Kevin Garnett has officially retired. I thought Garnett had one more year of player-coach left in him, guiding a young Wolves team toward the future, getting back together with his one time mentor, Coach Thibodeau. Uh, apparently not. I assume that Thibs wasn't eager for KG's tutelage, wasn't eager to have KG hanging around and being a distraction, wasn't eager to have another voice besides his own--why else would Garnett leave? I'm torn: Garnett has been done for a while now but I was impressed with his veteran leadership last year and though I wasn't a fan of Coach Mitchell last year I thought he and KG had a great rapport with the team and keeping them both around in some capacity would have been a good move for the franchise. But once the reins got handed to Thibs, Thibs' first move was redecorating. Thibs is a rugged taskmaster and a bloodthirsty tyrant and while he's indisputably a great coach, I still think this young team needs some tenderness as opposed to an iron hand. Okay, well, the iron hand is fully in command, and apparently KG wasn't welcomed back. Garnett was one of the best I ever saw, toiled for years for crappy teams in Minnesota, finally got his glory with the Celtics, but that brief period was over a long time ago. Garnett is the kind of personality that can do whatever he wants....except play one more year for the Wolves. 1st ballot Hall of Famer, no doubt.
Chris Bosh is apparently done in Miami (and likely the NBA). Bosh's blood clots have returned and it seems that the Miami Heat have no interest in trying to bring Bosh back to basketball. Bosh wants to play, even going so far as firing his agent, but if win-at-all-costs Pat Riley wants no part of him, then who would? Bosh was a great player who never really even peaked. 1st ballot Hall of Famer, in my opinion. Contractual obligation makes him unlikely to get a chance to play at all this year. But perhaps he comes back next summer and tries to find a suitor (but I don't like his chances to ever play again).
Miami Marlins SP Jose Fernandez was killed in a boating accident over the weekend. There are a lot of baseball players in the world and when a young passes away (not an uncommon thing), we get the typical round of shoots and shames and then we get back to business. But this one's different. Fernandez is one of the best young pitchers in the game: 1st round pick, Rookie of the Year, 2-time All Star, top five in Cy Young voting in his 1st year (and probably again in his 4th). The dude was a legit star and still ascending. Damn shame to see him go (and I don't look forward to the sordid details of his death, which are surely still on the way). Tough blow for the Marlins and another blow for South Florida sports.
Hillary debates Trump. Honestly I found this to be a real disappointment. Reminded me of that Saints-Giants game from last week: felt like it was gonna be a shootout, both teams up and down the field, lots of points on the board...instead a 16-13 snoozefest. Yeah, that was the 1st debate. I watched because hey, man, say what you will about Trump, he's a showman, he's a wild card and seeing him and Hillary on the stage together sounded like it could be some fun. Instead of the shootout we got the predictable snoozefest: Trump had some highs and lows, Hillary really had neither but in the end they both did what they've been doing for the last year. Trump hammered a coupla points well but floundered around on the points beyond his grasp; Hillary's job was to not look like a crazy person and, well, she succeeded. No notable drama, no substance, no one got served, which bodes well for Hillary. I suspect the next round of polls will show a drop for Trump while Hillary holds position, maybe even gets a little bounce. (A modest plea: having a debate with any moderator other than Brian Lamb is like having a Super Bowl with college referees)
Sam Allardyce out as England's manager. Allardyce just took his 'dream job' about six weeks ago, win his 1st and only match, but has already been terminated after a newspaper sting operation purports to show him circumventing rules to manipulate player movement. Uhhh, I dunno, I don't see any crime here. Sure, he kinda looks like a boastful, obnoxious jackass but I certainly don't see any criminal activity and everything he does actually do is nothing more entrapment. A bunch of reporters claimed to be Asian businessmen interested in paying Allardyce to give a series of speeches for a shit ton of money. Happens all the time, what's the big deal? He talks to the reporters about how to get in on player movement by bribing agents to convince players and managers to make certain moves. Okay, unethical if he ever actually did anything. But not illegal and in this context just philosophical talk. There's no corresponding moves that indicate a pattern of illegal behavior and, again, this is all just entrapment, none of this actually happened, nor did Allardyce try to make anything happen. I don't know how libel laws work in the UK but if I were Allardyce I'd lawyer the fuck up and sue everyone I could. It'd probably take a few years but I suspect he'd get paid off in the long run. And since his career looks to be over, its not like he's got something better to do. Personally I'm rooting for him, sure he's a jackass but he got a raw deal.
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
US Open
Kerber over Pliskova. It felt early on like Kerber was gonna run Pliskova out of the stadium, then Pliskova got it together and felt like she was gonna get it done. But Kerber had a solid push at the end of the 3rd set to take the championship. Pretty good final, went back and forth. The semis were the only other women's matches I watched this year: Kerber whooping unranked Wozniacki; and Pliskova over Serena (like Duke basketball, always a pleasure to watch Serena lose). Kerber looks good but not unbeatable, it's a good time for women's tennis.
Wawrinka over Djokovic. Oh, good stuff! Wawrinka dropped his opening serve, looked real nervous early on and it felt like Djokovic was gonna steam roll him. Djokovic had two walkovers leading up to this so he was fresh while Wawrinka had gut check matches against Nishikori and Del Potro (he played hard but I reckon that's the last we'll ever see of Del Potro) in the quarters and semis. (I'd like to go back and see Djokovic's match with Monfils in the semis, apparently Monfils was fucking with him pretty hard) I guess being tested worked in his favor. Wawrinka was able to get his break back, then crumbled in the tie break. But he was able to take the 2nd and then outlasted Djok in a marathon 3rd set and I knew it was over. I missed the 4th set, Djok had a controversial medical delay but Wawrinka seemed cool with it. Good match, good win for Wawrinka.
