Husky Basketball Mid-Season Report

Yesterday's victory over the OSU Beavers marked the halfway point in the Huskies' Pac-10 season. The conference season has been a disappointment to say the least, evident in the Huskies' 3-6 conference record, with the Huskies (hopefully) hitting rock bottom in a blow-out loss to Washington State just over one week ago. Acquiring a bid for the NCAA tournament will most likely require winning six or seven of their remaining conference games, and a strong showing in the conference tournament. The Huskies do have the benefit of having five of the remaining nine conference games at home, where the Huskies have been clearly superior throughout the season, with only one home loss. My intent in this post is to highlight the Huskies' strenghs and weaknesses, both on an individual and team level, through the use of statistics, as a means to evaluate the season performance and to illustrate what must be improved if the Huskies are to succeed in the second half of the Pac-10 season. Being the huge nerd that I am, I've tracked the Huskies statistics, both cumulative and in conference, throughout the season, and in addition to the traditional counting statistics, I've kept some more advanced, and hopefully revealing, metrics. I've kept most of the stats that John Hollinger provides to ESPN.com, including True Shooting Percentage; Assist, Rebound, and Turnover Rate; and also per 40 minute points, rebounds, assists, fouls, steals, and blocks. I wish I was better with Blogger and/or Excel, so that I could figure out how to attach my spreadsheet to this post, but as of now I haven't figured that out yet. For now, you'll have to trust me on the numbers. I swear I'm not lying.

Looking at the team numbers, the Huskies as a team have one real strength: rebounding. For the season, the Huskies have grabbed 57% of all rebounds, a very significant advantage. This number drops to 53.9% for conference games, a total that is still very good. In particular, the Huskies are great offensive rebounders, an attribute that greatly enhances their offensive game. What's interesting is that this advantage is mostly created by one player: Jon Brockman. For the season Brockman has a Rebound Rate of 19.7, meaning that he grabs 19.7% of all rebounds while he's on the court. By comparison, the next closest Husky is Artem Wallace, with a Rebound Rate of 12.9. Brockman's rebounding really carries the team, as Spencer Hawes has been a fairly inferior rebounder for a college seven-footer, though Brockman does receive some help from Justin Dentmon and Adrian Oliver, both of whom are very good rebounders for guards. Also of note is the complete lack of rebounding that the Huskies get from Ryan Appleby, who's posted a season Rebound Rate of 3.7. Dentmon and Oliver have accumulated rebounds at a rate of roughly 2.5 times better than Appleby.

The Huskies have also had one glaring weakness this season: defense. This has been a real source of disappointment, due to the early season emphasis from the coaches and players on the importance of defense. What's more, there doesn't seem to be a real obvious cause for this deficiency. The Huskies aren't clearly athletically inferior to their opponents, and they have plenty of size. If I had to venture a guess, I would blame a lack of communication and continuity, which is an issue with such a young team, though it is an issue that more commonly manifests itself on the offensive side of the ball, which has been one of the Huskies' strengths, though their offensive performance has been far from perfect. The defensive issues have been readily apparent in conference play in particular. In conference games the Huskies have yielded an opponent's True Shooting Percentage of 60.3%, which is an astronomical figure. True Shooting Percentage adjusts shooting percentage to account for three-pointers and free throws, and from personal observation, it does seem as if the Huskies have been victimized by the three point shot, with the Arizona game really sticking out in that regard. It seems like the Huskies yield an inordinate amount of wide-open three point attempts, with the main culprit being slow defensive rotation, which also is apparent in the amount of easy lay-ups and dunks they give up. This is one place where it seems like the Huskies have missed Joel Smith and the departed Harvey Perry. The Huskies' perimeter defense would really benefit from one or two more athletic bodies to add to the rotation. I also think that the Huskies increased reliance on the scoring of Ryan Appleby in conference play is a detriment to the defense, as Appleby doesn't strike me as a particularly adept defensive presence. I don't think it's in the best interest of the team to have Appleby on the court for 30+ minutes a night, but with the offensive contributions of Quincy Pondexter and others limited in conference play, Romar's hand is forced. I don't mean to denigrate Appleby's talents, as his offensive play in conference play (TSP of 66.3%, high assist and low turnover rates) has been a great aid to the team, but he does have holes in his game (defense and rebounding) that leave him best suited to a complementary rather than leading role. Whatever the cause may be, the Huskies have defensive issues that must be fixed if they wish to improve in the second half of conference play.

