I made five big "bets" within this year's Tournament bracket:
(1) West Virginia to the Elite Eight. FAIL YESTERDAY.
(2) UCLA to the Elite Eight. FAIL TODAY.
(3) Texas over Duke. NOT FEELING GOOD ANYMORE.
(4) Syracuse over UNC. HOLLOW RESIDUAL VALUE.
(5) The Big Ten will suck, uniformly. BLIND STUPIDITY.
As I watch UCLA get throttled by Villanova, I'm not thinking "What was I thinking?!?!" in not picking Villanova than in affirmatively believing in UCLA. I was swayed by the past three years' Final Four trips -- that they retained a regional champion's DNA. Wow, was I wrong.
That's not to avoid giving credit to Villanova -- this is the best I have seen them play, not just this season but in recent memory (particularly in a big game, like one in the NCAA Tournament). To be fair, this is the worst game I have seen UCLA play in 4 years of Tournament excellence. (Again: Credit Villanova as much as disparage UCLA for playing absolutely horribly.)
I think that -- despite West Virginia screwing me over with their flaccid performance -- the Big East re-affirms its mojo with this decisive ass-kicking. (Although yesterday, my Louisville-over-Pitt pick for the finals -- while hardly an unconventional bet -- seemed plenty shaky.)
My big bets are blowing up in my face -- 72 hours into the Tournament.
Not a great feeling.
-- D.S.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Analyzing Barack Obama's NCAA Picks
From the Initial Bracket Through Round 1
Did I really neglect to link to this analysis of Barack Obama's bracket in the WSJ I did earlier this week? (At the time, it was amazingly fresh and ahead-of-the-curve. Now, it's a bit dated. But still!)
Meanwhile: Obama's first round was...yeesh. He went 19-13, good for a sub-10th percentile in the statistically significant Daily Quickie Readers group. (Still has 14 of 16 Sweet 16 teams left.)
-- D.S.
Meanwhile: Obama's first round was...yeesh. He went 19-13, good for a sub-10th percentile in the statistically significant Daily Quickie Readers group. (Still has 14 of 16 Sweet 16 teams left.)
-- D.S.
Saturday 03/21 (Tournament) Quickie
Wow, yesterday sure made up for Thursday. We got our biggest upset of Round 1: Cleveland State over Wake Forest. Like most of the country, I had Wake to the Sweet 16 -- but they played like they didn't know they were in the NCAA Tournament. Was this really the same team that looked like the best in the country back in January?
Meanwhile, this tournament needed a signature upset: 13 over 4 qualifies, although it didn't FEEL like an upset during the game itself-- if only because the Vikings dominated from start to finish. Honestly, I'm kicking myself for not recognizing that Wake had been totally slumping recently.
And the late-evening games yesterday were terrific -- I know that the 8/9 game is sort of vestigial (won't the winner lose to the 1-seed anyway?), but the Siena-Ohio State game was terrific. I actually think the Saints will give Louisville a hell of a game.
You know my biggest bracket bust-up of the day: West Virginia ousted by Dayton. I took WVU to the Elite Eight -- who knew the 'Eers would decide to simply not show up for the first round?
In the first round, I went 25-7. At this point, the "How's your bracket?" shifts to how many Sweet 16 teams you have remaining (I have 14). For the record, Barack Obama went 19-13. Yikes. (To his credit, he still has 14 of 16 Sweet 16 teams remaining.)
My biggest games of the day are the first one -- UCLA-Nova (I have UCLA winning) -- and the last one -- Duke-Texas (I have Texas winning).
By the way, my whole "Big East will rule" theory sort of fell apart yesterday. West Virginia didn't show up. Pitt was nearly upset by a 16-seed (and certainly didn't look like a team that can/will win 6 straight).
If there was a big winner of the first round, it's the Big 12: Wins by Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri and Texas A&M. Obviously, we need to see how many teams from each league make the Sweet 16 to really gauge strength, but the Big 12 could land up to 4 of the spots.
I think the 2nd round is going to be a great slate of games. Even if Thursday was mostly drama-free, I think the difference between the 32 teams playing today and tomorrow just isn't that big -- I expect unpredictable results. What more can you ask for?
-- D.S.
Meanwhile, this tournament needed a signature upset: 13 over 4 qualifies, although it didn't FEEL like an upset during the game itself-- if only because the Vikings dominated from start to finish. Honestly, I'm kicking myself for not recognizing that Wake had been totally slumping recently.
And the late-evening games yesterday were terrific -- I know that the 8/9 game is sort of vestigial (won't the winner lose to the 1-seed anyway?), but the Siena-Ohio State game was terrific. I actually think the Saints will give Louisville a hell of a game.
You know my biggest bracket bust-up of the day: West Virginia ousted by Dayton. I took WVU to the Elite Eight -- who knew the 'Eers would decide to simply not show up for the first round?
In the first round, I went 25-7. At this point, the "How's your bracket?" shifts to how many Sweet 16 teams you have remaining (I have 14). For the record, Barack Obama went 19-13. Yikes. (To his credit, he still has 14 of 16 Sweet 16 teams remaining.)
My biggest games of the day are the first one -- UCLA-Nova (I have UCLA winning) -- and the last one -- Duke-Texas (I have Texas winning).
By the way, my whole "Big East will rule" theory sort of fell apart yesterday. West Virginia didn't show up. Pitt was nearly upset by a 16-seed (and certainly didn't look like a team that can/will win 6 straight).
If there was a big winner of the first round, it's the Big 12: Wins by Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri and Texas A&M. Obviously, we need to see how many teams from each league make the Sweet 16 to really gauge strength, but the Big 12 could land up to 4 of the spots.
I think the 2nd round is going to be a great slate of games. Even if Thursday was mostly drama-free, I think the difference between the 32 teams playing today and tomorrow just isn't that big -- I expect unpredictable results. What more can you ask for?
-- D.S.
Friday, March 20, 2009
First-Round Friday: Afternoon Games
Late Afternoon Update: Well, all that mojo I had earned from UCLA over VCU just went right out the window after West Virginia lost to Dayton, eliminating one of my Elite Eight teams. (Elite Eight!)
