Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Playoffs Power Guide, Bloggie-Style
This marks year #3 for the FBBTTPL re-analysis of the conventional wisdom with regard to NFL teams. You'll recall in the past that I have come up with a vaguely-representative formula based on the BCS to assemble a ranking that looks at records, schedule strength, quality wins, and a subjective poll ranking. The formula is as follows: A + B + C - D = score, and the rankings are scored from lowest to highest.
A: Rank in the ESPN power poll -- the subjective element. Hardly foolproof, but then again any poll that puts the 10-6 Patriots eight spots ahead of the 10-6 Redskins can't be all bad.
B: Number of losses.
C: Strength of schedule factor. This year I only ranked the 17 teams with winning records, so it's a relative strength test, probably differing slightly from a league-wide one. Anyway, I calculate the number of games against winning teams, which among the +.500 teams ranged from 11 (San Diego) to 5 (Seattle). The strength was then ranked 1-17 among these teams, where San Diego gets one point, and Seattle gets 17, and these scores were multiplied by 0.4 to dilute the factor. Otherwise you'd have the Chargers rated ahead of the Colts, which surely isn't an accurate reflection of... OK, never mind.
D: Number of quality wins, i.e., wins over teams included in the Sensational 17.
And the results?
1. Denver 3+3+1-7= 0
2. Indy 1+2+4.8-5= 2.8
3. Seattle 2+3+6.8-5= 8.8
4. Patriots 4+6+2.2-3= 9.2
5. Pittsburgh 6+5+3.2-4= 10.2
6. Chicago 5+5+4.8-3= 11.8
7. Tampa 7+5+4.8-4= 12.8
8. NYG 10+5+2.2-4= 13.2
9. KC 13+6+1-6= 14
10. Jax 11+4+6.4-3= 14.4
11. Cincy 8+5+4.8-3= 14.8
12. Carolina 9+5+4.8-3= 15.8
13. Wash 12+6+2.2-4= 16.2
14. San Diego 15+7+0.4-5= 17.4
15. Dallas 16+7+2.2-4= 21.2
16. Miami 14+7+4.8-4= 21.8
17. Minn 17+7+4.8-2= 26.8
As usual, the order gets shuffled around. The first number in the formula is the ESPN poll, so it's easy to compare. Biggest jump: KC, up four spots; biggest falls: Cincy and Carolina, down three. Some notes:
* Denver's ascention to #1 is pretty dramatic. Of course, they own one of the league's largest home-field advantages, and were 3-3 against winning teams on the road. But they survived a killer schedule and ran the table both at home and against all losing teams in any venue, and they leapfrog Indy and Seattle based on much tougher opponents and more quality wins. Who can argue with that?
* Pats could easily have made it to #3 by playing first-teamers against Miami last week and chalking up what would have been an easy quality win (and one less loss) in that case. Of course, Seattle threw its last game to the Packers for the same reason, so nobody can really complain. Still, the Pats are an enigma here: Six losses, 3-6 against winning teams (after going 9-1 last year and undefeated in 2003)... And yet, toss out the Miami gift and what you have is a tale of two totally unrelated half-seasons. ESPN puts them eight slots ahead of the next 6-loss team... but again, toss out the Miami game and they're a 5-loss team, just like the next six teams in the poll.
* Kansas City is totally underrated. Six quality wins, including over Denver and the Pats. Sure, five road losses and a home chunker to Philly early on before the Eagles disintegrated killed their hopes. But move them to the NFC and is there any reason not to put them in the Super Bowl? Seattle is the odds-on favorite, assuming they can grind down the Bears and/or maybe Tampa in the rain, but the Seahawks played only five winning teams all year, beating only Dallas, the Giants, and a disinterested Colts team which had already clinched home field and whose coach was dealing with a family tragedy.
This marks year #3 for the FBBTTPL re-analysis of the conventional wisdom with regard to NFL teams. You'll recall in the past that I have come up with a vaguely-representative formula based on the BCS to assemble a ranking that looks at records, schedule strength, quality wins, and a subjective poll ranking. The formula is as follows: A + B + C - D = score, and the rankings are scored from lowest to highest.
A: Rank in the ESPN power poll -- the subjective element. Hardly foolproof, but then again any poll that puts the 10-6 Patriots eight spots ahead of the 10-6 Redskins can't be all bad.
B: Number of losses.
C: Strength of schedule factor. This year I only ranked the 17 teams with winning records, so it's a relative strength test, probably differing slightly from a league-wide one. Anyway, I calculate the number of games against winning teams, which among the +.500 teams ranged from 11 (San Diego) to 5 (Seattle). The strength was then ranked 1-17 among these teams, where San Diego gets one point, and Seattle gets 17, and these scores were multiplied by 0.4 to dilute the factor. Otherwise you'd have the Chargers rated ahead of the Colts, which surely isn't an accurate reflection of... OK, never mind.
D: Number of quality wins, i.e., wins over teams included in the Sensational 17.
And the results?