With the team strengths and weaknesses addressed, I'll move onto the individual players, and see what the stats have to say about their performance thus far.

Spencer Hawes: The Huskies best scorer has seen his performance drop off slightly in conference play, though through fault of his own. A bout with the flu and an ankle injury have limited him, and he still seems to be trying to get back to full strength. As much as I like his scoring repetoire and passing ability, he does have some holes in his game, much of which stem from a slight lack of aggressiveness and average athleticism. His rebound rate of 12.2 for the season and 11.1 in conference are very low for a seven-footer, and his shot-blocking abilities have dropped off in conference with the increased level of competition. I have one qualm with his offense: he doesn't go hard to the basket enough. In eight conference games he's only attempted 22 free-throws, compared to 101 field goal attempts. As good a foul shooter as Hawes is, if he could get that ratio closer to one free-throw attempt for every two field goals, it would really increase his scoring and overall offensive efficiency.

Jon Brockman: One of the few Huskies to raise the level of his game in conference. He's increased his offensive efficiency by hitting his free-throws more frequently, and he's also cut down on turnovers and fouls while taking a more prominent role in the offense. On a completely unanalytical level, he's an absolute joy to watch play, and I'm happy that he's the type of player who will stick around for four years.

Quincy Pondexter: His drop off in conference play has been pretty disappointing, but he also set the bar fairly high early season. His drop in scoring looks like one of the reasons for the struggles in conference, and he's been very turnover- and foul-prone in conference, which has led to less playing time. The Huskies need him to play better, because he's one of the best players on the team at creating his own shot and getting to the free-throw line, where's he's a bery good foul shooter. I wish he'd take more three-point attempts because he's been very accurate on three's all year.

Justin Dentmon: His level of play has risen from that of a season ago, but he's been erratic. Too often he's out of control, taking bad shots and making turnovers, which leads to a low TSP and a high turnover rate. He does seem to have figured out that he's not a very good three-point shooter, and has scaled back his attempts in conference to just one a game. Like Pondexter, when he's on, the team really benefits because of his ability to make his own shot and create easy looks for everyone else.

Ryan Appleby: Along with Brockman, Appleby has been one of the players to raise his game in conference. Appleby is a player who really benefits from the evaluative ability of TSP. Because he takes so many three-pointers, his field-goal percentage will tend to be lower than one would think with his shooting ability; with TSP though, his three-pointers are accounted for, and due to the fact that he's hitting a ridiculous 50% of his threes in conference, his TSP sits at 66.3% in conference. He's also a very good passer and rarely turns the ball over.

Phil Nelson: This guy can really frustrate me. It seems like he forgets that he's 6-8. Over half the shots he takes are threes, but he's only hit 29.4% on the season. Also, in 349 minutes this season, he's only attempted 3 free throws, which is really a pretty amazing ability to avoid getting fouled, and has not attempted a single free-throw in Pac-10 play in 183 minutes. His mid-range game looks to be pretty strong, but he doesn't use it enough. He has trouble asserting himself on offense, and seems content to let the game come to him.