Meanwhile, you have to feel for East Tenn St fans -- that was as close to a 16-over-1 upset that late in the game as we had seen in a long time (maybe since UConn-Albany in '06?) Tell you one thing: It doesn't bode well for a long run for Pitt.
Headlines: North Dakota State earns a moral victory against the defending champs -- but not a real one... I miss yet another 8/9 game (WTF?)... Big 12 continues its hot streak with Oklahoma State... Big East rolls on, with Marquette surviving Utah St -- a win is a win... Who's ready for the James Harden Show?
Meanwhile, you have to feel for East Tenn St fans -- that was as close to a 16-over-1 upset that late in the game as we had seen in a long time (maybe since UConn-Albany in '06?) Tell you one thing: It doesn't bode well for a long run for Pitt.
Headlines: North Dakota State earns a moral victory against the defending champs -- but not a real one... I miss yet another 8/9 game (WTF?)... Big 12 continues its hot streak with Oklahoma State... Big East rolls on, with Marquette surviving Utah St -- a win is a win... Who's ready for the James Harden Show?
First-Round Friday: How's Your Bracket?
How does your bracket look? It leads today's SN column (loaded with Friday AND Saturday game previews and more), and is the question of the moment.
I go back and forth about the whole "Do I really care about YOUR fantasy team?" (I generally like hearing about it.) But about brackets, I can't get enough: I'll ask anyone, and I really want to know.
I went 13-3. As usual, I am kicking myself for the misses more than congratulating myself for the hits.
Picking Butler over LSU? (But didn't Butler nearly lose at home to Northwestern? Should have been my tip-off.)
Picking BYU over Texas A&M? Seduced by the MWC at-largeness and discounting -- wrongly -- the Big 12.
And, yeesh: I might not be big on the Big Ten this year, but since when is Clemson EVER a clutch Tournament team? (As opposed to savvy Tournament coach John Bielein.)
But missing 8/9 games is forgiveable -- who expects them to last past the weekend? Same with the Clemson-Michigan winner; that team was losing tomorrow to Oklahoma anyway.
Now, all week I have been bemoaning the UCLA-VCU quandary. I'm in the tank for both teams. I ended up picking UCLA, based on the three straight Final Fours. Picking them to the Elite Eight, actually. So a lot was on the line.
It turned out to be the best game of the day -- a nail-biter. I cannot think of a better way for it to end than Darren Collison -- the epitome of the "three Final Four" experience -- forcing VCU superstar Eric Maynor into a game-breaking miss at the buzzer. Fitting.
I feel bad for VCU. I said this in the column, and I believe it: It was a very very very tough match-up for them. I think VCU could/would have beaten ANY team seeded 2 through 10 in this field. Sometimes, the draw is everything.
Meanwhile, I hesitate to preen, but after watching the Philly appetizer -- Villanova wearing down fiesty American -- I think folks who assumed Nova would waltz through their hometown into the Sweet 16 might be mistaken.
And I think Gonzaga -- if they get by Western Kentucky, obviously -- will give UNC a hell of a game. The Zags play with a sizeable chip on their shoulder; they are kind of d'bags, actually. Not in the Duke way, but more in the "We know we're good" way. See Pargo's posterizing.
Of the games today, the one I'm watching most closely is West Virginia vs. Dayton. I have the 'Eers going to the Elite Eight, but they may not make it out of Round One. Mizzou-Cornell should be a fun one.
Speaking of which: Did you check out Nate Silver's projections? He bases them on Pomeroy's gold-standard analysis and a few other CBB quant guys. What is interesting is that it seems to bear out my bullishness on both West Virginia and UCLA making the Elite Eight. (And I think if Gonzaga wasn't matched up with UNC, they would be in the Elite Eight, too. Who knows: As I said above, the Zags have the swag to KO the Tar Heels. But it's nice to know the stats back up my "gut.")
And the Big Ten can salvage a very positive first round if Wisconsin beats Florida State, which I think they will. Why? Tempo. Wisconsin's system is very hard to prepare for -- Bo Ryan is a Top 10 "Tournament coach" -- and the Badgers will dictate the tempo.
What happened when Florida State played another Big Ten team that played a slow-it-down tempo like Wisco? Northwestern clocked them by 14.
Complete SN column here. Mid-day check-ins coming based on game results.
Just remember: It really doesn't matter how many wins you rack up over these first two days. What really matters is how many Elite Eight (and presumably Final Four) teams you have left standing, both after today and on Monday morning.
-- D.S.
I go back and forth about the whole "Do I really care about YOUR fantasy team?" (I generally like hearing about it.) But about brackets, I can't get enough: I'll ask anyone, and I really want to know.
I went 13-3. As usual, I am kicking myself for the misses more than congratulating myself for the hits.
Picking Butler over LSU? (But didn't Butler nearly lose at home to Northwestern? Should have been my tip-off.)
Picking BYU over Texas A&M? Seduced by the MWC at-largeness and discounting -- wrongly -- the Big 12.
And, yeesh: I might not be big on the Big Ten this year, but since when is Clemson EVER a clutch Tournament team? (As opposed to savvy Tournament coach John Bielein.)
But missing 8/9 games is forgiveable -- who expects them to last past the weekend? Same with the Clemson-Michigan winner; that team was losing tomorrow to Oklahoma anyway.
Now, all week I have been bemoaning the UCLA-VCU quandary. I'm in the tank for both teams. I ended up picking UCLA, based on the three straight Final Fours. Picking them to the Elite Eight, actually. So a lot was on the line.
It turned out to be the best game of the day -- a nail-biter. I cannot think of a better way for it to end than Darren Collison -- the epitome of the "three Final Four" experience -- forcing VCU superstar Eric Maynor into a game-breaking miss at the buzzer. Fitting.
I feel bad for VCU. I said this in the column, and I believe it: It was a very very very tough match-up for them. I think VCU could/would have beaten ANY team seeded 2 through 10 in this field. Sometimes, the draw is everything.
