went from sentimental favorite at Augusta National to leading contender for the green jacket. Two weeks from now, Woods may well have his fifth Masters title in hand.

Still, up until his Sunday win, there appeared to be a pretty broad pool of favorites to win the first major of the season. These players should not be forgotten on the heels of Woods' Sunday performance. They will pose a strong challenge to Woods.

Up until Sunday, Phil Mickelson was having a fantastic season. Mickelson was not even in Orlando at Bay Hill and somehow lost the pole position as Masters favorite. Mickelson won at Riviera with an intelligent strategy and survived his own shaky misgivings on Sunday. At Doral, in Woods' stroke play return event, Mickelson was great from start to finish. In particular, Mickelson showed that he could still play the classic Lefty style of aggressive golf that he will have to nurture in order to be successful at the Masters.

At the end of last season, everyone started claiming to be Irish to get a piece of Padraig Harrington. With a stunning final round performance at the gale force Open Championship and an opportunistic win over Sergio Garcia at Oakland Hills, Harrington is the only man that can complete the Paddyslam.

Since those two wins, Paddy has struggled in tournament play. Still, Harrington showed signs of some form this weekend at Bay Hill. With three rounds at par or better, Harrington finished tied for 11th. He will prepare for Augusta National at the Shell Houston Open, setup much like Augusta will be. Harrington is determined to be a U.S. Open away from history.

Perhaps a very dangerous man is being overlooked. Retief Goosen won the Transitions Championship just two weeks ago. It was Goosen's first win on the PGA Tour since 2005 and first significant win since the 2007 Qatar Masters. Goosen has struggled with his swing, with his eye, and finished in 89th and 108th on the money list in the past two seasons. How, then, could he be a Masters contender?

He has been erratic so far this season on the PGA Tour, but he has two top-three finishes. Additionally, he has an excellent track record at Augusta National. He has not missed the cut in his last seven Masters starts and has finished on the medal stand in two of the last three Masters. In other words, the Goose likes Augusta National.

There are certainly other players that would not surprise anyone to see them in contention on Sunday. Sergio Garcia, maybe Ernie Els, or a young European player may be able to make some serious noise. Former Masters winner Zach Johnson is showing signs of life. With how Augusta National has played in the last several Masters tournaments, it seems that the track has allowed a greater number of lesser-known players into the fold. That trend may continue again this year, largely depending on the weather.

The thing to remember in this entire discussion is that Tiger Woods is not the only player that can win the Masters. Contrary to the thousands of articles written praising Woods' clutch performance (as opposed to Sean O'Hair's choke job), this author is convinced that Woods is at his most vulnerable in his comeback.

It is impossible to deny that Woods will likely make a full comeback in due time. What Woods did on Sunday was not reminiscent of a player thriving on nostalgia. Until Tiger is fully back, though, the rest of the golf world has one — maybe two — big chances to capture a major. The players listed above know this and will work extra hard to take advantage.

Posted by Ryan Ballengee at 11:03 AM | Comments (0)

March 30, 2009

In the Rotation: NBA Week 21

At this time last season, the question that loomed over the Western Conference playoff race was, "is a team with 50 wins going to miss the playoffs?"

As the teams out West battle it out over the last two weeks of the regular season, the question this season isn't about who is or isn't getting in, but rather who is or isn't getting home court advantage?

Heading into play on Monday, there are just two and a half games that separate the number two seed San Antonio Spurs from the seventh-seeded New Orleans Hornets. That leaves six teams (Spurs, Rockets, Nuggets, Jazz, Trail Blazers, and Hornets) in a 10-game shootout for the numbers two, three, and four seeds, and the home-court advantage that goes along with them.

Last week's Starting Five focused on the Eastern Conference playoff race. And while the Fairness Doctrine may not necessarily apply to Sports Central, it surely applies to the Rotation.

This week's Starting Five takes a look at the Western Conference playoff race as we try to sort through the madness that is taking place on the left coast and figure out which three teams will win the coveted home-court advantage in the first round of the playoffs.

Starting Five

1. Once again, we know who's number one...

The Lakers' slight hiccup in Atlanta on Sunday means very little to them. After Tuesday's 18-point win in Oklahoma City, the Lakers clinched the best record in the Western Conference. The Cavs' home-friendly schedule the rest of the way means that it's going to be very tough for the Lakers to catch them for the best record in the league. The Lakers, unlike every other team in the West, know exactly where they stand going into the postseason.

This leaves Phil Jackson with an interesting coaching dilemma: with the top seed already locked up, should Uncle Phil rest his stars to get them well-rested for a deep playoff run?

On the one hand, Kobe Bryant has been an ironman for this team over the past two seasons. For just the second time in his career, Bryant played all 82 regular season games last season, followed by 21 playoff games, a stint with team USA in the Olympics, and has played the first 73 games this season. If anyone has earned a day off, it's him.

Meanwhile, the absence of Andrew Bynum has Pau Gasol playing just under his career high in minutes per game. Gasol has missed just one game for the Lakers this season, and he too is coming off an abbreviated offseason, having led Spain to the gold medal game in the Beijing Olympics. If there's a second player on this roster who has earned a day off, it's Gasol.

On the other hand, the Lakers have developed great chemistry over the first 73 games of the season. Is Jackson, who is as good at managing the game from a mental standpoint as he is with Xs and Os, willing to break the rhythm his team has spent the last six months creating for an off night or two for his best players?

My guess is that unless Kobe suffers some kind of injury (like the twisted ankle that sent him to the locker room early on Friday at New Jersey), expect to see him in uniform for each of the remaining nine Laker games as this teams tries to steamroll into the first round of the playoffs.

2. But who's number two?

If the Rotation were a magic 8 ball, the answer to this question would read, "ask again later." And in this case, it's not a complete cop out.

That's because, if you ask again later, the answer will most likely be different.

As of right now, the Spurs hold a half-game lead over both the Denver Nuggets and Houston Rockets. In theory, if certain tiebreak situations play out right, the Spurs could conceivably drop from second to fourth without even playing a game.

And while a head-to-head three-way matchup would be the easiest way to settle this logjam at the top, the scheduling gods have not been that kind to us. The Spurs don't play the Rockets or Nuggets any more this season, and the Rockets and Nuggets won't meet again, either.

That means that the number two seed in the West could go to the team with the easiest remaining schedule, in this case, Denver.

The Nuggets have eight games left, including five home games, and five games against teams below .500. Compare that to the Rockets (eight games remaining, five road games, only two games against sub .500 teams) and the Spurs (nine games left, five road games, and two back-to-backs that include travel between the first and second game) and it looks like Denver might have the inside track on the two-seed.

However, just to be safe, ask again later.

3. But wait, there's more!

It's not just a three-team race for the two seed. Portland, Utah, and New Orleans are all just two back in the loss column from San Antonio, and one back of Denver and Houston. The good news for these three teams: each of the three teams on the outside looking into the race for home-court advantage in the first round has at least two games remaining against the three teams that would currently host a first round playoff series.

At this point in the season, the only reliable way to make up ground on a team is to beat them head-to-head. With two games to make up and less than 10 games remaining, you can't count on other teams to beat the competition. If given an opportunity to hand a team a loss, you have to take advantage. The Blazers, Jazz, and Hornets will all have the opportunity to gain a game or two (depending on tiebreakers) with wins over the two, three, or four seeds between now and the end of the season.

The bad news for these three teams: they still have to play each other. Meaning even if they do win the games against the division leaders, there's still a chance that these three teams could all just beat up on each other and give up any ground that they may have gained in the first place.

4. So will anyone who currently has home court advantage lose it?

It doesn't seem likely. I think that the order of the three teams (San Antonio, Denver, and Houston) will finish is up in the air, but I can't see any of them falling back into the five seed.

The remaining schedules for Portland, Utah, or New Orleans are all as tough or tougher than the remaining schedule of the three teams they are chasing. They each have at least five games remaining against playoff teams, and almost unbelievably, all three teams have more road games remaining than home games.

Also, consider this. Houston and Denver both have winning percentages of .648. Each team has eight games left. If you apply the winning percentage to the remaining games, you can deduce that they are each likely to go at least 5-3 in their remaining games.

In order to catch them to even force a tie, the five, six, or seven seeds would have to go at least 6-2 or 7-2 depending on how many games they have remaining. Asking a team that plays mostly road games against mostly playoff teams to rattle off seven of nine is a pretty tall order, and I don't know that Portland, Utah, or New Orleans will do it.

5. The Dallas Mavericks

Dallas is the most overlooked team in the playoff picture. The Mavs still have a fighting chance to catch New Orleans, Utah, or Portland and avoid a dreaded first-round matchup against the Lakers.

Last week we talked about how poorly the Magic match up against the Pistons. Well, the same can be said about the Mavericks matching up against the Lakers.

If Dallas can't catch one of those three teams and finds itself in the eight spot, they can start setting tee times for the first week in May. They have lost their last six games to the Lakers and are just 3-16 against lifetime against the Lakers at the Staples Center.

Unless the Mavericks get hot in a hurry, it looks like we may only get four games worth of Mark Cuban's playoff antics in 2009.

In the Rotation: Oklahoma City Thunder

The Oklahoma City Thunder may currently reside in 12th place in the Western Conference standings at 20-53, but they still have a chance to make a big impact on the Western Conference playoff race.

Five of their remaining nine games are against Western Conference playoff teams. OKC has had their share of lottery luck in recent years, so don't expect this young and talented team to tank it at the end of the season in the hopes of a few extra lottery balls.

If a playoff team takes the Thunder lightly, look for Kevin Durant and company to try and play the role of spoiler in the Western Conference playoff race. Their five games against playoff teams is the most remaining out of any lottery team in the West, meaning they'll have plenty of opportunities to catch a good team off guard and potentially cost someone a critical playoff position.

Out of the Rotation: Golden State Warriors

The Warriors are just behind the Thunder as far as games remaining against playoff teams with four. The problem is, you never know which Warrior team is going to show up. And I mean that literally, not as a metaphor for inconsistency.

A combination of real injuries (Stephen Jackson, Andris Biedrins) and Don Nelson's (I'll be gentle) "experimental" new strategy of resting players for no good reason in an attempt to evaluate you players for the future means that every night the Warriors are trotting some mismatched collection of players.

The Warriors have lost four games in a row, all to Western Conference playoff teams by an average of 11.5 points per game, and don't seem to be in any kind of hurry to try to play winning basketball for the rest of the season. The Thunder strike me as a team posed as a threat to play the role of spoiler. The Warriors, as a team, look like they've just plain spoiled.

Inactive List: James Posey

The New Orleans Hornets had a problem last season in their second round seven-game slugfest with the Spurs: they completely lost focus. If you recall, David West completely lost his cool a few different times in that series and they didn't seem mentally strong enough in Game 7 to match San Antonio's intensity and playoff savvy.

Fast forward to this offseason, when the Hornets signed James Posey to a four-year, $25 million deal. He was supposed to be the veteran leader, a big shot taker and a big shot maker, and a guy who knows what it takes to win (he's played on two of the last three NBA champions).

Fast forward again to Friday night in New York, and Posey made possibly the biggest bonehead play of the NBA season. After being whistled for a loose ball foul, Posey fired the ball at the referee's feet and was immediately ejected from the game and later suspended for the following game, Sunday's matchup against the Spurs.

I understand that Posey was caught up in the moment of a close game, but that is just unacceptable. Any time you do anything the results in contact with an official, you can expect at least a one-game suspension.

The Hornets, who were at the time (and are currently still) playing without both Peja Stojakovic and Tyson Chandler because of injury, need Posey now more than ever. They need someone (perhaps a veteran with championship experience?) to step and make big plays in the absence of two of their most important pieces.

Instead, the player that they brought in to be their glue guy off the bench, whose sole purpose on this team is to be around and step up in situations just like the one the Hornets find themselves in right now, is getting ejected form close games and getting suspended for critically important games in the finals weeks of the season.

The Hornets managed to win without Posey against the Spurs on Sunday, but the ejection/suspension could be an ominous sign for the Hornets, who are yet to prove that they are good enough mentally to compete with the upper echelon of the Western Conference in the playoffs.

Thanks to Posey's mental lapse this weekend, the Hornets' mental toughness problem looks like it may still need to be addressed in New Orleans.

Be sure to check back at Sports Central every Monday to see who cracks Scott Shepherd's Rotation as he breaks down what is going on around the NBA.

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 11:58 AM | Comments (0)

Tennis and the Economic Crisis

The economic side of professional tennis, unlike the economics of other sports like baseball and football, often goes unnoticed and is rarely discussed. The economy has been headline in most papers, websites, and television news broadcasts for just about half a year now. If I hear someone say "crisis," "meltdown," "recession," or "depression" one more time, I might just start to believe it.

It's funny, though, how with all this talk, most of the people I know all still have the same jobs, with about the same pay, with the same issues and challenges, and some of them actually have new cars (my friend Jim says thank you Chrysler for the "buy one, get one for a buck" deal). The Yankees, Mets, Giants, and Jets are still building new stadiums, focused on luxury boxes. The ticket prices have still been raised, and yes, seat licenses are still up for sale at ridiculous prices. And people are buying them. I see signs that there are problems, but not with those of us who are responsible with our money. So I wonder, how is the average pro tennis player doing?

Something that flew under the radar this year was that Venus Williams lost her apparel deal with Steve and Barry's, the retailer of EleVen sportswear. Steve and Barry's folded, mostly due to the inability of EleVen and other celebrity brands to sell. Her sister, Serena, was in deep negotiations with Nike about her clothing endorsement deal and at several junctures there was discussion that the cost may not justify the benefit.

Jelena Jankovic, at the time the number one woman's player in the world, was dropped by Reebok. Thankfully, she wound up signing with a new player in the apparel game, Anta, out of China. Several players have switched endorsement deals from companies like Adidas and Nike to Fila and LaCoste, rumored to be more because the major brands are trimming their budgets than them being offered a better deal. It's an interesting view. The money isn't quite as big, as well. Jankovic's deal was for only $5.1M over three years. I know, doesn't sound like poverty, but just think, the number one player in the world was not renewed by a major player in the tennis industry. Clearly, money is getting tighter.

Just a few weeks ago, there was some discussion about the ATP and WTA stop at Indian Wells, California. Ticket prices were up only a little over the 2008 cost, mostly due to the new sponsorship by BNP Paribas. The tournament management did acknowledge that attendance was expected to be down slightly. A sign that people are watching their discretionary pennies more. The Billie Jean King Cup at Madison Square Garden, a one-off special event that pitted the Williams sisters versus the Serbians Ivanovic and Jankovic, made money, but fell far short of packing MSG.

For decades, exhibitions like this, pitting top players against each other in a one night, winner-take-all format, would pack the Garden and really give the promoters a huge financial boost. Sponsorships are dwindling at tournaments, especially because most of the big corporate tennis sponsors are the same companies that needed bailout money, like Citibank, credit card companies like American Express, and automobile companies, Ford being the largest.

The last time the economy was like this, tennis participation went up. According to the Tennis Industry Association and the USTA, participation is up again and growing higher. Should mean more sales of racquets and balls. It doesn't appear to be the case, although again, the industry and my friends don't appear to be in serious jeopardy yet. To quote one of my long-time acquaintances who works for a major tennis industry brand, "It will be a lean year, but I'll survive okay." So for now, looks like its only the financial sector of the economy that is in the dumper.

I worry about the state of the industry. Heck, I make a living off it myself. But I feel good right now, as it seems that at least finances won't be the big issue in 2009. Roger Federer and Mirka Vavrinec can rest a little easier knowing that R-Fed will have enough chances to win some dough to take care of the baby-to-be that is currently honing its skills under the care of Mirka (congrats you two, long time coming).

So it's just up to the quality of the tennis now. Come to think of it, the last time the economy was like this, along came Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Chris Evert, Martina Navratilova, and Evonne Goolagong. Maybe the economy should stay like this for a while for tennis' sake.

Posted by Tom Kosinski at 11:22 AM | Comments (0)

March 27, 2009

Exciting Passing Game and the AFL

SI.com and one of its partner sites recently ran a piece titled, "AFL did not offer exciting brand of football," whose premise was that the AFL's passing game was overrated, and specifically that the NFL, not its upstart competitor, offered excitement in the passing game. I'm going to link to the article at the end of this sentence, but I would really encourage you not to click through and give it any hits, because it was lazily-researched, misleading trash.

For those unfamiliar with the AFL, it did business from 1960-69, and was the original home of the Bengals, Bills, Broncos, Chargers, Chiefs, Dolphins, Jets, Patriots, Raiders, and Titans (Oilers), merging with the NFL in 1970. The AFL helped grow the popularity of professional football enormously. Among the AFL's contributions were the 14-game schedule, the modern vertical passing game, increased visibility for the sport, and most of the AFC. Player salaries also sky-rocketed, because the two leagues tried to outbid each other for rookies. This is a good thing. Prior to 1960, a lot of NFL players still had other jobs in the offseason, since a football salary was nothing special in those days. With higher salaries, players could afford to spend the offseason practicing and working out, and the result was a higher level of play.

But I'm not here to defend the AFL's contributions to modern-day pro football; I'm defending it from a specific charge that the AFL's passing game was unexciting. The heart of "AFL did not offer exciting brand of football" can be summarized in the following statistics it cited:

NFL passers boasted:

• a higher completion percentage every single year
• a higher average per attempt every single year
• a higher passer rating every single year
• a better TD-to-INT ratio almost every single year (8 of 10)
• a higher TD percentage almost every single year (9 of 10)
• a lower INT percentage almost every single year (9 of 10)

Here's the most shocking discovery:

• NFL passers completed better than 50 percent of their attempts every single year of the 1960s.
• AFL passers never completed 50 percent of their passes in the 1960s — not once in the entire decade.

There are several problems here. Let's take them one at a time.

1. The author seems to believe that higher completion percentage equates with excitement. Many football fans would disagree. The career record for completion percentage belongs to Chad Pennington, whom I would posit is one of the most boring good quarterbacks of the last 20 years. Pennington has a notoriously weak arm, so instead of throwing downfield, he throws short slants and screens. Long passes are harder to complete, but they're a lot more exciting. Excitement is not an objective statistic I can prove, but I am extremely confident that there is a negative correlation between completion percentage and excitement. Risky, low-percentage plays are more exciting than safe, high-percentage plays. That's true almost by definition.

2. More generally, the author is confusing good passing with excitement. I have my own QB excitement figure: touchdowns plus interceptions. It's a simple statistical formula, but I think it passes the "common sense" test. Here are last year's top 5: Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Brett Favre, Kurt Warner, Jay Cutler. Those are all pretty exciting players. Last year's bottom 5, minimum 300 pass attempts: Ryan Fitzpatrick, Jeff Garcia, Jason Campbell, Kerry Collins, Trent Edwards. Again, I think this makes sense. No one remembers anything Fitzpatrick or Edwards did last year, Garcia and Campbell are known for being conservative, and Collins ran a ball-control offense. Collins and Favre had almost identical passer ratings last season (80.2 and 81.0, respectively), but Favre was a lot more interesting to watch. Campbell's rating (84.2) was almost as good as Cutler's (86.0), but Campbell is a frustrating bore and Cutler is a fireball.

All of which leads me to this: the current incarnation of the "West Coast Offense" is incredibly dull. A WCO emphasizes high-percentage horizontal passing with a minimum of down-the-field vertical passing. High completion percentage and low interception percentage are good statistics. There's nothing positive about incompletions or interceptions. But those are both play-it-safe statistics. Go ahead, throw the screen pass to a running back. We know no one's going to intercept that, and you'll probably pick up 5 yards. Yawn. This kind of offense deliberately discourages the most exciting play on offense: the long pass attempt. It's a risky play. Long passes are usually incomplete. They get intercepted much more often than short passes. And they're a lot of fun.

3. Most of all, the author of the AFL hit piece is confusing good quarterbacks with excitement. Which is more fun, watching Ben Roethlisberger throw to Hines Ward, or Jake Delhomme passing to Steve Smith? Was it more exciting to watch Tom Brady playing with Troy Brown and Deion Branch, or Daunte Culpepper and Randy Moss? This isn't all about the quarterbacks. And the one position where the AFL may have been stronger than the NFL, possibly even a lot stronger, was wide receiver.

Great AFL receivers included Hall of Famers Lance Alworth, Don Maynard, and Fred Biletnikoff, as well as fellow standouts Otis Taylor, Lionel Taylor, Art Powell, and Charley Hennigan. During the AFL's existence, the NFL's best receiver was probably Tommy McDonald. He was a good receiver, a Hall of Famer. But he wasn't as good as Maynard, and he wasn't even in the same league as Alworth. In the 1960s, McDonald had 410 receptions for 6,733 yards and 62 touchdowns. Maynard had 546 receptions for 10,289 yards and 84 TDs. I heard someone on an NFL Films special, I forget who, say they thought the AFL's reputation as a passing league was due solely to Lance Alworth.

The NFL had great passers in the 1960s. In fact, it was a golden age for quarterbacks. But the AFL had great receivers, and specifically, the AFL had great deep threats. Other than Bob Hayes and Homer Jones towards the end of the decade, the NFL's best pass-catchers were possession receivers. It's time to look at some stats. Let's start with yards per completion. That's a good "excitement" stat because it's basically measuring long passes, and one 50-yard completion is more exciting than 10 five-yard completions. In fact, I think one 50-yard incompletion is probably more exciting than 10 five-yard completions. From 1960-69, the AFL averaged 12.83 yards per completion, the NFL 12.51. That's not a huge difference, but it's not a tiny one either. 1/3 of a yard is a lot when you add it up over 45,000 catches. And the AFL averaged eight more passes per game.

What about my excitement stats, touchdowns and interceptions? The AFL averaged 3.13 passing TDs per game, the NFL 2.90. The AFL averaged 3.78 interceptions per game, the NFL 3.07. The AFL averaged an extra passing TD or INT per game compared to the NFL. The AFL averaged 30 more passing yards per game.

The author's problem is not understanding the argument. The AFL averaged more yards per completion and more pass attempts, passing yards, passing touchdowns, and interceptions per game than the NFL. Clearly, obviously, and indisputably, it was the more pass-oriented and more wide-open of the two leagues. Almost as clearly, it was more exciting. The author admits that "every football historian insists the old American Football League built a market for itself in the 1960s with an exciting, wide-open brand of football that stood in sharp contrast to the boring three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust style that defined the staid, frumpy NFL." The stats corroborate this. Let me repeat: the stats don't disprove this, as the author asserts; rather, they back it up.

What the author is really arguing is that NFL quarterbacks were better than AFL quarterbacks. That is certainly true. I have no doubt that NFL quarterbacks in the 1960s, as a group, were better than AFL quarterbacks. But better passers doesn't mean more excitement. If quarterbacks were perfect, with no interceptions, not even any incompletions, the game would be incredibly boring.

The article's premise is a PR stunt. Stating that NFL QBs were better than their AFL counterparts is obvious, a waste of time. Stating that the NFL was more exciting than the AFL, though — that's controversial. It's also absurd. It's just as ridiculous to suggest that the NFL was the more exciting league as it would be to suggest that the AFL's passers were better than the NFL's. The AFL featured more passes, more big plays — more touchdowns, more turnovers — and more excitement.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 11:57 AM | Comments (1)

The Sun is Setting on the Phoenix Suns

Deep in the heart of the desert, as the sun slowly sets in the distance, it appears that the Phoenix Suns' hope of a championship are disappearing.

After going through their share of struggles this season, the Suns are poised to miss the postseason. Even if the Suns manage to squeak out a birth in the postseason, it is unlikely the will pose a challenge to the powerhouse teams in the West. For a team that has been expected to compete for a championship the last couple of years, the decline of the Phoenix Suns has been shocking.

Since becoming an expansion team in 1968, the Phoenix Suns have found success in the league. Posting 17 50-win seasons, the Suns have shown they know what it takes to win, at least in the regular season. They have made eight trips to the Western Conference Finals and in 1976 and 1993, they made it to the NBA Finals. Of course, for all of the success Phoenix has had, there is a stat that stills haunts their franchise: they have never won an NBA championship.

After the "[Charles] Barkley era" ended, the Suns struggled to find success in the late '90s and early '00s. In 2004, the Suns found success once again and started building a dominant franchise. Management signed unrestricted free agent Steve Nash from the Dallas Mavericks. Nash was sensational that season. He averaged 11.5 assists and was named the MVP of the league. Combined with high-flying Amare Stoudemire and sharp-shooter Joe Johnson, the Suns claimed the first seed in the West, and rolled all the way to the Western Conference Final. The Suns were eliminated by the San Antonio Spurs, ending their amazing season.

Ever since that season, the Suns have continued to be one of the most competitive teams in the NBA. Phoenix developed one of the premier "run-and-gun" offenses in the game. Two-time MVP Steve Nash, the conductor of the offense, has effectively run an offense that has had the Suns competing with the best teams in the league.

Over the years with Nash and other players such Shawn Marion, Amare Stoudemire, Boris Diaw, and Grant Hill, the Suns have maintained their high-octane offense. Just look at the stats. In the '04-'05 season, the Suns averaged 110.7 points a season, tops in the league. The next season, they averaged 108.1 points a game, also tops in the league. In 2007-2008, the Suns averaged 109 points a game, two off the league lead. Even this season, when the Suns are slightly struggling, they are still leading the league with 109 points a game.

So why have the Suns failed to reach the promised land? The Suns, in all of their offense glamor, have consistently failed to develop a crucial part of the game: defense. For every highlight-reel basket, every three-pointer, or slam-dunk made, the Suns have made a horrible play on defense. The Suns' offensive stats paint a pretty picture, but unfortunately the defensive stats do just the opposite. In 2004-2005, opponents scored 104 points a game against the Suns. The next year, opponents averaged 103. In 2006-2007, opponents averaged 103 points again and the next year, a whooping 105.

And how are the Suns doing this year? They are allowing 106 points a game. Is it any wonder they may miss the playoffs? Then Suns have always had a high-flying offense and they've been known to take risks on the defensive side. However, the Suns have failed to find a middle ground between their "run-and-gun" offense and playing smart defensive ball. Defense wins championships, and Phoenix's lack of defense has definitely hurt them.

Every superhero has its weakness. While Phoenix has been a superpower during the regular season, the San Antonio Spurs have been their kryptonite in the playoffs.

The Spurs have been a nightmare matchup for the Suns. They have have had little trouble dispatching the run-and-gun offense of the Suns. Though the Spurs have dominated the Suns in the regular season, they have provided a major roadblock in the postseason. In all three of their postseason meetings since the run-and-gun era began, the Spurs have won all three. In the 2005 playoffs, the Suns cruised all the way to the conference finals, before falling 4-1 to the Spurs. The Sun maintained their solid offensive play, but suffered on the defense end. They never held the Spurs under a 100 points. Two years later, the Suns fell to the Spurs again in the semifinals. Their defense was a little better, but they still couldn't find a way to win. Finally, in 2008, the Suns fell to the Spurs in the first round.

Throughout all of these series, the Suns have struggled with the big three of Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, and TIm Duncan. Duncan has been able to control Stoudemire, while Parker and Ginobili have victimized the Suns' defense. Needless to say, the Spurs are not the Suns' most desirable match. The Spurs are in large part the reason Phoenix has failed to win a championship, even with such a talented roster.

The Suns may not win a championship this year, yet the future isn't hopeless. The team has started to better develop their younger players and still have experienced veteran players. Young players such as Alando Tucker, Louis Amundson, and Goran Dragic, mixed in with star players such as Amare Stoudemire, Leandro Barbosa, and Shaquille O'Neal, should give the Suns a chance to be competitive again.

Yet, if you ask any Suns fans, they will tell you that the Phoenix Suns have missed a glorious opportunity to win the team's first NBA championship. Through years of missed opportunities, largely thanks to their defense and the San Antonio Spurs, the Suns have extended their championship drought.

A drought that may continue in the desert for years to come.

Posted by Jonathan Hamelin at 11:37 AM | Comments (0)

March 26, 2009

Why Curt Schilling Belongs in the Hall

"Turn out the lights, the party's over"

I'm a pretty loyal guy. For a player to earn a special place in my heart, he usually has to be a lifelong Boston guy. At the very least, he has to have spent the bulk of his career here.

Curt Schilling is different. He technically spent five seasons in Boston. He was only truly healthy for one of them.

At least until the ALCS.

I'm amused by the Hall of Fame conversation that's been going on in Boston since Schilling announced his retirement. While many people feel he's Hall of Fame caliber, in the end, his statistics just don't measure up.

Apparently, the Hall of Fame is about nothing more than statistics.

Just ask Jim Rice.

To me, a Hall of Fame player is more than just statistics. Not that Schilling is a complete slouch when it comes to statistics.

He ended his career with 3,116 strikeouts, 15th all-time. 3,000 strikeouts is one of those "magic" statistics. Of the eligible pitchers who have reached that milestone, only Bert Blyleven hasn't been inducted.

But that's the only real "Hall of Fame" level statistic Schilling has achieved. His 216 wins are more than a few Hall of Famers, but less than most of them. He never won a Cy Young.

Most importantly, he was never the best pitcher. There was always someone who was better. Whether it was Pedro Martinez or Randy Johnson, someone was always just a little better than he was.

Call it bad timing (had he played in the '80s, he would have been the best pitcher of the decade), call it whatever you want. It's a very valid argument against his getting into the Hall.

Add it all up, and he's a borderline Hall of Famer; one that in the end, probably doesn't measure up.

But there has to be special circumstances. Some players do things that transcend statistics and catapult them into the Hall of Fame.

Schilling was injured in Game 1 against the Yankees in the 2004 ALCS. So he could pitch again in Game 6, an elimination game, he agreed to an experimental operation.

The team doctor practiced the procedure a few days earlier on a cadaver. Or, I should say, invented the procedure. Given that it had never been done before.

The team doctor sutured the skin around the dislocated tendon in Schilling's right ankle down to the deep tissue to form an artificial sheath to prevent the tendon from snapping against the bone.

I can't even type that without cringing.

He attached it with three stitches.

One of those stitches came loose during the game, resulting in the famous bloody sock.

Schilling pitched brilliantly, won the game, and the Red Sox went on to defeat the Yankees in seven games.

Before Game 2 of the World Series, they performed the same operation. This time, the doctor used four stitches in the hopes that the ankle would be more stable.

But one of the stitches irritated a nerve. Schilling could barely walk.

But he pitched anyway.

Schilling was Kirk Gibson, Willis Reed, Jack Youngblood ... he was everything they were and more. He was brilliant, winning the eighth postseason game of his career.

Leading the Red Sox to their first world championship since 1918.

Three years later, pitching with a completely dead arm that would later require surgery, he won three postseason games while helping lead the Red Sox to their second World Series championship of his short tenure.

He ended his career with a ridiculous and unmatched 11-2 postseason record. He won three World Series championships.

Not everyone likes Schilling. He talks too much. He's too opinionated. He endorsed John McCain (not a popular move in the liberal northeast).

But you don't have to like the man to recognize what he was.

Let there be no doubt. No doubt whatsoever.

Curt Schilling belongs in the Hall of Fame, and he should go in wearing a Red Sox cap.

Sean Crowe is the New England Patriots Examiner at Examiner.com. He writes a column every other Thursday for Sports Central. You can e-mail him at [email protected].

Posted by Sean Crowe at 11:42 AM | Comments (1)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 5

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Jeff Gordon — While handling problems on long, green flag runs rendered winning in Bristol nearly impossible, Gordon still had a capable car, and hammered out a fourth-place finish, his series-leading fourth top-10 of the year. Gordon maintained the top spot in the point standings, and leads Kurt Busch by 76 points.

"Even when I'm bad, I'm good," says Gordon. "No, that's not some provocative Mae West quote from the 1920s that only Darrel Waltrip would remember. It describes my season thus far. Although I haven't won a race, the car's been competitive in each race. It's great to lead the points. I like it on top. Now, I'm sure Mae West uttered that line quite often."