Adrian Oliver: Intriguing. Another player who's improved with the start of the Pac-10 season. He's not a very good scorer or shooter, but he's a very good penetrator and passer, with the best Assist Rate on the team for the season and during conference play, where he leads by a wide margin (Assist Rate measures how many of the possessions that a player uses that end up as assists). In addition, he has the best assist-to-turnover ratio on the team in conference. He's a good rebounder despite his size, and one of the better defenders on the team, but he's very foul-prone, leading the team in fouls per 40 minutes on the season. I think he could be a beast in a couple seasons if his shooting improves, and he has improved his shooting in conference play, though he's also not taking shots as frequently.

Artem Wallace: Wallace has been playing more minutes as of late, though I'm not quite sure why. He can do one thing, rebound, especially on the offensive end, but lacks any other discernible skills. No offensive game to speak of, and every time he attempts a free throw an angel dies. If Romar ever sent in a player just to make really hard fouls in an attempt to injure opponents, ala John Chaney, Wallace would be the odds-on favorite.

Hans Gasser: A sentimental favorite of mine, due to his earnest expression while setting screens, and the fact that he once flipped off my ex-girlfriend at Earl's on the Ave. A decent rotation guy, he basically does what Mike Jensen did last year, stretching the defense with his ability to step out and hit the three, not really rebounding, and setting lots of screens. He doesn't turn over the ball, and he's a decent passer.

Brandon Burmeister: He's kind of been forgotten in conference play. All he does is shoot threes, though he does have good size for a guard and looks proficient rebounding and playing defense, but it seems like he's been the odd man out recently.

So that's the player-by-player breakdown. If I had to offer a solution for improving play in the second half of conference play, it'd be better defensive play, which should hopefully come with experience, and possibly the return of Joel Smith. Also, a number of players will have to pick up their level of play, most notably Quincy Pondexter and Phil Nelson, and Justin Dentmon has to be more consistent, which is going to be the result of an active choice by him to play more within his means. The Huskies will have to win the rest of their home games, including UCLA and Washington State, and then hope to get a couple road victories, with their easiest games coming at Arizona State and Oregon State, and may also have to win the game at Pittsburgh in three weeks. It's not impossible, but it won't happen unless improvements are made on both a team and individual basis.

Any other input is welcome. Drop your knowledge in the comments.

Husky Basketball Stats

(I'm pretty sure I figured out how to display the stats. Hopefully this link works. If not, I will have proved once again to be hopelessly inept when it comes to computers.)

NFL Playoffs: Conference Semi-Finals!!!

Well, I went just 1-3 in the Wild-Card round, but I guess it could of been worse. I'm actually fine with the picks I made, and would probably make them again. It's kind of hard to predict that the Colts would come out and stuff Larry Johnson all day, while Trent Green decides to have one of the worst games of his life. The Eagles were in position to cover nearly all game long, but decided to let the Giants stick around and nearly make a comeback. As to the Seahawks, I'm just happy they won. I've come to the conclusion that they're kind of shitty, yet lucky, which I guess isn't that bad. Better lucky than good, right? I did nail the Jets-Pats game. I was annoyed early on when the Jets were keeping the game close, because I didn't want to see them get a cheap cover, but the Pats came through, thus ending the season of one of the least impressive 10-6 teams of all time.

The Jets had a lot of luck this season due to scheduling, etc., but I believe luck plays a much bigger role in the NFL than some would like to admit, and I believe the Jets have a young nucleus that could be very good in the future, if they play their cards right. Their offensive line is very talented and had two rookies on it this year, I like their receivers, and I think Chad Pennington will continue to win games if he's healthy. I like to make fun of how weak his arm appears to be, but at the same time I think that arm strength is one of the more overrated aspects in a quarterback. I thought it was funny when Jay Cutler's draft stock went up so much last year as the result of him having the strongest arm in the draft, based on velocity. How frequently does a quarterback throw a pass as hard as he possibly can in a game? Michael Vick has one of the strongest arms I've seen, but it doesn't matter when he's skipping passes to his receivers and forcing balls to Alge Crumpler in triple coverage. I'd rather have an accurate quarterback who makes good decisions as to when to throw the ball any day, and that's the category that Pennington falls into.