Meanwhile, I hesitate to preen, but after watching the Philly appetizer -- Villanova wearing down fiesty American -- I think folks who assumed Nova would waltz through their hometown into the Sweet 16 might be mistaken.
And I think Gonzaga -- if they get by Western Kentucky, obviously -- will give UNC a hell of a game. The Zags play with a sizeable chip on their shoulder; they are kind of d'bags, actually. Not in the Duke way, but more in the "We know we're good" way. See Pargo's posterizing.
Of the games today, the one I'm watching most closely is West Virginia vs. Dayton. I have the 'Eers going to the Elite Eight, but they may not make it out of Round One. Mizzou-Cornell should be a fun one.
Speaking of which: Did you check out Nate Silver's projections? He bases them on Pomeroy's gold-standard analysis and a few other CBB quant guys. What is interesting is that it seems to bear out my bullishness on both West Virginia and UCLA making the Elite Eight. (And I think if Gonzaga wasn't matched up with UNC, they would be in the Elite Eight, too. Who knows: As I said above, the Zags have the swag to KO the Tar Heels. But it's nice to know the stats back up my "gut.")
And the Big Ten can salvage a very positive first round if Wisconsin beats Florida State, which I think they will. Why? Tempo. Wisconsin's system is very hard to prepare for -- Bo Ryan is a Top 10 "Tournament coach" -- and the Badgers will dictate the tempo.
What happened when Florida State played another Big Ten team that played a slow-it-down tempo like Wisco? Northwestern clocked them by 14.
Complete SN column here. Mid-day check-ins coming based on game results.
Just remember: It really doesn't matter how many wins you rack up over these first two days. What really matters is how many Elite Eight (and presumably Final Four) teams you have left standing, both after today and on Monday morning.
-- D.S.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
First Thursday: Late Day/Early Evening
You would never know that Villanova was playing in Philadelphia, the way the fans are going crazy for American. And AU is playing amazing right now.
The entire early-evening session is shaping up as 4 close games, including this whopping upset brewing in Philly. Not just a 14 over a 3, but AU beating Nova in a virtual home game for VU.
Meanwhile, the afternoon was sort of a joke: Who made the decision to have two 1-seeds play at the same time? You might as well put 1-seeds at the No One Watches 5 p.m. game.
Maryland-Cal was interesting -- and, technically, an upset. (No more questions about Maryland's fitness as an at-large pick, right?) Purdue was mildly interesting, late. Good start for the Big Ten.
Tonight feels like it's going to be a fun one.
-- D.S.
The entire early-evening session is shaping up as 4 close games, including this whopping upset brewing in Philly. Not just a 14 over a 3, but AU beating Nova in a virtual home game for VU.
Meanwhile, the afternoon was sort of a joke: Who made the decision to have two 1-seeds play at the same time? You might as well put 1-seeds at the No One Watches 5 p.m. game.
Maryland-Cal was interesting -- and, technically, an upset. (No more questions about Maryland's fitness as an at-large pick, right?) Purdue was mildly interesting, late. Good start for the Big Ten.
Tonight feels like it's going to be a fun one.
-- D.S.
First Thursday: Early Afternoon Game Reax
Early-Afternoon Game Update: Damn you 8-9 toss-up! I missed both.
*Like everyone else, I got Memphis; like everyone else, I would have given up all the points associated with my prediction for Memphis (Final Four) to see them lose.
Meanwhile:
*The SEC is acquitted...
*Butler is no longer has any Cinderella cachet...
*Obviously, the Big 12 was better than we thought...
*Who was peddling the inanity that BYU was a classic MWC Tourney-tough team?
And finally: As long as the Selection Committee was only going to give out 4 at-large bids to non-power-conference teams, it would have been nice for half of them (Butler, BYU) not to choke the hell out of the opportunity in the opening hours of the Tournament.
Can we get St. Mary's and San Diego State back?
-- D.S.
*Like everyone else, I got Memphis; like everyone else, I would have given up all the points associated with my prediction for Memphis (Final Four) to see them lose.
Meanwhile:
*The SEC is acquitted...
*Butler is no longer has any Cinderella cachet...
*Obviously, the Big 12 was better than we thought...
*Who was peddling the inanity that BYU was a classic MWC Tourney-tough team?
And finally: As long as the Selection Committee was only going to give out 4 at-large bids to non-power-conference teams, it would have been nice for half of them (Butler, BYU) not to choke the hell out of the opportunity in the opening hours of the Tournament.
Can we get St. Mary's and San Diego State back?
-- D.S.
Rejoice: First Thursday of NCAA Tournament
Update: March Madness on Demand is AWESOME. The high-quality version is remarkable. And I am using the iPhone app on the side and that is amazing, too. Oh, and GO NORTHRIDGE.
Last chance! Join the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge. Just a smidgen outside the Top 100 most popular T.C. groups on all of ESPN.com. You all rule.
Meanwhile, today's SN column is loaded with First Thursday goodness: An analysis of both the afternoon and evening schedules, plus a lot more.
And I am sure of this: It will be a defining day for Twitter, at least among sports fans. Follow along at @danshanoff (or just look on the right side, but that's only my last 3 tweets).
Today is the day when you read all the glowing profiles of scrappy would-be Cinderellas like American, and you suddenly wonder if they can pull off an upset. It's what makes the day great, even if it ruins your bracket.
I, of course, will wait for the Game of the Day, tonight: UCLA vs. VCU. Three-time defending Final Four team vs. the most popular bandwagon upset pick in the country. Should be amazing.
Complete SN column here. Sign up for the Daily Quickie Readers group. Buckle yourself up for 12:20 and all afternoon.
-- D.S.
Last chance! Join the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge. Just a smidgen outside the Top 100 most popular T.C. groups on all of ESPN.com. You all rule.
Meanwhile, today's SN column is loaded with First Thursday goodness: An analysis of both the afternoon and evening schedules, plus a lot more.
And I am sure of this: It will be a defining day for Twitter, at least among sports fans. Follow along at @danshanoff (or just look on the right side, but that's only my last 3 tweets).