Wawrinka over Djokovic. Oh, good stuff! Wawrinka dropped his opening serve, looked real nervous early on and it felt like Djokovic was gonna steam roll him. Djokovic had two walkovers leading up to this so he was fresh while Wawrinka had gut check matches against Nishikori and Del Potro (he played hard but I reckon that's the last we'll ever see of Del Potro) in the quarters and semis. (I'd like to go back and see Djokovic's match with Monfils in the semis, apparently Monfils was fucking with him pretty hard) I guess being tested worked in his favor. Wawrinka was able to get his break back, then crumbled in the tie break. But he was able to take the 2nd and then outlasted Djok in a marathon 3rd set and I knew it was over. I missed the 4th set, Djok had a controversial medical delay but Wawrinka seemed cool with it. Good match, good win for Wawrinka.
Monday, September 5, 2016
Thoughts About Retirement
This past NBA season was all about Kobe's last hurrah. Kind of a joke but the Lakers had nothing else going on anyway (and were playing to save their top 3 protected draft pick), so letting Kobe run roughshod of everyone one last time seemed fitting. Also fitting was that Tim Duncan did not give us a farewell tour, choosing to ride off into the sunset by issuing a minimal press release in August. Personally I thought Duncan had one year left in him, I thought his decline last year had more to do with changes in Spurs personnel than in his deterioration, but I can't say I'm surprised he decided to move on or that he treated his retirement like an afterthought. Kobe is perhaps the most self-important athlete of my lifetime (at least I'm sure he wouldn't appreciate anyone else being suggested for that title!) and watching him chuck 3 pointers at an embarrassing rate was predictable. Going for 60 in his final game was probably predictable: no one else had anything play for and if Kobe had gone 3-35, 6 turnovers, no assists or rebounds, well...that would've been every bit as fun to watch, so might as well keep feeding the guy who has never fed anyone else in his life. Who was the better NBA player all in all? I'll take Duncan. He was a quiet badass whereas Kobe was the ultimate attention hog. Both had top flight careers so frankly choosing your favorite personality is as good a tiebreaker as any.
Alex Rodriguez, one of the greatest baseball players of all time (whether you like it or not), was summarily drummed out of the Yankee lineup about a month ago and while no one would be shocked if he turned up on a spring training roster next year, his career is pretty much done. 697 home runs, only three other dudes in the history of the game hit that many, clearly ARod was one of the greats, right? Why does everybody hate ARod? He's a cheesy guy that needs to be loved (like Kobe) but is a rather low key personality that doesn't want to do stuff just to be liked (like Duncan). He's not an abrasive personality, he's not a shameless self-promoter, he doesn't endorse every product that comes down the pike, his private life is not something I know anything about, and, yes, he was busted for steroids but a) I couldn't care less and b) so was every other good player of his generation. So why does everybody hate ARod? I dunno but I will say when the career highlights were mentioned, I must confess I totally forgot he won 2 MVPs with the Yankees. I barely remember him with the Yankees though that was the bulk of his career. ARod is a guy that I tuned out so long ago that I didn't remember most of his best moments. Honestly, baseball is still in the steroid phase where its trying to undermine itself and demean its own stars for no real reason. ARod is going to be the face of the self-loathing period longer than the rest. I think he's a pretty good TV personality, we'll see how that changes the perceptions of his career over the next 20-30 years.
Michael Phelps won 14 more gold medals this summer in Rio and capped another brilliant Olympic run by announcing his retirement (for the 3rd time if I'm not mistaken). Yes, he's getting older, and, yes, he's already won 80 (roughly) gold medals, so maybe he's had his fill of guts and glory. But I gotta ask: why should he retire? He swims. That's the best exercise your body can get, why would he stop doing that? Why would his game deteriorate? Allen Iverson took a lot of abuse, you knew he'd wind down eventually; Deion Sanders had the best first step in the history of football and once that left him, you'd knew his game would suffer; Rafael Nadal throws everything he's got into returning every ball, you know these hard courts are going to shred his knees and ankles; even Tiger Woods played a game of repetitive motions that could lead to all kinds of nagging injuries. But why would Phelps ever deteriorate? He doesn't face defenders trying to physically stop him, there aren't any kooky herky jerky motions that might lead to muscle deficiencies or injuries, his body can still grow stronger (or at least not get weaker) for another decade or so (damn, he's not that old). I can understand that kids will come along and be better than him, than can happen. But I think he can still be better than what he's done so far, so why not keep coming back?
Meanwhile, Tim Tebow is trying to play baseball after many years of NOT trying to play football. The guy who never really had a career--and yet never went away--is still trying to be something he's not. And what of Serena Williams? She's at that point where the up-and-comers of women's tennis are lining up to lay beat downs on her, how much of that do you think she'll endure? I suspect her retirement will come quickly and out of the blue probably in the next year.
I'm gonna miss Duncan. I guess I'll even miss Kobe. I'd already forgotten ARod before he left, I never thought twice about Tebow and honestly Serena is probably my all-time least favorite athlete. But I got a feeling Phelps will be back again (and again and again).