I really like this slate of second-round games. Every game is intriguing. I think Patriots-Chargers will be a great game, I love the combination of the Ravens defense and the Colts offense, I think Saints-Eagles could go either way, and I think Bears-Seahawks could be a strong upset possibility. The Bears seem to be moving backwards, while the Hawks seem to be improving, and they seem to have luck and momentum on their side. They also have experience playing in bad weather, which is important. Anyway, let's get down to the match-ups, with lines from Bodog.com, over/under listed after the teams:

Indianapolis (+4) @ Baltimore (42)

Best defense in the league against the best offense. What's more, Baltimore might be the best team against the run AND the pass, while Indy combines the best pass attack with one of the best run games. A definite unstoppable force versus immovable object game. I think what will be underlooked though, is the other main match-up, the Baltimore offense against the Colts defense. I think this is what will ultimately decide the game. Baltimore isn't great on offense, but they can do enough to win. Indy's defense, on the other hand, won't be able to do enough to win, in my opinion. I believe their defensive success in the first round against KC was mostly due to awful coaching by Herm Edwards, rather than their defense turning a corner. I think Baltimore will be able to grind the ball against Indy, and do enough through the air with play-action to keep Indy from stacking the front, as they were able to do against KC. My money's on Baltimore

New England (+4.5) @ San Diego (47)

I think this could be a great game. It seems like no one knows what's going to happen, even Vegas, which has given the official "We have no clue" spread, 4.5. San Diego's the best offense outside of the state of Indiana, but New England has a strong defense. I think the weakest of the four main units in this game is San Diego's defense. They're pretty strong against the pass, due to a great pass rush, but they have holes against the run, and the Pats are a strong running team. My pick all week long has been Whale's Vagina, but I've started to waver. It's the Marty Schottenheimer factor. He terrifies me. He's choked so often in the play-offs over the years, going way too conservative on offense to win. At the same time though, I don't know if he's had a team as strong as this one, and LaDainian Tomlinson is at the peak of his game. I'm going to stick with my initial reaction of Chargers, but I think this is my shakiest pick.

Philadelphia (+6) @ New Orleans (49)

This line has moved quite a bit this week; I think it opened at either 4 or 4.5. They've played once this year, with New Orleans winning 27-24 at home. I get the feeling that this game might come down to a field goal, so I would take Philadelphia and the points. I think either team could win this outright, and six points is just too large of a line. Both teams are really good offenses, and I think Philadelphia might have actually improved with Donovan McNabb out, not because Jeff Garcia's a better quarterback, but because it makes the offense more reliant on Bryan Westbrook. Philly could be scary next year with McNabb in, as long as Andy Reid remembers to get the ball to Westbrook more often. As good as Philly is, the Saints are probably their equal on offense. I do think Philly is slightly better defensively, though losing CB Lito Sheppard to injury really hurts them. I think New Orleans can have a lot of success in three and four wide receiver sets, though they have injury issues of their own, as Joe Horn may not play. I think there's going to be a lot of points in this game, and it'll be exciting as hell. Definitely watch it if you have the chance. I think it'll come down to a field goal.

Seattle (+9) @ Chicago (37)