Today is the day when you read all the glowing profiles of scrappy would-be Cinderellas like American, and you suddenly wonder if they can pull off an upset. It's what makes the day great, even if it ruins your bracket.
I, of course, will wait for the Game of the Day, tonight: UCLA vs. VCU. Three-time defending Final Four team vs. the most popular bandwagon upset pick in the country. Should be amazing.
Complete SN column here. Sign up for the Daily Quickie Readers group. Buckle yourself up for 12:20 and all afternoon.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Tournament Challenge Last Chance:
Join "Daily Quickie Readers" Group
It's down to the final hours: Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge. It's 370 strong: Would love to get to 500, but thanks for joining!
Apologies to Pomeroy, Gasaway, Pelton Et Al
(Sorta) taken out of context! I said so much more great things about the value of quant analysis!
If my picks bomb out this year as badly as last year (18th percentile in the Daily Quickie Readers pool), I am giving up on my "gut" and going long on the quants in March 2010.
Ken Pomeroy, John Gasaway, Kevin Pelton: You all know I remain the hugest of fan. (And that's just college hoops analysts -- not even counting Neyer, Silver, Ma et al across other sports.)
Oh, well. At least the quote made my mom happy.
-- D.S.
"It's all chance?" Did I really say that? Or even imply it? Crap!Dan Shanoff...said gut feeling is more important than statistics, but taking a look at the numbers can never hurt.
In the end, he said, it's all chance.
"You think you know everything about college basketball and then all of a sudden your mom is finishing ahead of you [in a tournament pool], which happens every year to me with my mom," he said.
If my picks bomb out this year as badly as last year (18th percentile in the Daily Quickie Readers pool), I am giving up on my "gut" and going long on the quants in March 2010.
Ken Pomeroy, John Gasaway, Kevin Pelton: You all know I remain the hugest of fan. (And that's just college hoops analysts -- not even counting Neyer, Silver, Ma et al across other sports.)
Oh, well. At least the quote made my mom happy.
-- D.S.
Advice for SeattlePI.com And Other Papers:
Treat Your Front Page Like Real Content
Jack Shafer offers great advice: Dynamic front-page presentation. It's a relevant notion tomorrow, of all days.
12 years ago, when I was running ESPN.com's NCAA Tournament coverage, I changed the "top story" on the front page of the site an average of every 6 minutes, from noon until 5, on those first two days of the Tournament -- when the majority of fans were relying on ESPN.com (front page and scoreboard pages) to follow the Tournament from work.
I rewrote the blurb of information that led the site -- over and over -- depending on the developments in the games themselves and how that was impacting the bracket.
It was almost like a live-blog. Or a Twitter stream. The front page of ESPN.com wasn't your gateway to the original content -- the front page itself WAS the original content.
I'm not along in thinking the first two days of the NCAA Tournament are the greatest weekdays of the year. There is nothing like the at-work (or skipping-out-of-work) attention from sports fans, all day long, plus the non-stop action of the games.
-- D.S.
PS: That first round of the '97 Tournament offered the opportunity for the greatest headline ever displayed on ESPN.com, coming just after 15-seed Coppin State upset 2-seed South Carolina:
"Coppin' a Feel: Cocks Get Blocked"
At this point, I'm not even sure if it actually happened or merely ALMOST happened. I could swear I have a print-out of it -- from being live on the site -- in a file somewhere in my house.
12 years ago, when I was running ESPN.com's NCAA Tournament coverage, I changed the "top story" on the front page of the site an average of every 6 minutes, from noon until 5, on those first two days of the Tournament -- when the majority of fans were relying on ESPN.com (front page and scoreboard pages) to follow the Tournament from work.
I rewrote the blurb of information that led the site -- over and over -- depending on the developments in the games themselves and how that was impacting the bracket.
It was almost like a live-blog. Or a Twitter stream. The front page of ESPN.com wasn't your gateway to the original content -- the front page itself WAS the original content.
I'm not along in thinking the first two days of the NCAA Tournament are the greatest weekdays of the year. There is nothing like the at-work (or skipping-out-of-work) attention from sports fans, all day long, plus the non-stop action of the games.
-- D.S.
PS: That first round of the '97 Tournament offered the opportunity for the greatest headline ever displayed on ESPN.com, coming just after 15-seed Coppin State upset 2-seed South Carolina:
"Coppin' a Feel: Cocks Get Blocked"
At this point, I'm not even sure if it actually happened or merely ALMOST happened. I could swear I have a print-out of it -- from being live on the site -- in a file somewhere in my house.
Obamaball: Barack Obama's Bracket Picks
Barack Obama's NCAA Tournament picks are finally live. Seemed to pick Louisville to go all the way before flip-flopping and taking UNC (who he didn't even seem to have beating Pitt, originally).
That's a lot more intrigue than he has in the rest of his bracket, which seems pretty chalky. Looks like he was high on Clemson before thinking better of it, and somehow got sold on Florida State.
Most of all, wasn't it refreshing to see him with all the cross-outs and question marks? JUST LIKE THE REST OF US FANS. (Really: Read this. It's like talking about the bracket with your friends.)
-- D.S.
That's a lot more intrigue than he has in the rest of his bracket, which seems pretty chalky. Looks like he was high on Clemson before thinking better of it, and somehow got sold on Florida State.
Most of all, wasn't it refreshing to see him with all the cross-outs and question marks? JUST LIKE THE REST OF US FANS. (Really: Read this. It's like talking about the bracket with your friends.)
-- D.S.
Wednesday 03/18 A.M. Quickie:
Obama Bracket Analysis, Plus Why Coach K Must Destroy His Soul If He Wants To Win
Barack Obama and I share three Final Four teams: Louisville, Pitt and Memphis. He, conservatively, has UNC in the South. I have Syracuse. (He has Cuse getting to the regional final, though.)
His bracket will be revealed on ESPN at noon today, but I actually found the complete versions of his East and South brackets, and so I led today's SN column with an analysis of his early-round picks, in addition to his conventional Final Four.
The upshot: Very pragmatic, as expected. Few upsets. A blind spot for Illinois (obviously) and perhaps a little over-enthusiasm for Florida State (politically smart, given the state's value in the 2012 election?)