"I'm intrigued by Formula 1's proposed championship format, in which the driver with the most wins is declared the champion. Theoretically, that means I could be in last place under the F1 format, which makes sense, because isn't that where most Americans in F1 end up?"

2. Kyle Busch — Busch led 378 of 503 laps at Bristol to capture his second win of the year. Busch took the lead on lap 445 and held it until the end, using a timely pit stop during the race's final caution to maintain his edge and bring the No. 18 Snickers Toyota to victory lane. In Saturday's Nationwide race, Busch's pit team fumbled a tire on their last stop, costing Busch the win. He admonished his team by parking his car in turn 3 near the track's exit tunnel and left the track.

"Hey, when you gotta go, you gotta go," says Busch. "For years, everyone's been questioning Busch's exit strategy. Well, there it was."

"As for my pit crew, I was beginning to lose confidence in them. My crew chief Steve Addington kept telling me to keep the faith, but all I could do was 'snicker.' Luckily, they came through when it counted, keeping me in the lead on that last pit stop. My crew team hates it when I question their manhood, but my request to them of 'Ladies, first' right before that final pit seemed to be the right motivator."

"Now, in a Bristol race with an unusual lack of controversy, it was up to me to create some. And I did so by criticizing Dale Earnhardt, Jr., when in fact I was asked about being compared to his father. If people are going to 'boo' me at races, I might as well give them a reason. What do we see more often than Junior in the Winner's Circle? Haley's Comet."

3. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson led 88 laps and finished third in Bristol, his first top-five finish of the year, which moved him into the top 10 of the Sprint Cup point standings. Johnson credited a meeting with crew chief Chad Knaus and the Lowe's team two weeks ago, in which Johnson indicated what he needed for his car to be competitive at Bristol.

"Chad's great," says Johnson. "When I say 'Jump,' he says 'How high?' He does whatever it takes to make the No. 48 car fast. Chad's a pro at pushing the envelope, whether that means stretching the rule book to find a competitive edge, or actually pushing an envelope filled with fine money across the table to a NASCAR official."

4. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer, last year's winner at Bristol's spring race, was unable to defend his crown, hampered by a slow start and a loose-handling No. 33 BB&T Chevrolet. Bowyer eventually scrambled his way into the top 15, finishing 13th. He dropped one spot in the point standings to third, 79 behind Jeff Gordon.

"It was the thrill of my career last year to take the Jack Daniels car to a win in the home state of the Jack distillery," says Bowyer. "This year, it would have even been a bigger thrill to drive the BB&T Chevy to victory at a track with 'banking.' But it was not to be."

"But, after the mystery surrounding the announced attendance at the Kobalt Tools 500 in Atlanta, it was great to see a full house at Bristol. You know, 160,000 fans in the stands in Bristol translates to about 8,000,000 in Atlanta. It doesn't take a pessimist or an optimist to see that the stands at Atlanta were half-full, or half-empty. Even a blind man could see that."

5. Carl Edwards — Edwards and the No. 99 Aflac team struggled to find speed all weekend, with practice times near the slowest and a disappointing qualifying effort of 38th. However, steady work on pit road and patience on the track resulted in a 15th-place finish, the lone bright spot for Roush Fenway Racing.

"I'm puzzled as to why we couldn't get the setup right," says Edwards. "Normally here, we're fast and competitive. Our performance was odd and unusual. It is allergy season, so I guess you could say we were Claritin 'queer.'"

"As for my teammates, things couldn't have been much worse. Greg Biffle had engine trouble and finished 39th. Matt Kenseth broke his splitter and finished 33rd. And Jamie McMurray got roughed up by Juan Montoya and finished 37th. Personally, I think Montoya got off easy with just a warning. He's lucky this didn't happen under the George Bush administration, otherwise he would have been declared an 'enemy combatant' and detained in the NASCAR hauler, which for these purposes would have been called 'Juan-tanamo Bay.'"

6. Kurt Busch — Busch started 32nd and was running in 30th when a spin by Todd Bodine forced Busch's No. 2 Miller Lite Dodge into the back of Kevin Harvick's No. 29 Chevy. Busch suffered moderate front-end damage, and, after repairs in the pits, steadily charged to the front. He finished 11th as younger brother Kyle took the win, giving the Busch brothers the last three Sprint Cup wins.

"I've got to hand it to crew chief Pat Tryson and the Miller Lite team for getting me back out there," says Busch. "Sometimes, minor cosmetic changes make vast improvements. And sometimes they don't. But that's between me and my plastic surgeon."

"Luckily, though, my incident with Harvick was an unavoidable racing incident and no one's fault. Trust me, I'm the last person that wants to tangle with Harvick, especially at Bristol. For me, that would be a dance called the 'Tennessee Welts.'"

7. Denny Hamlin — Hamlin chased Joe Gibbs teammate Kyle Busch across the finish line in Bristol, earning the runner-up spot at the track affectionately known as the "bull ring." Hamlin moves up six spots in the point standings to eighth, and is 163 out of first.

"Hey, I thought a 'bull ring' was a phone call from Bruton Smith," says Hamlin. "Anyway, Smith's got major pull in the business of NASCAR. The man owns so much that he even claims Aaron Fike's forearms as one of his 'tracks.'"

"He even claims he's one of the 'Fantastic Four,' the one they call 'The Thing.' I have my doubts. If Smith's a superhero, then Randy Lajoie is a character in an Austin Powers movie."

8. Tony Stewart — Stewart fell a lap down just past the midway point of the Food City 500, but was never able to snatch the "Lucky Dog" free pass, mainly due to a race short on cautions and heavy on long, green flag runs. Stewart's disappointment with his 17th-place finish was somewhat placated by teammate Ryan Newman's weekend at Bristol, which included a front-row start and a top-10 finish for the Army-sponsored No. 39 car.

"It's quite fitting that Newman drove to a top-10 finish," says Stewart. "Especially after my visit to the Army base at Fort Knox, Kentucky last week, where I completed two of my lifelong goals: driving a simulated Army tank, and visiting a strip club, pawn shop, and liquor store all within a block's radius."

"The tank was quite an experience. The technology is amazing. And speaking of 'technology,' I'm entering the Twitter age, and will updating my fans with quick messages of my daily routine. In addition, I'll also be using the service to send invitations to my wild, uninhibited hauler parties, with messages I like to call 'Twit For Twat.'"

9. Kasey Kahne — Kahne started fifth on the grid and matched his qualifying effort with a fifth-place in Bristol, his first top-five of the year and second consecutive top-10. Kahne moves up three spots in the points, and is now sixth, 155 out of first.

"After two-straight top-10 finishes," says Kahne, "I feel like this team is headed in the right direction. Finally, there is some joy in 'Bud-ville.' Good finish or no, Kasey Kahne never strikes out, especially with the 37-to-48-year-old, undersexed, dissatisfied housewife stalker demographic. It's great to always be able to count on your fans."

10. David Reutimann — Reutimann finished 12th in the Food City 500, just missing out on his second top-10 finish of the year. The Michael Waltrip Racing driver has only one finish worse than 14th this year, and is 11th in the Sprint Cup point standings, 187 out of first.

"In conjunction with the NAPA Cap Exchange," says Reutimann, "in which you can bring your old cap to a NAPA Auto Parts dealer and receive a new NAPA Racing cap, we here at Aaron's have decided to implement a similar promotion. You can bring that brand new NAPA cap and exchange it for a new Aaron's cap. I call it the 'Don't Be Like Mike' Cap Exchange."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:24 AM | Comments (2)

March 25, 2009

Missed Opportunities and No Cinderella

Three years ago, it was commonly thought that the NBA's age limit requiring draftees to be at least one year out of high school would serve to improve college basketball. And you can't improve college basketball without improving the NCAA tournament, or so it seems.

Perhaps the NBA is an unfair scapegoat for the reason why the NCAA bracket, once siphoned down to 16 teams on Sunday night, is the chalkiest that it has ever been in the seeding era (since 1979) through the first weekend. Yet, no more than eight players ever went straight from high school to the pros in any given year. While eight players of high quality can make a huge difference to college basketball, they probably can't explain why protected seeds (the one through fours) have made the second weekend 36 of 48 times in the three years since the age limit compared to 26 of 48 in the three years before.

All of this may just be a coincidence. After all, it has been said that this year promised to be one of the most top-heavy seasons ever. However, even in the glory days of college basketball that people refer to so often, where most players stayed four years, there were huge upsets. In fact, the two greatest Cinderella stories referred to by most in NC State and Villanova came from this era within two years of each other.

However, if there is a strong correlation between chalky NCAA tournaments and the NBA age limit, we may know for sure soon enough, as it is rumored that the NBA may push to have the mandatory age to be 20, or two years out of high school for the next collective bargaining agreement. If my theory holds, it may lead to the possibility of Division I basketball becoming more like football, with I-A and I-AA categories, however alarmist it may sound.

And that brings up another point driven home by the 2009 NCAA tournament. The media-driven creation of parity in college basketball is dead.

Yet what is now dead may have never really been living. If parity had been alive, the best day of its life would have been March 26, 2006. The day George Mason beat Connecticut. To fans that love the Cinderella element that this tournament usually presents, that game was the ultimate two and a half hours. And when this decade shuts its doors in eight months, that game will likely go down as the best college basketball game this decade.

While George Mason's run to the Final Four was special, captivating, and everlasting to those who watched, it was paradoxically fleeting and may never be duplicated by any teams at that level of college basketball.

If college basketball truly wanted parity, the NCAA would ban conferences having their own TV deals, create national contracts with four or five channels, and then evenly distribute the money amongst all 340-odd Division I schools and implement other revenue-sharing schemes. Alas, this is not the NFL and the schools that do have the money would never voluntarily give away a lucrative money stream. That would definitely cheapen the special nature of when a lesser-known program does buck the odds and makes it to the Sweet 16 or Elite Eight.
Change a couple things about the first four days of the tourney, though, and it may have been a totally different story as far as the underdogs are concerned.

For starters, and just in the first round, slow starts doomed the comeback attempts of Butler, VCU, Utah State, and Northern Iowa against LSU, UCLA, Marquette, and Purdue, respectively. Akron, American, North Dakota State, and even 16-seed East Tennessee State all were leading or within reach in the second halves of matchups against Gonzaga, Villanova, Kansas, and Pitt.

The second round saw two huge chances for mid-majors as Siena had a surprising late lead on Louisville at 63-59, but the Cardinals got a Terrence Williams three to retake the lead and spur a run. Western Kentucky furiously fought back from nine down with two minutes to go and tie the game with Gonzaga at 81, but then allowed Demetri Goodson's Edney-esque coast-to-coast layup in the final second and also had poor free throw shooting to blame.

And there were also great games being played at a high level between two power conference teams, such as the games between Marquette and Missouri (save Lazar Hayward's crucial mistake) and the Texas/Duke matchup.

Sure, three teams remain from non-BCS leagues in Gonzaga, Xavier, and Memphis. But all three are very established as perennial powers, although it remains an interesting question as to why Gonzaga gets more national respect than the Musketeers. And in the next round, as with the aforementioned game in 2006, the number one team in the nation will take on the lowest remaining seed who very well may have been the last team in the field. However, that is where the similarities between Arizona and George Mason come to a screeching halt.

Not all is bad as far as the remainder of the tournament goes. Save for the Arizona/Louisville game, all of the other seven games should be solid contests with Villanova/Duke, North Carolina/Gonzaga, and Syracuse/Oklahoma standing out as the best.

Here's to hoping for more great games in the second weekend, and please, please, someone save us from another Final Four with all number one seeds. In other words, let's get even some more madness in the final two weeks of the best tournament in sports.

Posted by Ross Lancaster at 11:20 AM | Comments (0)

March 24, 2009

Lessons Learned From March Madness

There I was, Wednesday night, computer windows tiled so I had all my reference materials in front of me. I had won bracket pools two out of the last three years, and it was time to find the next Davidson. Was there even another Davidson? Two hours later, with my brackets saved, and my confidence brimming, I went to bed with high hopes.

It's several days later, and boy, did I learn some lessons.

Don't bet on a Bob Huggins coached squad — I'll just give you the facts. Besides Huggins' first two years as head coach at Cincinnati where the team went to the Final Four and the Elite Eight the following year, a Huggins coached team has not made it out of the first weekend 11 out of 14 seasons. This includes a second round exit in the 2001-2002 season as a No. 1 seed. I liked West Virginia this year. I thought they were tough, had senior leadership, and were battle-tested. I forgot about Huggins. Don't make the same mistake.

Never underestimate the nobody believed in us angle — John Calipari has become synonymous with getting his Memphis Tigers to play with a chip on their shoulders. Last year, despite a top seed, the Tigers still had themselves convinced no one believed they could win the title, and that they should have garnered a top seed coming from Conference USA. This year, the nobody believed in us angle is being sponsored by Arizona. Arguably the last team to get in, the Wildcats are in the Sweet 16. It is true that they have had an easy road, playing an overrated Utah team and an upset-minded 13-seed Cleveland State. Arizona, however, has played lights-out defense and looks like the team that beat Kansas and Gonzaga, not the team that lost five out of their last six.

Western Kentucky is the new Gonzaga — It seemed fitting that a second round matchup pitted the Hilltoppers against the 'Zags. The only thing that did not match the parallels that these two are traveling along was Gonzaga pulling out the victory on some shoddy Western Kentucky defense. I think it's time that we stop seeding Western Kentucky so low come tournament time because every year they make some noise ... sound familiar? Last year, Courtney Lee and the Hilltoppers made it to the Sweet 16. This year, they were a coast-to-coast layup away from crashing the ball a second straight time. They are no longer the step-child in Bluegrass hoops. While Kentucky plays in the NIT, Western Kentucky continues to emerge and trust me, it won't belong before these guys are a top-five seed. It's going to happen.

Don't get caught up in the madness — Every year after Selection Sunday, I go straight to the bracket and start to look things over. Then George Mason enters my thoughts, Stephen Curry is draining threes, Hampton is shocking Iowa State, and Princeton is running the backdoor cut on defending champion UCLA. Suffice to say, I go crazy. I want to be the one to pick the next big upset. I don't want to go chalk in the tourney, I want excitement. While that may be all well and good for viewing purposes, it is highly unlikely. If you're like me, and are trying to will the upsets by picking them in your brackets, take a step back, breath deeply, and think with your mind, not with your heart.

The tourney is not the same without mid-major at-large berths — Part of the greatness of the NCAA tournament is the chance for the little guy to make a run at the giants. Almost every year, one small school gets up the gumption and takes on the establishment and everyone falls in love with them. This year, the selection committee decided they were tired of giving the little guy a chance and invited an unprecedented number of BCS conference teams in the dance. Seven from the ACC, Big 10, and Big East got their name called and six from the Big 12. Throw in six from the Pac-10 and three from the SEC and that's over half the field.

Why should mid-majors be penalized because the only teams they can face are other mid-majors? BCS schools don't want to face them because losing to them would look terrible on their resume if they are a bubble team. Yet, 26-win teams Creighton, St. Mary's, and Davidson had to sit on the bench. Seeds 11 and higher should be reserved for mid-major berths, give them a chance to make some waves. It's no wonder this season has provided us with the most top-seeded heavy Sweet 16 ever; it's because they all play the same brand of basketball at the top level. Get some other teams in there to stir the pot, and you have a much better tournament that exemplifies March Madness, or else you just have March Mildness.

The Big 10 is overrated — They got seven teams! That's all I could think about when the brackets were unveiled. Seven! Now a weekend later, with only two remaining, it's obvious the committee must have been drinking the Big 10 Kool-Aid to receive that many bids from a conference that hasn't shown it is anywhere near the depth that people think to receive so many bids. Please, indulge me. What has the Big 10 done outside of conference to deserve seven bids?

The SEC, they are who we thought they were — At the same time the Big 10 was getting seven bids, the SEC was only getting three. With no teams left, it seems the committee should have used the same decision making it did on the SEC as the Big 10.

The Big East is for real — Seven teams entered, five still remain, 'nuff said. Pitt, UConn, Louisville, 'Nova, and Syracuse can all catch fire and win the tournament, they are that strong this year. Each team has the tools to be successful in March. They all have an inside-outside presence, they all have leadership, and all of them have a standout player/players that can cause hell for an opposing defense. It would not surprise me if we had an all Big East Final Four, not in the least.

You need seniors — Seniors keep you grounded, seniors get the job done. The difference between 22 and 18 is incredible, which is why teams with good leaders always do well in the tournament, and players with one-and-done NBA auditioners never last.

Trust your gut — When filling out your bracket, go with your gut. If I went with my gut, I would have had a perfect Sweet 16. But then I read more, and listened more, and before long, I had an all-new bracket, with new upsets and long-shots. Now my bracket is covered in red ink and I have a bevy of friends rubbing it in my face.

This year is an apparition — Never will the tournament be almost all chalk again. When you have over 35 BCS participants, you lower the rate of good mid-major at large teams causing these teams fits. The more mid-major at-large teams that get in, the bigger chance of a nine-seeded Rhode Island beating a top-seeded Stanford, or a 10-seeded Davidson beating a second-seeded Georgetown we will have.

Tom Izzo knows March Madness — He wins in March, plain and simple.

Top 12 seeds are still left, two No. 4s, a No. 5 and 12, buckle up... — This may be the only positive of a big boys bracket. This will be a knockdown, drag-out battle to reach the Final Four. All of these teams have seen each other before, either on TV or through a common opponent. Each team will be prepared as best they can, and each participant will be playing with everything on the line. Big conference bragging rights and a title is on the line and competitive juices will be flowing.

Come next year, none of this will matter — That, I guarantee you.

The first day was a bore, the second night was high octane, pedal to the metal excitement. With 48 teams wondering what went wrong, SC's Wailele Sallas has learned a thing or two. Although none of them will probably salvage his bracket, they might help understand the Madness.

Posted by Wailele Sallas at 11:59 AM | Comments (1)

Stanley Cup Contenders or Pretenders?

Around the end of January, there seemed to be a clear groups of haves and have-nots in the NHL — or perhaps, more appropriately, serious Stanley Cup contenders and also-rans.

Fast forward about two months. With less than a dozen games on the schedule for each team, every so-called elite team has run into its share of problems. The good news for those teams is that they amassed enough points in the first 2/3 of the season that their place in the standings aren't necessarily in danger. However, what made each team seem invincible has disappeared; in its place is inconsistency, injuries, and now-glaring holes on the roster — holes that can no longer be filled with trade-deadline deals.

Let's see how the mighty have fallen...

San Jose Sharks

Once on a record-busting pace, first-year coach Todd McLellan predicted that the team would eventually hit a slump, and hit a slump they did. Some of it could be blamed on injury; after all, the third and fourth lines (including key checking and penalty-killing forwards) were decimated and replaced with AHL call-ups while injuries kept peppering the defense and even goaltender Evgeni Nabokov was out for a spell.

No one predicted the slump that the star-studded Sharks offense went through, though. For everyone to go cold at once is alarming, and it points to McLellan's comments about how the team may not be as mentally tough as it wants to be. That mental toughness is critical to overcoming adversity in the playoffs. That sounds familiar coming out of San Jose, doesn't it?

Detroit Red Wings

Sure, the Red Wings can score. Any team with Pavel Datsyuk, Henrik Zetterberg, and Marian Hossa should be able to do that. Team defense? Goaltending? That's something different. While Chris Osgood had a spectacular Cup run last year, things have been so bad for Osgood that he even went on a team-sponsored sabbatical to try to get his head back in the game. The Wings gave up eight — yes, eight — goals twice within a few days of each other, and Detroit's goals-against is worse than just about every team that's vying for a playoff spot.

Is this a concern for Mike Babcock's team? Remember, in the playoffs, checking is tighter and powerhouse offenses often run cold against stingy defense tactics. Considering the rather shocking plus/minus of Detroit's key defensive players (perennial Selke candidate Kris Draper is a double-digit minus), you can bet Babcock has stocked up on some extra Tums for this very reason.

Boston Bruins

This year was supposed to mark the return of the big bad Bruin machine, yet their train seemed to have run out of steam around the All-Star Game. A large part of it was the extended disappearance of the team's offense. Unlike the Sharks, whose big players dried up for a few weeks, key Bruins forwards like Phil Kessel and David Krejci had just a handful of goals each in months.

However, the bigger concern for coach Claude Julien has become Boston's inability to hold on to leads in key moments. Call it mental lapses, brain cramps, or just inconsistent work ethic; whatever the case, the Bruins aren't adding up to more than the sum of their parts right now. Their aura of invincibility has diminished to the point where rumblings of a first-round upset — at one point, an unthinkable prediction — are coming up more often than not.

The difference, though, between Boston and Detroit/San Jose is that no one expected the Bruins to contend for a Stanley Cup. The Bruins are essentially where San Jose was a few seasons back — on the cusp of greatness thanks to the emergence of key young players. If Boston gets bounced early on, pundits can chalk it up to a learning experience and fans can talk about how the team is ahead of schedule.

For Detroit, as disappointing as an early exit may be, the Red Wings can still hang their hats on their recent Stanley Cup championships. With parity and the salary cap, it's becoming nearly impossible to achieve the level of consistent regular season success as the Red Wings have had, let alone back-to-back Stanley Cups, and Wings fans can be thankful that their team hasn't hit the Cup hangover that Anaheim, Carolina, and Tampa Bay had. After all, Detroit still has 29 other teams to contend with, and how many can say they've won Cups in the past ten years?

That leads us back to San Jose, where playoff disappointment after playoff disappointment has plagued this franchise since their Conference Final appearance in 2004. Will another early round exit lead to a dismantling of this team's core? That seems rash as the playoffs are unpredictable, and bad bounces or injuries can lead to upsets. However, the Sharks have lacked consistency and effort in their previous exits; if they don't at least deliver on those promises, heads will roll.

Posted by Mike Chen at 11:49 AM | Comments (0)

March 23, 2009

In the Rotation: NBA Week 20

March Madness it is not, but the last three weeks of the NBA season still holds much significance in the basketball world.

At stake between now and April 15th (the final day of the regular season): the MVP trophy, best record in the NBA (and the home-court advantage throughout the playoffs that comes with it); free agents-to-be playing hard for the first time all season in order to cash in this offseason, and young players on bad teams trying to solidify a spot in the rotation for next season.

And, of course, playoff seeding.

We dedicate today's Starting Five to the Eastern Conference playoff race as we take a look at five of the most important things to watch for over the next three weeks as we prepare for what could be a grueling dogfight to see who will represent the East in the NBA Finals.

Starting Five

1. We know who's No. 1...

What once was a three-team race for the top spot in the East is now just a question of whether or not the Cavs can hold off the Lakers for the best record in the NBA. Cleveland enters the week with a .814 winning percentage and a game up on the Lakers (.791 winning percentage) in the loss column.

With the Lakers having to play their next six games on the road, the window for the Cavs to swoop in and steal the best record in the NBA seems wide-open.

Remember this, though, the Lakers swept the season series with the Cavs this season, meaning they would have the tiebreaker if the two teams finish with the same record. Essentially, the Cavs would have to finish the season at least a game up on the Lakers if they want home-court advantage in the NBA Finals.

With 12 games to play, the Cavs find themselves in that very position. With eight of their remaining 12 games left at the Q, where they are a remarkable 32-1 by the way, the Cavs seems to be in the driver seat for the all important home-court advantage throughout the playoffs.

2. But who's No. 2?

We may very well know the answer to this after Wednesday night, as the Boston Celtics visit the Orlando Magic for what could very possibly be the game that determines who finishes with the second best record in the East.

As it stands right now, the Celtics are just percentage points ahead of the Magic, but both teams currently sit at 18 losses. Boston leads the season series 2-1, so a win would give them, in essence, a three-game lead over the Magic if you account for the tiebreaker.

An Orlando win, however, would put the Magic a game up on the C's in the loss column and in position for home-court advantage should both teams advance to play each other in the second round of the playoffs.

To say that Wednesday's game in Orlando is going to be important is an understatement, and expect Amway Arena to be rocking and the announcers to use the phrase "playoff intensity" no fewer than 10 times.

3. Is the two-seed even all it's cracked up to be?

That depends on who you ask. Surely, both Orlando and Boston want home-court advantage in a head-to-head matchup, but the two-seed comes at a much greater cost for the Magic.

If the playoffs were to start today, the Detroit Pistons would be the seven-seed in the East. Their home loss to the Heat on Sunday afternoon didn't help the Pistons' chances of climbing out of that spot any time soon. That's good news for Boston if they finish second; they have completely dominated the Pistons this year.

For Orlando, the possibility of playing the Pistons isn't so appealing. How bad of a matchup is it for the Magic? Since the 2006-07 season, the Pistons are 17-3 against the Magic including playoff games and swept all three games this season. The Pistons have eliminated the Magic from the playoffs each of the past two seasons, with Orlando winning just one game in the two series combined.

Magic coach Stan Van Gundy called playing the Pistons "groundhog day" after their March 9th loss at the Palace, and Rip Hamilton said this week, "I don't think they want to see us."

Even the Pistons fans are hoping for an Orlando/Detroit first round matchup. As the Pistons were putting the finishing touches on the aforementioned March 9th win, I sent out a text to all of my Piston fan friends and asked, "Would you rather somehow sneak into the four-seed and host a playoff series or finish a seven and play the Magic?"

Everyone answered "play the Magic" without having to think about it.

So while finishing in the two-seed and having home court against Boston in round two is probably more important in the overall scheme of things to the Orlando Magic, finishing third and playing the Sixers in round one is a much more manageable consolation prize.

4. Can the winner of the 4-5 matchup threaten the Cavs?

It doesn't seem likely. As of right now, the Hawks would host the Heat in round one of the playoffs, with the winner to move on and play Cleveland in round two.

The Cavs are 3-1 against both of those teams this year, and although all eight games have been close (only one has been decided by double-digits), neither has had an answer for King James and company in the fourth quarter.

To make matters worse, neither team is very good away from home. The Hawks are 14-22 on the road, and the Heat are just 13-21. Being eight games below .500 on the road isn't exactly a recipe for success when you face the possibility of playing four road games against a team that has lost just once at home all year.

Still, the Hawks showed last season that they can compete with anyone in a playoff series, and the Heat still have Dwyane Wade, so it's unfair to just pencil the Cavs into the conference finals, but the outlook for either of these teams advancing past the second round is bleak.

5. Who will get the eighth and final playoff spot?

Who cares? If you were a fan of Chicago, Charlotte, Milwaukee, New Jersey, Indiana, or New York, wouldn't you rather finish out of the playoffs and take your chances in the lottery than finish eighth and get swept by the best team in the league?

I'm not saying that finishing eighth and getting in the playoffs isn't an achievement, but let's face it, if my team finishes the season eight games under .500 I'm looking forward to next season, I'm not looking forward to being embarrassed in the first round of the playoffs.

In the Rotation: Charlotte Bobcats

Even though I just said I wouldn't necessarily want my favorite team to finish in the eighth seed, I'd make an exception if I were a Bobcats fan. This team has never made the postseason since joining the league back in 2004, but they find themselves just a game back of the Bulls for the eighth seed.

While they could certainly use a high draft pick, the chance of winning the lottery is so slim for them that they'd be the one team that would benefit the most out of a playoff series against Cleveland.

They remind me a lot of the Hawks from last season; they have a young core, they've gotten better as the season went along, and they made a midseason trade (in this case a series of midseason trades) that has eventually paid off.

Advancing to the playoffs would be great for the fans (they'd get their first taste of postseason basketball since the Hornets left town), great for the players, and great validation for the front office as proof that bringing in Larry Brown was the right move.

Having some postseason experience, plus a full training camp under Brown with their new core, plus the addition of the 16th pick, would be a big step in the right direction for this franchise heading into next season.

Out of the Rotation: All six teams fighting for the eighth seed

It's bad enough that a team with less than 40 wins is going to get in the playoffs, but what's even worse is that none of the teams seems able to dig deep and finish strong to seal up the final spot.

The six teams (Bulls, Bobcats, Bucks, Nets, Pacers, and Knicks) are separated by just 3.5 games, and all six teams played one game over the weekend. Only the Pacers won, and they played the Bobcats, so someone had to win. Each of the other five teams lost by an average of 10 points.

It doesn't matter how bad your record is at this point of the season, if you are within reach of making the playoffs, you have to bring it every night. None of these six teams seem hungry enough to grab the final playoff spot, and we could be on the verge of redefining the meaning of "backing into the playoffs" if someone doesn't decide to step it up over the last 10 games.

Inactive List: New York Knicks

Last week, I talked about the possibility of the Sacramento Kings setting a record for futility by being the first team in NBA history to go 0-30 against the opposing conference, and the New York Knicks went ahead and spoiled it by losing to the Kings by 27 at home on Friday night. It was the last game of a four-game East coast trip for the Kings, and the Knicks still have something to play for.

How on earth can you let a team that hasn't beaten a single Eastern Conference opponent all season come into your building and win by 27 points? That's just an amazing accomplishment of ineptitude, and for a showing like that, there's no place for the Knicks anywhere near the rotation, so they have to settle for the shame of a spending a week on the Inactive List.

Be sure to check back at Sports Central every Monday to see who cracks Scott Shepherd's Rotation as he breaks down what is going on around the NBA.

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 11:59 AM | Comments (0)

NFL Offseason Winners and Losers

Many people have commented on every sports site out there about the unfortunate state of the NFL and professional sports in general. I constantly see another athlete under arrest or being charged with some crime or another. I also see players leaving places they've been for years to go to another team for more money (and very often, not much more money).

But aside from the arrests, what's most disturbing to me, particularly this season, is the amount of players who have been flat-out released by teams they've spent their whole career with. Sadly, the reality for sports fans and writers is that there is little to nothing we can do about it. And so, all I can hope to do as a sports writer is show you who has won and lost the numerous battles of trading and free agency this offseason.

Winners

Kansas City Chiefs

Acquiring Matt Cassel and Mike Vrabel for the No. 34 pick in the draft is sensational. Yes, Matt Cassel could prove to be not as amazing as everybody seems to think he will be. Yes, Mike Vrabel is getting older. But that is not much to sacrifice when in the previous season the Chiefs gained a billion draft picks from Minnesota for Jared Allen. If the Chiefs are going to succeed in 2009, they need Tony Gonzalez to stay in Kansas City and Matt Cassel to perform at or near the level he did in 2008. They also need their 2008 draft picks to get over their rookie mistakes and start playing football. Keeping Larry Johnson around would also help, but I'm not going to call that an absolutely necessary. L.J. seems to be a bit of a distraction to this team.

Dallas Cowboys

No, I do not think the Cowboys should have released Terrell Owens, but it is a move I can understand. What I fail to understand is why teams are so lazy about trying to trade players who still have market value. Why wouldn't you try to trade T.O.? Somebody would take him, probably even somebody decent, like the Buffalo Bills.

For the Cowboys, though, they've been able to clean up a few things in releasing T.O. and Adam "Pacman" Jones. Those two being gone will undoubtedly improve the locker room. I'm not saying that the clique of Jason Witten, Tony Romo, and Jason Garrett are the good guys and T.O. is the bad guy, but it's far easier to deal with the problem by disposing of one player than of two players and a coach, no matter who is "right." Releasing Brad Johnson was also probably a good idea. I think we saw in that loss to the St. Louis Rams that Johnson no longer has what it takes to be in the NFL. I personally am not sure how safety Roy Williams fit into the mix of being releasable, but I imagine it is another locker room issue.

Losers

Minnesota Vikings

The Vikings have tried to make numerous moves. They tried to get T.J. Houshmandzadeh from Cincinnati, but he ended up in Seattle. They've been in the mix on the Jay Cutler talks and far before that, the Matt Cassel talks, but those have amounted to nothing. The worst thing for the Vikings, however, is that they've lost two veteran team leaders to free agency. Pro Bowl Center Matt Birk left the Vikings to sign with the Baltimore Ravens and Pro Bowl Safety Darren Sharper recently signed with the New Orleans Saints.