Alex Rodriguez, one of the greatest baseball players of all time (whether you like it or not), was summarily drummed out of the Yankee lineup about a month ago and while no one would be shocked if he turned up on a spring training roster next year, his career is pretty much done. 697 home runs, only three other dudes in the history of the game hit that many, clearly ARod was one of the greats, right? Why does everybody hate ARod? He's a cheesy guy that needs to be loved (like Kobe) but is a rather low key personality that doesn't want to do stuff just to be liked (like Duncan). He's not an abrasive personality, he's not a shameless self-promoter, he doesn't endorse every product that comes down the pike, his private life is not something I know anything about, and, yes, he was busted for steroids but a) I couldn't care less and b) so was every other good player of his generation. So why does everybody hate ARod? I dunno but I will say when the career highlights were mentioned, I must confess I totally forgot he won 2 MVPs with the Yankees. I barely remember him with the Yankees though that was the bulk of his career. ARod is a guy that I tuned out so long ago that I didn't remember most of his best moments. Honestly, baseball is still in the steroid phase where its trying to undermine itself and demean its own stars for no real reason. ARod is going to be the face of the self-loathing period longer than the rest. I think he's a pretty good TV personality, we'll see how that changes the perceptions of his career over the next 20-30 years.
Michael Phelps won 14 more gold medals this summer in Rio and capped another brilliant Olympic run by announcing his retirement (for the 3rd time if I'm not mistaken). Yes, he's getting older, and, yes, he's already won 80 (roughly) gold medals, so maybe he's had his fill of guts and glory. But I gotta ask: why should he retire? He swims. That's the best exercise your body can get, why would he stop doing that? Why would his game deteriorate? Allen Iverson took a lot of abuse, you knew he'd wind down eventually; Deion Sanders had the best first step in the history of football and once that left him, you'd knew his game would suffer; Rafael Nadal throws everything he's got into returning every ball, you know these hard courts are going to shred his knees and ankles; even Tiger Woods played a game of repetitive motions that could lead to all kinds of nagging injuries. But why would Phelps ever deteriorate? He doesn't face defenders trying to physically stop him, there aren't any kooky herky jerky motions that might lead to muscle deficiencies or injuries, his body can still grow stronger (or at least not get weaker) for another decade or so (damn, he's not that old). I can understand that kids will come along and be better than him, than can happen. But I think he can still be better than what he's done so far, so why not keep coming back?
Meanwhile, Tim Tebow is trying to play baseball after many years of NOT trying to play football. The guy who never really had a career--and yet never went away--is still trying to be something he's not. And what of Serena Williams? She's at that point where the up-and-comers of women's tennis are lining up to lay beat downs on her, how much of that do you think she'll endure? I suspect her retirement will come quickly and out of the blue probably in the next year.
I'm gonna miss Duncan. I guess I'll even miss Kobe. I'd already forgotten ARod before he left, I never thought twice about Tebow and honestly Serena is probably my all-time least favorite athlete. But I got a feeling Phelps will be back again (and again and again).
Sunday, September 4, 2016
NFL Preview
I love football, always have. But I don't have nearly the depth of knowledge in football that I do in basketball or baseball and I have no idea how to predict a future season. By the end of the year I'll have interesting observations to make but in summer time, this is all from the gut stuff. I've been listening to various 'experts' during their previews and all I can think is, 'Dude, it's all about injuries. How da F do you know who's gonna get hurt?'
I looked over this year's NFL schedule and picked a winner for each game. I didn't consider spreads although I did try to throw in an occasional situational upset. Of course, this does not (cannot!) take into account who won't be playing week to week. This exercise tends to ignore the middle: I usually end up with too many great teams and too many awful teams. I do have 11 double digit winning teams and only 6 teams with 4 or fewer wins. Yeah, nothing about that seems accurate. But this is just a start. This is what I came up with:
(15 wins)
Packers
(13 wins)
Bengals, Raiders, Cards
(12 wins)
Pats, Chiefs, Panthers
(11 wins)
Texans, Bucs, Seahawks
(10 wins)
Steelers
(9 wins)
Colts, Cowboys, Giants
(8 wins)
Broncos, Rams
(7 wins)
Bills, Dolphins, Bears, Lions, Falcons
(6 wins)
Titans, Chargers, Eagles, Redskins
(5 wins)
Niners
(4 wins)
Jets, Jags
(3 wins)
Browns, Ravens, Saints
(0 wins)
Vikings
Just based on this, who seems overrated and who seems underrated?
Okay, start at the bottom: very unlikely the Vikings win ZERO games. They won their division last year and still feature a solid defensive line and one of the great running backs of all time. I did this game-picking exercise before they traded for Sam Bradford, but frankly I still wildly underrated before they got an NFL QB (and I should say, I still kinda like Bradford, needs a lot of help from his O line but if they can keep him upright, he should be really good for them). So why did I have them so low? I dunno, they just never seemed like the better team in any single match. Looking back at it, more likely the Vikings win 8 or 9 games and compete for a wild card (and that I've probably overrated the Lions and Bears). I'll say Vikings go 8-8.
The Ravens were decimated by injuries last year and can't really be as bad as they were...but I still don't care for their roster and there's a decent chance they get decimated by injuries again (it is football, after all). So I'll stand by the 3-13 record for the Ravens.
Yeah, I think the Browns could be truly awful this year. In fact, I'm surprised I gave them 3 wins. The good teams are entirely unpredictable but the bad teams announce themselves ahead of time. The Browns are relying on the resurgence of RG3 and...uh....does not bode well for them, methinks. I assume they're gearing up for the draft by now. I'll go 2-14 for the Browns.