Notably, he picked VCU over UCLA. Most folks are riding VCU as an upset pick. I have gone over, ad nauseum, my issues here. I am picking UCLA. I actually feel OK about it.
Make no mistake: I feel BAD that VCU won't move on. I feel BAD that I couldn't pick them to the Elite Eight, as I wanted to. But I don't think my pick will be wrong. (Ack! Jinx!)
I also don't feel bad about picking Syracuse to upend UNC in the South:
First of all, I think UNC -- even if they win the region -- won't beat Pitt. So my exposure is limited. Second, I think that Ty Lawson's status is iffy enough -- and UNC is affected enough by his iffy status -- that it's no lock to pick them.
At full strength, UNC would be tough to beat. The fact is: They won't be at full strength. And if they play Syracuse? Good luck to Lawson keeping up with Jonny Flynn, who has emerged as the most dynamic PG in the country -- even more dynamic than Lawson.
No, the only pick I feel weird about -- the one that could derail my bracket most -- is Duke. I have Duke losing to Texas in the 2nd round.
There are a few problems with this: (1) The game is in Greensboro. (2) Duke this year is better -- a lot better -- than the previous two years' chokers. (3) Texas isn't that good. (4) Greg Paulus doesn't really play much anymore.
And No. 4 is the crux of it: I am blinded by my loathing of Duke and my schadenfreude to see them lose early, yet again. Greg Paulus kind of typifies that -- he may be the least likeable Duke player of all time, which is saying something.
But Paulus isn't really playing anymore. In fact, he has been benched into oblivion. And, did you notice, Duke got a lot better once Paulus stopped getting starter's minutes.
Here is an unknown: When it comes down to crunch time, will Coach K -- no great Xs and Os tactician -- give Paulus important minutes because Coach K has a blind spot for his seniors and for his gritty favorites?
(See the '99 title game, when he put the ball in Trajan Langdon's hands; he promptly bungled what would have been the game-winning play. Oh, and Coach K sat freshman Corey Maggette for extended minutes, even though Maggette was the only player on the Duke roster able to dominate UConn, as he proved in the game's opening minutes. This decision-making formed the basis of my argument that Coach K is not a great game coach. Calhoun schooled him.)
So here it is: If Coach K cares more about winning than his leadership, he will keep Paulus out of the game -- and Duke will win. If Coach K cares more about leadership than winning, he will play Paulus out of some irrational loyalty -- and Duke will lose.
I am betting on the latter.
But if Coach K uses the former strategy and he destroys a little piece of his soul in the process -- doing whatever he needs to get the win (particularly given the pressure he and the program are under after the last two season-ending debacles) -- it's a win for Duke-haters, even if Duke wins.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
His bracket will be revealed on ESPN at noon today, but I actually found the complete versions of his East and South brackets, and so I led today's SN column with an analysis of his early-round picks, in addition to his conventional Final Four.
The upshot: Very pragmatic, as expected. Few upsets. A blind spot for Illinois (obviously) and perhaps a little over-enthusiasm for Florida State (politically smart, given the state's value in the 2012 election?)
Notably, he picked VCU over UCLA. Most folks are riding VCU as an upset pick. I have gone over, ad nauseum, my issues here. I am picking UCLA. I actually feel OK about it.
Make no mistake: I feel BAD that VCU won't move on. I feel BAD that I couldn't pick them to the Elite Eight, as I wanted to. But I don't think my pick will be wrong. (Ack! Jinx!)
I also don't feel bad about picking Syracuse to upend UNC in the South:
First of all, I think UNC -- even if they win the region -- won't beat Pitt. So my exposure is limited. Second, I think that Ty Lawson's status is iffy enough -- and UNC is affected enough by his iffy status -- that it's no lock to pick them.
At full strength, UNC would be tough to beat. The fact is: They won't be at full strength. And if they play Syracuse? Good luck to Lawson keeping up with Jonny Flynn, who has emerged as the most dynamic PG in the country -- even more dynamic than Lawson.
No, the only pick I feel weird about -- the one that could derail my bracket most -- is Duke. I have Duke losing to Texas in the 2nd round.
There are a few problems with this: (1) The game is in Greensboro. (2) Duke this year is better -- a lot better -- than the previous two years' chokers. (3) Texas isn't that good. (4) Greg Paulus doesn't really play much anymore.
And No. 4 is the crux of it: I am blinded by my loathing of Duke and my schadenfreude to see them lose early, yet again. Greg Paulus kind of typifies that -- he may be the least likeable Duke player of all time, which is saying something.
But Paulus isn't really playing anymore. In fact, he has been benched into oblivion. And, did you notice, Duke got a lot better once Paulus stopped getting starter's minutes.
Here is an unknown: When it comes down to crunch time, will Coach K -- no great Xs and Os tactician -- give Paulus important minutes because Coach K has a blind spot for his seniors and for his gritty favorites?
(See the '99 title game, when he put the ball in Trajan Langdon's hands; he promptly bungled what would have been the game-winning play. Oh, and Coach K sat freshman Corey Maggette for extended minutes, even though Maggette was the only player on the Duke roster able to dominate UConn, as he proved in the game's opening minutes. This decision-making formed the basis of my argument that Coach K is not a great game coach. Calhoun schooled him.)
So here it is: If Coach K cares more about winning than his leadership, he will keep Paulus out of the game -- and Duke will win. If Coach K cares more about leadership than winning, he will play Paulus out of some irrational loyalty -- and Duke will lose.
I am betting on the latter.
But if Coach K uses the former strategy and he destroys a little piece of his soul in the process -- doing whatever he needs to get the win (particularly given the pressure he and the program are under after the last two season-ending debacles) -- it's a win for Duke-haters, even if Duke wins.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
2009 Name Of The Year Tournament
The 2009 Name Of The Year (NOTY) Tournament bracket is live. Check it out and put your top picks in the Comments. The field gets stronger and stronger each year. Get NOTY analysis here.