The only move that the Vikings have made that has any potential whatsoever is the trade they made for Sage Rosenfels and that may honestly prove to be the stupidest move of all. Getting Rosenfels for a fourth-round pick though seems reasonable, even if he is only a backup for two years. This offseason has not been kind to the Vikings and unless they can somehow get Cutler or Torry Holt or both, I don't think it is going to get any better.

Tampa Bay Bucs

The Bucs perpetuated the problems of the NFL more than perhaps any other team this offseason. They released five veteran players, many of which had spent the vast majority of their careers in Tampa and they were very unapologetic about it. I can understand WRs Joey Galloway and Ike Hilliard, but releasing Warrick Dunn, who'd be happy to be nothing more than your third down back, and Derrick Brooks, who has been perhaps the greatest leader the organization has ever seen, is just awful. The organization has brought in good players this offseason (TE Kellen Winslow, RB Derrick Ward), but their attitude toward those veteran leaders is one that would make me not want to play in Tampa. It tells me that as soon as I lose a half a step or turn 35, I'll be gone and that is not something I would appreciate as a player.

You Tell Me

Denver Broncos

The fact that Jay Cutler is upset is enough to take the Broncos out of the category of winners for the 2009 offseason. I believe blame can be spread pretty thickly on all parties for this problem, but the reality is that keeping Cutler happy should have been a priority for the Denver front office and it wasn't. They made every player on the team expendable and hearing that may motivate players on the fringes to work harder, it makes extremely talented players want to find a home where they'll be more appreciated and that's what happened with Jay Cutler.

Denver has signed some interesting players including RB Correll Buckhalter from Philadelphia, RB J.J. Arrington from Arizona, and perhaps the biggest move was signing safety Brian Dawkins from Philadelphia. If, by some miracle, the Broncos can keep Cutler and keep him happy, I think they'll be okay, but losing Cutler will probably mean a rebuilding year in 2009 and that will not make the newly signed free-agents all too happy.

New England Patriots

The Patriots were on the short end of the stick (in my opinion) on the Cassel and Vrabel trade, but they seem to be picking up lots of the veterans that have been released from other clubs. They've signed RB Fred Taylor, WR Joey Galloway, CB Shawn Springs, and CB Leigh Bodden, all released from their previous teams, but who really knows if any of those players will be worth much of anything in 2009 alone. The Patriots may have made amazing signings in those instances and may have made a good trade in Cassel, but it's tough to call them winners this offseason right now.

All in all, the question I keep coming to when I hear about the latest NFL transaction is why are teams releasing players who have tradable value? What was the point of releasing Marvin Harrison, Torry Holt, Roy Williams, Fred Taylor, Derrick Brooks, Warrick Dunn, or anybody else that you could add to the list who could clearly still contribute to an NFL team? Did teams try to trade these players and there was no market for them? I doubt that highly; many of them have already signed with other teams.

I think what is most disturbing about these releases is that we are beginning to see less and less of a focus on veteran leadership on many teams, especially teams with young head coaches. Do these young coaches feel so threatened that they have to clear out anybody who the players might look to in a transition? Ultimately, one has to ask, how long will these new coaches last?

Posted by Andrew Jones at 11:29 AM | Comments (1)

March 20, 2009

Cleveland's Greatest Hope

Cleveland, Ohio; the mistake by the lake as some have called it. Their sports franchises suffer from more than just the unyielding cold. Despite the best efforts of the Indians, Browns and Cavaliers combined, the city has now gone 60 years without a championship. Cleveland is easily considered among the most tormented of sports cities whether it be John Elway, Michael Jordan, Art Modell, or Edgar Renteria driving the stake through their hearts.

This current Cavaliers team has dazzled their home crowd all but once this season. On the wings of LeBron James, the Cavs have incredible opportunity and yet so small a window. While LeBron remains in the prime of his career, his contract ends in 2010, at which point many believe him to be defecting to the Big Apple. The quiet murmurs on this rumor have grown to deafening decibels over the past few years now.

With that said, Cleveland is sitting pretty atop the NBA's perch. They currently hold the best record in the league and are 4½ games ahead of Boston for the No. 1 spot in the East. With their 30-1 record at home, the importance of the top seed throughout the playoffs cannot be understated, especially against the Celtics, who only won last year by taking all four games in Boston.

For the defending champs, those 4½ games may be too much to ask with only 15 games remaining. With the injured Kevin Garnett set to come back for Friday against the Spurs, that still leaves Rajon Rondo and Leon Powe battling injuries, as well. Just a night ago, a disgruntled Doc Rivers let his frustrations towards the refs get to him in a loss at Chicago. Rivers was ejected and used his postgame face time to rip the official who tossed him. This begs the question: is the coach losing sight of the goal here?

Two seasons ago when the Cavaliers made the NBA Finals, they were a Little Team That Could, overwhelming the mighty Detroit Pistons thanks to LeBron doing it all by himself in Game 5. No one gave them any chance against San Antonio, and rightfully so. 2009 will be a different story. Cleveland may very well come into the playoffs as the dominant team. Perhaps they are not a favorite to beat the Celtics or the Lakers, but not a considerable underdog either. With first year Cavalier Mo Williams as LeBron's new trusty sidekick, this may be Cleveland's best shot at a title in many years.

While the Celtics demonstrated that a true determined team effort can overcome any opponent in 2008, the Cavaliers may have their greatest test come from out west. So long as the Cavaliers keep their No. 1 seed, they will have a great chance at holding off the Celtics with four of the seven games being held in Cleveland. The Lakers are not only much closer to the Cavaliers in the standings for NBA Finals home court (just a half game), but they may well be hungrier, as Kobe's crew has made it clear in 2009 that there would be no letting up off the throttle after Boston did exactly that to them in the '08 Finals.

Los Angeles has won a series of statement games including both games against the Celtics and Cavaliers, meaning they own the rights to Cleveland's only home loss.

While Celtics/Lakers may still be the best possible Finals matchup, a Cavs/Lakers series would be an awfully close second. In Kobe and LeBron, you would have the two main MVP candidates and most spectacular, most driven individual players in the game going head-to-head for seven games.

It was beginning to appear that Boston and L.A. were reclaiming their respective thrones as the two league superpowers, yet Cleveland has made it clear this will have to be a three-party system, at least while James remains a Cavalier.

For Cleveland sports fans, has there ever been an athlete that has so clearly had the abilities needed to singlehandedly bring home a title quite like LeBron James? Bernie Kosar was considered a very good, not great, quarterback in the '80s, while Kenny Lofton or Albert Belle could only account for so much in the Indians' lineup. Perhaps Browns running back Ernest Byner came the closest to doing just that, and I'm afraid most of you know how that ended.

Being the most talented all-around athlete in the NBA, LeBron James has always carried the burdens of great hopes on his shoulders. This is no different. A city starved for a title is counting on you. Make them all witnesses to an euphoric trophy presentation in June 2009.

Posted by Bill Hazell at 11:47 AM | Comments (0)

March 19, 2009

The Not-So-Sweet 16

At last, March Madness has arrived.

There's nothing quite like March Madness, a tournament that unifies and excites the country much more than any politician ever could. The days in between Selection Sunday and the start of the first rounds are exciting; as hope springs eternal with each bracket filled. Debate runs high, emotions rise and fall in seconds — it's simply the best playoff system we've got in sports.

And yet, despite all that, I'd still like to make one tweak with the tournament. It still needs one little change.

I'd love to see a different type of play-in game.

I don't think the play-in game should be for the 16th seed. If a team earns an automatic bid, get them into the first round, regardless of their RPI. What was the reward for Alabama State going 21-9 and winning the SWAC regular season and tournament? Ending their season in Dayton, Ohio. Yes, the Hornets weren't going to be national champions, but there's still something about the end to their season that just doesn't seem right.

Morehead State is going to become Louisville's sacrificial lamb. It doesn't make that play-in game so interesting, does it? At least, though, Morehead State will get a taste of the real dance. As much as the NCAA tries to legitimize it, the 16 vs. 16 matchup simply doesn't provide any March Madness feel, let alone any reward to the teams who won their conference tournament. They knew, going in, that chances for a national title weren't very realistic. They just wanted to step out on the big stage. And frankly, Dayton simply isn't that stage.

So, I say let's change it up. Instead of a 16 vs. 16 matchup between teams with automatic bids, let's take two at-large teams, sitting squarely on the bubble, and have them fight in a 12 vs. 12 matchup. Have them meet at Kansas City's Sprint Center, a terrific facility that's as neutral as can be, being right in the middle of the country, and give the smaller conferences at least a chance to take their shots at the big boys as legitimate number 16 seeds.

Think about this ... instead of Alabama State and Morehead State kicking things off, what if it was Arizona and St. Mary's, fighting for the chance to play Utah?

That'd make for a compelling matchup: two teams who were on the bubble, fighting their way into the brackets. The fifth seed that takes on the winner (in this scenario, Utah), gets a much tougher 12 seed than usual, but at the same time, gets one extra chance to scout their opponents. The TV ratings would obviously be bigger for such a matchup, and imagine the extra twist in every office pool in America! You've got drama before the madness. It's exciting just to think about the possibilities.

Play-in games aren't fun. It's basically a 48-hour rush to prepare, fly to your locale, and get ready to play a game that no team really was expecting to play. If we're going to do this, let's make it two at-large teams, who would just be relieved to keep their dreams alive, instead of two teams who won their tournaments, thinking they had the automatic chance to dance.

Posted by Jean Neuberger at 11:52 AM | Comments (0)

Grainy Issue Remains For MLB Bat Makers

Upon the release of new and unprecedented regulations and mandates prescribed for all Major League Baseball certified bat manufacturers on December 15, 2008, no attention was garnered by the mainstream media at the time. As such, a disservice was done to these unheralded craftsmen who largely for the past decade have been trying to compete with the behemoth Hillerich & Bradsby Company, the manufacturer of the renowned Louisville Slugger.

Not unlike the small business owner trying to remain fiscally sound and viable in the current marketplace in the toughest economy in nearly 80 years, small-sized and boutique bat makers struggle to survive. However, the question must be asked, was it ever intended by MLB for them to compete with the likes of Louisville Slugger? Louisville Slugger supplied over 50% of MLB bats in spite of 31 other certified suppliers during the 2008 season. And of those that they supplied to MLB, over 60% of them were made of maple wood.

But dissimilar to many small businesses striving to stave off bankruptcy in the current economic climate, it was MLB which poured salt in the wounds of many of these small business bat makers. MLB increased its already excessive fees for the privilege of providing bats to its players, and gives them no legal protections for that privilege. And now bat makers must also agree to be subject to random audits over their manufacturing processes, thus giving up their trade secrets on their products.

One could only hope that MLB would have had such a stringent criterion in place regarding its drug testing program, which to this day chooses to ignore George Mitchell's recommendation in his 2007 report to MLB that the testing facility be an independent entity, which it currently is not.

And for all of MLB Commissioner Bud Selig's aplomb regarding how MLB's drug testing program is the best and most stringent in all of professional sports, most MLB players still are only tested two times per season. The initial test all of them get the first week of spring training. Some players do get a random third test during the year. However, the latest figures available for offseason testing are from between the 2007 and 2008 seasons. The number of offseason tests given to players at that time was a total of 60.

The pending issue on the rate of flailing broken bats in MLB games, predominantly over the past five seasons, precipitated an investigation largely targeting maple wood. It perpetuated MLB's nearly overnight solution to the problem after years of never having taken an interest as to the integrity of any equipment being used throughout MLB clubhouses. Prior to the upcoming 2009 MLB season, MLB teams essentially had an honor code when it came to bats, gloves, and balls, not to mention uniforms and the body armor used in the batter's box, which seemingly pushes the envelope more and more each season.

But unlike MLB's present drug testing program, which lingered for years amidst wrangling with the Major League Baseball Players Association, MLB's newly sprung regulations for the bat making process was a unilateral directive, which many of these bat suppliers have since learned, took little of their input into consideration. And true to form, both the drug testing program and the latest bat manufacturing regulations remain flawed by MLB and apparently now a topic no longer open for further discussion.

Unfairly, such bat manufacturers who have been providing bats for MLB teams, and in some cases for many years, were given only a 30-day window to meet the new requirements. By January 15, 2009, in order for such suppliers to comply with the new provisions in their contracts with MLB, they were required to ante up a $10,000 administration fee, which is double the fee required for 2008.

Bat makers also are required to provide proof of a broad-based liability insurance policy which now requires $10 million in coverage, per occurrence, up from the $5 million of required coverage in 2008. Such coverage can cost upwards of $100,000 per season for each bat supplier. Additionally, bat makers also needed to show proof of 15 dozen manufactured bats in their inventory by that January 15th date.

All of the criteria prior to bat manufacturing approval also now include myriad disclosures of individual manufacturing processes which must be adhered to by each bat maker and are dependent upon the actual type of wood they use in the process.

So for example, the term "sweet spot" historically has been used to refer to the part of the barrel where the bat's trademark or label was put and where the hitter would get the most bang for his buck. Players were taught to turn the label facing up in order for the bat to hit the ball with the grain. Now, the newly concocted guidelines entail that the label be 90 degrees rotated, thus the bat will make contact with the ball against the grain for all maple bats, which also now must be two-tone in color.

Since more than 50% of all MLB players use maple bats, such a change stands to arguably interfere with players' swings and could prove a distraction to them. But one must look past that as an issue as it does not seem to register with MLB that this may create an unintended hindrance for its players. After all, players are more than welcome to hit with the more traditional ash bats that will allow them to hit with the grain.

Furthermore, it is stunning that the indemnity clause in the agreement states that the bat supplier, "Agrees to at its sole expense, indemnify, defend, and hold harmless all MLB Entities and Individuals from and against any claims, suits damages, and costs arising from or related to its bats that are approved for use in Professional Play, the use of such bats, and defects or deficiencies in or the breaking of such bats." In addition, "Each bat supplier shall be required by the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball and shall name each of the MLB Entities and Individuals as additional insured's under such policies."

So essentially, MLB is holding the small bat manufacturer liable for any mishap that might occur directly or indirectly from a broken or flying bat on the field or in the stands and assumes no responsibility itself. On its face, it does not exactly give fans the sense that MLB or the owners of its teams care about their safety.

For a multi-billion dollar business which Commissioner Bud Selig has had no problem crowing about how its revenues totaled a combined $13 billion the past two seasons, it would appear that it would be in a far better position financially to make whole a fan or a player, a coach or an umpire on the field of play who is unintentionally injured by a bat at the ballpark. It is not a like-issue with regard to baseballs, as they are exclusively manufactured by the Rawlings Manufacturing Co., a multi-national corporation with deep pockets.

The upshot is that due to the short time frame allotted bat manufacturers to comply with all of MLB's demands, including the technical information about the manufacturer's wood processing, it is rife for excluding as many of them as possible. However, there had been a quorum of small bat manufacturers that asked MLB to meet with them during the MLB Winter Meetings, which took place in Las Vegas, NV the first week of December 2008.

Shut Out

At that time, many bat makers had already supplied feedback in detailed reports as requested by MLB on recommendations to the bat making process they would make in order to mitigate the breaking and shattering of both maple and ash bats, predominantly the woods of choice. Unfortunately, regardless of the feedback that MLB did receive in written form, the bat makers were shunned when they requested a sit-down with the MLB Health and Safety Committee, which was formed in June 2008, and with Roy Krasik, the Senior Director of MLB Operations, at the Winter Meetings.

Not unlike that which takes place in our nation's Capitol and in the West Wing of the White House, much window dressing and self-aggrandizement goes on in MLB. And very often, the issues at stake get short shrift. Such a case could be made in this instance regarding "overhauling" the bat manufacturing process to allow MLB to appear that it has adequately addressed the issue. But in this case, MLB's powers-that-be may have interfered a bit too much by imposing unproven regulations upon its bat suppliers, who are the principals who best know their craft.

In essence it really comes down to a matter of common sense, which the Office of the Commissioner of MLB has clearly lacked since Bud Selig's term began in 1992.

At issue is not only the length to weight ratios of bats, but the wood's moisture content and probably most obvious of all, the thinner handles relative to the larger bat barrels. Even though MLB now newly insists on a detailed analysis of the manufacturing process, the unadulterated alteration of bat handles and bat cups by both clubhouse equipment managers and players alike, known to have done so in the past, will not be monitored by MLB. And the bat manufacturer will now have the burden of proof that its bats were manipulated after-market, should irregularities be found.

There has been a size restriction on MLB bats since 1862 regarding the diameter of the barrel which was not to exceed 2.5 inches. Then in 1895, 2.75 inches became the maximum diameter, as it remains today, and prior to in 1868, the length of the bat could be no longer than 42 inches, which remains the standard today. With respect to weight, the maximum difference between inches and ounces must be less than 3.5 ounces. Therefore, a 34-inch long bat must weigh at least 30.5 ounces.

And the ratio between the diameter of the bat handle and the diameter of the barrel as well as the lightness of the bat's weight all contribute to the integrity of the bat, although the bat handle's diameter may not exceed 0.842 of an inch. Such has been the case since the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the MLBPA in 1994.

Finally, when MLB asked for suggestions from numerous parties regarding the shard and exploding bat phenomena, the obvious answer at least immediately was to extend the netting behind home plate, used in all MLB stadiums, to include those areas of seating along the first base and third base lines. But Bud Selig's response was that it would take away from the enjoyment of the game's experience and block the view of the fans; at least those fans who occupy the most expensive seats in the ballpark.

Again, this is not about the "best interests of baseball," the best interests or health of the fans, or providing the best bats or equipment for MLB players. Rather, it is about MLB's almighty dollar, its total domination of its environment, and for it to remain Goliath to its many Davids; in this case, the bat makers.

But in a 2009 economy, MLB would be doing itself a service if it far more respected those who brought it to the dance — the fans and the small businesses that prop it up. Both are central to its continued success rather than its sponsors that come and go and have a dollar interest not a baseball interest in the game.

And sadly, the "best interests of baseball" can no longer be readily found at 245 Park Avenue in New York City, the home of the executive suites of MLB.

This article is the third in a series of reports by Diane M. Grassi: Are MLB Bats the New PEDs? (2008) and MLB Bats Whittled Down to Uneven Playing Field (2007).

Posted by Diane M. Grassi at 11:46 AM | Comments (0)

March 18, 2009

NCAA Tourney Bracketeering

It's that time of year again, NCAA tournament time, when the talk of "seeds" centers not around the ethics of artificially inseminating them in the body of a demented mother of six, but rightfully on the positioning of college team in the grandest, single-elimination, 65-team, winner-take-all tournament of the year. That's right, it's the men's NCAA Division 1 tournament, and if you think "Bracketology" is a Pearl Jam album, or you think "Dickie V" is an "STD-er, baby!," then cease reading immediately and resume your pathetic existence.

It's also the first tournament without CBS analyst Billy Packer, who was dropped by CBS in July. It will be the first tournament in quite a while in which Packer won't be the lead analyst, although it will be the first tournament in quite some time that the word "lackadaisical" is not mispronounced. There's no "x" in that word, Billy!

Geez, whatever happened to Gary Bender?

Did the selection committee get it right with its four No. 1 seeds?

For the most part, yes. But you could make a case for Memphis and Duke, two No. 2 seeds, being No. 1s. Unlike Pittsburgh, Connecticut, and North Carolina, Memphis and Duke made the final and won their conference tournaments. Duke, however, was rewarded with games in Greensboro, North Carolina, just a quick jaunt from Durham down Interstate 85 in a BMW, and what looks to be the easiest path to the Elite Eight for a No. 2 seed (the Devils are bracketed with the tournament's weakest No. 3 seed, Villanova).

Memphis? They only swept the Conference USA regular season and tournament on their way to a 31-3 record, the most wins in the nation. Apparently, the selection committee discounted the difficulty of the running the paper mâché Conference USA gauntlet, and weighted losses to Xavier, Syracuse, and Georgetown more than wins over the likes of Houston and UTEP. However, the committee did acknowledge that the Tigers were the best team, college or pro, in the city of Memphis.

What are some possible first-round upsets?

The No. 5 versus No. 12 matchups present the most chances for upsets. Three of these four games could go to the No. 12 seed. I don't like No. 12 Northern Iowa to beat No. 5 Purdue in the West, but I'll go with Big Ten defense over Atlantic Coast Conference offense with No. 12 Wisconsin beating No. 5 Florida State in the East.

In the South, No. 12 Western Kentucky is practically a consensus to "upset" No. 5 Illinois, so much so that it can barely be classified as such. The Illini may be without guard Chester Frazier, who injured his right hand last week in practice. Frazier is the Illini's defensive stopper, and had surgery on his hand in hopes of playing on Thursday. It's hard to bet against a good hand job, but give me the Hilltoppers to win, sending Illinois coach Bruce Weber home before he loses his voice. What? He sounds like that all the time?

In the Midwest, No. 12-seeded Arizona, possibly the last team to make the field, faces No. 5 Utah. The Wildcats feature 6'7" forward Chase Budinger, who averages 17.9 points per game, and learned earlier this season that the imprint of a sneaker sole on his face was not permanent, although the incident did give Mike Tyson a new idea for a face tattoo. Budinger will lead the Wildcats over the Running Utes (that's Utah's nickname, and not a stomach problem).

I also like No. 11 Temple to shock No. 6 Arizona State in the South, aided by an inspirational video of former coach John Chaney urging the Owls to win, or "I'll kill you!"

In the West, the No. 11 seed, 30-4 Utah State, puts their impressive record up against No. 6-seeded Marquette, minus star Dominic James. I like the Aggies to win this, but I don't they'll advance to the Sweet 16. That would entail a multi-game tournament winning streak, which in Utah is known as "polygame-y." The Aggies will fall in the second round to Missouri, who will earn the nickname "more than one wife"-beaters.

And in the tournament's biggest shocker, I like Stephen F. Austin to drop a stone-cold stunner and upset Syracuse, but only if the Lumberjacks' number of threes is 16. And that's the bottom line.

What are some of the other intriguing matchups in the tournament?

The 7-10 seed games all feature major conference versus major conference showdowns. In the Midwest, it's No. 7 Boston College against No. 10 Southern California. In the West, No. 7 California faces No. 10 Maryland, No. 7 Texas takes on No. 10 Minnesota in the East, and No. 7 Clemson squares off against No. 10 Michigan in the South. Hey, that Clemson/Michigan game is like the ACC/Big 10 Challenge, except that in this case, people care about the outcome.

I'll take USC, California, Texas, and Clemson.

Who's in your Elite Eight?

In the Midwest, I like Louisville to face the rugged Spartans of Michigan State and their personable coach Tom "H to the" Izzo. A lot of people have the trendy pick of Wake Forest beating the Cardinals in the regional semifinals. You want trendy? How about Rick Pitino's pimpin' suits, like the all-white number he wore back in February against Georgetown? Denny Crum in polyester it was not, but it certainly got attention. The NCAA balked at Pitino's request to add a top hat and cane to his ensemble, and Pitino was nearly cited for recruiting violations. No, not by the NCAA, but by a local pimp, who claim Pitino stole some talent from his stable.

The 'Ville will benefit from tournament experience, plus a viral e-mail video of Pitino in his famous white suit, gaily singing Rick Astly's "Never Gonna Give You Up," will pop up in the inboxes of all the Cardinals' opponents, rendering them helpless against Louisville. Louisville fans will then feverishly make signs, taunting opponents that they just got "Rick-rolled."

Pitino gets fashion-conscious in the Cardinals regional semi versus Wake, when he breaks out a black and gold, tailed tuxedo with a top hat, in honor a Wake's Demon Deacon.

In the West, I'm going chalk, with Connecticut and its overpaid coach Jim Calhoun facing Memphis in the regional final.

In the East, I'm going with Pitt and UCLA, although I was tempted to follow the advice of ESPN's Digger Phelps and go with Pitt and Xavier, which truly is a "bracket-buster." I think Digger's taking the "March Madness" thing literally, and I'm sure most people were equally as stunned when he named Kelly Tripucka and Adrian Dantley to his 2009 all-tournament team.

I was tempted to pick Duke, but I'm not sure the buggy-whip arms of guard John Scheyer can carry the Blue Devils into the regional finals. Scheyer is a great shooter, but I'm not even sure he can make it to the next level, which for white Duke guards, is a place on the bench as Mike Krzyzewski's assistant. Duke will fall to UCLA in the round of 16.

In the South, despite the uncertainty surrounding Ty Lawson's big toe, I'll have to go with North Carolina to reach the regional final. Nothing brings a high-powered offense to its knees like a Tar Heel with a bad toe. Without Lawson, UNC's normally fast-paced offense goes from "run and gun" to "pedestrian." Lawson's playmaking ability opens up the floor for UNC's other players, and if the Heels need a basket, Lawson is unstoppable going to the hoop.

If Lawson doesn't play, or further injures his toe, UNC probably won't make it to the Elite Eight, and Roy Williams will be uttering a bevy of "F"-words, including "fudge," "fold," and "failure." I expect Lawson to suck it up, be a "foot" soldier, and take his painkilling shots like a man, then tell everyone who doubted his ability to play with pain that "I toed you so."

Look for the Heels to meet Oklahoma in the regional final, setting up a showdown between two future NBA lottery picks, the Sooners' Blake Griffin (2009) and UNC's Ed Davis (2011). You didn't think I was going to say Tyler Hansbrough, did you?

Final Four?

Give me Louisville, Memphis, Pitt, and UNC.

The Championship

Tyler Hansbrough has done nearly everything in his career, except win a national championship, and make a pass out of a triple-team for an easy dunk or wide-open three. Hansbrough will put the Heels on his back, figuratively and literally (he'll give Lawson a piggy-back ride to treatment after each game), and UNC defeats Memphis 84-80 in the final.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:59 AM | Comments (0)

Who's Number One?

The Detroit Lions have been on the clock since last season started. We all knew they would be a mess before it got underway, but no one could have put their money on them being 0-16 bad, because even the worst of teams that have passed through the years have slipped into at least one win during the season. So as a reward for being so terrible and an unbearable team to watch (minus Calvin Johnson), the Lions were given the loser's spoils: number one overall pick in the 2009 NFL draft.

As an NFL franchise, the mark of picking first overall signifies a couple of things. It shows that you've been god-awful for some time and probably getting progressively worse as time passes and it gives you a ray of hope that the young man who will walk on the stage first on draft day and don the silver and blue cap will lead your team back to respectability someday. I mean, who else on the draft board can have a full spectrum of choices? You can also liken the team with the number one pick to the kid at school with the brand new game console, or the great lunchbox item. Everyone else at school (the NFL) wants to nice up to you or even trade for something.

Over the next month as the draft gets closer, be sure the Lions will get their fair share of offers of pick or packages with players with everything short of a team owner's first-born. The Lions would be foolish not to listen to and consider every reasonable offer that is placed on the table. I mean, any deal can't possibly make them any worse, can it?

Let's assume that the Lions do keep the number one pick. They do have a number of options and anyone that they explore would fill a huge need. They could go with what seems to be the popular choice and go with Georgia QB Matt Stafford, who has all the physical tools to be a successful signal caller in the NFL. It's safe to say that Daunte Culpepper is not the long-term answer at QB in Detroit.

Given, if the Lions take Stafford, there could be a high probability that he is clobbered within inches of his life due to the lack of protection given by Lions offensive line this past season, which is why they are also considering taking Jason Smith, tackle from Baylor with the top pick. Smith has risen up the charts of the draft since workouts have started and if (phrase upcoming used for all offensive lineman taken this high in the draft) he lives up to his potential, could provide the Lions a linchpin at the glorious position of left tackle.

Then again, the Lions did hire Titans defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz, and he is probably lobbying for Detroit to take Wake Forest LB Aaron Curry. Curry, the 2008 Butkus Award winner and the clear-cut winner as most coveted defensive player in the draft, would give the Lions the perfect compliment with young linebacker Ernie Sims and newly-acquired Julian Peterson to give the Lions a formidable linebacking corps.

Of course, if you are Detroit, you have to be careful. If history proves anything to us, it's that nothing is a sure thing, especially when dealing with high draft picks. If you pick Matthew Stafford, you would hope he turns out like John Elway, Eli Manning (minus all the whining and trade talks), Peyton Manning, or Carson Palmer, and not like Tim Couch, David Carr, or Alex Smith. Remember how Robert Gallery, Leonard Davis, and Mike Williams were before their drafts? You have to hope Jason Smith doesn't turn out the same way. And for every great linebacker that has panned out, you don't want Aaron Curry to become another Andy Katzenmoyer, Mike Mamula, or LaVar Arrington.

What you really want to do is avoid being the Bengals, who stubbed on two consecutive top overall draft picks with Dan Wilkinson and Ki-Jana Carter in 1994 and 1995, respectively. Even more importantly, you want to avoid making the same mistakes of yesteryear, with the Lions becoming Wide Receiver Refuge, with four first-round picks on receivers. Maybe it was all done in the hope of making Joey Harrington a better quarterback, yet another snafu perpetuated by the Matt Millen years. After the seemingly brainless Marty Morningweg, the failed tenure of Steve Mariucci, and change of pace to Rod Marinelli, the Lions seemed to have gotten the job to the right man in Jim Schwartz.

Ahead for Schwartz, new GM Martin Mayhew, and the Lions organization is the task of making the right decision with the first overall pick in the draft. Climbing from rock-bottom won't be easy, but to figure out the direction the franchise wants to go in isn't exactly rocket science. As the old adage says, "The only way to go is up." Rest assured, however, if the Lions front office screws this one up either with a bad choice or an idiotic draft deal, it could take years for them to recover from what is already a mess in the Motor City. I guess they could look on the bright side. At least they don't work for Ford.

Then again...

Posted by Brian Cox at 11:58 AM | Comments (3)

March 17, 2009

Sports Central's Roundball Roundtable

Toughest Region

Corrie Trouw: Midwest

Is it just me, or does it seem like all of the regions are fairly reasonable to their elite seeds? Most years, you can look at seeds 3-8 in one region and envision tough first and second weekend games for that region's No. 1 and 2. This year's crop of No. 3s (Syracuse, Missouri, Kansas, Villanova) looks like as weak a group at that level as I can remember. Remember, that 2003 Syracuse title-team was a No. 3, and they had Carmelo Anthony. I think 2009 Syracuse loses to the 2003 squad by 25.

But if you twisted my arm just a little bit, I'd have to say Louisville has the most formidable company in the Midwest region. Maybe not so much in the Cardinals' half of the region (though they could draw Ohio State in the second round in Dayton, just an hour from Columbus), but the bottom half features Final Four vets Tom Izzo, Bill Self, and Bob Huggins, not to mention USC and its stable of NBA talent. Heck, even the 3-14 matchup has some intrigue, as tournament rookie North Dakota State gets to play relatively close to home in Minneapolis against the defending champs, Kansas.

Andrew Jones: Midwest

Do you seriously see a matchup outside of Louisville vs. the play-in team and Michigan State vs. Robert Morris that you are absolutely confident in? Ohio State and Sienna can both give Louisville a run for their money. West Virginia and Dayton have shown they are quite dangerous and either could beat Kansas (if NDSU doesn't beat them first). Boston College has beaten top teams and USC is incredibly hot. What is honestly weak about this region are the two and three seeds. Michigan State is vulnerable, struggling last week against Minnesota and losing to Ohio State. Kansas is also vulnerable as they lost to Baylor. Is Baylor better than anybody in this entire region besides Robert Morris? I think Louisville will escape and make it to the Final Four, but it will not be easy.

Jonathan Lowe: South

From 1-9, this regional is the most "star-studded" as far as top 25 squads. You have the possible best team in the country (UNC), most important player (Blake Griffin of Oklahoma), and two smoking-hot teams (Syracuse and Gonzaga). Add in the athleticism of Illinois, Clemson, and LSU. Then throw in the defensive intensity of Arizona State and Butler. I could see one of five or six teams heading to Detroit out of this region.

Ross Lancaster: East

While I think the committee did a good job of balancing the regions, take a quick look at the top seeds in the Pitt-led region. After the Panthers who are probably second-favorites to win the national title after Louisville, there's Duke, a Villanova team that seemed to score at will in February and early March, and Xavier, who beat Missouri, Memphis, and LSU out of conference and made the Elite Eight last season.