As I mentioned last week, I am a shameless Seahawks homer. I don't think I'm irrational when it comes to them, but I may be a tad over optimistic in my evaluations of them. That said, I think they have a legitimate shot in this game, and I think they're a great pick to cover. I have worked to suppress the first Bears-Hawks game from this season, and ultimately, I don't think that examining that game is a very good method of looking at this one. These are very different teams than they were in week 4, when they first met. Chicago is not nearly as scary on defense with Tommie Harris and Mike Brown out, and Tank Johnson's various, ahem, distractions. The loss of Harris creates a cascade effect through the entire defense; they don't get as effective of an initial surge up front with him out, which hurts against the run and the pass. Without as strong a pass rush from the front four, they need to blitz more, which leaves them susceptible to the run and to big plays passing. On offense, Sexy Rexy Grossman has lost his confidence, and their passing game has been scaled back significantly, which actually benefits a Seahawk defense that is prone to giving up big plays. I was pretty impressed by the Seahawk defense last week, which really only gave up 13 points (Dallas returned a kickoff) to a very strong offense. They reminded me of the defense of last year, good at bending but not breaking, clutching up in big situations, pressuring the quarterback, and swarming to the ball. I think that the impact of losing Marcus Trufant and Herndon is overstated, because neither corner played very well at any point this year. As a team, the Hawks have been much more consistent the last few weeks, and they seem to be steadily improving. I think they should, at least, be able to keep this game close, and I think they could win it outright. Plus, there's a good chance it snows, which makes any game much cooler and important looking. Seahawks and the points!!! And I like the over!!!

Well, there you go. I plan on being firmly planted on the couch all weekend, drinking America's finest beer of 1893, Pabst Blue Ribbon. I think this could be a memorable weekend. Now, if only Sexy Rexy Grossman could take some pointers on "gunslinger's mentality" from Tony Romo.

Projecting the Mariners in 2007

Hello there. I have been trying to avoid the Mariners as a subject of discussion as of late, due to the saddening ineptitude of their front office this offseason, but with the recent struggles of the UW basketball team, and the absolutely atrocious KC-Indy game on right now, I have turned to my trusty companion, the Interwebs, in an attempt to find solace regarding the prospects of the upcoming baseball season for the M's. One of my favorite aspects of the offseason is making projections for the upcoming season, and a simple search of the webs reveals that there is clearly no shortage of widely available forecasting systems for MLB. Of course, the gold standard for forecasting systems is PECOTA, published by Baseball Prospectus, but alas, it is yet to be unveiled for this upcoming season, and due to the proprietary nature of its formuli, I would feel squeamish about reproducing too much of its data in this freely available forum. The good news, though, is that there are a number of freely available forecasting systems that are also quite good, among them ZIPS, from Baseball Think Factory, Tango Tiger's Marcel, and a new system I've discovered this year, Chone, produced by Blogger's own Chone Smith, who has really done some impressive work this offseason, despite being an Angels fan. Chone ran r-correlations for the various forecasting systems about a month ago, and came up with these results for offensive projections for these three systems: ZIPS, .684, CHONE, .677, and Marcel, .664. Earlier research by Tango Tiger revealed that the strongest r-correlation a projection system can have is about .73, and all three of these systems come reasonably close to that figure.

With the individual player forecasts available on these sites, it's fairly easy to make a reasonable projection of a team's preformance for next season, particularly an offense's performance, just by making some predictions for playing time. A team's cumulative OPS corresponds amazingly well to their runs scored; i.e., a team with an OPS of 750 will score about 750 runs, within 10% in either direction. Last season, the Mariners' OPS was 749, and they scored 756 runs. The Giants produced an OPS of 746 and scored 746 runs. 15 teams in MLB last season had OPS and runs scored figures that differed by less then 20. This measure works really well for middle-of-the-pack offenses, which is where I figure the Mariners to be. This measure does not work as well when predicting a team's pitching performance, but it can still be used to make a rough estimate of runs allowed, and with the runs scored and runs allowed figures, one can estimate a team's Pythagorean record (explained here for the uninitiated). As it currently stands, I would expect the Mariners line-up for next season to look something like this, with my predicted PA's for each player in parentheses:

CF Ichiro (700)
3B Adrian Beltre (650)
DH Jose Vidro (500) (goddammit)
LF Raul Ibanez (650)
1B Ritchie Sexson (600)
RF Jose Guillen (500)
C Kenji Johjima (500)
2B Jose Lopez (600)
SS Yuniesky Betancourt (600)