The Saints also feel like an easy call as a bad team. They're getting older and more expensive and they're in a division with the defending conference champs (Panthers), an up and coming tough D squad (Bucs) and a slightly younger clone with a hungry new coach (Falcons). None of that is promising for the Saints. I'll stick with 3-13 for the Saints.
The Jets were not good last year and don't seem any better to me. 4-12 sounds about right for the Jets.
The Jags are one that I'm wrong about. The Jags have been monumentally bad for the last few years but they do seem like they're moving in the right direction. I think their division is soft (I think I've overrated the Texans and Colts) and if that D can stand up, I think the Jags could be a real surprise in the AFC. I think they can stay in the mix for that division right up through December. I'll go 9-7 on the Jags.
The Niners are another one I think I'm wrong about. It was only 3 years ago that the Niners were talented, young and deep at every position, looked like they were going to dominate the NFC West for years to come. Man, all of that is loooooooonnnngggg gone! How on earth do they win 5 games? No, no, no, I am not buying Blaine Gabbert at QB, not buying Chip Kelly in his 1st year, not buying their D line or running game. I'll say 3-13 for the Niners.
The Titans should be fun to watch but I'm not sure they win too many games this year. Indeed, I think 6 wins is probably an overshot. I'll go 5-11 for the Titans.
Last year the Chargers (like the Ravens) were a solid veteran team that couldn't withstand all the injuries. But, man, Phillip Rivers is still really good, he keeps them in games they have no business competing in, he truly is Dan Fouts 2.0. That said, I still think the team is in disarray, they'll be one of those teams that wins game they oughta lose and lose games they oughta win. If you're into gambling, stay away from the Chargers! I'll stick with 6-10 because...I dunno....sounds about right.
I gave the Eagles 6 wins but looking back on it, I don't know why. I think this first post-Chip year could be disastrous: no running game, rookie QB, so-so defense. I'll go 3-13 for the Eagles.
I don't know about the Redskins. Kinda depends on Tony Romo really: if he's healthy the Cowboys could be really really good, if not the Redskins could still be in the hunt by the end of the year. I'll go 8-8 for the Redskins though it could be much higher or much lower.
As I said above, since I wildly downgraded the Vikings in my initial look, it seems like the Bears and Lions are both overrated in my predictions. I think the Lions could get an eye-opening year out of Matt Stafford (make or break season for him) but I don't like the defense. The Bears have been up and down over the years, I suspect they'll be down this year. I'll say 5-11 for the Lions, 6-10 for the Bears.
Brady and Belichick have so dominated the AFC East for as long as anyone can remember that the Bills and Dolphins (and NYJ, too) are in a permanent spin cycle. In most years the Bills have widest variance: if it all comes together they could be really good, but unless it all comes together they could be really bad. But this year I think that team is the Dolphins: front 7 of that defense looks mighty and if Tannehill can finally become something, the Dolphins could surprise people. While the Bills D has been steadily declining under Rex Ryan and the offense is still based on longshots. I'll got 5-11 for the Bills and 9-7 for the Dolphins.
The Falcons have been not-as-good-as-they-ought-to-be for like a decade now. With the Panthers looking solid and the Bucs on the rise, it doesn't feel like the Falcons break out of their mediocrity this year. I think 7-9 sounds about right for the Falcons.
The Broncos are the defending Super Bowl champs. They won last year with a fierce pass rush and the veteran savvy of Peyton Manning. The defense has taken a step back and while the QB situation doesn't seem like a huge step back, it doesn't feel like a huge step forward either. I just don't see how they could possibly be as good this year. I think there are some serious comers in that division, I'll stick with 8-8 for the Broncos.
The Rams will go 8-8. Yeah, rookie QB, new stadium, no real upgrade on the offense, but the pass rush is so good and Jeff Fisher is the ultimate 8-8 coach. Yeah, I'll stick with it.
The Colts have Andrew Luck, one of the bestest QBs in the business....and nothing else. I think they've been living off a sub-par division for years and I don't think that's gonna work for them this year. Not sure why I gave them 9 wins. I'll go 7-9 for the Colts.
The Giants are led by Eli Manning, a QB who has a knack for making bad teams good and good teams bad. By giving them 9 wins, I think I'm suggesting they're a bad team that will be elevated by Eli. I dunno...I think I'll stick with that. 9-7 for the Giants.
The Cowboys season is all about Tony Romo. The running game should be dominant, the defense should be better than ya think, if they can survive til Romo comes back, I think the Cowboys could run away with the division in December. I'll stick with 9-7 (and a home playoff game) for the Cowboys.
The Steelers for years have been a team that just chugs along, there's not always great but they're never bad and if some other team flubs it late, the Steelers are usually there to snatch an extra win or two. That said, it feels like there's been a steady erosion over the last few years. But I think the Ravens and Browns are still gonna be terrible, which can only benefit the Steelers. I'll back off a bit and say 9-7 for the Steelers.
I think I overrated the Texans. 11 wins seems kinda high for a team with a banged up defense and a brand new (largely untested) QB. And while their division isn't great, I think the Titans and Jags are on the rise and the Colts still have one of the best QBs in the league. I'll stick by the Texans winning the division but I'll knock them back to 9-7.
Yeah....the Bucs....every year somebody overrates the Bucs. I'll be that guy. I think the D is killer, I think Winston has a bust out season and the Bucs take advantage of minimal expectations. Bucs go 11-5.