Just lower than the protected seeds, there's a Florida State team that was criminally underrated until its ACC tourney run and a UCLA team that has one of the best offenses in the nation and has made three straight Final Fours. Of course, UCLA has a very tough first-round matchup with VCU. Unfortunately, the winner of that game will have to face Villanova in Philadelphia, barring a shocker by American.

Seth Doria: Midwest

Not only do you have the top overall seed in Louisville (Big East regular season and tournament champ), there's a former No. 1 ranked Wake Forest squad, a 12 seed in Arizona with two future first-round NBA draftees, a coach in Ohio State's Thad Matta who has never lost a first-round game, two of the top three non-Memphis mid-majors in RPI (Utah at No. 9 and Siena at No. 19), a West Virginia squad that beat Duke in the second round last year (and Pittsburgh in this year's Big East tournament), a Dayton team with wins over Marquette and Xavier on its resume, one of the best freshmen in the country in USC's DeMar DeRozen, a Boston College team that beat both Duke and North Carolina this year, the Big Ten regular season champ in Michigan State, and the Big 12 regular season champ (and defending national champ) in Kansas.

And if that wasn't enough, they have the highest average scorer to make the tournament this year in North Dakota State's Ben Woodside (22.8 ppg on 46 percent shooting and 43 percent from three).

Jean Neuberger: West

When it comes to this year's brackets, I'm impressed with the depth of the wild, wild West.

You start off with a UConn team that, despite losing Jerome Dyson, is still a monstrous challenge and a serious national title contender. Even then, UConn might have their hands full against a rugged, tough BYU squad or a speedy Texas A&M team. Then, as your second seed, you have Memphis, extremely talented, loaded with 31 wins and a massive chip on their shoulders for not getting a number one seed. The other NCAA team that's won 30 games is WAC champion Utah State, seeded 11th in this region. Throw in the tournament champions of the Big 10, Missouri Valley, and SEC, as well as the Pac-10 regular season champions, and you have a fantastic collection of very tough teams, least I forget the fastest 40 minutes in basketball today, Missouri, who won the Big 12 tournament. No doubt, whoever win the West will have climbed one heck of a mountain to get to Detroit.

Highest Profile Seed to Fall in First Round

Corrie Trouw: Washington

The Huskies seemed very pleased with themselves for winning a surprising Pac-10 regular season title. Rightfully so, but that translated into an uninspired showing against Arizona State in the conference tournament. Their matchup with Mississippi State will pit two of the country's best interior players, UW's Jon Brockman and MSU's Jarvis Varnado. If Varnado can negate Brockman, the game will be in the hands of the Huskies' guards on the outside, a place in which Washington has struggled. Lorenzo Romar's bunch only shot 34% behind the arc, and while the Huskies led their conference in scoring offense, they only shot 45.9% from the field (seventh in the Pac-10). This means that if the Bulldogs can slow down the pace and limit the Huskies' scoring opportunities, they'll have a strong chance to pull the upset.

Andrew Jones: Kansas

Yes, it's a bit crazy, I don't deny that, but I believe third-seeded Jayhawks will fall to North Dakota State. As I previously mentioned, Kansas lost to Baylor on a neutral court. Can they survive their opening round game which will hardly be on a neutral court? I can guarantee the entire state of North Dakota will make their way down Interstate 94 to the Metrodome (the only stadium in the world to host a World Series, a Super Bowl, and a Final Four). NDSU is quite dangerous. Ben Woodside has the potential to be the Stephen Curry of this tournament.

Jonathan Lowe: Wake Forest

There's really no logic in taking Wake Forest to lose their first round game to Cleveland State. The Demon Deacons went 11-5 in a tough ACC, are led by a talented duo in Jeff Teague and Al-Farouq Aminu, and were ranked number one at a point this season. The Vikings will try to slow down the pace with their athletic opponents. But the Horizon League tourney champs won't be timid. They have beaten Syracuse and Butler on the road (and came within a possession of beating the Bulldogs twice more).

Ross Lancaster: Illinois

I know, I know, I'm taking the easy way out by picking a 5-12 game in this spot, and not a top four seed. But I absolutely love Western Kentucky in this game. Admittedly, I could be biased because I attend a Sun Belt school (North Texas) and follow the conference intensely. However, this Western Kentucky team may be every bit the group that went to last year's Sweet 16.

Mind you, it's not a team that is as flashy or plays as fast as the bunch that was led by Courtney Lee and Tyrone Brazelton. Both those players have moved on, but left a balanced group behind first-year coach Ken McDonald that includes Sergio Kerusch and Sun Belt Player of the Year, Orlando Mendez-Valdez. The questionable injury status of Illinois point guard Chester Frazier leads me to think that Western Kentucky might just be a superior team to the Illini.

Protected seeds that I fully expect to win, but will get all they want from the underdogs include Wake Forest (Cleveland State), Kansas (North Dakota State), and Syracuse (Stephen F. Austin).

Seth Doria: Xavier

Everything is setting up beautiful for the Portland State Vikings. They're playing relatively close to home in Boise (430 miles from Portland, compared to 1900+ miles from Cincinnati). They're not scared of playing anybody (lost to Washington by only one in Seattle, beat Gonzaga by seven on the Zags' home-court). They have a dominant lead guard in 5-foot-6 senior dynamo Jeremiah Dominguez. They led their league in steals, assists, turnover margin, and three-point field goals made per game at damn near 10 (third in the nation overall in three-point field goals made). The have two guys who are deadly from long range in Dominguez (87-of-199 for 44 percent) and Dominic Waters (60-of-130 for 46 percent). And they've won six in a row, so they have their mojo going.

Xavier, on the other hand, has lost two of three (to Richmond and Temple) and five of their last 10. They average more turnovers per game (15.0) than assists (13.5) and only two teams in the A-10 were worse in turnover margin. Only three teams were worse in assist-to-turnover ratio. Sophomore guard Dante Jackson leads the team in assists at 2.8, but he's no match for Dominguez. This team might resemble the Elight Eight squad from a year ago, but that was a team driven by Drew Lavender on the perimeter and Josh Duncan. Those guys are gone.

The Musketeers will have an advantage down low (as is usually the case in these kinds of games) and both teams are fairly well adept at shooting the deep-range bombs (Xavier makes a higher percentage, but in way fewer attempts). But Dominguez makes the difference and Portland State pulls off the Big Sky's first tournament win since 12 seed Montana took out Nevada in 2006.

Jean Neuberger Wake Forest

I've heard a lot of people giving Wake a run to the Final Four. However, the Deacons haven't been the same Wake team that was ranked at the top earlier this season. They've gone just 8-6 in their past 14 games, and they're running into a serious buzzsaw in Cleveland State. The Vikings won't be intimidated by Wake, having beaten Syracuse at the Carrier Dome earlier this season, and are as confident as they've ever been after taking down Butler to win the Horizon league tournament.

One thing I look for in a dangerous low seed is experience at the guard position; a floor general who will keep the team composed in the most hostile or pressure-packed environments. The Vikings have just that in Cedric Jackson. They have numerous players who can shoot the three, and have plenty of athleticism to hang with the Deacons. Everyone looks out for Butler, but don't be surprised if it's Cleveland State that makes tourney waves from the Horizon.

Best 5-12 Matchup

Corrie Trouw: Utah vs. Arizona

Yes, I know Wisconsin vs. Florida State has more BCS conference sex appeal (and who could forget their memorable 2008 Champs Sports Bowl, right?). But if you've seen the 'Sconnies play, you know that they would make a matchup with Jack Bauer seem pedestrian and slow.

No, I'll take the Utes and the Wildcats, but these aren't the normal roles for your usual 5-12 storyline. This time the power conference team with the sought-after recruits fills the underdog spot, and the off-the-radar Mountain West champ gets a nice, cushy seed. We've seen mid-major vs. mid-major in the 5-12 games (WKU over Drake last year), we've seen BCS vs. BCS (Villanova over Clemson last year), and of course the typical No. 12 mid-major vs. the No. 5 BCS (pretty much every year). But the last time a major conference No. 12 played a mid-major No. 5? That hasn't happened since Florida State upset TCU in 1998.

Look for a war in the paint, as Utah's Aussie national teamer Luke Nevill battles Arizona's front court beast Jordan Hill. Someone's going to have a double-double.

And I'm setting the over/under for Lute Olson/Rick Majerus references during the broadcast at 2.5.

Andrew Jones: Illinois vs. Western Kentucky

All of the 5-12 matchups are intriguing, but in the Hilltoppers we see a team that had proven last year that they can compete with anybody. From the 12 seed they beat Drake, then beat the No. 13 San Diego Toreros, then lost by only 10 to Final Four-bound UCLA. This regular season, they beat the now number one seed in the tournament Louisville. I fully expect the Hilltoppers to beat Illinois, then move on to defeat Gonzaga to finally wrestle with North Carolina in the Sweet 16.

I think this will be the most popular first-round upset in people's brackets, but do not think for a second that Illinois is not tough. Even though the Big Ten got seven teams into the tournament, I don't think many people expect any of those to be a contender for the Elite Eight outside of Michigan State. Part of the reason for this I believe is because of the Big Ten's success in recent years has been minimal, but the Fighting Illini only average 12 turnovers per game. When they shoot the ball well from behind the arc and at the free throw line, they are tough to beat.

Jonathan Lowe: Utah vs. Arizona

I think this may be the year of the 6-11 matchups, but a 5-12 game that should be fun is Utah vs. Arizona. The Utes ended up on top of the rugged Mountain West, while the Wildcats held their consecutive tourney streak alive by sliding into one of the last at-large spots. Arizona has a triple-headed monster in Jordan Hill, Nic Wise, and Chase Budinger that could be deadly if they get rolling. This could be an opportunity for the MWC to make a statement for legitimacy.

Ross Lancaster: Illinois vs. Western Kentucky

Seeing as how I have already talked a bit about my favorite 5-12 matchup this year, I figured it would be a good time to talk about those matchups in general. Mainly, other than the Illinois/Western Kentucky battle, I'm not all that excited by the seed pairing most look to upsets for every year (the 6-11s seem much better to me).

Arizona over Utah? Maybe, but Utah plays so much better as a team than the Wildcats and Arizona had its last quality win over a month ago. Florida State and Wisconsin is a game I expect to be close for a half and change, but the size of the Seminoles' front line and the play of Toney Douglas will pull forward in the end. Northern Iowa over Purdue is an upset pick I've seen in some circles, but Northern Iowa will try and limit possessions, something Purdue will be more than willing to do.

Seth Doria: Utah vs. Arizona

As an Arizona alum, I'll obviously be picking the Wildcats over the Utes, though a voice in the back of my mind tells me that's a sucker bet.

When playing well, Arizona can beat anybody, as evidenced by victories over Gonzaga, Kansas, UCLA, and Washington. They can also look like complete crap, as evidenced by their sleepwalking through their first-round game against Arizona State in the Pac-10 tournament.

Contrary to what you may have heard, Chase Budinger is not the leader of this team. Nic Wise is the point guard and the biggest determining factor in the team's success. If he's driving the lane, making shots and getting to the free-throw line, the Cats are usually good. If he doesn't, they aren't.

The second key for Arizona is Jordan Hill, one of the most nimble big men in the country and a likely top-five pick in June's NBA draft. His matchup against Utah center Luke Nevill could well be the best matchup of big men in the entire first round.

And then there's Budinger, one of the most maddening players to root for. If he's got his game, he can be a major factor. But he also invites teams to take him out of his game. And, once that happens, he doesn't show the mental toughness to take it back.

This game might as well be an 8-9 game. They both beat Gonzaga. They both lost to UNLV. Both Russ Pennell and Jim Boylen are making their first trip to the NCAA tournament as head men.

I'm taking Arizona because I'm a homer and I think Nic Wise is good enough to impose his will.

Jean Neuberger Utah vs. Arizona

Should Arizona have gotten into the tournament? That's the question of the week as the Wildcats get ready to face the Utes. The Wildcats have done a great job of handling the preseason drama from Lute Olsen's departure, and they've won on the strength of a superb frontcourt led by Chase Budinger and Jordan Hill. They take on a Utah team whose attacked is two-pronged. 7-2 center Luke Nevill is the catalyst inside the paint, while Luka Drca leads the assault from behind the perimeter. Utah's Shaun Green is one of the best sixth men in America, and a deadly three-point shooter, as well.

This game will come down to two things. First, can Nevill slow down Budinger and Hill in the paint, forcing Arizona to go outside? And secondly, can Utah shoot well enough from behind the arc to allow Nevill some freedom inside? If both of those things happen, Utah wins easily. Otherwise, expect a good, close game between these two.

Most Intriguing First Round Game

Corrie Trouw: Oklahoma State vs. Tennessee

It might not be O.J. Mayo/Michael Beasley like we saw last year, but this will be an offense-lover's delight. The Cowboys were sixth in the county in points per game, and their top four scorers are all guards (that's right, all guards) averaging double-digits. On the flip side, only nine teams took more shots than the Vols this year, and UT averaged 78.5 points per game, good enough for 16th nationally. Let's just say neither of these teams have seen a shot they weren't itching to take. Take the over.

Andrew Jones: LSU vs. Butler

I believe both Butler and LSU got seeded rather low. I thought both were more in the 6-7 range, but regardless of all that, these two teams both lost games they should not have lost last week. I believe this will provide both teams with a bit of added inspiration as they move forward. I think LSU's losses may have been a bit detrimental to their confidence, seeing as they've lost three of their last four games. Mid-major teams always have something to prove when March comes around and I think Butler will prove it by smacking around LSU.

Jonathan Lowe: LSU vs. Butler

Trent Johnson strolled in Baton Rouge this season and turned LSU into the surprising regular-season champ of the SEC. Todd Lickliter continued the recent tradition that has made Butler a tournament staple. Now the two meet in the 8-9 contest of the loaded South Region. This should be a great matchup of LSU's small-tall punch (Marcus Thornton and Tasmin Mitchell) against the Bulldogs' tough team reputation. I also recommend watching out for Marquette against Utah State.

Ross Lancaster: Ohio State vs. Siena

Every year, there are first-round games that, on the surface, look like ways to solve the argument about top mid-majors v. middle-placed power conference teams. That is, until the game actually happens and whatever side the loser falls on forgets about that game. I feel that this is one of those games.

This is also a game that is a huge contrast in styles, with Ohio State as the grinding half-court team and Siena as the running, up-tempo side. If one side can play the game at its speed, it should win. But, if Ohio State wins a high-scoring game or Siena wins a grinder, we will know that one team was more worthy.

Seth Doria: Minnesota vs. Texas

Texas coach Rick Barnes has lost in the first round a full 50 percent of his NCAA tournament appearances (eight of 16), while Gophers coach Tubby Smith is 13-1 in his 14 tournament first rounds. That's a fairly big disparity.

Contrary to typical Tubbyball, the Gophers actually play better when the game is up tempo, which should match well with what Texas wants to do. All 10 of Minnesota's losses, and seven of Texas' 11 losses, came in games where they scored fewer than 70 points. On the other hand, the Gophers were 12-0 when scoring 70 or more. Texas was 15-3 when scoring 70 or more.

I'm probably going to take Minnesota here just because of the vast disparity in first round records between the two coaches, but I really have no idea who's going to win. I am fairly sure, though, that this will be a highly entertaining contest.

Jean Neuberger Oklahoma State vs. Tennessee

Plenty of orange and plenty of fire! Two very intense coaches in OSU's Travis Ford and Tennessee's Bruce Pearl should produce two very intense teams, making for a great first round matchup. The Cowboys struggled at the start, but have come on lately at the end of the season. They were impressive in their win over Oklahoma in the Big 12 tournament, and one thing's for sure: they can really score at will. Eight times this season, OSU has scored more than 90 points. Tennessee, meanwhile, hasn't lived up to preseason expectations, but the Vols are a seasoned bunch with a lot of talent. Wayne Chism and Tyler Smith make for an intimidating frontcourt, and when J.P. Prince and Bobby Maze are on, the Vols can play with anyone. This matchup has "high-scoring instant classic" written all over it.

Who's This Year's Davidson or George Mason?

Corrie Trouw: Utah State

To quote Ron Burgundy after jumping into the grizzly bear pit, "I immediately regret this decision," but I'll stick with it anyway. The Aggies enter the tournament as the nation's top field-goal-percentage team (49.8%), my top-secret predicator of tournament success. Utah State's first round opponent, Marquette, is reeling after losing Dominic James, having lost five of their last six since his injury.

Should they upset the Golden Eagles, Utah State would likely face Missouri in the second round. The Tigers are an up-tempo, high volume offense (81.1 PPG), but their vulnerabilities play into the Aggies' strengths. If Utah State can hit some threes (39.8%, 15th nationally) and keep Mizzou in reach, free throws could help them seal the upset. The Tigers are ranked 11th in the Big 12 in free throw shooting (66.8%). That's the recipe for keeping Cinderella's slipper snugly on-foot into the second weekend.

Andrew Jones: Syracuse

Aside from Western Kentucky, who I've already covered, I'm going to go with the Orange. I call them a sleeper simply because I don't think many people are giving them much respect in the South with UNC and Oklahoma. I think Blake Griffin and Tyler Hansbrough are great players, but Syracuse averages more points per game than anybody in the Big East and they do it as a team with five players averaging more than 10 points per game. I think Syracuse has a very good chance at winning the South.

Jonathan Lowe: VCU

A lot of people look at Virginia Commonwealth as a team that can do some damage in the tourney. Count me among them. I think the draw sets up well for them. UCLA hasn't been as good as advertised defensively. I usually am a fan of Villanova, but for some reason, I think they are vulnerable this season. Duke goes as their perimeter shooting does. And Eric Maynor has stunned the college ranks before (the Rams stunned Duke in the '07 tourney). An 11-seed Colonial Conference team ... just call me nostalgic.

Ross Lancaster: Utah State

Before the brackets came out, I pledged to take whoever was playing Marquette in the first round. Yes, after the injury to Dominic James, the Golden Eagles still have Jerel McNeal and Wes Matthews. However, Marquette basically only plays seven guys as a result and has only beaten St. John's since James went down. They will be taking on the Aggies, who would have been a strong contender to win a game against a full-strength higher seed.

Against Missouri, I expect Utah State to have a good shooting night. After all, the Aggies are the top team in the nation in field goal percentage. Utah State is a better defensive team that you've come to expect from the champion of the WAC, and can also beat you in a variety of ways on offense, even though Gary Wilkinson is the kingpin of the offense down low.

Seth Doria: Arizona State

People don't yet realize just how good Pac-10 Player of the Year James Harden is.

They will after they see him over the next few weeks.

Between Harden doing everything (20.8 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.2 apg), Jeff Pendergraph down low (14.5 ppg, 8.4 rpg, 66.5 percent from the field), the long-range shooting of Rihards Kuksiks (44 percent on 192 attempts) and the intelligence of Derek Glasser (8.5 ppg, 4.8 apg, 41.4 percent from three), ASU has everything you need to make a serious charge.

The Sun Devils will beat Temple, then Syracuse, then Oklahoma, then North Carolina.

Jean Neuberger: Western Kentucky

I really like the Hilltoppers to be this year's surprise team. WKU has all the ingredients necessary to be a true Cinderella team. First, they've got tournament experience, having reached the Sweet 16 last year. Second, they have strength in their backcourt, led by A.J. Slaughter and Sun Belt player of the year Orlando Mendez-Valdez. Third, Western has a big marquee win, taking down Louisville earlier this year.

In the first round, Western's backcourt should be able to attack a wounded Illinois team, who will probably be without Chester Frazier. Illinois is not an offensive juggernaut, so late in the game, if points are needed, look for the Hilltoppers to take command. Secondly, while Gonzaga is a challenge, Western's strength, athleticism, experience, coupled with all the pressure lying on Gonzaga's shoulders, could spell a huge upset. Don't be surprised if it's the Hilltoppers making a return trip to the Sweet 16.

Who Survives to the Final Four?

Corrie Trouw: Michigan State, UConn, Pittsburgh, North Carolina
Andrew Jones: Louisville, Memphis, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Jonathan Lowe: Pittsburgh, Michigan State, Connecticut, Gonzaga
Ross Lancaster: Louisville, Memphis, Pittsburgh, Gonzaga
Seth Doria: Louisville, Memphis, Pittsburgh, Arizona State
Jean Neuberger Louisville, Missouri, Pittsburgh, North Carolina

Posted by Jonathan Lowe at 11:55 AM | Comments (0)

What the Committee Really Said

You've probably seen members of the NCAA tournament selection committee do plenty of boring interviews over the past week or so. They'll make vague references to bodies of work, S-curves, and bracketing rules. But all of us have already seen their strongest comments, which were placed on 65 different lines, simultaneously crushing and realizing the dreams of young basketball players across the country.

So what did the committee really tell us and the other sects of the basketball world on Selection Sunday? Luckily, I speak selection committee-ese, and I've interpreted their strong opinions for you here.

To the Big Ten: We're just not that into you.

Yes, the Big Ten got seven teams in, so the committee was at least first-date interested. But look carefully at the seedings. Michigan, despite a seventh-place middling finish within the league, boasted wins over UCLA and Duke. The Wolverines grabbed a 10-seed. Meanwhile, Wisconsin, the league's fourth-place team that lacked a non-conference win against a tournament team, apparently was one of the last two at-large teams. The Badgers slid dangerously low to a 12-seed.

And what was the difference between tournament 10-seed Minnesota (22-10, 9-9 Big Ten) and tournament snub Penn State (22-11, 10-8 Big Ten)? From here, it looks like the Gophers' neutral floor win over Louisville. So the committee made it very clear: they didn't seem very interested in what the Big Ten did in conference, but rather how they proved themselves out of it.

To the Pac-10 and SEC: West siiiide

This year's committee would clearly choose Tupac and Snoop over T.I. and Outkast. Look no further than their local conference tournament champs. Both USC and Mississippi State were on the outside looking in as of Saturday afternoon, but each snuck into the Big Dance with a conference tournament title. However, the committee rewarded underachieving USC (21-12) with a 10-seed, placing them in front of multiple at-large teams. Meanwhile, the SEC champs, with a better record than USC (23-12), were relegated to the 13-line, the land of obligatory qualifiers Akron, Cleveland State, and American.

The love the committee showed for the Pac-10 by including Arizona and seeding four teams from the league at seven or higher is fairly notable, considering the Pac-10 was thrown around as the fifth-best league throughout the season. Apparently, the committee thought the difference between the No. 5 Pac-10 and the No. 6 SEC was Grand Canyon-esque.

To recent tournament darlings: Oh yeah, about that whole "past tournament results don't matter" thing ... We didn't really mean that about you.

Look, I'll preface this by saying that trying to establish a pecking order for the low-major conferences is like what Nicholas Cage's character in "8MM" went through as he trudged through the darkest corners of the porn world. I'm not sure you ever get to the truth and you'll see a lot of performances you wish you could forget. However, check out where the Cinderellas of the last few years ended up this year:

• Western Kentucky (Sweet 16 in 2008): 12-seed
• Siena (Upset No. 4 Vanderbilt in 2008): 9-seed
• VCU (Upset Duke in 2007): 11-seed

Note that all three of these are at or above the seed-line of Wisconsin and Arizona.

Now I'm hardly a BCS conference honk who worships at the big-school alter. Quite the contrary: I love that Gonzaga, Xavier, and Utah were rewarded with top-five seeds. However, compare the three darlings of recent tournaments to some of the other automatic qualifiers. Cleveland State beat Syracuse and lost to West Virginia and Washington by 10 and 15, respectively. Siena, on the other hand, beat Northern Iowa and lost to Tennessee, Oklahoma State, Pitt, and Kansas by similar margins to CSU's major non-conference losses. Yes, Siena performed better in their league, but CSU had to go through Butler. So what makes Siena four seeds better than Cleveland State? It's hard to believe it's not that win against Vandy last year.

To injured players: Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses ... as long as they're not out for the year.

St. Mary's with a damaged Patty Mills? Sorry, no tournament for you. Marquette minus Dominic James? You're falling to a six-seed. The Big Dance is no country for broken bones.

And I really don't have any problem with this. Remember when Cincinnati was the unquestioned best team in the country in 2000, Kenyon Martin broke his leg in the conference tournament, and the committee bumped them to a two-seed? The team that plays in the tournament is the team that the committee is judging. Unfortunately, that might not be a team's best version.

However, I find two issues that pop up from this clearly articulated policy. First, why do teams get credit for wins in November if the committee is judging teams based on who they are in March? How many coaches have talked about how much different their teams are entering the postseason than they were in the preseason (Bill Self and John Calipari off the top of my head)? So what's the big difference between St. Mary's beating Providence in the early season with Patty Mills and Arizona beating Kansas around the same time with no obvious roster differences? The young Jayhawks have grown up a lot since then, so that win would seem just about as invalid as the Gaels'.

The second issue this raises regards the openness of injury information. Injuries to college players are already a taboo topic for teams and journalists alike. But now the teams have a very clear motivation to hide injuries and their severity. For example, North Carolina bailed from the ACC tournament in fairly unimpressive fashion without Ty Lawson. The tournament committee still gave UNC a top seed under the assumption that Lawson will return. But what if the injury is worse than the Tar Heels are letting on? What if they dressed Lawson in warm-ups for those games just to suggest that he could possibly have played had they needed to win? Had Carolina announced Lawson's injury was worse, would UNC still be a No. 1?

Now the committee has to take into account the credibility of their information about these injuries, and that's a seriously subjective criterion. What if one team (let's say USC in Los Angeles for example) is from a larger media market with more attention and a brighter spotlight than another (say, Northern Iowa in Cedar Falls). No offense to the hardworking journalists in Cedar Falls, but I'm going to bet on the sheer number of reporters and stash of resources in L.A. to ferret out injury information on USC before anything surfaces about UNI.

Nevertheless, the tournament committee spoke very clearly this year, and the lack of outrage over snubs and seeds in the 24 hours following the release of the brackets reflects that. But if anything they said ticks you off, hey, don't blame me: I'm just the messenger.

Posted by Corrie Trouw at 11:22 AM | Comments (3)

March 16, 2009

In the Rotation: NBA Week 19

One of the oldest conversation starters in sports is: as a sports fan, what is your favorite time of the year?

There's no right or wrong answer; everyone has their own personal preference.

Without a doubt, spring is my favorite time of the year for sports.

Spring marks the beginning of golf season (Tiger's back!); spring training means everyone in baseball is still in first place (the Tigers are back!); and with only a month left in the NBA season, the arrival of spring means that the NBA playoffs can't be far behind.

But, as the old saying goes, you have to take the good with the bad.

As far as sports in the spring is concerned, the bad for me is the start of March Madness.

It's no secret that I'm not a fan of the college game, and Thursday night's 6OT "thriller" between Syracuse and Connecticut is a perfect example of why I can't get into college hoops.

The only reason that game went into six overtime periods is because neither team was good enough to score in the final seconds to win the game. Each overtime period ended with a missed shot or a botched possession leading to yet another overtime. Nobody could step up and make a big play.

Call me old fashioned, but I prefer my overtime games to be settled by heroes, not goats.

And while John Q. may have been focused on the all important conference tournaments this week, the Rotation never waivers from its undying affection for all things NBA.

In case a week of watching college basketball has skewed what you remember about the game being played at its highest level, this week's Starting Five consists of a few friendly reminders from the NBA world to help you focus on what March basketball is all about: playoff seeding.

Starting Five

1. LeBron is the best player in the world...

It's not as if that statement needs much validation to begin with, but LeBron gave it to us this week anyway.

The Cavs started a three-game West Coast trip on Tuesday night in the Staples Center against the Clippers. A miserable shooting night for the Cavs (they missed their first 17 threes) had them trailing by 17 heading into the fourth, and then LeBron took over. He had 10 points in the quarter, finished with his second straight triple-double, and spearheaded a comeback that few players in the game are capable of leading their team to.

The King followed Tuesday's 32/13/11 clinic with another triple-double Thursday night against the Suns, leading the Cavs from behind in the fourth to rally to a somewhat easy eight-point win, LeBron's first career victory in Phoenix.

A triple-double wasn't in the cards for James the following night in Sacramento; LeBron was too busy dropping 51 on the Kings to worry about padding the assist and rebound totals. He finished with 22 points in the fourth quarter and overtime combined, and once again almost single-handedly erased another double-digit fourth quarter deficit on the road. The win clinched Cleveland's first division title since 1976.

If you're scoring at home, that's two triple-doubles, a 51-point game, and three fourth quarter comeback wins in four days, all roads game mind you, to clinch the Cavs' first division title since before the bicentennial.

Not a bad four day stretch for the world's best player.

2. ...But Dwyane Wade is the MVP (as of now, anyway)

If you've been following the Miami Heat at all this season, you know that there isn't another player in this league who is more valuable to his team than Dwyane Wade.

LeBron puts up ridiculous numbers night in and night out because he can; Wade puts them up because he has to.

As great as he's been, it's LeBron's help that has his team at the top of the Eastern Conference standings. Mo Williams is an all-star, and the Cavs have several players that fill specific roles for them. They are a well-constructed team.

The Heat, on the other hand, offer little to no help to Wade at all. If Wade doesn't have a monster game, the Heat lose. Period. It's just that, more often than not, Wade does deliver with a monster game, and he has the Heat six games above .500 and competing for the four seed and home-court advantage in the first round of the playoffs.

The final month of the season will offer plenty of chances for both Wade and LeBron to state their MVP cases (Kobe and CP3, too), but if Wade carries this team for the final month like he has for the first 66 games of the season, I don't see how anyone could be viewed as more valuable to their team.

3. There's no place like home (court)...

With Phoenix pretty much out of the playoff picture, the Western Conference playoff race isn't so much a race of who gets in, but rather a dogfight to see who get home court.

As it stands right now, the number three seed Houston leads the eighth and final seeded Dallas by just two and a half games.

How important is home court advantage in the West? Of the six teams fighting for the two remaining home-court-advantage-in-the-first-round spots (I'll concede at least a top four finish to San Antonio, leaving Houston, Denver, New Orleans, Portland, Utah, and Dallas to finish three through eight in some order), all have a home winning percentage of at least .700.

Of those six teams, only New Orleans at 18-15 has a winning record on the road.

The teams are so evenly matched that any of the six could potentially land a three or a four seed. All of these teams are also so equally tough at home that knocking whoever finishes three or four off in a playoff series could prove to be a daunting task.

4. ...Especially after a fight

After Monday night's blowout loss to the Blazers at the Rose Garden in Portland, the Lakers have now lost 20 of the 26 regular season games they have played against the Blazers in that building.

With the fans already chanting "Beat L.A." before the game even began, the last thing the Lakers needed was to give the Blazer crowd more fuel for the hatred of all things Lakers that already burns in the Pacific Northwest.

Instead, the Lakers left Blazer fans with the lasting image of Rudy Fernandez being carted off on a stretcher after a cheap foul by Trevor Ariza and the intense (at least by NBA standards) shoving match that ensued.

For a team that has a hard enough time winning at the Rose Garden, the Lake Show didn't do themselves any favors by all but ensuring that on their next trip to the Rose Garden (April 10th), hostility from the fans will be at an all-time high.

5. Don't play mind games with Kobe

There's plenty more on this later in the landmark case of Artest V. Sanity, but we'll fast-forward a day to the end of the Lakers and Spurs game for right now.

After the Spurs made a furious comeback in the fourth quarter to trim a 14-point deficit to just two with under two minutes to play, the Spurs chose rookie George Hill over grizzled, old vet Bruce Bowen to defend Kobe down the stretch.

According to Kobe after the game, his initial thought when seeing that he had the rookie guarding him: "Bake him."

Thirteen seconds after Hill entered the game, Kobe buried a Big Cajones Three over him; ball game over.

Hill's comment on the play, "I thought it was good defense."

Maybe it was some sort of reverse psychology by Gregg Popovich to put in the rookie as opposed to his defensive specialist, trying to bait Kobe into forcing a bad shot. It didn't work.