This seems about right, though I have no clue what they plan on doing with Ben Broussard. I hope they don't plan on playing Vidro at 2B because he's useless in the field at this point. There was some discussion about him playing first, which makes me think they'll move Broussard for nothing, as Bavasi seems to enjoy doing that. Here's how I figure the bench distribution of PA's will look, if they keep Broussard:

Broussard (300)
Rene Rivera (ugh) (150)
Willie Fuckin' Bloomquist (200)
Mike Morse (100)
Jeremy Reed (150)

These are complete guesses, as they will probably make another terrible move that will alter the bench, most likely involving Reed or Broussard, but I can't predict the future. These estimates give the M's 6200 total PA, about what they had last year. Now, here's the projected OPS figures for each player, by CHONE, ZIPS, and Marcel:

Ichiro: 770, 789, 794
Beltre: 811, 779, 833
Vidro: 780, 726, 761
Ibanez: 762, 800, 812
Sexson: 842, 824, 854
Guillen: 795, 776, 800
Johjima: 785, 771, 774
Lopez: 775, 737, 739
Betancourt: 695, 697, 739
Broussard: 792, 805, 811
Rivera: 643, 545(!), 726
WFB: 697, 607, 665
Morse: 696, 715, 800
Reed: 741, 728, 725

Each system basically agrees on Ichiro, Johjima, Broussard, Sexson, and somewhat surprisingly, Reed. More variance on Beltre, Ibanez, and the young guys not named Reed. So here's the team OPS for each projection system: CHONE: 771, ZIPS: 757, Marcel: 784. The three systems come up with pretty similar numbers. The Mariners can be expected to score between 700-850 runs next season. Out of the three projections, I think the ZIPS numbers seem too pessimistic, and the Marcel numbers a bit optimistic. Marcel is the least sophisticated of the three systems, as it is just a three-year weighted average regressed to the mean, and adjusted for player age, and I think it may be a bit bullish on Beltre, Sexson and Guillen.

These run figures aren't too bad when you consider the scoring environment of Safeco. I don't think the Mariners problem will be offense. It's too bad they'll feel compelled to throw a bunch of AB's at Vidro, and the bench is going to be ugly, but the M's should be able to score enough to win. The biggest problem I see is the lack of depth. An injury to one of the big guys would really kill the offense.

My methodology for the pitching portion of the projection will be different than the hitters' portion. Because OPS allowed doesn't correlate to runs allowed the same way as OPS does to runs scored, I'm going to take the projected ERA figures by the three forecasting systems, then create innings pitched projections for each pitcher, and finally, add on the average unearned run figure for American league teams from last season (60). I'm going to err on the side of caution on the innings pitched figures due to injury concerns, etc.

Starting Pitchers (ERA by CHONE, ZIPS, Marcel), and innings projected by me:

Felix Hernandez (3.34, 3.71, 3.95) 190
Jarrod Washburn (4.14, 4.45, 4.47) 180
Miguel Batista (4.58, 4.62, 4.47) 180
Horacio Ramirez (4.85, 5.13, 4.54) 140
Cha Seung Baek (4.58, 6.02, 4.38) 100
Jake Woods (4.54, 4.73, 4.61) 100

Wow, that's an incredibly mediocre rotation. If it wasn't for the presence of Felix, I'd be tempted to call it a contender for worst rotation in the league. Even with Felix, it won't be very good. The worst part is that they had to pay good money to acquire two of these guys, then had to trade Rafael Soriano to get another. Washburn and Batista are basically league average starters with durability, while Ramirez is a little worse than that and injury prone, and Baek and Woods are replacement-level. The bullpen should be pretty good once again, mainly due to the presence of JJ Putz, but the lack of Rafael Soriano and the uncertainty about Mark Lowe means the unit probably won't be as strong as last year (projected ERA by CHONE, ZiPS, Marcel), and innings projected by me:

JJ Putz (2.84, 2.88, 3.66) 70
George Sherill (3.24, 3.40, 4.31) 50
Chris Reitsma (4.35, can't find his ZiPS, 4.99) 60
Eric O'Flaherty (4.88, 4.35, 4.50) 50
Julio Mateo (4.11, 3.97, 4.35) 60
Sean Green (4.41, 4.79, 4.50) 50
Justin Lehr (4.46, 5.11, 4.88) 70
Sean White (no projection, 5.45, no projection) 50
Mark Lowe (4.61, 4.44, 4.10) 30

I used the ZiPS figure across the three systems for Sean White, and used a midpoint between CHONE and Marcel for Reitsma's ZiPS figure. I suspect these nine to get almost all the bullpen innings this season, barring injury. I guess I should throw in Jon Huber, too, but I'm going to be lazy. I don't really know what to expect with Lowe. Information on his injury has been incredibly hazy. I would guess he'll be able to pitch around the All-Star break. This only adds up to 1380 innings, and most teams pitch about 1440 innings, so I'm just going to tack on 60 innings of last years' league average ERA. This isn't exactly a scientific process, and there's a good chance that these innings could be at a much higher ERA, but they could also be lower, due to variance in performance in small samples. So here's the runs allowed projections, by system: CHONE: 740, ZiPS: 783, Marcel: 769.

Runs scored, runs allowed, by system:

CHONE: 771, 740
ZiPS: 757, 783
Marcel: 784, 769

With these numbers we can calculate expected Pythagorean wins:

CHONE: 84.3
ZiPS: 78.2
Marcel: 82.6

These numbers aren't nearly as bad as I thought they would be (that could be the Mariners 2007 slogan: "not nearly as bad as you thought"). Things working against the M's: Mike Hargrove, susceptibility to injury, lack of a bench, lack of minor league depth, inability to make in-season moves, inability to beat the A's, irrational Willie Bloomquist love. I think when all is said and done, the M's will be about .500, and be fairly boring in the process. I love this team!

NFL Playoffs

The first week of the NFL playoffs will soon be upon us. I closed out the NFL season on a pretty strong run of picks, riding nearly all underdogs to an 11-5 week 17, after going 8-8 in week 16. My final regular season record: 135-119-2. Sixteen games over .500, for a winning percentage of 53.1%. In addition, I predicted the winners of six of the eight divisions; I doubt anyone alive hit more than that, because no one thought New Orleans would win the NFC South over Carolina, the consensus preseason Superbowl pick, hardly anyone picked the Eagles in the East, and no one thought Baltimore would be as good, or Pittsburgh as mediocre, as those two teams were.

I think I started to figure this year out by the end of the season, as in the last four weeks I went 39-25, hitting nearly 61%. Not too bad for my first full season of picks. Here's the thing: if I had theoretically placed twenty dollars on every single game of this NFL season, here's how much money I would of won: $185, barely ten dollars a week. Unless you can consistently hit at least 55% or more of all games, betting on everything is definitely not a good strategy. It's much better to pick your games and capitalize on skewed lines, such as is the case with the pre-season over/under lines, which tend to be routinely off, where I ended up hitting 7 out of the 10 picks I recommended, with the help of the late season collapse of the Dallas Cowboys (I loved, absolutely loved, to write that sentence). Or just pick every underdog, if it's another year like this one.

Now that the playoffs are here, it's time to really prove one's mettle. These are the games that count. I'm starting to sound like Joe Theismann. Here's my picks for the first round match-ups, with the glorious return of extended commentary!!! (Lines from USA Today):

Kansas City (+6.5) @ Indianapolis (51)