Hall of Fame DS Commenter's Must-Read
Worth your 10 minutes to read this post by Sparty -- David -- one of the finest commenters this blog ever had (even if he's no fan of this blog) and the inspiration for the blog Sparty & Friends.
Tuesday 03/17 A.M. Quickie:
Brackets, Play-In, Bryce Brown, More
Today's SN column leads with the annual Tuesday-of-NCAA-Tournament-week lamentation: Second-guessing your biggest bracket reaches.
I am fairly unrepentant (for now) about picking UNC not to win the South -- instead picking Syracuse.
I am fairly unrepentant (for now) about picking Duke to lose in the opening weekend -- they are a better team this year than the past two, but still: Unproven as anything but March chokers.
I am also fairly unrepentant (for now) about picking Villanova to lose in the opening weekend, despite the Wildcats playing the game in Philadelphia.
Where I am stuck is over which team will be the one to beat Nova: UCLA or VCU? For now, I have UCLA beating VCU -- and even advancing to the Elite Eight.
(Click here for a full rundown of my picks from my Wall Street Journal column yesterday.)
I have no problem picking the winner of that game to the Elite Eight. If they weren't playing each other, I would probably pick both teams to the Elite Eight.
Where I am stuck is picking UCLA over VCU. The Bruins were my favorite to win it all last year, and I obviously remain awestruck at their three-years-running Final Four streak.
(I'm not trying to crawl inside my head too much here -- although, again, that's the annual tradition today -- but I wonder whether I keep picking UCLA as some sort of fading reflection of the Florida title teams in 2006 and 2007, who faced UCLA in those Final Fours.)
But, as I wrote a two weeks ago, I'm in the tank for Anthony Grant, who I think is the best young coach in America. I think Eric Maynor is awesome, and they have this young center who could dominate -- don't forget the way they dispatched Duke two years ago and nearly beat Pitt.
Against virtually any other team (outside the No. 1 seeds), I would pick VCU and not look back. But against UCLA -- Ben Howland is the best Tournament coach in the country -- it's the one match-up where I pick against VCU. I don't buy this UCLA-travels-2700-miles thing.
So it's UCLA over VCU for now, although I may kick myself about it on Thursday -- when the team I don't pick in that game streaks to the Elite Eight, I will try to find a way to enjoy it anyway.
More in today's column: Jay Cutler soap opera... Thunder rising... Vols recruiting coup... WBC gets even more ludicrous... and More.
-- D.S.
I am fairly unrepentant (for now) about picking UNC not to win the South -- instead picking Syracuse.
I am fairly unrepentant (for now) about picking Duke to lose in the opening weekend -- they are a better team this year than the past two, but still: Unproven as anything but March chokers.
I am also fairly unrepentant (for now) about picking Villanova to lose in the opening weekend, despite the Wildcats playing the game in Philadelphia.
Where I am stuck is over which team will be the one to beat Nova: UCLA or VCU? For now, I have UCLA beating VCU -- and even advancing to the Elite Eight.
(Click here for a full rundown of my picks from my Wall Street Journal column yesterday.)
I have no problem picking the winner of that game to the Elite Eight. If they weren't playing each other, I would probably pick both teams to the Elite Eight.
Where I am stuck is picking UCLA over VCU. The Bruins were my favorite to win it all last year, and I obviously remain awestruck at their three-years-running Final Four streak.
(I'm not trying to crawl inside my head too much here -- although, again, that's the annual tradition today -- but I wonder whether I keep picking UCLA as some sort of fading reflection of the Florida title teams in 2006 and 2007, who faced UCLA in those Final Fours.)
But, as I wrote a two weeks ago, I'm in the tank for Anthony Grant, who I think is the best young coach in America. I think Eric Maynor is awesome, and they have this young center who could dominate -- don't forget the way they dispatched Duke two years ago and nearly beat Pitt.
Against virtually any other team (outside the No. 1 seeds), I would pick VCU and not look back. But against UCLA -- Ben Howland is the best Tournament coach in the country -- it's the one match-up where I pick against VCU. I don't buy this UCLA-travels-2700-miles thing.
So it's UCLA over VCU for now, although I may kick myself about it on Thursday -- when the team I don't pick in that game streaks to the Elite Eight, I will try to find a way to enjoy it anyway.
More in today's column: Jay Cutler soap opera... Thunder rising... Vols recruiting coup... WBC gets even more ludicrous... and More.
-- D.S.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Tournament Challenge: Sign Up Now
For The "Daily Quickie Readers" Group
Go over to the Tournament Challenge page. Search for the "Daily Quickie Readers" group. Join the group. Submit your bracket. Show us all how smart you are. Revel in my failure.
My Tournament Picks In Wall Street Journal
In what has become an annual ritual for me, the Wall Street Journal has published my NCAA Tournament picks, complete with the usual levels of self-doubt, self-deception and self-loathing. You can find them here, and you will see why I already feel like my bracket is busted.
NCAA Selection Committee Screws Cinderella
The Selection Committee really screwed the Cinderellas this year.
VCU -- a strong contender for a Sweet 16 run -- got three-time defending Final Four participant UCLA, then Villanova... in Philadelphia.
Siena -- which won a Tournament game last year -- was "rewarded" with a 9-seed, putting it up against Louisville in Round 2. (BYU got similar treatment, stuck in an 8/9 game, then UConn.)
Western Kentucky? Gonzaga? If they win their first-round games, they play... each other, ensuring that one mid-major won't advance.
When you look at the bracket -- from the seeding and placement to who they DIDN'T include (lowest-ever 4 non-power-conf at-large bids) -- you see a Committee favoring power leagues.
If this is truly the "Year of the Big East" -- and I confess my bracket goes long that it is -- the Committee did what it could to help push that along.
Last year's "all 1-seed" Final Four was, in my opinion, terrible for the sport and terrible for the Tournament. (The only thing that saved it was the novelty that it had never happened before.)
I am stunned at how few upsets I have predicted, particularly in the first round. (I don't think I have any beyond the non-upset 9-over-8, 10-over-7 and 12-over-5.)
Let's hope that at least a few non-power-conference teams defy the bracket and create some unexpected drama. "Chalk" is not what anyone wants from the NCAA Tournament.