Conventional wisdom might not always work against Bryant; some nights he's going to beat you no matter what and that's just the way it is, but why encourage him to dominate by putting the rookie on him?

Gregg Popovich is one of very few NBA coaches that I'll give a pass to just about anything he does because he's proven in the past that nearly every button he pushes is the right one, but after Thursday's puzzling personnel move, I'll be gentle and say that the decision to go with Hill over Bowen was "curious at best."

(That, or Pop knows that the Spurs can't catch the Lakers for the top spot out West anyway, so he inserted Hill knowing that Kobe would torch him, but that Hill would learn a valuable lesson in the process that will carry over into the postseason. Actually, the more I think about it, that scenario seems about five times more likely than that possibly that Pop just mismanaged his rotation late in the game.)

In the Rotation: R.I.P. Bill Davidson

For the second time in less than a month, the NBA has lost one of the true great owners in league history.

Growing up in Detroit and getting to see Mr. D's impact on Detroit basketball firsthand, I can truly say that there isn't an owner in the league that I would have rather had at the controls of my favorite team over the past 35 years.

In a lot of ways, Davidson was the pioneer to the modern style of owning a professional sports franchise. He was the first owner in all of sports to buy his team their own private plane, and he footed the entire $70 million bill for the Palace of Auburn Hills, the NBA's first completely privately funded arena. Twenty years after opening its doors, the Palace remains one of the top venues in the NBA.

Davidson may not have been as recognizable or flamboyant (he rarely did interviews) as the other owners around the league, but the impact he had on his team and his community speaks for itself.

Out of the Rotation: Sacramento Kings

The Kings are threatening a record of futility that I never could have imagined: they are winless against the Eastern Conference this year. No team has ever gone 0-30 against the opposing conference in a season. In fact, the Kings 0-26 start marks the longest inter-conference losing streak in NBA history.

The Kings blew a golden opportunity on Sunday to get their first win against an Eastern Conference opponent this season when they lost to the East's worst team, the Washington Wizards, despite the fact that the Wizards didn't make a field goal in the final eight minutes of the game.

With their next four games against Eastern Conference teams, including three road games in four days, the Wizards may have very well squandered their last chance at beating an Eastern conference team this season.

Inactive List: Ron Artest

The George Hill guarding Kobe Bryant potential mind game that took place on Thursday night was nothing compared to the backfiring mind game that Ron Artest tried to play with Bryant the night before.

With just under seven minutes left to play in the game and the Rockets trailing by two, Artest was whistled for a foul after elbowing Kobe Bryant as the two made their way down the floor. After a brief scrum, the players were each assessed technical fouls and the battle was on.

Artest and Bryant grabbed, shoved, and talked trash to each other for the rest of the game. Kobe, as anyone who's watched a basketball game in the past decade knows, lives for these sort of one-on-one games within the game, and was more than happy to demonstrate this to the Secretary of Defense.

Bryant scored 18 points in the final four minutes and 13 seconds as the Lakers coasted to an eight-point victory.

Artest, who finished the game with 11 points on 4-of-16 shooting (including 0-8 on threes), continued to jaw with Kobe down to the final seconds, as Kobe laughed at him and knocked down free throws to seal the fate of the Rockets.

The Spurs were probably in the wrong for thinking that they could put a rookie on Kobe in the final minutes and still win the game. But Ron Artest's mental mistake of rattling the cage of the fiercest competitor in the game, who also doubles as the NBA's most deadly scorer in clutch situations, is just plain dumb, even by Artest's standards.

There's no place in the Rotation for bonehead mistakes like that, so Artest can take a week on the Inactive List to formulate a new plan on how to stop Kobe. You know, in the off chance that the Rockets get past their fear of advancing out of the first round and meet up with Bryant and the Lakers deep in the playoffs.

Be sure to check back at Sports Central every Monday to see who cracks Scott Shepherd's Rotation as he breaks down what is going on around the NBA.

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 11:39 AM | Comments (0)

March 13, 2009

2009 NFL Mock Draft

As I pondered my annual mock draft posting for this site, I reviewed the excellent work of my colleague Josh Galligan and became a bit nostalgic. You see, I have been posting a reasonable facsimile of this mock for what will be my third year, and I remember the smattering of criticism I received amongst the plaudits for my efforts. Of all these criticism, each equally valid (supposing the idiom "one's reality is made up of 10% fact and 90% perception of those facts"), no one person made as much an effort to disprove my prognostication acumen than one Seth Doria.

While Seth is an accomplished Internet sports writer and a very entertaining read, some of that criticism just didn't seem warranted and frankly, to be flat dropped from his annual comparison of NFL draft soothsayers made me realize for the first time the pain of being completely snubbed. Now many would have backed down to the negative critique and seemingly highly scientific methodology behind it, I'm far too stubborn for such a submission. Or too stupid, I guess only time will tell which is the case. But I digress. The bottom line is I may have had my ups and downs in my previous mocks, but by no stretch should those results define my ability to deign the draft future. Consider those years a prolonged slump that I have exercised all winter to, well, exorcise. In short, I want another chance.

In light of my newfound enthusiasm for proving myself more capable than some have previous suggested, I am openly challenging Mr. Doria to a heads-up competition, man versus man, his picks against mine. Since this is my challenge, I'm setting the rules; there will be no self-serving scoring methodology which best fits my shortcomings and confuses those of us who don't have journalism degrees from Arizona.

My scoring is simple. Team, slot, player all correct = 3 points, team, and player selected = 1 point, player in right "slot," but wrong team = 0.5 points. First round only. Highest score wins. Mr. Doria, this is that proverbial gauntlet that I feel obligated to cast at your feet in light of your comments against my picks these past two seasons. It is your opportunity to put your reputation where your mouth is.

For those of you not interested in any sports writers' grudge match, feel free to peruse this article and I do hope you enjoy it! As you will note, my mock drafts always include any potential trade scenarios that I see as being possible.

In the spirit of this interactive 21st century we find ourselves, I issue an additional challenge to any person who feels compelled to accept. Should you feel that you have what it takes to put your name behind your opinions (and be equally willing to have that name and those picks dragged through the literary mud should the situation dictate), I invite you to post your top 10 or 15 picks out here, as well. I'll give the winner his or her "just desserts" should you be the most accurate and, while there will be no tangible reward or cash prizes, there will be those all-important bragging rights we hear so much about.

As for you, Seth, I do hope that this challenge finds you before draft day as I look forward to having a chance to redeem myself to your loyal readers. Should I win, all I ask is that you say as much in one of your articles and that you agree to include my mocks in your annual wrap-up. If I lose, I vow to jump out of the draft prognostication business completely and I give you free reign to disparage me however you'd like in your writings.

Sparing you any further details or self glorification, I give you my picks.

1. Detroit Lions

Hmmm, where do we start? As has been noted repeatedly since December, this is an 0-16 team and they have a roster to match that record. On the surface, it appears their only "solid" position is wide receiver (which stands to reason, since they've spent 14 straight first round picks on that position ... okay, maybe not that many, but still). However, dig a bit deeper and you will see that they actually have some other strengths, or at least "non-weaknesses," particular along the offensive and defensive lines. Where they are woefully inept is at defensive back (league-low 4 interceptions in 2008), quarterback, and linebacker. The easy pick here at No. 1 is quarterback, where there is value for the position and a real need to get a "face-of-the-franchise" sort of player.

PICK — QB Matthew Stafford, Georgia

2. St. Louis Rams

This is a team that feels it is where it needs to be offensively providing good health, which they sorely lacked in 2009. Add to that their new, decidedly defensive-minded head coach (ex-Giant defensive guru Steve Spagnuolo) and you have what I would classify as the ultimate target for those looking to move up to grab a franchise offensive tackle. Unfortunately, there are three or four of those types of o-linemen available with top-10 ratings, so trading out will not be easy. This will leave Spagnuolo and the Rams at two where they will be forced to grab the best available defensive option.

PICK — LB Aaron Curry, Wake Forest

3. Kansas City Chiefs (Jacksonville Jaguars)

New coach? Check. New quarterback? Check. Acquire veteran leadership? Check. All and all, this has been an exceptionally successful offseason to date for Kansas City. Considering they now are missing a second-rounder, though, the ideal move here would be to trade out of the top 10 and pickup an extra first day pick or two. With Seattle lurking at No. 4 and poised to draft a receiver of their own, look for the Jaguars to work to move into this slot where they can get the top-rated guy out there to help shore up a receiving corps that has been decimated by poor judgment and underwhelming performances.

PICK (JAGUARS) – WR Michael Crabtree

4. Seattle Seahawks

They need defensive help badly and with the draft playing out as I have it here, they guy who I suspect they've been eyeing since the Senior Bowl will be on the board. They won't hesitate with this pick.

PICK — DT B.J. Raji, Boston College

5. Cleveland Browns

In analyzing the Browns' needs, there truly is only one player in the top 10 that fits the mold of a player that would be valuable and needed in their current schemes. Fortunately for them, that player is still available.

PICK — DE Brian Orakpo, Texas

6. Cincinnati Bengals

Welcome to the offensive tackle portion of the draft. With this pick, the Bengals will have their choice of the four highly-touted prospects. Andre Smith is clearly the most talented, but equally clearly is the largest headache and most baggage-ridden option; you'd have to think Cincy will be leery of adding such a questionable character guy to their current group of questionable character guys. Look for the Bengals to go for the safest pick in this position.

PICK — OT Jason Smith, Baylor

7. Oakland Raiders

Oddly enough, there are three offensive tackles that are just about identical in both stature and workout results and a fourth slightly larger one. The slightly larger one is what we call in some circles a "world-class head case." One of those other three has already been drafted. This will leave two realistic choices for the Raider brain trust, who are desperate to protect their assets at RB and QB. Which of those two will Oakland pick? Flip a coin.

PICK — OT Eugene Monroe, Virginia

8. Jacksonville Jaguars (Buffalo Bills via KC Chiefs)

The Jags need offensive line help, to be sure, but it is laughable to me to think they will be entertaining a position other than wide receiver in round one of this draft. The stars just seem too well-positioned for them not to pick a receiver, especially with their "clean" option at WR, Reggie Williams, recently being charged with DUI and possession of marijuana. Keeping this in mind, and with the questions surrounding the durability of Percy Harvin and Jeremy Maclin, the Jags simply have to move up for Crabtree. That leaves KC picking here, and I don't see why they wouldn't try to move down still further in round one. Look for a team with eyes for one of the two top-level offensive tackle prospects to slide in front of Green Bay to pick "their guy," and I see Buffalo as being that team, especially considering their recent signing of WR Terrell Owens has eliminated the need to pick a receiver in round one.

PICK — OT Michael Oher, Mississippi

9. Green Bay Packers

Green Bay is in the frustrating position of being one or two players from serious contender consideration. It isn't likely they will fill any of those spots through this year's draft, but with a top-10 pick and a whole lot of depth at the tackle position, look for the Pack to score themselves a premier offensive lineman here that could slide into the right tackle slot come August, assuming he isn't in jail by then. Many will throw up their hands and disgust and insist that he will fall out of the top 10 and beyond, the reality of the situation is it wouldn't matter if the guy carries around a duffle bag full of severed heads; he's a No. 1 talent at No. 9 prices.

PICK — OT Andre Smith, Alabama

10. San Francisco 49ers

Where the Niners really need help is along the defensive line, particularly in the area of getting pressure on opposing quarterbacks. With Orakpo long gone and only a couple of "fringe" first-round types left on the board at that position after the UT star, look for the Niners to go after an athletic type that has some versatility.

PICK — DE/LB Aaron Maybin, Penn State

11. Buffalo Bills (Kansas City Chiefs)

Getting a starting offensive tackle to keep QB Trent Edwards off his back long enough to chuck it to either Lee Evans or T.O. has to be a priority for the Bills in this draft. This would almost require them to move up, which is why I have them doing just that to grab Oher ahead of the Packers, who have made no secret of their affection for the giant Mississippi road grater. This leaves KC in the most opportune position: twice removed from a top-10 pick (which will net them several additional day one selections in either this draft or the next) with their choice of one of two players whom they wanted all along.

PICK (CHIEFS) — WR Jeremy Maclin, Missouri

12. Denver

I am a firm believer in omens, good or bad, and if I were Jay Cutler, I'd have seen on enormously bad omen in the recent talks involving myself and a trade out of town. However, it seems clear that new head coach Josh McDaniels is prepared to move past this obvious slight aimed at his starting QB and is willing to do what has to be done to rekindle the trust between the two. A good start would be to get Cutler some more offensive weapons, particularly some who are willing to be led, unlike his current top receiving option. While I wouldn't at all be surprised to see the Broncos go with USC QB Sanchez here, I honestly don't believe Cutler's already damaged psyche could handle such a move, so I will give him a reprieve, at least for now.

PICK — WR Darrius Heyward-Bey, Maryland

13. Washington (Miami)

With the recent release of Jason Taylor, the Redskins are looking to fill a need at defensive end without overpaying for a free agent (especially considering they've already overpaid for three free agents this offseason). Unfortunately for Washington, this is not the deepest of draft at that position, so they will be forced to either reach a bit or trade down a few spots. Bet on the latter, and Miami makes an intriguing trade partner with their two second round picks and need for a playmaker on defense. Look for the 'Fins to jump ahead of the cornerback-starved Saints to pluck the top guy on most people's defensive back boards, whose stock is beginning to slide a bit.

PICK (DOLPHINS) — CB Malcolm Jenkins, Ohio State

14. New Orleans

If you are a gambling man, and you can find some crazy Vegas bookie willing to give you odds on the Saints using their first round pick on a cornerback, you make that bet without batting an eyelash. Regardless of how this draft plays out, the Saints will be drafting at their biggest position of need. In my version, the New Orleans gang will be mildly annoyed that they lost out on Jenkins, but they will certainly settle for the next best option.

PICK — CB Vontae Davis, Illinois

15. Houston

The Texans had several needs going into this offseason; rush end to play opposite Williams, defensive backfield help, receiver to play opposite Johnson, backup quarterback. The filled the first with Antonio Smith, the second by franchising Dunta Robinson and signing Eugene Wilson, and the last by grabbing ex-Lion Dan Orlovsky. Logic tells us that this leaves one pressing need.

PICK — WR Percy Harvin, Florida

16. San Diego

The Chargers are in an enviable spot. They are a good team with tons of talent that underachieved in the regular season, which landed them this prime draft position. They have a need to build some depth, particularly at linebacker, and have some options here to do just that.

PICK — DE Everete Brown, Florida State

17. New York Jets

Having snagged their defensive leader in Bart Scott to man the middle of new coach Rex Ryan's defense through free agency, the Jets should be able to relax a bit heading into the draft and focus on getting a speed receiver to stretch defenses out a bit. While secretly I believe that the Jets brass hope to have QB Mark Sanchez sitting here for the taking, I am equally certain that they will happily select one of the speedy wideouts remaining on the board. For now, I'm going to go with the more safe selection, but reserve the right to change my mind as the draft approaches.

PICK — WR Kenny Britt, Rutgers

18. Chicago

The Bears have publicly committed to starting Kyle Orton in 2009. With their lack of attentiveness to some of the free agent QBs that have moved around the league this offseason, I have to believe that commitment. You have to think that this would leave an opening for the obvious selection of a wide receiver, though several more are off the board than perhaps the Bears (and most others) would have suspected coming into the draft. At least one first round talent at the position remains on the board, but he'll be gone after this selection. And, as an aside, I want to go on record in saying that Nicks will be the most productive rookie receiver of this class, mark it down.

PICK — WR Hakeem Nicks, North Carolina

19. Tampa Bay

Tampa couldn't be happier having Sanchez fall to them here. Should things play out as they have here, this is a no-brainer.

PICK — QB Mark Sanchez, USC

20. Dallas (Detroit)

Detroit couldn't be happier with how their Roy Williams trade turned out. Dallas underachieved in '08, leaving them with a couple of picks that fall far earlier in their respective rounds than they could have imagined when they made the deal. Having addressed their need for an offensive leader with the first overall selection, Detroit will set its sights on getting the same sort of leader for their defensive unit. Lots of those types to choose from in this area of the first round.

PICK — ILB James Laurinaitis, Ohio State

21. Philadelphia

Philly will be miffed that all those receivers went where they did leaving them empty handed, but they will, as a very nice consolation prize, have access to the power runner that they desperately need as a result.

PICK — RB Chris "Beanie" Wells, Ohio State

22. Minnesota

Many have the QB Freeman going here, but now that Sage Rosenfels is in town, that need has dwindled. With a defense that is set and depth across the roster, the Vikings should go for the best player at position of need, which is interior offensive line.

PICK — C/OG Max Unger, Oregon

23. New England

I won't waste any of our time pretending to know what the Patriots are planning to do. Nobody knows. Nobody ever knows. No team more effectively protects its intentions, be it the draft, trading scenarios, free agent signings, injury lists, ticket sales; you name it, they've hidden the truth on it. This is simply my best guess.

PICK — LB Brian Cushing, USC

24. Atlanta

Step two in building a better team is surround your weapons with weapons. While step one was far more successful than most had figured it would be, Matt Ryan could really use a top-tier tight end.

PICK — TE Brandon Pettigrew, Oklahoma State

25. Miami (Washington)

Having successfully traded down, the Redskins will be in a much more advantageous position to draft the player they need in Taylor's replacement. While LSU's Tyson Jackson is more highly acclaimed, he is more of a 3-4 end or 4-3 tackle, which doesn't play well into Washington's defensive scheme. A more fitting pick would be closer in stature to Taylor, with good height and strength, but less bulk.

PICK (REDSKINS) — DE Michael Johnson, Georgia Tech

26. Baltimore

Losing Bart Scott left one big hole in that defensive front seven. Even with Ray Lewis re-signing, it still makes good business sense to pick up some depth at the linebacker position.

PICK — LB Rey Maualuga, USC

27. Indianapolis (Detroit)

In the first post-Tony Dungy era draft, Indy is in a prime spot to move out, especially considering the run on wide receivers leaves slim pickings for those in and around this slot. Look for the aggressive Lions to move in here packaging their second round pick with one or more of their latter round selections, as there sits on the board a very inviting option at RB.

PICK (LIONS) — Knowshon Moreno, Georgia

28. Philadelphia (Cleveland)

Recent history tells me that the Eagles will make a move, either up or down, on draft day. Seeing the situation play out has it has, smart money has the Browns aggressively trading in the back end of round one to grab a running back that they have scouted heavily in recent weeks.

PICK (BROWNS) — RB LeSean McCoy, Pittsburgh

29. New York Giants

The Giants are relatively content picking here, though trading down is a possibility. Look for the team to build some depth on defense.

PICK — DE Tyson Jackson, LSU

30. Tennessee

What do you get a team on the rise that seemingly has some of everything? Depth along the offensive line.

PICK — OT Eben Britton, Arizona

31. Arizona

What do you get a team on the rise that seemingly has done everything it could to screw up its offseason? Depth at one of those positions that it let slip away through free agency.

PICK — DE Larry English, Northern Illinois

32. Pittsburgh (Chicago)

If you are Pittsburgh, why would you not trade out of this slot? There isn't a good reason. Even though I've already stated that Chicago would look to grab a QB later, I also sense that they are big on Josh Freeman. Few expect the 6'6" signal caller to still be on the board here, so if he is, look for the Bears to make a move.

PICK (BEARS) — QB Josh Freeman, Kansas State

There you have it: version one of my mock NFL draft for 2009. As always, I don't claim to be perfect, so if you're betting on these picks, you're doing so at your own risk. For those of you that will take me up on my little friendly competition I say, "may the best man (or woman) win".

And as always, I welcome any criticism that may come my way (I'm looking at you, Seth).

Posted by Matt Thomas at 11:54 AM | Comments (8)

Sports Q&A: NFL Offseason Impacts

Two blockbuster deals in the NFL recently went down, with the Buffalo Bills signing Terrell Owens and the Chiefs trading for Matt Cassel. What will be Owens' impact in Buffalo, and is the Cassel trade good for both the Patriots and the Chiefs?

It looked like Cassel's trade to the Chiefs would be the defining moment of the offseason, and it was, until Terrell Owens was cut by the Cowboys and quickly signed by the Bills. For the right to one of the NFL's most dynamic receivers, the Bills only had to give up $6.5 million over one year, and surprisingly didn't have to surrender their souls to the Devil. Even Mephistopheles cares not to deal with Owens, although he would gladly do so with Drew Rosenhaus, a relative, serving as his agent.

Owens' talent is such that teams in need of physical upgrades are able to look beyond, or ignore altogether, Owens' inevitable immature, child-like, and whiny behavior. Teams signing Owens give an even deeper meaning to the term "just win, baby." Emphasis on baby.

After months of hinting that Owens would return, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones dropped the bomb, announcing that Dallas was letting T.O. go. Jones justified his action, saying he was "heeding the advice of several people," which, in Jones' egocentric world, means he discussed the matter with each of the numerous mirrors in his mansion, of course after asking, "Who's the fairest of them all?"

So is this a good move for the Bills? Wisely, they signed Owens to a one-year deal, which should imply to Owens that there is limited, albeit hopeful, trust in his ability to be an attraction, and not a distraction. Even someone as shortsighted as Owens should realize that failure may result in his next contract being not yearly, but hourly. In short, for the Bills, it's a risk worth taking for a year.

Many have theorized that Owens won't find a blue collar town like Buffalo pleasing to his social and media needs. That may be just what Owens needs — a place where he can step out onto his driveway and start doing sit-ups without being swarmed by microphones and cameras. Buffalo is, above all things, a hockey town, so the sooner T.O. learns that a "hat trick" is a hockey term and not a touchdown celebration, he'll realize his true place in the city.

Owens' new teammates are saying all the right things to welcome him to the team. For God's sake, the last thing you want to do in this situation is step on any 'T.O.'s.' Bills quarterback Trent Edwards said he was "thrilled" to have Owens, then immediately put down the scripted comments sheet provided by the Buffalo front office and hastily called Tony Romo. Romo advised Edwards not to get too chummy with his starting tight end, and never to look Owens directly in the eyes, lest you lose the ability to speak your mind.

And what of coach Dick Jauron? What is he expecting to gain from the addition of Owens, besides a bleeding ulcer? Obviously, Jauron approved the move and, in speaking with Owens before finalizing the deal, must have been won over by T.O.'s ability to say the right things at the right time. In other words, Jauron was duped. Look Dickie, when T.O. claims he's a "team" player, that just means he plays on a team.

What's the final analysis? Again, Owens in a one-year deal will pay dividends, and he'll definitely give the Bills a physical receiver to complement speedy but small wideouts Lee Evans and Roscoe Parrish. Owens will begin the season with a flourish, scoring 5 touchdowns in Buffalo's first three games. Then, when winter hits, and the Bills resort to their cold weather offense, Owens will get frustrated, feud with running back Marshawn Lynch, and will probably tweak a hamstring sometime in early November. He'll recover to finish the season strong, although we'll learn that Owens' issues with dropped passes are exacerbated by lake effect snow.

Final stats: 82 receptions, 1,100 yards receiving, 11 touchdowns, three sideline meltdowns, two uncomfortable locker room confrontations with ESPN's Ed Werder, and one near-brawl with Buffalo Sabres head coach Lindy Ruff after a run-in in downtown Buffalo, in which both men ask the question, "Do you know who I am?" To which both reply, "No."

***

Meanwhile, Cassel and linebacker Mike Vrabel were traded to the Chiefs for KC's second-round pick (34th overall) in April's draft, a clear sign that New England is convinced that Tom Brady will fully recover from the knee injury that sidelined him for nearly all of 2008. On the surface, it seemed like the Patriots were giving away more than they were getting, leading many to quip that this was the most lopsided exchange in New England since Tom Brady picked up Giselle Bundchen after dumping Bridget Moynahan.

Others praised former New England general manager Scott Pioli, who assumed the same job in Kansas City in January, for maneuvering a beneficial trade for the Chiefs that earned him the nickname Scott "Free." It seemed the Patriots front office was showing a little favoritism by offering a former employee such a sweet deal. Or was it such a sweet deal?

In the words of Lee Corso, 'Suck it, Herbstreet!' Or, more fittingly, in the words of Corso, 'Not so fast, my friend!' If you remember correctly, Brady was injured in New England's first game last year, against the Chiefs! Could this whole charade been orchestrated by the Patriots? This can't be the first time the words "charade" and "orchestrated" have been mentioned in relation to the Patriots, is it? Of course not. We all remember "Spygate," right? Let's call this one "Kneegate."

Did Tom Brady really hurt his knee against the Chiefs on that September afternoon in Kansas City? Maybe. Maybe not. Since when can you trust a New England injury report? Brady's knee injury served two purposes — one, it allowed Cassel to step into a situation in which he could flourish (tossing passes to one of the league's best downfield receivers, Randy Moss, and maybe the best possession receiver in the league, Wes Welker, and Kevin Faulk, one of the best backfield receivers), and thus padding his stats to become tasty trade bait. And two, it allowed Brady to play errand boy to Giselle, catering to her every need, all while we assumed he was rehabilitating that knee. The knee was okay. It worked just fine when Brady went to one knee to pop the question.

So, in the end, did anyone lose in this trade? No. There's no quarterback controversy in New England; Brady will resume his starting position, if he can break free of the clutches of Giselle. Plus, the Pats have an early second-round pick, who will probably turn out to be a Rookie of the Year candidate. The Chiefs have a proven linebacker in Vrabel, and finally an answer to their quarterback question, assuming Cassel's 2008 season was no fluke. And Pioli, as well as Bill Belichick and the Patriots front office, both maintain their reputations as shrewd and uncompromising deal-makers.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:24 AM | Comments (0)

March 12, 2009

I Hate NFL Free Agency

The NFL's 2009 free agency season is only about two weeks old, but there's already been plenty of action. As of this writing: Fred Taylor has signed with the Patriots, Mike Vrabel got traded to Kansas City, Brian Dawkins joined the Broncos, Tony Gonzalez is asking for a trade, the Bucs cut Derrick Brooks, and Matt Birk inked with Baltimore. Marvin Harrison and Deuce McAllister are free agents.

Taylor has spent his whole 11-year career with Jacksonville. Vrabel played in four Super Bowls for the Patriots. Dawkins, Gonzalez, and Birk played a combined 36 years with the teams that drafted them. Brooks, a future Hall of Famer, was the face of the Buccaneers franchise. Harrison has been with the Colts since 1996, 13 years. McAllister may be the most popular player in Saints history. There are future Hall of Famers in that group, legends who either couldn't wait to leave town, or whose teams couldn't wait to get rid of them.

I hate free agency.

I am glad for the players that they aren't slaves to the teams any more, that they have freedom to negotiate for market-value salaries. But if you're already earning $5 million a year, is another half-million worth moving your family to another city, or leaving them behind for half the year? Is it worth parting from your teammates and coaches? Is it worth turning your back on the team that believed in you on draft day? Is it worth disappointing the fans who have cheered for you and worn your jersey for a decade? Is it worth even one of those things? How could it be worth all of them?

Don't get me wrong, the players aren't the only villains here. The agents who say the home team offering $5 million instead of $5.5 is "disrespecting" the player are villainous. The new coaches who cut a team leader so they won't have to compete for locker room respect are villains. The team executives and GMs who heartlessly cut long-time veterans are villains. I don't mean to single out any one group, because they're all part of this process. But I hate it.

As recently as a decade ago, our heroes were players like Dan Marino, Bruce Matthews, and Darrell Green, who spent their whole careers in one uniform. Even since the birth of free agency, there have been players who would take less money or less playing time to stay with a team, and organizations that would keep a respected veteran who had earned the right to be a little overpaid in the last season before he retired. It's getting harder and harder to find those players, more and more difficult to find those teams.

Who was the last truly great player to finish his career having played for only one team? Michael Strahan? Green? For really great, top-10-players-ever great, you need to go back at least to Marino, who retired nine years ago. Would it have killed the Buccaneers to let Brooks finish his career in Tampa? Would it have tainted Harrison's legacy to catch 40 passes as the Colts' third receiver next year instead of 50 or 60 as someone else's second? Players and teams do a disservice to each other, and especially to fans, by not making sacrifices to limit player movement during free agency.

Late last week, the news came that Ray Lewis, a 13-year vet with the Ravens, had re-signed and would likely finish his career with Baltimore. It's hard to forget that two weeks ago, Lewis was practically bragging about going to Dallas, but all the same, maybe there's still some hope.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 11:50 AM | Comments (2)

Week 1 College Football Preview

Before I get to the most interesting games of week 1, a couple of general notes:

* Will have to wait a few days more for college football this year. No August games. The Thursday night that traditionally starts the season will be September 3rd.

* People dump on the SEC for the poor non-conference schedule and unwillingness to travel. They're getting better, though. Of the 11 SEC teams in action opening weekend, five are on the road (although that includes a neutral site game). The six SEC home games leave a lot to be desired, though — the opponents are Louisiana Tech, Western Kentucky, and four 1-AA teams (yes, I still refuse to call it the Football Championship Subdivision).

Here are the games I have my eye on early. I'm not going to bother with kickoff times because so few are set:

South Carolina @ North Carolina State (Thursday) — For the second year in a row, the season kicks off with this clash of the most mediocre the SEC and the ACC have to offer.

Nevada @ Notre Dame — Notre Dame awarded Nevada with this game because a few years ago, Nevada rearranged their schedule to the benefit of Notre Dame and BYU. This is also why Notre Dame played San Diego State last year. The difference is Nevada has a shot against Notre Dame (although the SDSU game was close, too). It would be a program-defining milestone for a Wolf Pack program that has already been on the uptick for several years.

BYU vs. Oklahoma @ Dallas — In Dallas? Someone help me with some sort of Red River Shootout/Mormon pun. I'm sure the BYU traveling faithful will be shocked by the big city excesses and decadence of Dallas, and would find Norman much more their speed. But money talks. Should be a very good game, though ... and actually I'm just angling for Mormons to leave angry comments.

Alabama vs. Virginia Tech @ Atlanta — You would think a game matching the defending SEC regular season champ vs. the ACC champ on a neutral field would be an exciting prospect, but somehow I feel like I am including this game only out of obligation.

Oregon @ Boise State — Boise State won 37-32 in Eugene last year and I feel like the over/under on this game should be about 100, particularly taking place in week 1 as it does.

Georgia @ Oklahoma State — This, and not Alabama/Virginia Tech, is the most compelling SEC game, and maybe any game, of opening week. Can Oklahoma State join Missouri and Texas Tech as elite opposition to the traditional Big 12 powers? Seems that every other year they are on the brink of doing just that, and then they regress.

Minnesota @ Syracuse — Minnesota is another school with a reputation of scheduling light. You know these games are set years and years in advance, and Syracuse used to be pretty good. Do you suppose the Gophers inked this game and said, "Ah ha! Now they'll respect us!"

Missouri vs. Illinois @ St. Louis — This game has evolved into the best annual opening week game. Sorry, Colorado/Colorado State.

Maryland @ Cal — Wow, did I take a bath last year when the Terps, who looked atrocious to that point, beat Cal, who had looked excellent. My money is staying far, far away from this one.

LSU at Washington — See "Minnesota @ Syracuse."

Miami @ Florida State (Monday) — These teams usually battle it out Labor Day night, but last year, they played in midseason and we got Tennessee at UCLA instead. Glad to have this one back even though the teams are a shadow of their former selves. It's a tradition.

Posted by Kevin Beane at 11:22 AM | Comments (4)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 4

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Jeff Gordon — Gordon moved closer to breaking his two-season-spanning winless streak, earning his second runner-up finish of the year with a second in Atlanta. Gordon fell a lap down early and was slowed by a dropped lug nut in the pits, as well as a clutch problem, but he managed those problems and avoided the tire issues that plagued many others on the caustic Atlanta surface.

"Tires and the Atlanta racing surface go together like me and my ex-gold-digger Brooke," says Gordon. "My memories of that marriage can't be exorcised by a simple repaving, however. It's too bad I didn't have a spotter out with me then on the dating scene to guide me clear of disaster."