It seems like the Seahawks should be on the way down but I don't think so. Every year that D is stout, the QB is top notch and they just find a way to win. I'll stick with the Seahawks going 11-5.
The Pats will be without Tom Brady for the first 4 games of the season. I say they 3-1 without him, 9-3 with him. Yeah, that sounds about right. Pats go 12-4.
I thought the Chiefs were playing really good football by the end last year. Alex Smith is not the most exciting QB but when you're going for continuity, he's the man. I like the Chiefs to build on last year and usurp the Broncos. That said, 13 wins sounds like a lot, don't it? I'll say the Chiefs go 11-5, still comfortable make the playoffs.
The Panthers rolled through the NFL last year (til the Super Bowl, of course) and while it seems inconceivable they can be that good again, they do look good enough to win 12 games and take their division. Panthers go 12-4.
I thought the Bengals were the best team in the AFC last year, still not sure how they lost to the Steelers in the playoffs but I thought they would've beaten the Broncos and the Pats and I still think that. I like the Bengals to hold it all together and go 13-3.
The Raiders are on the right track, one of those teams that should be exciting to watch even if they're losing. If it all comes together, they might just dominate for stretches of the season. 13 wins seems ludicrous...yeah, it does...but I'll stick with it.
The Cards flailed badly in the playoffs last year but, man, that D is so strong and I think Carson Palmer has one more good year left in him (though I don't see many more than that). I think the Seahawks will be good and the Rams are never an easy out, but I like the Cards to stay strong enough to go 12-4.
No way the Packers win 15 games, right? Right. But I think their division is soft so I'll still take them to go 13-3.
Okay, I made a few changes (which probably don't add up but who cares?) but my playoff picks are all still the same. So here's my playoff rundown:
AFC
Chiefs over Texans; Pats over Steelers
Bengals over Chiefs; Pats over Raiders
Bengals over Pats
NFC
Seahawks over Panthers; Bucs over Cowboys
Packers over Bucs; Seahawks over Cards
Packers over Seahawks
I'll take the Packers over the Bengals in the Super Bowl. All right, future has been predicted, no need for newspapers ever again.
But for real, here's some serious punditry for you: football is all about injuries. Basically all I'm saying above is if the Packers and Bengals can overcome the injuries they will surely have, then I think they have the best chances to make it to the Super Bowl. I could be wrong but ain't nobody else gonna be right either because the injuries are entirely unknowable. All I know is: it's good to have football back.
I looked over this year's NFL schedule and picked a winner for each game. I didn't consider spreads although I did try to throw in an occasional situational upset. Of course, this does not (cannot!) take into account who won't be playing week to week. This exercise tends to ignore the middle: I usually end up with too many great teams and too many awful teams. I do have 11 double digit winning teams and only 6 teams with 4 or fewer wins. Yeah, nothing about that seems accurate. But this is just a start. This is what I came up with:
(15 wins)
Packers
(13 wins)
Bengals, Raiders, Cards
(12 wins)
Pats, Chiefs, Panthers
(11 wins)
Texans, Bucs, Seahawks
(10 wins)
Steelers
(9 wins)
Colts, Cowboys, Giants
(8 wins)
Broncos, Rams
(7 wins)
Bills, Dolphins, Bears, Lions, Falcons
(6 wins)
Titans, Chargers, Eagles, Redskins
(5 wins)
Niners
(4 wins)
Jets, Jags
(3 wins)
Browns, Ravens, Saints
(0 wins)
Vikings
Just based on this, who seems overrated and who seems underrated?
Okay, start at the bottom: very unlikely the Vikings win ZERO games. They won their division last year and still feature a solid defensive line and one of the great running backs of all time. I did this game-picking exercise before they traded for Sam Bradford, but frankly I still wildly underrated before they got an NFL QB (and I should say, I still kinda like Bradford, needs a lot of help from his O line but if they can keep him upright, he should be really good for them). So why did I have them so low? I dunno, they just never seemed like the better team in any single match. Looking back at it, more likely the Vikings win 8 or 9 games and compete for a wild card (and that I've probably overrated the Lions and Bears). I'll say Vikings go 8-8.
The Ravens were decimated by injuries last year and can't really be as bad as they were...but I still don't care for their roster and there's a decent chance they get decimated by injuries again (it is football, after all). So I'll stand by the 3-13 record for the Ravens.
Yeah, I think the Browns could be truly awful this year. In fact, I'm surprised I gave them 3 wins. The good teams are entirely unpredictable but the bad teams announce themselves ahead of time. The Browns are relying on the resurgence of RG3 and...uh....does not bode well for them, methinks. I assume they're gearing up for the draft by now. I'll go 2-14 for the Browns.
The Saints also feel like an easy call as a bad team. They're getting older and more expensive and they're in a division with the defending conference champs (Panthers), an up and coming tough D squad (Bucs) and a slightly younger clone with a hungry new coach (Falcons). None of that is promising for the Saints. I'll stick with 3-13 for the Saints.
The Jets were not good last year and don't seem any better to me. 4-12 sounds about right for the Jets.
The Jags are one that I'm wrong about. The Jags have been monumentally bad for the last few years but they do seem like they're moving in the right direction. I think their division is soft (I think I've overrated the Texans and Colts) and if that D can stand up, I think the Jags could be a real surprise in the AFC. I think they can stay in the mix for that division right up through December. I'll go 9-7 on the Jags.