-- D.S.
VCU -- a strong contender for a Sweet 16 run -- got three-time defending Final Four participant UCLA, then Villanova... in Philadelphia.
Siena -- which won a Tournament game last year -- was "rewarded" with a 9-seed, putting it up against Louisville in Round 2. (BYU got similar treatment, stuck in an 8/9 game, then UConn.)
Western Kentucky? Gonzaga? If they win their first-round games, they play... each other, ensuring that one mid-major won't advance.
When you look at the bracket -- from the seeding and placement to who they DIDN'T include (lowest-ever 4 non-power-conf at-large bids) -- you see a Committee favoring power leagues.
If this is truly the "Year of the Big East" -- and I confess my bracket goes long that it is -- the Committee did what it could to help push that along.
Last year's "all 1-seed" Final Four was, in my opinion, terrible for the sport and terrible for the Tournament. (The only thing that saved it was the novelty that it had never happened before.)
I am stunned at how few upsets I have predicted, particularly in the first round. (I don't think I have any beyond the non-upset 9-over-8, 10-over-7 and 12-over-5.)
Let's hope that at least a few non-power-conference teams defy the bracket and create some unexpected drama. "Chalk" is not what anyone wants from the NCAA Tournament.
-- D.S.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Monday 03/16 A.M. Quickie, Posted Early!
Bracket Analysis, Final Four Picks, More
Filed Monday's SN column on Sunday night, shortly after the Brackets were announced. Here is a link to it. You will get some clues as to where my picks are going. At a minimum, you will get my Final Four picks and my pick for national champ (won't be a surprise).
My NCAA Bracket Is Already Busted
I have just finished writing up an analysis of my bracket picks that is going up tomorrow, and there is one section of it that is such a stretch that I feel like I have already lost the pool.
I'll reiterate what I said below:
That UCLA-VCU first-round match-up single-handedly nearly ruined the entire bracket for me -- put VCU as the 11-seed in the Midwest or West, and I would have both the Rams and the Bruins marching deep into the Tournament.
That one of those two necessarily has to exit on Day 1 seems ridiculously unfair. That I have to choose which one that will be is nearly as bad.
-- D.S.
I'll reiterate what I said below:
That UCLA-VCU first-round match-up single-handedly nearly ruined the entire bracket for me -- put VCU as the 11-seed in the Midwest or West, and I would have both the Rams and the Bruins marching deep into the Tournament.
That one of those two necessarily has to exit on Day 1 seems ridiculously unfair. That I have to choose which one that will be is nearly as bad.
-- D.S.
NCAA Tournament Bracket Absurdity
First of all, go join the Daily Quickie Readers group over at the Tournament Challenge.
The National Bracket already has some statistically significant results: America picks UNC to beat Louisville for the national title, with the Final Four a repeat of last year -- all No. 1 seeds advance.
(The Elite Eight is all 1 and 2 seeds, which you KNOW ain't gonna happen.)
Most contentious N.B. picks: UConn-Memphis, which was predictable... Syracuse-Oklahoma... one other notable result so far: Florida State over Xavier by a 60-40 margin. Surprising, given Xavier's recent proven excellence in the NCAA Tournament -- and FSU's lack of it.
So here's my dilemma: Back in November, I picked Louisville to win the national title. Do I try to maintain epic integrity and pick them to win it all this year?
(I did that last year with UCLA, and fell short -- it wasn't the reason my bracket sucked last year; that was all the OTHER wrong picks.)
Here's the thing: I'm naturally disinclined to pick the No. 1 overall team to win the national title -- certainly not this season.
That said: I like the idea of maintaining my pick from November til now. I just had figured that Louisville would finish the season as a 2- or 3-seed and I'd be making a novel bracket pick, not picking the damn No. 1 overall team in the field.
I'm also nervous about Louisville winning too many close games -- scoring margin should be a big factor in picking winners to go 6 straight. Close games means too much is left up to random chance. (And, as Pitt fans reminded me, L'ville played a much easier schedule than Pitt.)
So: Do I get ANY credit for picking Louisville in the preseason to win the national title if they do go on to win the national title -- but I have picked another team (say, Pitt) to win it all on my actual bracket?
My suspicion is that you all would say: Umm...no. No credit at all. You can't have it both ways. (And you'd be right, as much as I hate to say it.)
And so I'm torn: I actually do think that Louisville COULD win the national title -- I give them as much of a shot as Pitt (and an even better shot than UNC, who I think will fold early this season...again. Of course, Pitt has its own tradition of choking in March.)
But I really do hate taking the paper favorite. It seems so uninspired.
And, more importantly, feels like it will be inevitably wrong.
(Also: I'm absolutely sick to my stomach about UCLA-VCU in the first round -- I very well might have picked both to the Elite Eight... if not further. I still think UCLA has all the ingredients to be a Final Four team...yet again. And I think VCU is good enough to make a 2- or 3-game run. Of course, either will have to play Villanova in Philly -- again, WHY SELECTION COMMITTEE WHY?)
Just filed my column to Sporting News. Hope to have a URL for you shortly.
-- D.S.
The National Bracket already has some statistically significant results: America picks UNC to beat Louisville for the national title, with the Final Four a repeat of last year -- all No. 1 seeds advance.
(The Elite Eight is all 1 and 2 seeds, which you KNOW ain't gonna happen.)
Most contentious N.B. picks: UConn-Memphis, which was predictable... Syracuse-Oklahoma... one other notable result so far: Florida State over Xavier by a 60-40 margin. Surprising, given Xavier's recent proven excellence in the NCAA Tournament -- and FSU's lack of it.
So here's my dilemma: Back in November, I picked Louisville to win the national title. Do I try to maintain epic integrity and pick them to win it all this year?
(I did that last year with UCLA, and fell short -- it wasn't the reason my bracket sucked last year; that was all the OTHER wrong picks.)
Here's the thing: I'm naturally disinclined to pick the No. 1 overall team to win the national title -- certainly not this season.