"Anyway, tire issues certainly wreaked havoc on the field, especially for my teammate and pole sitter Mark Martin. He cut a right-rear tire and hit the wall, severely damaging the No. 5 Kellogg's-sponsored Chevrolet. Talk about a 'cereal' killer."

2. Kurt Busch — Busch manhandled the tricky Atlanta track, as well as the competition, leading 234 of 330 laps to take the Kobalt Tools 500 at Atlanta Motor Speedway. It was the elder Busch's third top-10 finish of the year, and he celebrated in the No. 2 Miller Lite Dodge with a victory lap in reverse, apparently in a symbolic act meant to explain his career arc since winning the Sprint Cup title in 2004.

"Hey, I'm from Las Vegas," says Busch. "'Back that ass up' is not just a request made of a stripper. It can be applied it to the race track, as well. Plus, I received the winner's purse of $164,175. And, only in Atlanta can you find a g-string large enough to stuff that amount into."

"Anyway, I call my inverted celebration the '2-Way Street.'"

"I've got to hand it to crew chief Pat Tryson for deciding on four tires there at the end. On a track like this, four tires is always the correct option, and that's what gave me the advantage over Carl Edwards. Martin Truex, Jr. may not agree, but 'passing' was easy."

3. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer finished sixth in Atlanta, the fourth time he's finished sixth there, joining Kevin Harvick to give Richard Childress Racing two cars in the top 10. Bowyer remains second in the point standings, 43 behind Jeff Gordon.

"I'm happy with the direction this team is heading," says Bowyer. "I know it's early in the season, but I can't help but imagine myself hoisting the 2009 Sprint Cup trophy, and handing it to the champion."

"But seriously, I think this team is capable of winning it all. Sure, some may say that would be viewing the outcome of the season through rose-colored glasses. I call it looking through 'Clint-ed' windows."

4. Carl Edwards — Edwards led at the final restart, but couldn't hold off Kurt Busch and Jeff Gordon down the stretch in Atlanta. During the race's final caution, Edwards took two tires while Busch and Gordon opted for four, and he was easily picked off by the two on a track in which grip is everything. Edwards' third place result bumped him from ninth to fourth in the point standings.

"It's fitting that my No. 99 Roush Fenway car features the Aflac mascot," says Edwards, "because I was a sitting duck out in front on two tires."

"But I'm happy to finish third, and pleased that the Roush Fenway organization didn't suffer the engine failures that plagued us last week. After Las Vegas, I told Jack Roush I wanted, in writing, his assurance that we wouldn't see engine failures again. And he happily obliged, with a heartfelt reading of The Little Engine That Could."

5. Tony Stewart — Stewart fought back from two laps down to earn a workmanlike eighth-place finish in Atlanta, his third top 10 of the year and a welcome rebound from his 26th last week in Las Vegas. Handling issues made the task difficult, as Stewart's No. 14 Old Spice/Office Depot Chevrolet started extremely tight and finished with a similarly serious loose condition.

"As you saw in a much-talked about pit incident," says Stewart, "Goodyear is so afraid of performing in Atlanta that even their tires themselves are trying to run away from the track."

"As for my car's handling, I'm used to things going from tight to loose in a span of minutes, not hours. Trust me, I've tried ¼-wedge, even ½-wedge adjustments on some of the ladies that attend my parties, but nothing seems to loosen them up like a few drinks and empty promises of the good life."

6. Kyle Busch — Busch suffered from a loose-handling race car throughout the day, initiated by a bad setup and exacerbated by the temperamental Atlanta Motor Speedway surface, to finish 18th in the Kobalt Tools 500, three laps down to the 12 cars on the lead lap.

"Well, if I can't win the race," says Busch, "then I can't think of anyone better to win the race than ... Jeff Gordon. But he didn't. My brother Kurt did, and really, I'm happy for him. And other guys are too. As we all know, Kurt's not the most popular driver in NASCAR, or anywhere for that matter. But Kurt deserved this win and it was nice to see him get his just rewards, which included 'backhanded' compliments from his old pals Jimmy Spencer and Tony Stewart."

"Kurt's finally getting some attention. Lately, all the talk has been about me, and Kurt's just had to sit their and admire me. I guess it's true what they say — Big Brother is watching. Now people are talking about Kurt, which means his ears must be burning, and not because of pain from cosmetic surgery."

7. Kevin Harvick — Harvick was one of several cars in the pits when NASCAR brought out the yellow flag when a crew member of Marcos Ambrose's team dashed across pit road to retrieve a tire. The No. 29 Shell Pennzoil Chevy fell two laps down, but Harvick and his crew gradually worked their way to the front and eventually posted a fourth-place finish. Harvick is now eighth in the points, 123 out of first.

"As for Ambrose's crew member," says Harvick, "I'm sure everyone was asking 'What was that guy thinking?' I think the question we, and NASCAR, should be asking is 'What was that guy smoking?' I think it's time for a preemptive drug test before that guy gets caught chasing tires across the interstate, high on heroin."

8. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth salvaged a 12th-place finish in Atlanta, his day hindered by an ill-handling car and a fuel miscalculation that cost him a spot in the top 10. He is now fifth in the point standings, 88 out of first.

"Handling was certainly an issue for us," says Kenseth. "The car was like a Carl Edwards' chokehold on Kevin Harvick — it lacked grip."

9. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson overcame a pit road speeding penalty to finish ninth in Atlanta, his second top-10 finish of the year. The three-time defending Sprint Cup champion moved up six spots to 13th in the point standings, where he trails teammate Jeff Gordon by 177 points.

"I understand my teammate Jeff Gordon had a 'clutch' problem," says Johnson. "I myself have had a few problems with the clutch, but never in the clutch, because everyone knows that once the Chase starts, Jimmie Johnson is 'clutch.' I am so money."

"But this is my typical slow start to the season. Has anyone noticed? You would think a three-time Cup champion would be a polarizing figure in this sport, and fans would either love me or hate me. However, it seems that the only reaction I can extract from fans is not love or hate, but indifference."

10. Kasey Kahne — Kahne scored his first top-10 finish of the year, clocking a seventh in Atlanta to break into the top 10 of the point standings. Like many drivers, Kahne was in the pits when Jimmy Watts, the gasman for Marcos Ambrose, ran across pit road and onto the infield grass to retrieve a stray tire. When NASCAR flew the caution as a result, Kahne fell a lap down, and spent nearly a third of the race regaining that lap.

"I'm happy to post my first top 10 for Richard Petty Motorsports," says Kahne. "Or is it Petty Enterprises? Or is it Gillett Evernham Motorsports? Or is it Petty-Gillett Racing/Enterprises? Or is it Starship Enterprises? Or is it Penn Jillette And Teller Enterprises? It's a confusing matter."

"Also confusing — my major sponsor, Budweiser, trying to push beer on the wine cooler-drinking set who call themselves my biggest fans."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:04 AM | Comments (0)

March 11, 2009

Who's the Last Team In?

It's Championship Week all over the college basketball landscape. From the tiniest gyms to the largest stages, Division I squads fight for titles and advancement. There are those, however, who only seek validation to the next stage of March's hullabaloo. For those "bubble" teams, mediocrity in a big conference can turn to prestige in the form of an NCAA tournament bid.

But while the college game is taking center stage this next week, the professionals continue their grind toward their own respectability. With under a quarter of the season left, teams scramble to find their way to a division crown, home-court advantage, or just a place in the postseason. For these teams, validation has to come on the court. But what if it didn't?

What if, just like in the NCAAs, the NBA had to choose their contestants for the playoffs? What if there was an imaginary level teams needed to achieve to get a shot at the title? Who would get in? Who would have the most desirable resume right now?

As of Monday, the Eastern Conference could make a case for this type of solution. While the Western Conference has quite a bit of separation between playoff contenders and pretenders, the East is a lot more muddled. After New Jersey's "bubble" victory over the Knicks Sunday night, five teams were within three and a-half games of eighth-place Chicago, and all six teams are below .500.

So, in the fight for mediocrity east of the Mississippi, which team ranks worthy of making the playoffs. Here would be the criteria for the committee to ponder over.

*Quality Wins = Wins over the top five NBA teams (Lakers, Cleveland, Boston, Orlando, San Antonio)
*Bad Losses = Losses versus bottom-tier (Minnesota, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Clippers, Washington, Sacramento)
*Road Record
*Hot or Cold (Record over last 10 games)

Chicago Bulls

Quality Wins: 2 (vs. ORL, vs. CLE)
Bad Losses: 5 (@ MEM, @ WAS, MIN twice, vs. OKC)
Road Record: 10-23
Last 10: 6-4

The Bulls have put themselves in position lately with an winning stint in the last 10 games. Point man Derrick Rose is one of the prime candidates for Rookie of the Year, and there is still a good collection of talent (Ben Gordon, Luol Deng, etc.). However, this team leads the way in "bad losses" with five. That includes a season sweep at the hands of Minnesota. Plus, there still seems to be a sense of underachievement and chaos with first-year coach Vinny Del Negro.

Milwaukee Bucks

Quality Wins: 2 (SA twice)
Bad Losses: 3 (MIN twice, @ LAC)
Road Record: 11-24
Last 10: 3-7

The Bucks have really tailed off as injuries to Michael Redd and Andrew Bogut might be the untangling of Milwaukee's playoff hopes. The sweep of San Antonio is impressive, but the Spurs were dealing with their own injury issues in the first game (no Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili). After winning at Detroit on February 17th, Milwaukee hasn't beaten another playoff-caliber (or contending) team. There's also the fact that they've been swept for the season by the Timberwolves.

Charlotte Bobcats

Quality Wins: 2 (@ LAL, vs. BOS)
Bad Losses: 0
Road Record: 10-20
Last 10: 7-3

Obviously, something came from trading Adam Morrison west to the Lakers. The Bobcats are the hottest team in this bunch, winning six in a row and seven of 10. Charlotte may have the best quality win of the lot, beating Los Angeles at the Staples Center. The Bobcats also have no "baggage" yet by accruing zero losses against the bottom-feeders (they do, however, have a loss against Golden State). Maybe Larry Brown does have this team going in the right direction.

New Jersey Nets

Quality Wins: 0
Bad Losses: 3 (@ OKC, WSH twice at home)
Road Record: 14-16
Last 10: 4-6

The talent is emerging on this team, with Devin Harris coming into his own and Brook Lopez quietly gathering support for ROY votes. The Nets can also make their game mobile. New Jersey has the most road wins and best road winning percentage (by far) of any fringe team. The most glaring weaknesses is lack of quality wins ... say, zero. The Nets haven't beaten any of the top five teams this season. That, combined with losing twice to the Wizards at home, can easily trump the advantages of their road play.

Indiana Pacers

Quality Wins: 4 (vs. LAL, vs. CLE, vs. BOS, vs. ORL)
Bad Losses: 4 (vs. MIN, @ MEM, vs. LAC, @ WAS)
Road Record: 9-26
Last 10: 6-4

The Pacers are a really intriguing case. This is now Danny Granger's team, as the young veteran is carrying the squad into contention. Indiana is the only team with more than two quality wins. But all four victories came at home and are buoyed by four bad losses. The recent record is a good sign, but their road record is pretty atrocious (winning one out of every four). One thing the committee might look harder at would be possible "quality losses." The Pacers have lost three other games against the upper crust by one possession or in overtime.

New York Knicks

Quality Wins: 2 (vs. BOS, vs. SA)
Bad Losses: 4 (vs. MIN, @ OKC, @ WAS, @ LAC)
Road Record: 7-22
Last 10: 4-6

Mike D'Antoni is finding a nugget of success in his first year running the Knicks. If nothing else, Nate Robinson is providing an entertaining outlet for fans at Madison Square Garden. But the luster is fading on the Big Apple yet again. New York is under .500 over their last 10 games. They have as many bad losses as Indiana, with just half the quality wins. The road has not been kind, either. Just seven victories away from the Garden puts the Knicks in bad shape.

The last thing that the committee might confer on would be records against similar opponents. Of the six "bubble" candidates, Milwaukee has played the other five more, and has taken advantage of those games. The Bucks are 10-7 in those 17 contests, including three wins against Charlotte and New York. The Bulls (7-6) also have a winning percentage against these peers, while the other four are at and below .500.

So, if I were a member in the room, who would I decide would be worthy of that final slot? All things considered, I'd have to take Indiana over everyone. Charlotte is the hottest team. New Jersey has the most impressive road record. Milwaukee has proven their worth against similar competition. And heck, Chicago has the best overall record of the bunch. But it's the quality wins (and close calls) that give the Pacers the nod by a razor-thin margin over the Bobcats.

Now, I know that everything will play its way out over the next few weeks, with one team deserving that eighth and final bid. But just think has much more tension and drama there would be if these pros had to "impress the judges." That might be some Madness to breathe in.

Posted by Jonathan Lowe at 11:50 AM | Comments (0)

The NCAA Bubble Shuffle

With so many conference championships going on this week, it's easy to lose focus on the few games that hold the most meaning. Sure, the Patriot League final between Holy Cross and American on Friday is interesting and worth a few hours of your television time. But it's not a huge impact game as far as the rest of the country is concerned. One team will win and make the bracket as a 14- or 15-seed. The other will not. Plain and simple.

But there are other games that serve as critical dominos in the dance before The Dance — call it the bubble shuffle.

Before we get to the list, a few notes from some of the non-BCS conferences:

St. Mary's may have gotten waxed by Gonzaga in the WCC title game, but the Gaels should still be fine. That Bracket Busters win over Utah State (RPI of 27) is a big positive.

The Horizon League title win by Cleveland State over Butler was a big blow for bubble teams elsewhere. Butler is in no matter what. And now some other borderline team is going to find themselves in the NIT as a result.

If Rhode Island and Dayton meet in the A-10 semis, the winner will get the conference's second bid (along with Xavier). Worst case for other bubble teams would be for URI or Dayton to reach the final, then lose to somebody who beat Xavier to get there. Temple did it last year and is in position to do it again.

Davidson (RPI of 69) is out after losing to the College of Charleston in the Southern semis.

I think the news will also be bad for Creighton (RPI of 39). The Selection Committee has shown no aversion to screwing over very good MVC teams that fall short in the conference tournament. Just ask Barry Hinson (though it's hard to feel bad for him considering he's an assistant to Bill Self at Kansas right now).

With that said...

Pac-10: Arizona State vs. Arizona and Southern California vs. California on Thursday

If Arizona had swept Cal and Stanford last week at McKale, the Wildcats would have reached 20 wins on the season and 10-8 in the Pac-10. That would have made them virtual locks. But they lost last Thursday to Cal and so now they stand at just 19-12, 9-9 in conference and a saddled with an RPI of just 52.

With victories this season over UCLA, Gonzaga, and Kansas, Arizona has the big wins. They have also avoided the horrible loss, with Washington State (RPI of 89) being the worst. Plus, the Selection Committee will likely give them the benefit of the doubt before snapping their 24-year streak of consecutive tournament.

(Should the streak play a factor? No. But there's something intrinsic in the sports ethos that you don't break historic streaks without absolutely having no choice. It's like bunting to break up a no-hitter when the game is out of reach. You just don't do it.)

With that said, if they lose to bitter rival ASU, which they have four times in a row, they would reach the committee at 19-13 and losers of five of their past six. Streak or no streak, that's a precarious position.

Unlike Arizona, USC (18-12, 9-9, 60) does not have the quality at the top of their resume. Their best wins came in a sweep of the Arizona schools back in January. They also have worse losses than the Wildcats, to Seton Hall (RPI of 100) and Oregon State (144), and have lost six of their last nine.

The Trojans absolutely have to beat Cal or they're definitely out. If they do win, they're probably going to need to win at least one more (likely against UCLA on Friday) to feel anywhere close to safe.

SEC: Kentucky vs. Ole Miss and Florida vs. Arkansas on Thursday, South Carolina vs. Georgia/Mississippi State winner and Tennessee vs. Alabama/Vanderbilt winner on Friday

God, the SEC is a mess.

Kentucky has lost four straight and eight of their past 11. They have a couple of nice neutral-court wins over West Virginia and Kansas State back in November, but that's about as good as it gets on the Wildcats' resume. Losing to Georgia at home last Wednesday ensures the Wildcats need to not only beat Ole Miss in the first round, but likely LSU in the second round and maybe even South Carolina, Georgia, or Mississippi State in the semis.

South Carolina looks to be pretty safe, but say Georgia were to beat Mississippi State in the first round, then take out the Gamecocks on Friday. Then you're looking at a team with an RPI in the 50s with a 1-5 record against RPI top 50 teams. Will the Selection Committee overlook their 275th-ranked non-conference strength of schedule just because they got to 22 wins?

If Vandy beats Alabama (who would have to get the auto bid to qualify), then takes out Tennessee, that might be enough. If they make the title game, they're in.

Florida was swept by Tennessee and, like everybody else in the SEC with the exception of the Vols, played a horrible non-conference schedule. The neutral-court win over Pac-10 champ Washington looks good, but they had nine wins over teams with RPI of 200 or worse, five of them 300 or worse. That kind of puts their 22-9 record in a different light. Lose a first-round game to Arkansas (RPI 142), and they're in deep trouble.

Big 12: Oklahoma State vs. Iowa State on Wednesday, Kansas State vs. Texas/Colorado winner on Thursday

Oklahoma State could have done itself a huge favor by beating Oklahoma in the season finale on Saturday, but even with the loss, they should be in fairly ok shape. They beat Texas and Kansas State and really don't have a killer loss on the resume (Baylor at RPI 75 the worst). Other than that, all of their losses were to RPI top 50 teams, with six of those to RPI top 25 teams. Lose to Iowa State (RPI 158), and that's a bubble-burster. Win and then lose to Oklahoma in the second round, they probably sneak in. Beat Iowa State and Oklahoma, and they're in no doubt.

Kansas State has wins over Missouri, Texas (road) and Texas A&M (road) on its resume, but no major non-conference wins, plus some pretty bad losses to Iowa (RPI 112) and Oregon (167). I'd put them in now, but a win over Texas (assuming the Longhorns don't lose to Colorado) would seal the deal.

ACC: Maryland vs. NC State and Boston College vs. Virginia on Thursday, North Carolina vs. Miami/Virginia Tech winner on Friday

Maryland did beat Big Ten champ Michigan State in non-conference play and upset ACC champ North Carolina a few weeks ago. But while those two wins are nice, they also lost to Morgan State at home and finished the regular season with a demoralizing loss to Virginia, putting them at just 7-9 in the ACC. Lose this game against NC State (just 6-10 in the ACC this year), and it could be the last in Gary Williams' career with the Terps.

As one of only two teams this year to beat both Duke and North Carolina, Boston College certainly has the top of the resume to make the field. Their only problem has been horrible lapses of concentration that resulted in losses to St. Louis (RPI 128) and Harvard (246). The Eagles ended up 21-10 and 9-7 in conference, which should be enough. But with an RPI of just 57, I don't think their profile can withstand a loss to 10-17 Virginia (RPI 109) in the first round.

Like Maryland, both Miami and Virginia Tech finished below .500 in ACC play at 7-9. The loser of this game will be eliminated from any bubble conversation. The winner probably has to beat North Carolina on Friday to stand a shot. Good luck.

Big East: Providence vs. DePaul and West Virginia vs. Notre Dame on Wednesday

Providence did finally break through against the top teams in the league by beating Pittsburgh (along with an earlier win over Syracuse). And though none of their losses are top teams with sub-100 RPI, they're record against teams with RPI in the top 50 is just 2-8. If they were to lose to DePaul, who went 0-18 in the Big East this season, that would leave them at just 18-13. With an RPI in the 70s, that won't be near enough.

Notre Dame has dug itself a big hole, but has the road in front of them to make a charge. First they got past Rutgers on Tuesday. Now they have a chance to make a statement against the Mountaineers, who beat them by nine in Morgantown in their only meeting this season. Win that one and they probably get a shot at one of the Big Four (UConn, Louisville, Pitt, and Villanova). (Okay, call it the Big Three Plus One.)

Big Ten: Minnesota vs. Northwestern on Thursday, Illinois vs. Michigan/Iowa winner and Purdue vs. Penn State/Indiana winner on Friday

Minnesota was looking golden after starting 16-1 and 4-1 in the Big Ten with wins over Louisville, Ohio State, and Wisconsin under its belt. But once the grind of the conference season started wearing on the young Gophers, their performance deteriorated. Now, after losing six of their last 10, including a sweep by Michigan and a loss to fellow Big Ten bubble player Penn State, Minnesota absolutely has to have this game against Northwestern. That would put them at 22-9 with a shot to make a statement against top seed Michigan State.

Michigan has a couple of big wins over UCLA and Duke on the resume, but they suffered a fairly damaging streak of losing seven of nine in January and February. Granted, all but one of those losses were to RPI top 50 clubs, but they count just the same. The sweep over Minnesota, plus a recent win over Purdue, set up John Beilein's crew in fairly decent shape. But they absolutely have to beat Iowa in their first-round game on Thursday. A win over the Illini in the second round on Friday would seal the bid.

With a sweep of Illinois and splits with Michigan State and Purdue, Penn State has the conference wins to be firmly on the bubble. Their trouble is that they have absolutely nothing on their non-conference resume to brag about. They only played two games against RPI top 100 out of conference, and they lost both of them, to No. 65 Rhode Island and No. 40 Temple.

The Nittany Lions probably could have sown up a spot if they had beaten Iowa in the regular-season finale, but the double-overtime loss cost them a first-round bye in the Big Ten Tournament and puts them in a more precarious position. If they lose to Indiana on Thursday, they're out. Beat Indiana and they'll get Purdue in the second round. Beat Purdue and they're in no problem. Lose to the Boilermakers, and there are going to be some sleepless nights waiting for Sunday.

Mountain West: San Diego State vs. UNLV on Thursday, Utah vs. New Mexico on Friday (only if both win their first games, Utah vs. TCU and New Mexico vs. Wyoming)

The regular season ended with five teams with 20 or more wins: BYU (24-6, 12-4 MWC, 21 RPI), Utah (21-9, 12-4, 11), New Mexico (21-10, 12-4, 58), San Diego State (21-8, 11-5, 43), and UNLV (21-9, 9-7, 55).

The conference is getting at least two bids, with a chance at three. ESPN's Joe Lunardi has the Mountain West with four: BYU, New Mexico, Utah, and UNLV. Personally, I think that's high. Then again, I don't wear a fantastic toupee.

Regardless, the Mountain West Tournament looks to be a very compelling one. Of all the teams, BYU is the only one who could withstand an early loss and still make the NCAA tournament field (maybe Utah with that RPI). The San Diego State/UNLV game on Thursday will be an elimination game. New Mexico would have to make the finals.

Posted by Joshua Duffy at 11:37 AM | Comments (0)

March 10, 2009

Longhorns Brown-Nosing Again

Mack Brown this past week announced that he is going to be inviting BCS experts to Austin to explain to his team why his team came up .024 BCS points short of Oklahoma.

"Starting out today, they think it is a viable chance for them if they go back if they go out and clean up in a few areas," Brown said Tuesday before the Longhorns began spring practice on Friday.

BCS experts? How about the game film of his team's loss to Texas Tech? Wouldn't that be the most direct explanation of where to "clean up?" A loss, to a team beaten down by Ole Miss (third-place SEC team) and utterly dismembered by the Oklahoma team you are trying to claim to be better than based solely on a win in early October?

But instead, Mack Brown is complaining about the BCS.

"We want to find out where we fell short in those areas. Is it margin of victory? Was it not scoring more because if it doesn't matter to the computers it does to the human vote? We're looking at all those things now."

Really, Mack? We are going to blame a national system for not picking you in a tie between three 11-1 Big 12 teams that went 1-1 against each other? When Oklahoma's resume was clearly the best of the three?

If so, I think that irony can officially be redefined. I think that system was pretty good to you in 2004, when Cal was left out of the Rose Bowl. To refresh the memory, that one-loss Cal team won 10 games by an average of 23.9 points per game, finished in the top six in scoring offense and defense, and whose lone blemish was a six-point loss at USC, which went 13-0 after drubbing Oklahoma 55-19 in the title game. (Texas's loss was to that Oklahoma team, 12-0.)

Aside from an unimpressive finale at Southern Miss (moved from Sept. 16 because of Hurricane Ivan; the Bears passed on a garbage time touchdown in a 10-point win), the thing that kept Cal out was that the Bears refused to pander for votes like Brown did after Texas beat Texas A&M (7-4) by a score of 26-13 at home in its finale.

"If you've got a vote, vote for us," Brown said. "I'm asking you to do that and I'm asking everyone across the nation ... This team deserves to be in the BCS. They deserve to go more than some teams that are being talked about."

Cal coach Jeff Tedford's desperation attempt to snap his school's four-and-a-half decade long Rose Bowl drought?

"We're 10-1, that speaks for itself ... I hope it works out that way. But it's out of our control for now."

That's a slight contrast. "This team deserves to be in the BCS more than them" vs. "It's out of our control." Shameless begging and politics vs. dignity and class. Guess which won out.

The Texas-leaning computers naturally didn't budge, but Texas sprinted past Cal as the polls shifted like A-Rod's account of steroid usage. Six coaches dropped Cal below sixth (nobody in the AP had them that low), two had them down at eighth. There is no evidence Brown asked a few coaches for a favor (not that we would ever know), but at the very least a few of those coaches manipulated their poll, dropping Cal farther to increase the impact of their votes.

So Brown played the system like a fiddle in the past. This year, he said that no one in the country could beat Texas after squeaking by yet another overrated Ohio State team in the Fiesta Bowl. And after complaining that the BCS shunned Texas, you honestly expect us to believe you are something more than a shameless, manipulative self-promoter?

Brown's comments consistently ring hollow as the whiny complaints of a powerful, entitled program that has had plenty of success in recent years yet never seems happy. Not saying he's a bad coach, but please. You can't say his pattering serves any purpose.

Despite being a good coach, he publicly accepts no blame toward his team's shortcomings against Texas Tech. Nor does he focus on the fact that it is the Big 12 that implements that BCS as its three-team tie-breaking rule. (Then again, why would he object; the BCS has treated him well before.)

As usual, Mack Brown even with a high finish takes the low road. He's begging to know what they need to do better in their 11 wins rather than their one loss. Like any good politician these days, he's completely missing the point.

So enjoy watching Texas relentlessly pile it on to any over-matched opponents in 2009. And enjoy listening to Brown whine about what the Longhorns did in their wins when it is their losses that keep them out of Pasadena.

Posted by Kyle Jahner at 11:04 AM | Comments (2)

Valuable Lessons From Davis Cup Weekend

The Davis Cup weekend is over, resulting in some exciting quarterfinal ties to which fans can look forward in September. I was lucky enough to witness the USA vs. Switzerland tie live in Birmingham, Alabama. The weekend only confirmed what I have personally experienced as a player, as a coach, and as a fan over the years: in terms of a weekend of excitement and high quality tennis, nothing gets better than the Davis Cup.

This weekend's Davis Cup ties did more than just confirm what I already knew; they also provided some valuable lessons to the federations, coaches, fans, and players. Some of them were new lessons; some of them were simple confirmations of old lessons.

Let's begin with Birmingham. Tickets sold-out within two hours for this event. Sure, one can argue that Roger Federer's expected presence during the tie helped boost ticket sales. But sold-out within two hours, more than a month ahead? It's a bit more than the name of Federer at play in this case. Birmingham was the perfect choice, a town starved for high quality tennis competition, having only been exposed to a challenger-level ATP tournament for over a decade that ended back in 2003.

The crowd was fantastic and the Swiss visitors to whom I talked seemed to enjoy Birmingham and all that it had to offer (Civil Rights museum, Vulcan, etc.) without having to worry about neither cold weather (how about over 70 degrees?) nor any crazy traffic despite being in a city. Tournament organizers were happy and the American team, especially Patrick McEnroe and Andy Roddick, could not say enough about the crowd. USTA got it right on this one and they should consider Birmingham for future events.

As for Switzerland, they made the American victory a lot tougher than expected, in the absence of Roger Federer. The expectation was that the tie would be over by Saturday, with a straight-set victory by the Bryan brothers. Swiss made a match of it, winning a match on Friday, extending the Bryan brothers to a fourth set tiebreaker, and finally succumbing on Sunday following a remarkable performance by Roddick to close the door on Stanislas Wawrinka.

Switzerland did this with a Wawrinka that has not played an ATP match since January due to injury, and only four matches since October of last year, and with Marco Chiudinelli, who came back from a massive knee injury suffered back in 2007. The lesson here is that there is life after Federer. If they can stay injury-free and develop their games further, the Swiss can actually field a competitive team who can win matches and cause pain to some other traditionally powerful Davis Cup teams. If Federer can play, that is icing on the cake.

One obvious lesson: put your best team out there. In other words, find incentives and do whatever you can to get your best players to play. Historically, the USA has suffered from not being able to put the best team out there consistently. Ironically, this was the reverse case, for one weekend. The USA had its best team against a short-handed Swiss team. As usual in these cases, the "best" team triumphed.

Speaking of the crowd factor, Sweden learnt a lesson the hardest way possible this weekend. The tie between Sweden and Israel was played in front of empty seats, a decision taken by Malmo City committee. Israel won 3-2 the closest and most exciting Davis Cup match never to be witnessed by a live crowd.

On Sunday, Dudi Sela and Harel Levy both won five-set thrillers to carry Israel to the quarterfinals. Couple of lessons to learn here; leave politics out of sports and under any circumstances, don't let some city council comprised of individuals who have no clue on a crucial sports event like a Davis Cup tie make such an important decision like whether fans should be allowed or not. The famous Swedish fan spirit might have been just enough to push a tired Thomas Johansson to a win the fifth set against Sela, or help get Andreas Vinciguerra get the final break at 4-4 or 5-5 in the final sets when he had break opportunities, instead of Levy getting it at 7-6 to win the final set.

As to lessons that were confirmed, the surface once again played a big role. The French, clearly the better team on paper (Captain Guy Forget even called it his dream team), lost to Czech Republic on a fast carpet surface in Ostrava. Argentina and Spain, as usual, rolled over opponents on their home courts, on the slow, red clay. Anyone want to bet that Czech Republic, who will get to play at home next round against Argentina, is going to remain with carpet? Will the odds-makers bother to come up with the odds of Germany beating Spain, on clay in Spain?

Croatia has a tougher decision to make on the question of surface when they face USA at home in September. If they want the Americans to suffer, they should pick clay. However, that should make Croatians suffer somewhat also, as Marin Cilic and Mario Ancic are better players on fast surfaces. They need to decide whether the advantages of being a sadist outweigh the disadvantages of being a masochist in this case. If so, play on clay!

On last lesson for the fans: predicting Davis Cup results is one of the toughest tasks in tennis. Don't take my word for it, go ahead and fill your bracket for the rest of the draw and see how it will turn out at the end of the year. Surface, time gaps, team compositions, and the different format present endless challenges to the expert tennis follower.

Posted by Mert Ertunga at 11:00 AM | Comments (7)

March 9, 2009

In the Rotation: NBA Week 19

Here in the rotation, we don't condone public indecency in any way. However, it's hard to ignore that there has been a lot of streaking going on around the NBA lately.

It may not be the kind of streaking you might see overseas at a soccer game or at some sort of PETA rally, but it's certainly altered the playoff picture in the NBA right now.

And while we won't be stripping down and racing to the quad any time soon, this week's Starting Five consists of five of the most prominent streaking teams in the NBA right now.

Starting Five

1. Utah Jazz's 11-game winning streak

Quite simply, no one is playing better basketball than the Jazz right now. They have the best record in the league since February 1st, going 14-1. They are healthy (Carlos Boozer had started six straight games before missing Sunday with an ankle injury, but is expected to be back on Tuesday), motivated (they haven't lost since the passing of Larry Miller), and red-hot (averaging 106 points per game during their 11-game winning streak).