The Niners are another one I think I'm wrong about. It was only 3 years ago that the Niners were talented, young and deep at every position, looked like they were going to dominate the NFC West for years to come. Man, all of that is loooooooonnnngggg gone! How on earth do they win 5 games? No, no, no, I am not buying Blaine Gabbert at QB, not buying Chip Kelly in his 1st year, not buying their D line or running game. I'll say 3-13 for the Niners.
The Titans should be fun to watch but I'm not sure they win too many games this year. Indeed, I think 6 wins is probably an overshot. I'll go 5-11 for the Titans.
Last year the Chargers (like the Ravens) were a solid veteran team that couldn't withstand all the injuries. But, man, Phillip Rivers is still really good, he keeps them in games they have no business competing in, he truly is Dan Fouts 2.0. That said, I still think the team is in disarray, they'll be one of those teams that wins game they oughta lose and lose games they oughta win. If you're into gambling, stay away from the Chargers! I'll stick with 6-10 because...I dunno....sounds about right.
I gave the Eagles 6 wins but looking back on it, I don't know why. I think this first post-Chip year could be disastrous: no running game, rookie QB, so-so defense. I'll go 3-13 for the Eagles.
I don't know about the Redskins. Kinda depends on Tony Romo really: if he's healthy the Cowboys could be really really good, if not the Redskins could still be in the hunt by the end of the year. I'll go 8-8 for the Redskins though it could be much higher or much lower.
As I said above, since I wildly downgraded the Vikings in my initial look, it seems like the Bears and Lions are both overrated in my predictions. I think the Lions could get an eye-opening year out of Matt Stafford (make or break season for him) but I don't like the defense. The Bears have been up and down over the years, I suspect they'll be down this year. I'll say 5-11 for the Lions, 6-10 for the Bears.
Brady and Belichick have so dominated the AFC East for as long as anyone can remember that the Bills and Dolphins (and NYJ, too) are in a permanent spin cycle. In most years the Bills have widest variance: if it all comes together they could be really good, but unless it all comes together they could be really bad. But this year I think that team is the Dolphins: front 7 of that defense looks mighty and if Tannehill can finally become something, the Dolphins could surprise people. While the Bills D has been steadily declining under Rex Ryan and the offense is still based on longshots. I'll got 5-11 for the Bills and 9-7 for the Dolphins.
The Falcons have been not-as-good-as-they-ought-to-be for like a decade now. With the Panthers looking solid and the Bucs on the rise, it doesn't feel like the Falcons break out of their mediocrity this year. I think 7-9 sounds about right for the Falcons.
The Broncos are the defending Super Bowl champs. They won last year with a fierce pass rush and the veteran savvy of Peyton Manning. The defense has taken a step back and while the QB situation doesn't seem like a huge step back, it doesn't feel like a huge step forward either. I just don't see how they could possibly be as good this year. I think there are some serious comers in that division, I'll stick with 8-8 for the Broncos.
The Rams will go 8-8. Yeah, rookie QB, new stadium, no real upgrade on the offense, but the pass rush is so good and Jeff Fisher is the ultimate 8-8 coach. Yeah, I'll stick with it.
The Colts have Andrew Luck, one of the bestest QBs in the business....and nothing else. I think they've been living off a sub-par division for years and I don't think that's gonna work for them this year. Not sure why I gave them 9 wins. I'll go 7-9 for the Colts.
The Giants are led by Eli Manning, a QB who has a knack for making bad teams good and good teams bad. By giving them 9 wins, I think I'm suggesting they're a bad team that will be elevated by Eli. I dunno...I think I'll stick with that. 9-7 for the Giants.
The Cowboys season is all about Tony Romo. The running game should be dominant, the defense should be better than ya think, if they can survive til Romo comes back, I think the Cowboys could run away with the division in December. I'll stick with 9-7 (and a home playoff game) for the Cowboys.
The Steelers for years have been a team that just chugs along, there's not always great but they're never bad and if some other team flubs it late, the Steelers are usually there to snatch an extra win or two. That said, it feels like there's been a steady erosion over the last few years. But I think the Ravens and Browns are still gonna be terrible, which can only benefit the Steelers. I'll back off a bit and say 9-7 for the Steelers.
I think I overrated the Texans. 11 wins seems kinda high for a team with a banged up defense and a brand new (largely untested) QB. And while their division isn't great, I think the Titans and Jags are on the rise and the Colts still have one of the best QBs in the league. I'll stick by the Texans winning the division but I'll knock them back to 9-7.
Yeah....the Bucs....every year somebody overrates the Bucs. I'll be that guy. I think the D is killer, I think Winston has a bust out season and the Bucs take advantage of minimal expectations. Bucs go 11-5.
It seems like the Seahawks should be on the way down but I don't think so. Every year that D is stout, the QB is top notch and they just find a way to win. I'll stick with the Seahawks going 11-5.
The Pats will be without Tom Brady for the first 4 games of the season. I say they 3-1 without him, 9-3 with him. Yeah, that sounds about right. Pats go 12-4.
I thought the Chiefs were playing really good football by the end last year. Alex Smith is not the most exciting QB but when you're going for continuity, he's the man. I like the Chiefs to build on last year and usurp the Broncos. That said, 13 wins sounds like a lot, don't it? I'll say the Chiefs go 11-5, still comfortable make the playoffs.
The Panthers rolled through the NFL last year (til the Super Bowl, of course) and while it seems inconceivable they can be that good again, they do look good enough to win 12 games and take their division. Panthers go 12-4.