I like this game's potential a lot. It'll be built up as Peyton Manning versus Larry Johnson, but there's a lot more going on here. Indy still has the best offense in football, and it seems like they have for a long time now, but their defense has severely regressed this season, especially against the run. Kansas City isn't quite as good on offense as they have been in the past, but they still have Larry Johnson, arguably the best running back in football not named LaDainian Tomlinson. It's a shame that Herm Edwards has so stubbornly handed LJ the ball 416 times on the year, basically guaranteeing a catastrophic injury next season, but we'll talk about that when next season comes around. Indy's defense is about average against the pass, and maybe the worst in football against the run, while KC is good running or passing the ball, though they probably don't throw the ball enough. KC's defense is fairly mediocre against the run and the pass, while Indy is the best passing team in football, and one of the better running teams, though this fact is often overlooked. I think there's a number of possible outcomes to this match up. I could see KC run the ball effectively and keep the game close, or maybe even sneak out a win by effectively shortening the game and keeping the Indy offense off the field, or I could see Indy be too overwhelming for the KC defense and win easily. I get the feeling that Indy's sand-bagged at times this year, and may have some tricks up their sleeve, but on the otherhand they've been unable to stop the run even when they know it's coming. I don't think I'm comfortable taking Indy and laying the points when they can't stop the run. KC might not win outright, but I think it'll be close. Kansas City

Dallas (+3) @ Seattle (46.5

Really, you can stop thanking me for predicting the collapse of Tony Romo. I don't have anything against the guy per se, but we live in a time when there's just too much media hype (as evidenced by this blog) to fairly evaluate players, especially young players who get the phenom tag. Because outlets like The Worldwide Leader feel the need to push storylines for the sake of ratings, rather than offering evenhanded analysis, you end up with the short-lived phenomenon of Tony Romo, greatest quarterback to ever live. Ever. In History. The same thing happened with Rex Grossman, certified gunslinger, earlier in the season. Of course, the storylines end up being false, because no one alive can live up to the hype the media has created, the scouting reports and defensive schemes around the league get caught up to date, and the players end up crashing back to Earth. Full disclosure: I am a shameless Seahawks homer; I have picked them in every single game this season, which has frequently been to my prognosticating detriment, but I like their chances in this game, even with no one around to play cornerback. Dallas may have a very good offense, but they're regressing at the worst part of the season, and they're on the road against one of the best home-field advantages in the game with a mistake-prone young quarterback. On defense, I think the Hawks should be able to throw against the Dallas secondary, which just isn't very good against the pass, and should be able to grind it out against a front seven that's having injury issues. Anyway, I think the Hawks are due to finally play up to their potential, at least for this game. Seahawks!!!

New York Jets (+9) @ New England (37.5)

I've noticed this line creeping downward since it opened, which I think is just asinine. I think the Jets are lucky to be in the playoffs, which is mostly the result of their easy schedule. I like Chad Pennington, but I just don't think the Jets are in the same class as the Pats come playoff time. The Pats are one of the most balanced teams in the league, and should be able to run the ball all day against the Jets. New England

New York Giants (+6.5) @ Philadelphia (46.5)

I have a feeling that this may be a bad week for New York football fans. The Giants have been one of the more schizophrenic teams in the league this season, looking both great and awful at times, but mostly awful lately. They're a terrible team to wager on in the playoffs: shaky quarterback, prone to really stupid penalties, Tom Coughlin seems like the type who would be the first person to bring up the possibility of cannibalism if trapped somewhere with a group of people, etc. They're not a bad team, especially the offense when it's clicking, but the seem like the exact opposite of the kind of team that comes together for a playoff run. Plus, they killed me in that first round game against Carolina last season. That was absolutely brutal. Not going to let that happen again. I'm a big fan of the Philly offense; Jeff Garcia works in that system, and I think they've benefited by relying on the run more with Donovan McNabb out. Philly

There's my picks for the first round of the playoffs. feel good about them, though I'm a little wary picking three favorites after an entire season of underdogs killing. I like the over for both NYJ-NE and NYG-Philly.

Anyway, UW-Arizona tonight, at Hec Ed. Watch it. Hopefully the Huskies will continue their home dominance. We'll see.