That Jazz's recent success has catapulted them to the top of the Northwest Division and into the three-seed out West. Deron Williams is playing his best basketball of the season, registering double-figure assists in 11 straight games before only tallying 9 in Sunday's win in Toronto.

The Jazz, notoriously one of the toughest teams to beat at home, need all the momentum they can get going into the stretch run. Twelve of their remaining 18 games are on the road and they're going to need to continue to play at this high level if they want to hold on to their very slim lead over the Nuggets for the very crucial Northwest Division crown and the four-seed that likely comes with it.

2. New Orleans Hornets' 7-game winning streak

Let me get this straight, you mean to tell me that not trading your starting center for a bag of balls and some salary relief puts you in better position to make a late season push? That just doesn't make any sense.

Yet here were are, just weeks after a trade that would have sent Tyson Chandler to the Thunder was rescinded over a lingering toe injury, proving that in fact a contending team is better off not trading away one of its key pieces and essentially getting nothing in return.

The Hornets haven't lost since Tyson Chandler rejoined the team on February 23rd, and have pulled to within a half game of the Houston Rockets for the three-seed in the West.

With seven of their next 10 games against teams below .500, the Hornets have a chance to put themselves in the driver's seat in the Western Conference playoff race and gain some separation from the very congested rest of the pack, and are playing too good right now to believe that they'll do anything different.

Of course, any slight hiccups on the upcoming four-game East Coast trip and the Hornets could just as easily find themselves in the unfortunate position of having to play the Lakers or Spurs in the first round.

Such is life in the hotly-contested Western Conference.

3. Charlotte Bobcats' franchise-best 6-game winning streak

Don't look now, but Larry Brown has the young Bobcats overachieving and just a game back of the Chicago Bulls for the eighth and final playoff spot in the Eastern Conference.

Enjoy it while it lasts, Bobcats fans, both in the short-term and long-term, because consecutive games against the Spurs and Rockets this week ought to be the end of the winning streak, and it's only a matter of time before Larry Brown skips town and hands the team over to someone less likely to be able to maximize this team's talent.

Still, this season has been a very positive one for the Bobcats, and this strong finish, playoffs or not, will give the Bobcats some confidence and momentum going into the offseason.

4. Houston Rockets' 11-game home winning streak

The Rockets' last lost at home on January 28th, 95-93 to the 76ers. Since then, the Rockets have lost Tracy McGrady for the season to microfracture surgery and traded away their starting point guard, Rafer Alston, to the Orlando Magic.

Despite all that, the Rockets have played their best basketball of the season in the face of adversity, eerily similar to last season when the rattled off 22 consecutive victories after losing Yao Ming in mid-February.

The emergence of young players like Aaron Brooks and Von Wafer has helped push the Rockets into third position in the West and proven yet again that this team can still compete even without one of its most important pieces.

But with 13 of the Rockets' final 19 games against teams in the playoff picture, they are going to need even more brilliant play from their role players if they want to hold on to the home court advantage they'd currently have and so desperately need if they are going to finally get over the round one hump.

5. Minnesota Timberwolves' 9-game losing streak

Not all streaking is good streaking, however. Since the calendar changed over to 2009, the Minnesota Timberwolves have experienced both the good and the bad that comes with being streaky.

The T-Wolves started the New Year by rolling off wins in 10 of their first 12 games of 2009, only to have the wheels come completely off when Al Jefferson suffered a season ending knee injury in early February.

The Wolves, who looked like they had turned over a new leaf under new/old head coach Kevin McHale, have fallen back to their old and familiar ways, losing 11 of the 12 games they've played since Jefferson got hurt, including the last nine by an average of 12 points per game.

This late-season collapse could have a silver lining to it, as these losses surely won't hurt their lottery chances this May, but it's still a disappointing finish to a season that, for the first time in a long time, actually showed some promise for the Timberwolves.

In the Rotation: LeBron vs. Wade

This week, the NBA treated us to a double-dose of the best head-to-head matchup in the league right now. Everyone wants to talk about Kobe vs. LeBron or Chris Paul vs. Deron Williams, but time after time, when LeBron James and Dwyane Wade step on the floor together, they put on a show.

The two have been remarkable against each other in head-to-head matchups in their career; LeBron averaging 28.6 points, 5.6 rebounds, and 7.7 assists per game and Wade putting up 27.2, 5.4, and 6.8 in their 19 regular season matchups against each other (LeBron's Cavs have the slight 10-9 lead over the Heat).

This week's two matchups in six days would meet the already high standards these two superstars have set for themselves over the past six seasons. Wade came into Monday's game in Miami having just been named East Player of the Month for February, while LeBron and the Cavs had won seven of their last eight.

Monday's game turned into a shootout between the two early (both players scored over 20 in the first half) and would finish that way as well, as LeBron and his 42 points was enough to outlast Wade's 41-point, 12-assist, 7-steal performance as the Cavaliers beat the Heat in Miami 107-100.

The encore in the Q on Saturday would not be as climatic as the Cavs held the upper hand most of the game, led by LeBron's 21st career triple-double. Mo Williams stole the show with 12 points in the final seven minutes and Wade was ejected late as the Cavs won by 10.

While the second game may not have been as much of a head-to-head shootout as were accustomed to seeing when these two players take the court, the overall play of the two this week did not disappoint.

LeBron averaged 28 points, 9 rebounds, and 8 assists in the two games and achieved a triple-double, while Wade averaged 33 points, 7.5 rebounds, 10.5 assists, and 5.5 steals as the two showed once again why they are the most fun head-to-head battle to watch in the NBA.

Out of the Rotation: Phoenix Suns

Remember how impressive those three 140-point games were to start the Alvin Gentry era? Me either.

What a batch of fool's gold that turned out to be. The consensus at the time seemed to be, "I don't care who they're playing, 140 points is impressive." Really? Since when is blowing out the two worst teams in the league three times in four nights ground-breaking stuff? Isn't that what good teams are supposed to do?

I can't imagine the Spurs or Lakers going through that same stretch and thinking to themselves, "So what if this is the Clippers and Thunder, we've really found our groove now."

Instead, the Suns sold themselves and their fans that they were back to prominence by beating up on the NBA's junior varsity squads. Well, unfortunately for Alvin Gentry and the rest of the seven seconds or less gang, the Clippers and Thunder don't pop up on the schedule as much as they need them to.

Since Terry Porter was fired and Gentry reinstalled the seven seconds or less offense, the Suns are 1-6 against teams with a winning record. They are 5-0 against teams with losing records.

Porter and his slower, defensive-minded style may not have necessarily been the solution for the Suns, but the fact is he was 15-15 against teams over .500. Porter's style may not have been as fan-friendly, but at least it kept the Suns competitive.

Now, the Suns sacrificed competitiveness (minus 9.4 point differential against winning teams under Gentry) for the sake of being able to beat up on terrible teams (plus 23 point differential against losing teams under Gentry), and it's ultimately going to cost them a trip to the postseason.

Unless, of course, the Suns can somehow swap out some or their remaining games for a few extra visits from the Clippers.

Inactive list: Shaq

Shaq becomes the first ever repeat Inactive List offender as he makes the list for the second time this season.

As you may recall, Shaq was given this dubious distinction in week 3 for his role in an on-court skirmish with the Rockets and his ridiculously flagrant foul on Rodney Stuckey.

This week, Shaq was doing what he does best, not letting bygones be bygones, and got into a war of words over flopping with former coach Stan Van Gundy.

Van Gundy, rightfully so, called out Shaq for flopping while trying to draw an offensive foul on Dwight Howard Tuesday night. All he was doing was making a point of how hypocritical it is for Shaq, of all people, to flop.

Shaq even admitted that he was flopping on the play, and that should have been the end of it. Shaq was wrong to try to flop and he knew it, Van Gundy was right to call him out on it and that could have and should have been the end of it.

Instead, Shaq responded with a few tangents about Van Gundy being a "nobody" and a "master of panic," ensuring that he would remain in the headlines for yet another week.

I think Shaq's having a great season, and I would much rather use this space to give him credit for exceeding all my expectations (18 points and 9 boards at age 37 is downright impressive), but I can't get past the fact Shaq just seems unwilling to fade into retirement and let his stellar play in his final years be the punctuation mark on a Hall of Fame career.

Instead, he feels compelled continually call out former players and coaches regularly (mind you, it's only been eight months since he rapped about Kobe) as a seemingly desperate attempt to continually prove himself as the alpha dog of any situation.

The Suns are four games out of the eight-seed with 17 games to play. There are more important things to worry about than ex-coaches, and until Shaq starts to see it that way, he's The Big Inactive in my book.

Be sure to check back at Sports Central every Monday to see who cracks Scott Shepherd's rotation as he breaks down what is going on around the NBA.

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 11:53 AM | Comments (0)

NFL Team in London? Let's Hope Not

Choosing a topic for this article was by no means easy. The NFL's offseason is in full swing, thus much of the news with regards to the NFL is concerned with the draft. Anyone who has read any of my previous articles may be aware that I am English and I still reside in the land of my birth. As a result, I am far from knowledgeable on college football. Consequently, writing about the upcoming draft would have been a bit of a challenge for me, so I have decided to go for something a little closer to home.

During Super Bowl week, talk once again turned towards the possibility of a permanent NFL team in London. According to a senior league official, London could have their own team within 10-12 years.

Opinion on this controversial issue seems to be divided. Many people in America are against the idea, while fans on the other side of the pond would quite like a local team to support. I, however, am not one of those fans.

The support for the one-off games at Wembley Stadium has been staggering. All of the games, including the forthcoming New England Patriots vs. Tampa Bay Buccaneers, have sold-out in next to no time. In fact, there have been thousands of people left disappointed because they had not been able to get tickets.

The overwhelming support for these games is pleasing to see, but they are one-off games. One game a year is a novelty. I believe that is why these games are so popular. Should the NFL allow London to have a permanent team, then the novelty will wear off after a couple of seasons, just like it did with the London Monarchs in the World League.

In the Monarchs' first season in 1991, they drew in an average of 40,483 fans over the five games played at Wembley. The Monarchs also won the inaugural World Bowl in that very season. However, the success wouldn't last. Crowds began to dwindle significantly and by 1995, the team relocated to Tottenham Hotspur F.C.'s White Hart Lane. The 1995 season saw the average attendance drop to a mere 16,343.

Another problem that all the pundits seem to have looked past is where the proposed London team would play their home games. Presumably, the prime candidate would be Wembley Stadium. The stadium is rarely used; therefore, it would definitely be available to host games on a regular basis. The problem is that the pitch will undoubtedly be cut up and ruined on a consistent basis, much like it was after the first London game in 2007.

The notion of a slightly damaged pitch may not seem like a big deal, but it clearly was to the English people. Just one week after the NFL game at Wembley, the England national soccer team played in a crucial Euro 2008 qualifier at Wembley. The English went on to lose, after which many people blamed the loss on the poor state of the pitch. In my eyes, this shouldn't be a problem; after all, the conditions were the same for both teams. However, if it was a problem then, it will probably become a problem, and excuse, again.

So is there anywhere else to play host to a NFL season in London? The soccer stadiums in London, such as the Emirates Stadium and Stamford Bridge, would make good venues, but it is extremely unlikely that teams would allow them to play there for eight games a year. The Olympic Stadium, which is currently under construction, would also make a great venue, but the stadium is going to be reduced in size after the 2012 Olympics.

The only stadium this leaves is Twickenham, the home of the England rugby team. The historic ground is an iconic venue in English sport and it is well known all around the world. It would make a brilliant stage for battle between two NFL teams; but with the England rugby team playing there, the same problem could arise as with the England soccer team at Wembley.

Aside from these problems, there is the logistical nightmare of flying teams half-way around the world for NFL games. Apparently, fears about this should have been eradicated since a West Coast team, the San Diego Chargers, played in London last year. At least this is the view of the same senior official who claims that a London team is around 10 years away. What he seems to be forgetting is that things are easier for a one-off event. His proposals would result in this being a weekly ordeal.

Frankly, I can't ever see London having an NFL team. I know there are plenty of English people who like the idea and they would support the London-based outfit. I, on the other hand, will not buy into the NFL's ridiculous global domination propaganda. If a team does end up in London, I can guarantee that I will still support the Jacksonville Jaguars.

Posted by Luke Broadbent at 11:35 AM | Comments (2)

March 7, 2009

The Six Most Underrated NBA Players

A month after the NBA All-Star Game, and before the playoffs, it's time to take stock of the underappreciated player. Who is unsung or overshadowed, either by playing in a smaller market, with highly publicized teammates, or due to the little things he does? Let's take a look:

Kevin Martin, G, Sacramento Kings — Key stat: 23.7 points per game

Talk about small market. I love Sactown, and fantasy players value Martin, but few others know of him. One would think it difficult to remain under the radar in the league with a 23.7 scoring average. That's more than Dirk Nowitzki or Michael Redd put up in 2008! Yet being the King of the Kings holds no glory from an NBA standpoint. The 45% shooter managed his average while playing 36 minutes a night.

Tyson Chandler, C, New Orleans Hornets: Key stat: 7.7 defensive rebounds a game

It's all well and good that Chris Paul is outstanding at pushing the ball on the fast break — but you gotta have the ball first. Chandler's tenacity on the defensive boards helps trigger those breaks, and contributed largely to making the Bees the surprise team they were last season. Chandler's rebound-per-40 minute average is an impressive 16 per contest. He also finished second in the league with a .626 shooting percentage.

Caron Butler, F, Washington Wizards — Key stat: 2.2 steals per game

On a team that was built around the oft-injured and much-ballyhooed Gilbert Arenas, Butler's ability to score, defend, and finish the break are undervalued. In addition to his defensive prowess, he netted 20.3 points per game, and the club often ran more like a unit without the one dimensional Arenas. Butler is an excellent complement to versatile PF Antawn Jamison — unselfish and willing to share in some of the dirty work.

Samuel Dalembert, C, Philadelphia 76ers — Key stat: 2.3 blocks per game

Elton Brand must love teaming with this guy in the frontcourt! Dalembert provides defensive energy, his 10.4 rebounds per game came in only 33-odd minutes per contest — meaning he could average over 14 if he played more. Night in and night out, he gives his all against big men with bigger names than his. He's also a finisher, though Andre Iguodala makes all the highlight reels.

Jose Calderon, G, Toronto Raptors — Key stat: 8.3 assists per game

That's a higher clip last year than either Baron Davis or Raymond Felton. This FIBA veteran is the spark-plug of a team that welcomes Shawn Marion to its roster. Add his .519 shooting percentage (lifetime .500) and you see that Calderon is just a heady ballplayer. Raptors coach Sam Mitchell likes his team to get up a lot of shots, and Calderon is a playmaker who assures that most of the attempts are high percentage.

Andre Miller, G, Philadelphia 76ers — Key stat: 17 points per game

The man who was once traded for Allen Iverson is a prototypical point guard. His assist average was down last season (6.9 a night with a horrible club), but he scored 17 points a game because offensive punch was needed from him. None of that excessive dribbling for Miller, he keeps the basketball in the middle of the floor in transition and doesn't indecisively pick up his dribble. He's yet to play with a real winner, and there are GM's who could certainly put his gifts to use. His career assist average is 7.5 a game.

Those are a half dozen guys to keep an eye on. In a game of big men, the numbers, even those cited above, never tell the entire story. It's the little things that count.

Posted by Bijan C. Bayne at 11:13 AM | Comments (7)

March 6, 2009

American Golfing Dominance Over?

Danny Lee recently became the youngest winner in the history of the European Tour with a win in Australia at the Johnnie Walker Classic. Rory McIlroy won the Dubai Desert Classic with an all-world field last month at the ripe old age of 19. Ryo Ishikawa has won twice on the Japan Pro Golf Tour and is 17.

In very short order, the faces of golf have gotten a lot younger and a lot less American. Naturally, the success of these astonishing talents has rendered a lot of fans and writers to begin to wonder if the days of American dominance are numbered. After all, the only American in the top 25 that is under the age of 30 is Anthony Kim. Despite his fantastic 2008, Kim has yet to produce early on in 2009.

Sure, the greatest player in the world is American. The man that has long been considered the bridesmaid to that title — Phil Mickelson — is American. Kenny Perry is seemingly in the prime of his career at nearly 49-years-old. With all of the red, white, and blue's greatest players over 30 (and many over 40), the critics may be onto something.

The days of American golfing dominance could be coming to a close.

It isn't that Americans are particularly getting worse. It may just be that the world is finally catching up to the USA.

This trend has happened in other sports where Americans once dominated. A prime example is basketball, which has become a much more popular and competitive sport on a global scale. American basketball rested on its laurels while the rest of the world improved by forming national basketball programs and fielding squads which played together from the teenage years until their leap to the professional leagues.

When the United States couldn't even be respectable in the 2004 games, it was time for a response. The Redeem Team was formed three years out from the Beijing games with the mission of restoring American basketball to its rightful place. With careful planning, player selection, and a whole lot of money, the American program worked. We won and we have gold medals.

Perhaps it is time for the United States to make a similar investment in golf. The United States lags well behind European and Australasian nations in nationalizing golf programs. We have relied on the private system that has very capably been developed and maintained by organizations like The First Tee and the American Junior Golf Association.

The problem with this model is that golf is an expensive sport. Travel costs money. Practice costs money. Equipment costs money. Amateurs cannot maintain their status and have sponsorships, so the burden for these costs is left of the families of these aspiring golfers. The AJGA can only go so far in offering scholarships for players that are not well-off or as able to play.

Meanwhile, in Europe, children can get into national golf programs as teens. They learn how to play golf tournaments with solid instruction that is available and relatively inexpensive. In some cases, it is all paid for the player. The players get exposure to tournament golf, team golf, and the rigors of becoming a professional golfer. This leaves many European kids in a better place to come to the United States and participate in our lauded junior events.

It also prepares them better to come to the United States for the next step — collegiate golf. That model does not really exist in Europe, which forces developing players to decide either to turn pro or to continue to evolve by playing here. McIlroy and Lee being the exception to the rule, most European and Australian players opt to come play in college.

The sum of the experience for these foreign-born players is an advantage for them if they make it to the European and PGA Tours. They have had golfing careers that have had less financial worry and more time playing golf. They have extra years' worth of learning and experience that outpace their American counterparts.

Is it no wonder then that we see more foreign-born young guns than American ones? Americans that have the raw talent to make it to the PGA Tour then must figure out how to harness it and balance out that need with the financial need to play well enough to keep their dream alive.

The aforementioned Anthony Kim struggled with the balance in his early years on Tour. After finishing second in his first PGA Tour start in 2006, Kim admittedly struggled with maturity and focus. Fortunately, he discovered this on his own. Still, could he be even further along now if he had a national program that could have mentored him for many years?

As it turns out, it seems that the American golf development program ends with the Nationwide Tour. The Nationwide Tour boasts a stunning number of alumni that have gone on to win on the PGA Tour. Over 240 former Nationwide Tour players have won on the PGA Tour. Countless others have earned their Tour card. Many of them are Americans that were junior or collegiate golf standouts that proved unpolished at the end of their amateur careers. They needed extra seasoning to reach the PGA Tour.

Meanwhile, their young counterparts are bypassing the European Tour's minor leagues — the Challenge Tour — and winning in Europe now. They have yet to make much of a splash in the United States in terms of wins. Europeans still do not win many major championships. Still, young golfers are coming from overseas and having modest success.

The take away from all of this is that there is a reason why you do not see many young Americans winning golf tournaments. It is because they struggle from the start against their foreign counterparts. They take longer to mature and catch up, but may turn out to prove equally — if not more — successful over the duration of their careers. In other words, if you are an American golf fan, then patience is a virtue.

Posted by Ryan Ballengee at 11:38 AM | Comments (0)

March 5, 2009

Why the Cowboys Cut Terrell Owens

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

The NFL equivalent to this question involves the 2008 Dallas Cowboys. Did the team implode because Terrell Owens is a headcase, or did Owens blow up because the team was imploding? Many NFL fans, myself included, have cited "chemistry" — specifically, a lack thereof — in the team's dramatic decline last season. After starting 3-0, and rebounding to 8-4 after Tony Romo returned from injury, Dallas dropped three of its last four to finish 9-7 and miss the playoffs. It was a hugely disappointing season for a team that possessed a ton of talent on paper, and was widely expected to contend for the Super Bowl.

It would be, at best, a gross exaggeration to suggest that T.O. was solely to blame for the Cowboys' underachievements in 2008. Injuries played an enormous role, with Tony Romo, Marion Barber, Terence Newman, and even punter Mat McBriar all missing significant time. So did Felix Jones, Kyle Kosier, and defensive back Roy Williams. Dallas also played a tough NFC East schedule, and coordinators Jason Garrett and Brian Stewart were both panned for their lack of creativity.

So clearly, more than just a lack of chemistry put the Cowboys in trouble last season. But even if chemistry was a primary factor in the Dallas downfall, was Owens the only problem? What about the anonymous offensive player who went to Ed Werder about a meeting that was supposed to stay in-house? What about Pacman Jones, whose comings and going were in the news more often than Owens was? What about a coaching staff that exerted no visible control over its players? And what about owner Jerry Jones, who assembled this motley crew, time and again rolling the dice on all-talent, no-character time bombs waiting to go off in his locker room? Jones even called out one of his own players, bruising RB Marion Barber, for not playing through an injury. That certainly doesn't foster chemistry.

Am I here to make excuses for Owens? No. Emphatically, no. I think people like Stephen A. Smith, who spoke with real venom last night about Jones "lying through his teeth" regarding T.O.'s future, are loathsome and pathetic. Smith and his colleagues are supposed to be journalists, not celebrity-worshippers. I'm not interested in blindly bashing Owens, but I'm certainly not here to worship him. Several years ago, I called Owens "the most profoundly self-centered player in the history of the National Football League." He was "a supremely talented football player, but one whom the sport might be better off without."

But will the Cowboys be better off without him? I'm starting to wonder if Terrell Owens isn't a little bit like the player equivalent of Marty Schottenheimer. The postseason failures of Martyball are legendary, but the man was a phenomenal regular-season coach, with particular success in re-building bad teams. Owens is still a very good player on the field, and there is no doubt that he could help a team with holes in its receiving corps. But why would a contender want to play with fire?

The fact is that there is probably nowhere Owens would be happy for an extended period of time. He hates losing. I am totally convinced that Owens hates losing. So you can't put him on a bad team and expect that things will go well. He would explode before the bye week. But he also hates not getting the ball and not getting the credit. In the 31-year history of the 16-game schedule, no team has gone 19-0. And all it takes is one loss for Owens to start publicly complaining that he's not being used right. This guy divides locker rooms, hard. In both Philadelphia and Dallas, most defensive players had Owens' back, seeing a truly talented player capable of helping the team. Many — but certainly not all — of the offensive players and coaches, the ones who had to sit in meetings with this guy, couldn't wait for him to leave town.

Why did the Cowboys cut Terrell Owens? Partially because they don't need him; they have Roy Williams and Jason Witten and a strong running game. Partially because he's a convenient scapegoat for Owner Jones, who is always on the lookout to deflect blame from himself. And partly because Owens tears locker rooms apart. He is a distraction, especially when things are going badly and a team most needs to pull together. At the end of last season, Owens had his quarterback and coaches playing scared, forcing him the ball. The Cowboys will miss him, as surely as the Giants missed Plaxico Burress late last season, but they could still be better off without him.

Owens is trouble, but talent is hard to resist. He'll get picked up, probably for a very, very large salary. Things will go well for a short time, and then I'll write this article again.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 11:52 AM | Comments (1)

Forget Steroids and Recession: Play Ball!

American League

Unsurprisingly, the New York Bloated Payrolls were the principal spenders, lavishing the equivalent of the GDP of most small European countries on pitchers A.J. Burnett and C.C. Sabathia and slugger Mark Teixeira. They also re-signed veteran (has-been) Andy Pettitte and traded for 1B/OF Nick Swisher, who was a serious disappointment in Chicago, but enjoyed a couple of reasonable years in Oakland.

Burnett was a serial tease in Toronto and Florida, having the arsenal to compete with the best around, but consistently failed to either produce it and/or stay healthy. He owns a career ERA of 3.81 after 10 years in the majors. He walks too many batters — 3.50 per 9 last season — but the Yankee brass are gambling that they can harness the talent that helped him pitch a no-hitter in 2001 (complete with an amazing 9 walks) against the San Diego Padres.

No doubt in Brian Cashman's mind was the fact that Burnett owns a 2.56 career ERA against Boston and a 3-0 record at Fenway with a 0.40 ERA. But $82.5 million is a big price to pay to gamble on that record continuing.

C.C. Sabathia was the most prized pitcher on the free agent market and predictably signed with the Yankees despite claiming he wanted to stay in the NL so he got to hit. The extra dollars soon took care of that hunger for lumber.

Sabathia has been abused the last two seasons, pitching almost 500 innings including 10 complete games last season. He was virtually untouchable in Milwaukee, at least until the playoffs when the Phillies spanked him around, but bullying weak NL line-ups is a different ballgame to the bruising AL East. That said, he has a tough make-up on the mound and seems to have the sort of self-effacing personality that could cope with the ludicrous hubris of New York Yankee baseball.

Apart from his Pitcher Abuse Points, Sabathia has everything in place to be a big hit in New York, as does 1B slugger Mark Teixeira.

Teixeira is a 100 R and 100 RBI lock batting in the heart of a lineup that is a big upgrade on what surrounded him in Los Angeles and Atlanta. He is also an improvement, both offensively and defensively, on Jason Giambi, though he doesn't hit well against Boston, going .232 in 142 ABs and only .194 at Fenway. The money (eight years, $180 million) for adding another slugger to an already loaded line up may seem ill-advised, but the team brass were keen to both bolster the lineup for the postseason when the hits dry up and at the same time keep him from the clutches of rivals in Boston and Los Angeles.

The question is have the Steinbrenners done enough to move the team into position to challenge both old foe Boston and new kids on the block, Tampa?

The Boston Red Sox kept their spending to a minimum, re-signing aging catcher Jason Varitek after protracted negotiation and adding oft-injured starter Brad Penny with a one-year, $5 million contract.

Varitek is a declining offensive force and Penny has flattered to deceive for as long as A.J. Burnett, though at one-year for a modest addition to the payroll he's a justifiable gamble, though one that's unlikely to pay off.

Penny has pitched his career in the NL and still sports a lifetime ERA of 4.06, with numerous trips to the DL interspersed along the way. In the heat of the big-hitting AL, he could get seriously lit-up.

The Red Sox still has a nice rotation, a solid bullpen, and a good top of the batting order, but with David Ortiz lacking the presence of Manny around him and seemingly on the decline, both health-wise and statistically, the team will need more production from J.D. Drew, which is a worry as Drew is another career tease, apart from one decent season in Atlanta and one good — if injury-disrupted — season in St Louis in 2001.

Jason Bay has the look of a Fenway favorite about him, but he's not the type to carry an offense single-handed like Manny Ramirez or David Ortiz (in his prime) could, so the team will need big and injury-free years from either or both of Drew and Mike Lowell, more of the same from Dustin Pedroia and Kevin Youkilis and bounce-back seasons from either Varitek or particularly Ortiz.

The Red Sox will again be competitive, but with the Yankees upgraded and the Rays young and infused with the confidence of going to a World Series, they could struggle to win the most competitive division in the sport.

Nothing much happened down in Tampa during the offseason except the team picked up under-appreciated Pat Burrell from the world champion Phillies. Burrell will DH and is a big upgrade on porcelain Cliff Floyd.

Burrell was widely criticized in Philadelphia for being a defensive liability, striking out too often and not being a "clutch" hitter — whatever that is. The facts state that Burrell was a seriously productive hitter — averaging 28 homers, 92 RBIs, and 87 walks a year. He also owns a career OBP of .367. His fielding won't be an issue in the AL and he's surrounded by talent in B.J. Upton, Evan Longoria, Carl Crawford, and Carlos Pena that will boost his RBI opportunities.

The Ray's also possess one of the best rotations in MLB, with Scott Kazmir, James Shields, Matt Garza, and Andy Sonnanstine joined this year by last season's rookie sensation, David Price, and a deep bullpen that only lacks a closer that can stay healthy consistently.

Over in the West, the Los Angeles Angels have had a traumatic offseason, losing both bopper Teixeira after just two months in Anaheim and closer Francisco Rodriguez to the Mets — both to free agency.

Youngster Kendry Morales will step in at first and ex-Colorado closer Brian Fuentes will get first look to step in to ninth inning duties, though Jose Arredondo will be breathing down his neck should Fuentes falter.

Bobby Abreu was added to an already crowded outfield, though he'll help with a bit of power and a lot of OBP. The trouble is he's slated to bat second in the order and, without Teixeira, there's not a lot of power behind him.

I can't see the Angels being as good as last season as they will struggle to score freely, though they should still have enough to win a weak AL West as the rotation should be fine with John Lackey, Joe Saunders, Jered Weaver, Ervin Santana, and either Dustin Moseley, oft-injured Kelvim Escobar, or youngster Nick Adenhart and there's still enough arms in the bullpen even allowing for K-Rod's departure.

I don't see any other AL team contending for the pennant, as Cleveland, Detroit, and Chicago will all score runs, but have big pitching issues and the addition of Matt Holliday in Oakland is a bold move by Billy Beane, but he is surrounded by either fading stars like Eric Chavez and Jason Giambi or non-entities like Travis Buck, Ryan Sweeney, and Jack Cust.

National League

The defending champion Phillies are confident they've upgraded their offense slightly by replacing Pat Burrell with Raul Ibanez. The pitching staff returns virtually intact, though personally I remain skeptical about Joe Blanton's ability to put a decent full year together in a hitter's park and Jamie Moyer's chances of repeating his 2008. That said, the team will score runs and remains the team to beat in the NL.

Getting past the Mets in the East will again prove a big hurdle, with the New Yorker's loaded lineup and re-vamped bullpen, including two top-flight closers in J.J. Putz and Francisco Rodriguez. The Mets' top four starters of Santana, Perez, Maine, and Pelfrey is slightly better than the Phillies Hamels, Blanton, Moyer, and Myers and the team is just as loaded hitting-wise.

The Mets have suffered late season collapses that will have damaged them psychologically and Jerry Manuel has a job on his hands convincing the team they can actually overcome the Phillies. With the bullpen bolstered over the winter the team will be confident they can now close out games that they threw away in late innings the past two or three seasons.

Still in the East, the Atlanta Braves were active in the free agency and trade markets over the winter, adding Javier Vazquez, Tom Glavine, Kenshin Kawakami, and Derek Lowe to the rotation, as well as coming a close second in the race for A.J. Burnett. The bullpen looks strong, with two viable closers in Mike Gonzalez and Rafael Soriano at the back end.

The offense still relies too much on Chipper Jones but Brian McCann, Casey Kotchman, Yunel Escobar, and free agency signing Garret Anderson are serviceable enough. The team desperately needs a rebound season from outfielder Jeff Francoeur, who struggled badly at times in 2008. Francoeur has serious power, but strikes out too much and has spent time in the offseason adjusting his stance, losing weight, and trying to hit to the opposite field.

The Braves have SP Tommy Hanson and OF Jordan Schafer waiting in the wings to try to replicate what David Price and Evan Longoria did in Tampa in 2008. If there's a long-shot to win a pennant this year, it could be the Braves, who have a strong rotation, a solid bullpen, a crafty manager, and minor league talent to trade or call up if needed.

Outside of the East, the Cubs look the strongest bet to challenge, though offseason additions Aaron Miles (2B) and Milton Bradley are unspectacular signings. The team will need to get full seasons from SP's Rich Harden and Carlos Zambrano — both of whom have had injury question marks against them.

Zambrano was dreadful in his late two regular season starts, but bounced back in the playoffs to beat the weak-hitting Dodgers. Ryan Dempster was magnificent in 2008, his first season starting since 2003. Ted Lilly is a solid number four guy behind the hard-throwing Rich Harden, who came over midseason from Oakland and partly re-habilitated his reputation after a series of injury-riddled years.

