2020-21 NBA Playoffs (Play-in games)

Hornets 117-144 Pacers

Yeah, the Hornets were completely out of gas by the end of the season and were never in this game even for a minute. The Pacers played well, looked pretty good. 

Wizards 100-118 Celtics

I was surprised by this, thinking the fury of Russell Westbrook could pretty much single-handedly take the retiring Celtics, who look ready to be done with this season. Instead, Westbrook couldn't get any offense going (he was at his best when he was hunting for fouls more than buckets) and Beal and Bertans didn't score either. The Wizards mostly flailed and let Tatum go for 50. Honestly I can only assume that the Wizards wanted even less of the Nets than the Celtics did. 

Spurs 96-100 Grizzlies

Hard fought battle, the Grizzlies were generally a step ahead of the Spursand controlled pretty much throughout. Everytime the Spurs made a run, the Grizz would regroup and get the lead back. Frustrating watch as team defense just isn't as sexy as stars putting up big numbers. 

Warriors 100-103 Lakers

Fun game. The Warriors were up at halftime but was the glass half full or half empty: Curry didn't light it up and the Warriors were still ahead, but neither did Lebron or Davis and the Lakers weren't out of it. Davis got right in the 2nd half and Lebron did all his Lebron stuff and a late flailing 3 that the Warriors couldn't counter was the difference. The Warriors really wanted this game and it was there for them but frankly no one shot well, Wiggins defended Lebron well at times but then didn't mark him much in the 2nd half. I'm not surprised the Lakers won--they really wanted this game and still had to flail a fluke to get it--but I really have doubts about this squad. 

Pacers 115-142 Wizards

So, they couldn't score at all on the Celtics, then drop 142 on the Pacers. Come on, man, the Wizards didn't wanna play the Nets, that's all. The Pacers just never got going, while the Wizards hit every shot they put up it seemed like. 

Grizzlies 117-112 (ot) Warriors

Man, I didn't even think the Grizz played all that well, but Draymond was pretty awful, Wiggins disappeared for long stretches, Curry was okay but not great and the Grizz just kinda never went away. The Warriors were really gassed by overtime while the Grizz still seemed kinda fresh. Ja Morant is not a player I've seen much of, he's a weird player: seems totally in control and yet has no idea what he's doing simultaneously. He gets into the lane without much effort but never seems to know what he's gonna do when he gets there. 

A personal note on the play-in games, which were started last year (in the bubble). This is the first year out in the real world that the league has had this intro to the post-season. Personally I didn't like it, don't wanna like it, don't need it in the future. 

For the most part, I'd say no one liked the play-in games. And that's considering that this year featured the defending champs (that rare #7 seed that actually could win the championship) against the most popular NBA star of his generation (the rare #8 seed that actually has a strong national interes)--and went to a riveting late game finish--in the West; while the East featured two teams eager to avoid facing the #2 Nets, bringing its own wacky drama. 

And in the end the only difference it made was bouncing Steph Curry--what's the upside of that? 

This year's version is basically the best possible arrangement of teams we're ever going to see...and we still didn't like it. 

Commissioner Silver, the answer is clear: this year is as good as this will ever be, meaning you should end it now. 

Remember: if the NBA play-in games were really like MLB's version, then the playoffs would've been: Sixers, Bucks, Hawks with the Nets playing the Heat for the 4th spot in the East and Jazz, Suns, Mavs with the Nuggets playing the Clippers for 4th in the West. That's not what we got, nor will we ever. (*)

(*) I didn't like the play-in game. I wasn't sure if I made that clear. Lebron v Steph will never--can never--be repeated. This will never be better than it was this year and this year really wasn't all that great anyway. 

2019-20 NFL (Wild Card Round)

Bills @ Texans (-2.5)(o/u 43.5)
Two similar teams: good defensive squads with unpredictable QBs. Seems to me like the Texans QB (Deshaun Watson) is the better of the two QBs, while the Bills D is the better of the two defenses. So how does this strength on strength match work? I'm gonna take the home team to make a coupla more plays than the road team, that is I'm expecting Watson to make more big plays than Josh Allen. The Texans have frankly never been as good as it seems like they should be, the Bills are getting to a good place (but another year of deteriorating Pats is the Bills' best bet). This game could come down to turnovers, I could see this being a sloppy contest. I'll take the Texans 20-10 (Texans and the under).


Titans @ Pats (-4.5)(o/u 44.5)
The Titans run the ball well, don't make dumb mistakes (well, since they bench Marcus Mariota) and they have a strong Belichick pedigree, which pretty much makes them the perfect team to shock the Pats on their home field in the playoffs. The Pats D is good but that offense is not classic Pats, if the Titans pass rush can get to Brady then they could be stopped. I don't see this as high scoring game, could be a real slog of a contest. I think this'll be a tough game for Pats fans but I think they pull it out late.  I'll take the Pats 20-17 (Titans and the under).


Vikings @ Saints (-8)(o/u 49.5)
(Hmm...I don't think I saw the Vikings all year long...is that possible?) The Vikings are a good--not great--team and in the playoffs those are the teams I would typically bet on: solid O-line, solid D-line, QB that doesn't make mistakes, defensive backs that make the right play (if not the big play). But the Saints are the Saints, man: big offense, gonna be slinging it around and gonna be trying to make plays on defense (at which I think they'll be successful enough). I like the steady Vikings but I just don't think they've got enough to hang with the Saints at home. The Vikings' best bet is if the Saints are sloppy, muffing plays or turning the ball over (in which case I could totally see the Vikings stealing this).  I think it's close but I gotta go with the Saints at home, Saints 27-21 (Vikings and the under). 


Seahawks (-1.5) @ Eagles (o/u 45)
I always get the Seahawks wrong, I always underestimate what the combo of a good QB/good coach can achieve. But the Seahawks have actually looked more shaky than sturdy this season and I'm a little surprised they're going on the road as a favorite--even against the frustratingly disappointing Eagles. I like the Eagles to play their best game and punch the Seahawks in the mouth. Tough to take struggling Carson Wentz over the always-reliable Russell Wilson, but I just think the Eagles will have a few tricks up their sleeve that the Seahawks don't have. I'll say Eagles 17-16 (Eagles and the under).