I thought the Bengals were the best team in the AFC last year, still not sure how they lost to the Steelers in the playoffs but I thought they would've beaten the Broncos and the Pats and I still think that. I like the Bengals to hold it all together and go 13-3.
The Raiders are on the right track, one of those teams that should be exciting to watch even if they're losing. If it all comes together, they might just dominate for stretches of the season. 13 wins seems ludicrous...yeah, it does...but I'll stick with it.
The Cards flailed badly in the playoffs last year but, man, that D is so strong and I think Carson Palmer has one more good year left in him (though I don't see many more than that). I think the Seahawks will be good and the Rams are never an easy out, but I like the Cards to stay strong enough to go 12-4.
No way the Packers win 15 games, right? Right. But I think their division is soft so I'll still take them to go 13-3.
Okay, I made a few changes (which probably don't add up but who cares?) but my playoff picks are all still the same. So here's my playoff rundown:
AFC
Chiefs over Texans; Pats over Steelers
Bengals over Chiefs; Pats over Raiders
Bengals over Pats
NFC
Seahawks over Panthers; Bucs over Cowboys
Packers over Bucs; Seahawks over Cards
Packers over Seahawks
I'll take the Packers over the Bengals in the Super Bowl. All right, future has been predicted, no need for newspapers ever again.
But for real, here's some serious punditry for you: football is all about injuries. Basically all I'm saying above is if the Packers and Bengals can overcome the injuries they will surely have, then I think they have the best chances to make it to the Super Bowl. I could be wrong but ain't nobody else gonna be right either because the injuries are entirely unknowable. All I know is: it's good to have football back.
Friday, September 2, 2016
Philadelphia 76ers (so far)
This is the season the Sixers (and their fans) have been waiting for years now. They've got a ton of young (unproven) talent and plenty of space for next year. They should still suck pretty bad this year but, unlike previous seasons, they will at least be exciting and/or competitive and they should be well situated to make a for-real splash next summer.
They lost (uh....does it matter who they lost?) Isiah Canaan (Bulls), Elton Brand (Croatia), Christian Wood (Hornets), Ish Smith (Pistons), Kendall Marshall (Jazz), Carl Landry (waived), Sasha Kaun and Tibor Pleiss (both traded for and already waived). Personally I liked Christian Wood (but the Sixers have plenty of young big men) and Ish Smith (but he doesn't give them enough to re-sign him long term) and I think Tibor can be a worthwhile big man in the NBA (hmm, isn't he made for the Mavs?). But really none of these losses are worth thinking twice about going forward.
They added #1 pick Ben Simmons, Timothe Luwawu (#24), Furkan Korkmaz (#26) on draft night, added Jerryd Bayless (3yrs/$27m), Gerald Henderson (2yrs/$18m), Sergio Rodriguez (1yr/$8m) in free agency and they'll be rolling out 2014 draftees Joel Embiid and Dario Saric. Simmons will be a ball dominant forward (sliding McConnell into the 2nd string PG spot that he is perfect for), I suspect Luwawu and Korkmaz will be heading back to Europe for a year and Rodriguez is just a one shot deal.
PG Bayless, SG Henderson, SF Simmons, PF Okafor, C Noel with Rodriguez, McConnell, Stauskus, Thompson, Grant, Covington, Holmes, Embiid off the bench. That's not bad, still a lot of green bananas but the Sixers at least have themselves a bunch. They won't make the playoffs but they'll have another top ten pick (probably two depending on the Lakers) and plenty of flexibility for next summer. 2017-18 is still setting up to be the bust out for Philly but this season will be an exciting one for this team. Already looking forward to watching the youth movement.
They lost (uh....does it matter who they lost?) Isiah Canaan (Bulls), Elton Brand (Croatia), Christian Wood (Hornets), Ish Smith (Pistons), Kendall Marshall (Jazz), Carl Landry (waived), Sasha Kaun and Tibor Pleiss (both traded for and already waived). Personally I liked Christian Wood (but the Sixers have plenty of young big men) and Ish Smith (but he doesn't give them enough to re-sign him long term) and I think Tibor can be a worthwhile big man in the NBA (hmm, isn't he made for the Mavs?). But really none of these losses are worth thinking twice about going forward.
They added #1 pick Ben Simmons, Timothe Luwawu (#24), Furkan Korkmaz (#26) on draft night, added Jerryd Bayless (3yrs/$27m), Gerald Henderson (2yrs/$18m), Sergio Rodriguez (1yr/$8m) in free agency and they'll be rolling out 2014 draftees Joel Embiid and Dario Saric. Simmons will be a ball dominant forward (sliding McConnell into the 2nd string PG spot that he is perfect for), I suspect Luwawu and Korkmaz will be heading back to Europe for a year and Rodriguez is just a one shot deal.
PG Bayless, SG Henderson, SF Simmons, PF Okafor, C Noel with Rodriguez, McConnell, Stauskus, Thompson, Grant, Covington, Holmes, Embiid off the bench. That's not bad, still a lot of green bananas but the Sixers at least have themselves a bunch. They won't make the playoffs but they'll have another top ten pick (probably two depending on the Lakers) and plenty of flexibility for next summer. 2017-18 is still setting up to be the bust out for Philly but this season will be an exciting one for this team. Already looking forward to watching the youth movement.
Thursday, September 1, 2016
Orlando Magic (so far)
For the last coupla years the Magic have been one of my favorite teams to watch (I'm a sucker for youth movements). This summer saw a re-shaping of the entire roster, shipping out much of the promising youth in favor of veterans. As a watcher I've lost interest but has the team improved?