The bullpen lost closer Kerry Wood to free agency, but Aaron Heilman came over in a trade with Seattle with a view to starting rather than reprising his less than inspiring performances from the bullpen for the Mets in 2008.

The Cubs should have too much in the Central for the Brewers, whose rotation looks less than stellar and bullpen dubious with fragile closer Trevor Hoffman and the meltdown-waiting-to-happen Jorge Julio at the backend. The Brew Crew will score runs, but the Cubbies have better pitching.

In the West, both the Dodgers and the Giants will struggle to score enough runs, though the Dodgers have partly addressed that situation by finally re-signing Manny Ramirez and taking a (costly) chance on his attitude being right. The Giants, in particular, have strong starting pitching and are just a bat away from winning the division, though they seem loathe to get involved in bringing a big free agent bat to the club. Bengie Molina is the team's best hitter, which speaks volumes.

There's little else to excite in the National League and I remain convinced that both pennants will be won by teams coming out of the East and that the East will provide both league's wild card representatives. Pressed to name the two winners before the season starts, I'd go for Tampa Bay and New York Mets.

Posted by Mike Round at 11:05 AM | Comments (0)

March 4, 2009

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 3

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Kyle Busch — Hometown hero Busch won the Shelby 427 at Las Vegas Speedway, starting from the rear after an engine change rendered his pole win on Friday null. Busch wrested the lead from Clint Bowyer on lap 269, and held on through two restarts to collect his first win of the year. The driver of the No. 18 M&Ms Toyota celebrated with his customary bow, and added a kiss of the Vegas asphalt, which, he added, tasted like a Roush Fenway engine.

"I don't answer to anyone but myself," says Busch, "so it has to be an extremely important situation for me to kiss some as'. It's always a huge occasion to win on your home track, especially in front of fans who watched me and my brother grow up. For me, it was the return of the native son. For Kurt, though, it was the return of the native S.O.B."

"As for a jump to Formula 1 someday, I am seriously considering it. I welcome new challenges. Besides, who wouldn't want to race in a series in which qualifying actually matters, and one caution is a rarity, much less 14? They don't have debris cautions in F1, except for the occasional streaker, or Nazi sex orgy."

2. Jeff Gordon — Gordon locked his brakes trying to hit pit road late in the race, and his left front tire blew on the subsequent lap. Damage was heavy to the left front of the No. 24 DuPont Chevrolet, but heady work in the pits kept Gordon in the thick of things. He finished a solid sixth and took over the points lead from Matt Kenseth.

"It's hard to pinpoint what caused me to miss pit lane," says Gordon. "It could have been lack of concentration, or possibly lack of sleep. Or it could have been because of one too many viewings of Dale Earnhardt, Jr.'s instructional video on pit stops, called 'Pit Happens.'"

"I feel like this team is ready to break that winless streak. Not winning a race in 44 tries seems like an eternity, which is slightly less than the length of a FOX pre-race show."

3. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer survived contact with Juan Montoya early in the race, then gambled to stay on the track during a late-race caution. The move allowed Bowyer to lead nine laps, but he couldn't hold off the charging Kyle Busch in the end. Bowyer moves up four places in the point standings to second, 18 behind Jeff Gordon.

"When push comes to shove," says Bowyer, "neither Montoya nor I will give any quarter. I'm a strong-willed Kansas native; he's a feisty Colombian. I'm not willing to give an inch; he's not willing to give a kilo. If that comparison sounds forced, it is. It was a lot easier when I drove the Jack Daniels car to describe contact with Montoya, when 'Jack and Coke' neatly summed it up."

"As far as our decision not to pit late, this is Las Vegas; how can you not gamble? When you say 'double down' and 'all in' in Vegas, you're not only describing some of the stranger acts that occur in Tony Stewart's hauler, you're also referencing our pit strategy. Sometimes, you have to throw 'caution' to the wind."

4. Greg Biffle — While in the pits late in the race on a green flag stop, Biffle was victimized when the caution flew, dropping him from sixth to 15th on the restart. With the fastest car on the track, Biffle was able to reclaim eight positions in the final 23 laps for a seventh-place finish.

"In light of the engine trouble that afflicted three of my Roush Fenway teammates," says Biffle, "I'm delighted with our result. It's very uncommon for engine failures to strike this team with such magnitude. As most Roush Fenway drivers can tell you, when we say 'this thing could blow any minute now,' we're usually referring to Carl Edwards' temper."

5. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth's quest for history, winning the first three races of the season, ended abruptly on lap six when his engine expired amidst a cloud of smoke, the first of three Roush Fenway engines to suffer that fate. Kenseth finished dead-last in the Shelby 427, and tumbled two spots in the points to third.

"I've made shorter appearances on The David Letterman Show," says Kenseth. "When I said before the race that 'it looks like we're in for a long day,' I guess I was totally off the mark. I went from making history in Daytona and Fontana to being history in Las Vegas. I've made faster exits in some of my nightmares involving Carl Edwards."

6. Carl Edwards — Edwards' engine blew as the white flag dropped, spoiling a sure top-five finish in Las Vegas, site of the first of his eight Sprint Cup wins last year. He finished 17th, the last car on the lead lap, and holds on to the ninth spot in the point standings.

"I was quite confident I would defend my win here from last season," says Edwards. "That is, until Roush Fenway engines started dropping like me in Kevin Harvick's garage. In the end, I got very little for my effort, except for this t-shirt that reads 'I Ran a Fair Race in Las Vegas, and All I Got Was a Lousy 17th-Place Finish.'"

"As for our engine problems, it's hard to get a straight answer from anyone about what the problem was. I asked our engineering department about it, and they told me to check with our technical support team, which is based in Calcutta, India."

7. David Reutimann — Reutimann leapt into the top 10 of the Sprint Cup point standings, finishing fourth to match his qualifying effort as he took the Aaron's Dream Machine to his first top-five for Michael Waltrip Racing. Reutimann is now fifth in the points, 51 out of first.

"Hey, if you give a Toyota driver two engines," says Reutimann, "he can work wonders with it. I'll drink to Kyle Busch's victory with a 'Kamikaze,' because Japanese engines were going down at an alarming rate."

"Anyway, it's great to take MWR to places it's never been, because who else is going to do it? Michael can't stop talking about my race in Vegas. In fact, Michael can't stop talking ever. You should hear him on the radio during races — he doesn't shut up. That's why the guys on the team call him the 'driver's side air bag.'"

8. Kevin Harvick — Harvick was on pit row when Jeff Gordon's blown tire resulted in a caution flag, leaving Harvick a lap down. In addition, Harvick was busted for speeding while exiting the pits, but was able to battle his way to a finish of 12th in Las Vegas.

"That's what you call a 'double whammy,'" says Harvick. "But I've got to hand it to Clint Bowyer and Jeff Burton, who represented Richard Childress Racing well on the track. I must say that I'm envious of Jeff Burton's appearance on General Hospital. That's why my wife Delana and I have decided to expand our empire into the world of daytime dramas. We're going to call it All My Childress."

9. Tony Stewart — Stewart finished out of the top 10 for the first time this year with a 26th in Las Vegas, his day soured by an ill-timed pit stop and a loose left rear lug nut that combined to leave him two laps down. Stewart dropped four spots in the points, but still sits solidly in eighth place, 80 points out of first.

"We just didn't have Lady Luck on our side on Sunday," says Stewart. "Fortunately, she made it to the hauler just in time for the party, though. She's from Russia. The funny thing is, I'm the one that woke up the next morning with pasties on my nipples."

10. Bobby Labonte — Labonte finished fifth in the Shelby 427, as the No. 96 Hall of Fame Racing entry was the top Ford finisher in the field. Labonte, the 2000 Sprint Cup champion, moved up 10 places in the points to 10th, and is 99 out of first.

"I would be remiss, and in contempt of contractual obligations," says Labonte, "if I didn't mention our sponsor, Ask.com, a leading internet search engine, not to be confused with a similar sponsor of Randy Moss Motorsports, Ax.com."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:54 AM | Comments (0)

Post-Combine '09 NFL Mock Draft (Pt. 4)

Also see: Post-Combine '09 NFL Mock Draft (Pt. 1) | Pt. 2 | Pt. 3

I think I've written enough in the introductions so far to fill a small novel and I think we've all got a pretty firm handle on what's going on here. If you don't, then you might want to just follow the trail back to part one and I'm confident everything will then make sense.

I'd also like to thank all of the people who offered their feedback during this series — both the good feedback and the bad. Despite the fact that some of you might think I try and eat my toaster for breakfast, I assure you I'm a pretty sane and grounded individual. Although I do eat cake for breakfast sometimes...

The important thing is that you got involved and put the effort into the feedback process and as a writer, that's really all you can hope for. So thank you, thanks to Sports Central for hosting the series, and last, but certainly not least, thank you to the Academy.

Enjoy!

25. Miami Dolphins: Clay Matthews, OLB, Ohio State

The "other" USC outside linebacker, Matthews is the only other first-round capable OLB other than Larry English. English could certainly go here also, but you have to think that Bill Parcells would appreciate Matthews' smashmouth play style and choose him to mold into his defense.

26. Baltimore Ravens: James Laurinaitis, ILB, Ohio State

With each passing day that goes by in which Ray Lewis is still not a Raven, it seems more and more likely that it's never going to happen. Barring an unexpected turn of events, which quite honestly wouldn't be that unexpected at all in such a frenzied and frantic free agency period, the Ravens are going to need to fill in the incredibly large and gaping void at middle linebacker that now exists.

While it's easy to agree that Laurinaitis was the anchor of the Buckeye linebacker corps, it could even be argued that he was the anchor for the entire Ohio State defense during his time there. He's passionate, he's talented, and he's tough. You're going to have to be very tough to even try and fill Ray Lewis' shoes and Laurinaitis seems like a smart and logical choice. Can someone pinch me, though? I still can't begin to comprehend Lewis in another uniform next year...

27. Indianapolis Colts: Brian Robiskie, WR, Ohio State

2009 is going to be a bizarre year in terms of familiar NFL faces in all sorts of different places. One of these players that will be missing in action come September is Marvin Harrison and the Hall of Fame career and talent that come along with him. It's time for the Colts to find the next piece in their receiving arsenal and while some might argue that they won't do so with their first round pick, I just don't think so.

Players that could also be featured here: Kenny Britt and Deon Butler. Both wide receivers! It's kind of a stretch with Butler, though, so if it's not Robiskie, then it will likely be Britt.

28. Philadelphia Eagles: Sean Smith, S, Utah

Smith has rocketed up most people's draft boards thanks to his solid Combine performance and when you combine this with the recent departure of team anchor Brian Dawkins, you come upon a situation in which it would be very plausible for the Eagles to take a safety with their late first-rounder.

Should the team choose not to slightly reach for Smith at 28, then you can rest assured that they'll take a cornerback. Write it down!

29. New York Giants: Kenny Britt, WR, Rutgers

I have nothing nice to say about the Giants, so I won't say anything at all (Patriots fan here). But I will say that you could pretty much swap this pick with the Colts at 27. Whoever the Colts don't take will likely become a New York Giant not long after.

30. Tennessee Titans: Peria Jerry, DT, Ole Miss

No more Albert Haynesworth? No problem!

It just so happens that the Titans were gifted an early Christmas present in my little NFL mock draft universe. The primary road block on Jerry's trip to Nashville would be the Colts at pick 27, should they choose not to go the wide receiver route in the first round. As we know full well, a team's draft strategy can change with the slightest wind gust, so it would be best to prepare yourself for as many different scenarios as you can. Or for your hometown team at the very least.

31. Arizona Cardinals: Larry English, OLB, Northern Illinois

With Antonio Smith out the door to Houston, you'd think the Cardinals would be quick to get someone to replace him. Fortunately, the defensive end situation isn't quite as dire as the aging outside linebacker one. Because of this, the last top-tier offensive linebacker in this year's class just seems to be the right move in the grander scheme of things.

Should the Cardinals go the defensive end route, however, then Tyson Jackson would be the obvious choice as there are probably several people throwing furniture around their living room because he hasn't been taken yet. That's just how the cookie crumbles. Though my cookie is probably going to be incredibly off-the-mark and consistently incorrect, so don't get so upset!

32. Pittsburgh Steelers: Alex Mack, C, California

With Mack the unanimous premier center available in this year's draft, having him go to the Steelers with the last pick in the first round. It's common knowledge that the Steelers would do well to draft multiple offensive linemen to help plug in the holes they have at the position, but the fact that the best possible player will most likely be available to them in a position in which they also need help in is just a no-brainer.

Posted by Josh Galligan at 11:46 AM | Comments (1)

March 3, 2009

Post-Combine '09 NFL Mock Draft (Pt. 3)

Also see: Post-Combine '09 NFL Mock Draft (Pt. 1) | Pt. 2

Please excuse the fact that many of my predicted selections becoming nullified by the recent free agent signing and trade activity. Is it just me or has this free agency period been especially frenzied and active than most?

In the interests of keeping this on a path that could actually exist in our reality, due to the recent trades and free agency signings (as well as Michael Crabtree's 6-8 week hiatus due to surgery), here's a quick shuffling of some selections:

Eugene Monroe jumps to the Rams number two pick, Jeremy Maclin drops down to fill the Bengals' number six selection, and we'll say the Seahawks take the gamble on Crabtree with the number four pick. Yes, I'm serious and no, I'm not insane. Does anyone else remember the ridiculous amount of wide receiver problems they had last year? Is a well-stocked and promising wide receiver corps consisting of Deion Branch, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Nate Burleson, and Michael Crabtree that out of the question? I mean, Matt Hasselbeck is jumping up and down saying no...

As for the recent Matt Cassel trade, Aaron Curry jumps to the Chiefs' number three pick with the Browns taking Brian Orakpo at number five. This leaves the 49ers with the ripe opportunity to take Matt Stafford at number 10. Some might call me crazy, but I just say that I'm absolutely prepared for the world that will exist on April 25th should the Lions not go the quarterback route with their first pick. I'm not saying it's a certainty, I'm just saying that it's what I think will happen and I'm absolutely going to be here still to take my lickings or rub it in regardless of what happens. I'll either look like a genius in my NFL draft recap or I'll have a ton of fun making fun of myself — of this much you can be certain!

But enough jibber-jabber! Let's get right on to part three:

17. New York Jets: Chris Wells, RB, Ohio State

Despite a career year from Thomas Jones in 2008, he's going to be 31-years-old in August of this year and while some running backs have shown they can still remain effective after the magical age of 30, none of them did it for very long. Leon Washington, on the other hand, has shown promise, but he's definitely not a three-down back and is best used in kick/punt return, screen pass, and third-and-long-type situations.

In steps the opportunity that both of the top running backs heading into the draft will be available for the Jets at pick 17 and viola! While the Jets could easily go quarterback here, one thing at least is for certain: it's highly unlikely they'll be going the defensive route after the flurry of activity on the defensive side of the ball that just reeks of new head coach Rex Ryan.

Out of the two top running backs (with the other being Georgia alum Knowshon Moreno), Wells just seems to be the type of player that Ryan would want running the rock for him on offense. Not to take anything away from Moreno, but Wells just seems a bit more rugged and the type of player that the new-look Jets would love to acquire.

18. Chicago Bears: Darrius Heyward-Bey, WR, Maryland

Forget what all of the other mock drafts are saying about the Bears' first round pick, they need a wide receiver no matter how well people can convince themselves that Devin Hester can become a bona fide number one. Heyward-Bey fits the mold of fast wide outs that the Bears so love and while he doesn't have the best hands of the bunch, catching the ball will not be a liability.

Should the Bears to focus on the defensive side of the ball, then the general consensus is that they'll take a defensive end or cornerback. I still say they focus on wide receiver though as they'll be plenty of time to focus on these needs later.

19. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Mark Sanchez, QB, USC

With the recent rumor mill swirling that the Buccaneers were in the running for the Matt Cassel sweepstakes, the Buccaneers also landed tight end extraordinaire Kellen Winslow, Jr. through a trade with the Cleveland Browns.

Now they just need to find someone to throw him the ball and something tells me that the Bucs organization doesn't want that someone to be Luke McCown or Brian Griese. Some may say that a quarterback is unlikely since they still haven't seen how last year's fifth-round selection, Josh Johnson, will pan out, but if they were so impressed by him, why would they have gone after Cassel in the first place? Certainly not because he's the "veteran QB" they've been looking for since he only has one year of starting under his belt. Since when does that make you a veteran?

20. Detroit Lions: Brian Cushing, OLB, USC

Going along with my philosophy that the Lions would rather fill their other glaring holes first before turning to the quarterback position (especially since they have two possible QB solutions currently on their roster), I'm saying that the Lions go linebacker with their second, first-round selection and take Cushing.

It seems for some reason that everyone thinks that taking Stafford will immediately make the Lions a contender if he's good enough and while this could be true, the Lions still need some serious work on the defensive side of the ball before they should even think about contending for anything. Cushing is known for his hard work and nose for the ball and could be exactly what the Lions defense has been lacking in the past.

21. Philadelphia Eagles: Knowshon Moreno, RB, Georgia

Please travel back with me to Sunday Night Football in Week 4. The Chicago Bears were hosting the Philadelphia Eagles in a pivotal, early-season NFC showdown. Here's the play-by-play from the Eagles last major drive of the game. It was on the goal-line, mind you:

1-4-CHI4(5:40) C.Buckhalter right guard to CHI 1 for 3 yards (K.Payne).
2-1-CHI1(5:03) T.Hunt right tackle to CHI 1 for no gain (K.Payne, M.Brown).
3-1-CHI1(4:19) C.Buckhalter right guard to CHI 1 for no gain (A.Ogunleye).
4-1-CHI1(3:40) C.Buckhalter left guard to CHI 1 for no gain (A.Brown).

No dice. The Eagles lost and everyone was left scratching their head as to why the team hadn't picked up some type of capable power back to either compliment Brian Westbrook or be used as a hammer in his absence. The Eagles need a power running back — it's common knowledge.

Philadelphia, meet Mr. Knowshon Moreno. He's here to help you truck people over at the goal line and put six on the scoreboard.

22. Minnesota Vikings: Hakeem Nicks, WR, North Carolina

With the recent failed courtship of T.J. Houshmandzadeh, the Vikings front office is likely hungry for a wide receiver to pair with last year's acquisition, Bernard Berrian and especially in the wake of their recent signing of quarterback Sage Rosenfels.

Unless Nicks is off the board already, perhaps to the Bears at 18, it's up in the air on whether they would want to add another speedster WR in Bey to pair with Berrian. It's been shown before that it can be successful, but it's just hard to imagine them being okay with not really having any variety whatsoever in their receiving corps.

Should they not go the route of the wideout, then expect them to go after someone to help fill the void in the defensive backfield instead. But that would be a shame.

23. New England Patriots: Vontae Davis, CB, Illinois

It amazes me that more people don't expect the Patriots to take a cornerback here should one be available as it is such a glaring need for them. If we've learned anything about Bill Belichick's drafting strategies, it's that he has the utmost faith in his scouting department and that he'll go after the players in the orders that he sees fit.

But if Davis is available, then it's hard to imagine them passing up on the chance of him adding the spark that they need at the cornerback position.

24. Atlanta Falcons: Jared Cook, TE, South Carolina

Here's another shock tight end pick for you and while it may not be the way the Falcons choose to go, you have to admit that it would at least make sense. The Falcons need a tight end and a capable one would go a long way in giving Matt Ryan a weapon that he could use in safety net type situations.

This pick could also be Brandon Pettigrew should he fall this far and according to the vast majority of public opinion, he will. We'll have to wait and see though as with everything. Only 52 more days to go!

Stay tuned for the final part of this series!

Posted by Josh Galligan at 11:54 AM | Comments (4)

The Forgotten West

Over the last several years, one of my favorite pastimes on Thursday nights has been to stay up and watch the 11 PM Eastern time Pac-10 game. Even at this point, well into my college years, that tradition has stayed intact, often at the spurning of late-night get-togethers and others who want to watch the Western Conference TNT game.

This past week, I watched one of the best late Thursday games in my memory. It truly had everything you could want in a late-regular season college basketball game: the inside track towards a conference title for the winner, opposite styles clashing, and shifts in momentum seemingly every other minute. The game, perhaps more importantly, had the organic feeling of two of the best teams in the country playing each other.

My faith in Arizona State, the losers on Thursday, being a top team was somewhat shaken with its loss at streaking Washington State Saturday. The victors, Washington, continue to be criminally underrated, except by those west of Rockies.

A little over a week ago, I browsed upon a chat by everyone's favorite nasally analyst, Jay Bilas, where he was asked, "Why have you guys been paying all your attention to the Big East and ACC, and not to the Pac-10?"

His response, in a truncated manner, if you will was, "It's not the media's fault the Pac-10 is crap and decided not to show up for the tournament last year (sans UCLA)."

Yes, the Pac-10 isn't getting the hype it got a year ago. The conference can't boast that it has three or four top-three seeds at the head of its league like the Big East can or the top-to-bottom quality that the ACC can lay claim to. And it likely will only have one top-four seed in the Huskies, who will not be favored to go to the Final Four.

However, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see Washington get to Detroit, as the Huskies are an extremely balanced scoring team, with four players (Jon Brockman, Isaiah Thomas, Justin Dentmon and Quincy Pondexter) all averaging in double figures scoring, with Brockman, Thomas, and Dentmon all over 15 a game. In addition, role players like Matthew Bryan-Amaning, Darnell Gant, and Venoy Overton have proven themselves able to pick up the slack when one of the higher-profile players is having an off-night.

Because the Huskies play a higher tempo than the other nine teams in a much more half-court oriented Pac-10 than just a few years ago, some of their games can give the appearance that Washington does not play stellar defense. So the Huskies giving up 73.6 points per game in Pac-10 play (ninth in the conference) translates to 0.99 points per possession (second in the league).

Unsurprisingly, the Sun Devils that Washington completed a season sweep over with the game Thursday have the best defense in the league on a possession-adjusted basis. A huge surprise has been the play of UCLA, and not just because the Bruins were prohibited favorites to win the league after three straight Final Fours.

One would be hard-pressed to blame a team for not being world-beaters that lost all the players that UCLA did, especially since UCLA is now in second place after two Bruins wins and the Sun Devils' losses. Rather, it is the way UCLA has achieved its standing.

Ben Howland's Final Four clubs the last few years have been characterized by awesome defense and above-average execution in their half-court offense. This season, that offense has executed even better, to the tune of 1.14 points per possession, one of the best major-conference totals in the nation. The Bruins' defense has been average in league play, giving up 1.03 per possession. Only no one doubts that UCLA is capable of playing the level of defense that has excelled in recent Marches past. If the Bruins can recapture that ability to defend, it could be four in four years for point man Darren Collison.

While the Pac-10 is underrated, it has received Dallas Cowboys-like coverage compared to the Mountain West, a league that could receive a conference-record number of bids with four or five.

And it's easy to see why that has happened. Ever since creating its own network that many with cable or satellite can't receive, and signing a cable deal with a network that many probably can't find (CBS College Sports, or the artist formerly known as CSTV), the Mountain West doesn't get talked about nearly as much as when it had an ESPN/ABC deal.

If you're the type that looks at RPI throughout the season, you've seen Utah in the top 10 in that metric for most of the season, while having not seen them at all on TV. If Utah goes on to claim the Mountain West crown, and emerge as the conference's top NCAA threat, it will be one of the weirdest seasons ever by a champion in a top-7 RPI league.

The Utes started the season with a loss to Division II Southwest Baptist. Only three weeks later, Utah lost to Idaho State, a 12-18 club from the Big Sky on December 6. By the time another month went by, they had turned it around to beat two eventual regular-season conference champions in Gonzaga and LSU, who Utah pummeled by 30.

Utah has one of the best shooting percentages in the country, led by center Luke Nevill, the team's leading scorer, who makes 60% of his shots.

The team that beat Utah on Saturday night, BYU, doesn't have the gaudy computer numbers or resume of its bitter state rival, but is most likely safe for the NCAA tournament with a 10-4 conference record and a non-conference win over Utah State. San Diego State and UNLV rest on the bubble with conference marks of 9-5 and 8-6, respectively. Yet, UNLV is the likelier of the two to have its name called on Selection Sunday, with big non-conference trump cards to the Rebels' name in wins over Arizona and at Louisville.

New Mexico sits at 10-4 along with BYU, but may have to win a share of the conference title to have even the possibility of an at-large, as the Lobos have a middling RPI and no non-conference quality wins to speak of. Luckily for Steve Alford's crew, New Mexico has a home date against Utah on Tuesday in a league in which the top five teams are an incredible 31-3 at home.

Posted by Ross Lancaster at 11:45 AM | Comments (2)

March 2, 2009

In the Rotation: NBA Week 18

After this week, every team in the NBA will have played at least 75% of their games this season. If my math is correct (and it probably isn't), that means that if you count NBA seasons based on the year that they end (for example this would be the '09 season), 97.5% of the basketball that will be played this decade is in the books.

With the finish line in sight for the decade that, for a lack of a better term, we will dub the "2000s", now seems like as good a time as any to announce that at the end of the 2008-09 regular season there will be a special In the Rotation in which I will unveil my picks for the 2000's All-Decade Team.

And, let's face it, with only six more weeks left in this NBA decade, it'll be pretty tough to alter whether or not anyone makes the All-Decade Team, but it still seems premature to name the team.

However, that's not gonna stop us from having a little fun, trivia-style, with the decade of basketball that was the 2000s.

I've broken down this week's Starting Five into five categories: Scoring, Rebounding, Shooting, Passing, and Defense and given a 2000s-based question for each category. How much do you remember about the last 10 NBA seasons? Take today's quiz and find out.

First, a few housekeeping notes before we get into the questions. Totals are totals, and it doesn't matter how many games a player has played for his total stats to count. However, for the sake of using a good reference point, I think a player should have to have played at least half of the games possible this decade to qualify for the league leaders in per game averages.

Since there are 820 games played possible over the course of 10 NBA seasons, I set the minimum at 400 games to qualify for the league leaders. If a player were to average 30 points per game over the first 30 games of an NBA season and get hurt and miss the remainder of the season, I wouldn't consider them to be the best scorer in the league that year, so I'm applying the same logic towards counting stats accumulated over the span of 10 years.

Now that we got that out of the way, it's time for your quarterly NBA quiz.

Starting Five

1. Scoring

Q. There have been 18 players that have averaged over 20 points per game (minimum 400 games) during the 2000s. Name one of the only two players to average over 20 points per game despite going the entire decade without a 50-point game.

2. Rebounding

Q. Assuming that Dwight Howard plays another 15 games this season, his 12.5 rebounds per game will be good enough to qualify him to be the leading rebounder this decade. But despite averaging the most boards per game, Superman himself didn't even have the best rebounding game this decade. Which player had the most rebounds in a single game in the 2000s?

3. Shooting

Q. With 21 games still remaining in his decade, Ray Allen has buried 1,925 three-point field goals in the 2000s, by far the most threes ever made in one decade. Which player ranks second to only Allen in three-pointers made in the 2000s?

4. Passing

Q. As stated earlier, we are using the criteria of a minimum of 400 games played before a person qualifies for any per game leaders, effectively eliminating Chris Paul and his 9.8 assists per game from qualifying him from the assist per game leaders. Of the players who have met the minimum requirement, who has the highest assist per game average in the 2000s?

5. Defense

Q. We all know that defense wins championships, but that doesn't necessarily mean stealing the ball. Allen Iverson led the way over the past 10 seasons averaging 2.2 steals per game, but is still looking for his first NBA championship ring. In fact, there is only one player in the top 10 in steals per game in the 2000s that has won an NBA title. Who is that player?

Answers

1. Scoring

A. Carmelo Anthony's 24.1 and Kevin Garnett's 21.7 points per game have the two ranked 5th and 12th, respectively, in points per game over the past decade, yet neither has had a single 50-point game in their career.

Despite never blowing up for one monster game (although a career-high of 49 is nothing to sneeze at), Anthony has been able to remain amongst the top scorers in the league by scoring at a high rate with remarkable consistency. He has scored 20 points or more in 307 of the 423 games he has played in since he entered the league in 2003, or about 73% of the time.

Only Kobe Bryant at 83%, LeBron James at 81%, Allen Iverson at 79%, and Dirk Nowitzki at 77% have scored 20 or more points on a more consistent basis during that time than Carmelo.

And there's no better word than "consistency" to sum up Kevin Garnett's decade. K.G. has scored 40 points in a game only four times in his career, yet has still managed to average over 20 points per game over his 14-year NBA career.

2. Rebounding

A. Dikembe Mutombo finger-wagged his way to two different 29 rebound games for the Hawks at the turn of the century, narrowly edging out Ben Wallace's pair of 28 rebound games for the highest total in a game during the 2000s.

Mutombo has been in a far more diminished role lately, averaging just 17 minutes per game over the past seven seasons, but he established himself as one of the all-time great rebounders and shot blockers in NBA history, averaging 12.5 rebounds and 3.4 blocks per game in his first 11 seasons in the league.

His 12.2 rebounds per game in the '90s was third-best behind only Dennis Rodman and Shaq, and Mount Mutombo currently sits at 18th on the all-time rebound list with 12,333 career rebounds.

3. Shooting

A. With 1,497 three-pointers made (and counting), Peja Stojakovic ranks slightly ahead of Rashard Lewis (1,369) and Jason Terry (1,328) for the second most three-pointers made over the past 10 NBA seasons.

And while Peja has undoubtedly been one of the top marksmen in the league his entire career, he is still 428 makes behind Ray Allen for first place. To put it in perspective, a man known almost entirely for making three-pointers, "Big Shot Bob" himself, Robert Horry, only made 423 threes this decade.

In other words, Ray Allen is an entire decade's worth of Robert Horry three-pointers better than his next closest competition.

4. Passing

A. Despite winning two MVP awards this decade, Steve Nash and his 9.1 assists per game falls just short of Jason Kidd, who has averaged 9.2 assists per game over the past 10 seasons.

While both players have had a remarkable decade passing the ball, they both find themselves looking up some of the all-time greats in terms of greatest assist decades in history.

John Stockton dished out 11.9 assists per game in the '90s; Magic Johnson Showtime'd his way to 11.2 assists per game in the '80s; and Oscar Robertson tallied 10.5 dimes per game in the '50s (although they would have been worth closer to a nickel back then), all setting a standard that even two of the greatest assist men of all-time could not meet in the decade that was the 2000s.

5. Defense

A. Coming in at ninth on the list with 1.7 steals per game this decade, Kobe Bryant is the only player in the top 10 in steals that has won an NBA title. In fact, he, Eddie Jones, and Manu Ginobili are the only players inside the top 20 that won titles.

The same sort of titlelessness applies to the decade's block shot leaders, too. The only players in the top 20 in blocks this decade with rings are Tim Duncan, Ben Wallace, Shaq, and Kevin Garnett.

That can be looked at in two different ways. It could either mean that 16 of the 20 best shot-blockers over the past 10 seasons have not won a ring. Or that every NBA champion this decade had one of the top 20 shot blockers of the 2000s on their team.

In the Rotation

If you answered at least three of the five questions correct, consider yourself in the rotation for this week. It's been a long decade, but you've clearly paid enough attention to the greatest game in the world over the past 10 seasons that the rotation would be happy to have you.

Out of the Rotation

If you answered one or two questions right, consider yourself on rotation probation. Just like college, you can always get right back in the thick of things if you just ace the final exam. Just make sure you study a little extra over the next six weeks to be sure you don't repeat your mistakes once the season ends.

Inactive List

If you got zero right, you've probably spent the past few weeks down at Daytona, studying 40 times from the NFL combine or, God forbid, gearing up for the NCAA tournament. If any of those things excites you, then clearly the rotation isn't for you. Perhaps a look at our weekly NASCAR power rankings is a more appropriate way to spend your time.

Be sure to check back at Sports Central every Monday to see who cracks Scott Shepherd's rotation as he breaks down what is going on around the NBA.

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 11:55 AM | Comments (2)