1. Denver 3+3+1-7= 0
2. Indy 1+2+4.8-5= 2.8
3. Seattle 2+3+6.8-5= 8.8
4. Patriots 4+6+2.2-3= 9.2
5. Pittsburgh 6+5+3.2-4= 10.2
6. Chicago 5+5+4.8-3= 11.8
7. Tampa 7+5+4.8-4= 12.8
8. NYG 10+5+2.2-4= 13.2
9. KC 13+6+1-6= 14
10. Jax 11+4+6.4-3= 14.4
11. Cincy 8+5+4.8-3= 14.8
12. Carolina 9+5+4.8-3= 15.8
13. Wash 12+6+2.2-4= 16.2
14. San Diego 15+7+0.4-5= 17.4
15. Dallas 16+7+2.2-4= 21.2
16. Miami 14+7+4.8-4= 21.8
17. Minn 17+7+4.8-2= 26.8
As usual, the order gets shuffled around. The first number in the formula is the ESPN poll, so it's easy to compare. Biggest jump: KC, up four spots; biggest falls: Cincy and Carolina, down three. Some notes:
* Denver's ascention to #1 is pretty dramatic. Of course, they own one of the league's largest home-field advantages, and were 3-3 against winning teams on the road. But they survived a killer schedule and ran the table both at home and against all losing teams in any venue, and they leapfrog Indy and Seattle based on much tougher opponents and more quality wins. Who can argue with that?
* Pats could easily have made it to #3 by playing first-teamers against Miami last week and chalking up what would have been an easy quality win (and one less loss) in that case. Of course, Seattle threw its last game to the Packers for the same reason, so nobody can really complain. Still, the Pats are an enigma here: Six losses, 3-6 against winning teams (after going 9-1 last year and undefeated in 2003)... And yet, toss out the Miami gift and what you have is a tale of two totally unrelated half-seasons. ESPN puts them eight slots ahead of the next 6-loss team... but again, toss out the Miami game and they're a 5-loss team, just like the next six teams in the poll.
* Kansas City is totally underrated. Six quality wins, including over Denver and the Pats. Sure, five road losses and a home chunker to Philly early on before the Eagles disintegrated killed their hopes. But move them to the NFC and is there any reason not to put them in the Super Bowl? Seattle is the odds-on favorite, assuming they can grind down the Bears and/or maybe Tampa in the rain, but the Seahawks played only five winning teams all year, beating only Dallas, the Giants, and a disinterested Colts team which had already clinched home field and whose coach was dealing with a family tragedy.
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
It Has To Happen
Five reasons why the Sox need Miguel Tejada:
5. The obvious one -- three infielders just can't get it done.
4. The other obvious one -- Manny must go. At this point, he is either of no value to the Sox, if we are to believe he won't even report in the spring, or is of almost no value, having burned every bridge in sight this time even if he does show up. All I can say is, I never should have thrown down for an authentic Manny jersey. At least Stacey talked me out of Manuel for a boy's name.
3. Assuming Manny goes, what we lose in thump we gain in intangibles, out of the same slot in the order. Some numbers to consider...
- we all know Manny is the metronome. Vs. lefties? 1.000 OPS. Righties? 1.000 OPS. Home? 1.000 OPS. Late innings? 1.000 OPS.
- Tejada is less impressive at the plate. Assuming he's in his prime, recent seasons suggest he'll post an OB% about 50 points lower, in the .350 range, and a slugging some 75-100 points lower. BUT: he strikes out some 30 percent less or so, makes good contact, and really only loses the OB% in walks. Will he ever match Manny's production? Probably not. But he's a shortstop, so will he and a replacement outfielder together match the production of Manny and a replacement shortstop? Perhaps.
2. Since Sox fans are still as unnecessarily negative as ever, this move will completely change the tone in Boston.
[Interesting and rather cathartic column by Gammons today. Yes, it seems like the Sox are in management disarray since Theo left, but I definitely buy the idea that if Theo had been here, the roster (and Yankee roster as well) would quite possibly be no different.
1. And above all else... He's Ortiz' best friend. Ortiz is going into his walk year with about 28 teams waiting for him. Ortiz is the indispensible one.
Make it happen Jen Hoyerington.
Five reasons why the Sox need Miguel Tejada:
5. The obvious one -- three infielders just can't get it done.
4. The other obvious one -- Manny must go. At this point, he is either of no value to the Sox, if we are to believe he won't even report in the spring, or is of almost no value, having burned every bridge in sight this time even if he does show up. All I can say is, I never should have thrown down for an authentic Manny jersey. At least Stacey talked me out of Manuel for a boy's name.
3. Assuming Manny goes, what we lose in thump we gain in intangibles, out of the same slot in the order. Some numbers to consider...
- we all know Manny is the metronome. Vs. lefties? 1.000 OPS. Righties? 1.000 OPS. Home? 1.000 OPS. Late innings? 1.000 OPS.
- Tejada is less impressive at the plate. Assuming he's in his prime, recent seasons suggest he'll post an OB% about 50 points lower, in the .350 range, and a slugging some 75-100 points lower. BUT: he strikes out some 30 percent less or so, makes good contact, and really only loses the OB% in walks. Will he ever match Manny's production? Probably not. But he's a shortstop, so will he and a replacement outfielder together match the production of Manny and a replacement shortstop? Perhaps.
2. Since Sox fans are still as unnecessarily negative as ever, this move will completely change the tone in Boston.
[Interesting and rather cathartic column by Gammons today. Yes, it seems like the Sox are in management disarray since Theo left, but I definitely buy the idea that if Theo had been here, the roster (and Yankee roster as well) would quite possibly be no different.
1. And above all else... He's Ortiz' best friend. Ortiz is going into his walk year with about 28 teams waiting for him. Ortiz is the indispensible one.
Make it happen Jen Hoyerington.