They let go of Brandon Jennings (Knicks), Joe Harris (Nets), Dewayne Dedmon (Spurs), Jason Smith (Wizards), Andrew Nicholson (Wizards), Ersan Ilyasova (Thunder), Victor Oladipo (Thunder), Shabazz Napier (Blazers), and Devyn Marble (Clippers). Jennings was never meant to last in Orlando, Harris is a minimal commodity, Dedmon is nice but not irreplaceable, Smith is....who is he?, I like Nicholson and thought he could've helped this team for the long term, Ilyasova was always just a chess piece for the Magic, Oladipo isn't the bust-out star the Magic were hoping for but he was certainly good enough to earn another contract from Orlando, Napier is probably my least favorite in the entire league, Marble is a bottom of the roster guy. Okay, maybe that's not so bad.
They made all the deletions to make room for DJ Augustin (4yrs/$29m), Jeff Green (1yr/$15m), Bismack Biyombo (4yrs/$72m), Serge Ibaka (free agent next summer), CJ Wilcox, Stephen Zimmerman (41st pick) and they re-signed Evan Fournier (5yrs/$85m). Augustin is a reliable backup PG, Green is an occasionally explosive scorer, Biyombo is an athletic rebounder down low, Ibaka has one year to provide wing scoring and good D, Wilcox will take Napier's spot at the end of the bench, Zimmerman is a nice 2nd round pickup, and giving Fournier a ton of money was the smartest thing they've done in a while.
Considering how little they received for Mo Harkless, Tobias Harris, Kyle O'Quinn, Channing Frye and Victor Oladipo, we shouldn't be surprised that the Magic have moved two of their most recent draft picks: #11 (Damontis Sabonis) to the Thunder and #47 (Jake Layman) to the Blazers. The youth movement is officially over, the sad retread of aging vets is here. Are they better? Ehh, maybe. But they're certainly not any more interesting, nor do they appear secure for the future. How do these pieces fit together? Does Hezonja play PG? Does Ibaka play PF? Do Vucevic and Biyombo play together?
Starting five: PG Payton, SG Fournier, SF Gordon, PF Ibaka, C Vucevic with Hezonja, Augustin, Wilcox, Green, Biyombo, and Zimmerman off the bench. Not a bad collection of talent and they do have Coach Vogel to put it all together. But everything about their moves over the last coupla years indicates a team that doesn't know what it wants to do. They're tired of building for the future but they don't have enough right now to be players. I don't see them getting to the 8th spot in the East and given their penchant for giving up on previous moves, I wouldn't be surprised to see Ibaka, Vucevic and/or Green get moved at the trade deadline. If that is the case, hopefully it's because they have a reason to do so.
They let go of Brandon Jennings (Knicks), Joe Harris (Nets), Dewayne Dedmon (Spurs), Jason Smith (Wizards), Andrew Nicholson (Wizards), Ersan Ilyasova (Thunder), Victor Oladipo (Thunder), Shabazz Napier (Blazers), and Devyn Marble (Clippers). Jennings was never meant to last in Orlando, Harris is a minimal commodity, Dedmon is nice but not irreplaceable, Smith is....who is he?, I like Nicholson and thought he could've helped this team for the long term, Ilyasova was always just a chess piece for the Magic, Oladipo isn't the bust-out star the Magic were hoping for but he was certainly good enough to earn another contract from Orlando, Napier is probably my least favorite in the entire league, Marble is a bottom of the roster guy. Okay, maybe that's not so bad.
They made all the deletions to make room for DJ Augustin (4yrs/$29m), Jeff Green (1yr/$15m), Bismack Biyombo (4yrs/$72m), Serge Ibaka (free agent next summer), CJ Wilcox, Stephen Zimmerman (41st pick) and they re-signed Evan Fournier (5yrs/$85m). Augustin is a reliable backup PG, Green is an occasionally explosive scorer, Biyombo is an athletic rebounder down low, Ibaka has one year to provide wing scoring and good D, Wilcox will take Napier's spot at the end of the bench, Zimmerman is a nice 2nd round pickup, and giving Fournier a ton of money was the smartest thing they've done in a while.
Considering how little they received for Mo Harkless, Tobias Harris, Kyle O'Quinn, Channing Frye and Victor Oladipo, we shouldn't be surprised that the Magic have moved two of their most recent draft picks: #11 (Damontis Sabonis) to the Thunder and #47 (Jake Layman) to the Blazers. The youth movement is officially over, the sad retread of aging vets is here. Are they better? Ehh, maybe. But they're certainly not any more interesting, nor do they appear secure for the future. How do these pieces fit together? Does Hezonja play PG? Does Ibaka play PF? Do Vucevic and Biyombo play together?
Starting five: PG Payton, SG Fournier, SF Gordon, PF Ibaka, C Vucevic with Hezonja, Augustin, Wilcox, Green, Biyombo, and Zimmerman off the bench. Not a bad collection of talent and they do have Coach Vogel to put it all together. But everything about their moves over the last coupla years indicates a team that doesn't know what it wants to do. They're tired of building for the future but they don't have enough right now to be players. I don't see them getting to the 8th spot in the East and given their penchant for giving up on previous moves, I wouldn't be surprised to see Ibaka, Vucevic and/or Green get moved at the trade deadline. If that is the case, hopefully it's because they have a reason to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