That said: I like the idea of maintaining my pick from November til now. I just had figured that Louisville would finish the season as a 2- or 3-seed and I'd be making a novel bracket pick, not picking the damn No. 1 overall team in the field.
I'm also nervous about Louisville winning too many close games -- scoring margin should be a big factor in picking winners to go 6 straight. Close games means too much is left up to random chance. (And, as Pitt fans reminded me, L'ville played a much easier schedule than Pitt.)
So: Do I get ANY credit for picking Louisville in the preseason to win the national title if they do go on to win the national title -- but I have picked another team (say, Pitt) to win it all on my actual bracket?
My suspicion is that you all would say: Umm...no. No credit at all. You can't have it both ways. (And you'd be right, as much as I hate to say it.)
And so I'm torn: I actually do think that Louisville COULD win the national title -- I give them as much of a shot as Pitt (and an even better shot than UNC, who I think will fold early this season...again. Of course, Pitt has its own tradition of choking in March.)
But I really do hate taking the paper favorite. It seems so uninspired.
And, more importantly, feels like it will be inevitably wrong.
(Also: I'm absolutely sick to my stomach about UCLA-VCU in the first round -- I very well might have picked both to the Elite Eight... if not further. I still think UCLA has all the ingredients to be a Final Four team...yet again. And I think VCU is good enough to make a 2- or 3-game run. Of course, either will have to play Villanova in Philly -- again, WHY SELECTION COMMITTEE WHY?)
Just filed my column to Sporting News. Hope to have a URL for you shortly.
-- D.S.
NCAA Tournament Bracket Analysis
Putting my instant reactions on Twitter (found here or to the right). Then jumping right into filing my Sporting News column to (hopefully) get published in the early-evening.
Tournament Challenge Reminder:
Join "Daily Quickie Readers" Group
Just a reminder to be sure to get into the "Daily Quickie Readers" Tournament Challenge group. No password necessary -- it's open to anyone.
I'm Done With the Conference-Tournament System
I'm not sure what the final straw was: I guess it was USC beating Arizona State.
USC had little chance of making the NCAA Tournament without winning the Pac-10 tournament. Arizona State was already an NCAA Tournament lock.
In the end, the Sun Devils had little or no incentive to actually win the Pac-10 Tournament. Pride, maybe. But pride isn't enough to counter desperation -- that's what USC brought.
If Arizona State was playing for its Tournament life, I suspect the result would have been different. Same thing with UNC vs. Florida State. Same thing with Wake vs. Maryland. Same thing with Oklahoma or Kansas or Texas or Xavier or Dayton... the list goes on.
More than anything else these past few days, what has been exposed is what a sham the "power conference" tournament structure is: NCAA "locks" have little reason to play to win -- NCAA Tournament seeding? Feh: Pitt will probably be a 1-seed anyway; same with UNC.
The point is: There is no way that the "lock" teams are playing their hardest -- or, at least, playing as hard as teams with a lot more to gain from the system. Plus: The experts seem to reward Bubble teams for wins over "name" teams in the conference tournament, even though these name teams aren't playing nearly as hard as they were in the regular season.
Look, I'm sure the top teams protest that they are trying their hardest -- but it simply doesn't hold water: You're telling me they care as much in an ultimately meaningless now as they will next week, when each game mean literally everything? No way.
-- D.S.
USC had little chance of making the NCAA Tournament without winning the Pac-10 tournament. Arizona State was already an NCAA Tournament lock.
In the end, the Sun Devils had little or no incentive to actually win the Pac-10 Tournament. Pride, maybe. But pride isn't enough to counter desperation -- that's what USC brought.
If Arizona State was playing for its Tournament life, I suspect the result would have been different. Same thing with UNC vs. Florida State. Same thing with Wake vs. Maryland. Same thing with Oklahoma or Kansas or Texas or Xavier or Dayton... the list goes on.
More than anything else these past few days, what has been exposed is what a sham the "power conference" tournament structure is: NCAA "locks" have little reason to play to win -- NCAA Tournament seeding? Feh: Pitt will probably be a 1-seed anyway; same with UNC.
The point is: There is no way that the "lock" teams are playing their hardest -- or, at least, playing as hard as teams with a lot more to gain from the system. Plus: The experts seem to reward Bubble teams for wins over "name" teams in the conference tournament, even though these name teams aren't playing nearly as hard as they were in the regular season.
Look, I'm sure the top teams protest that they are trying their hardest -- but it simply doesn't hold water: You're telling me they care as much in an ultimately meaningless now as they will next week, when each game mean literally everything? No way.
-- D.S.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Does the Bubble Even Exist This Year?
I have isolated something that is bothering me about Championship Week this year: The major-conference conference-tournament system is totally flawed.
The teams that are already NCAA Tournament locks have little incentive to win, to want to play 3 or 4 games in 3 or 4 days or to truly play with any sense of urgency at all. (Obviously, there are exceptions, but far more are following this rule this year than are exceptions to it.)
Teams that are on the Bubble do care. Teams that are out of the Tournament entirely do care. That's why you see Baylor beating Kansas. Or Maryland beating Wake. Or Mississippi State beating LSU. Or Ohio State thumping Michigan State.
And, yet, the system gives away NCAA Tournament bids to the conference-tourney champs -- and seems to overvalue conference-tourney wins -- even though those wins may be iffy.
If Wake or Kansas or LSU or Xavier or Michigan State don't really seem to give a shit, does Maryland or Baylor or Mississippi State or Temple or Ohio State beating them really prove those winners are Tournament-worthy? Maybe it does, but maybe we shouldn't overrate the wins.
I'm just saying: We place this out-sized value on conference tournaments (and even individual wins in conference tournaments), when many of the leading participants -- at least the ones that care more about the national title than a provincial one -- have no reason to care.
We'll see if UNC joins the group, in a battle with Florida State.
By the way, if every Bubble spot is accounted for by these shady conference-tournament results -- does the Bubble even exist this year? I would argue it doesn't.
-- D.S.
The teams that are already NCAA Tournament locks have little incentive to win, to want to play 3 or 4 games in 3 or 4 days or to truly play with any sense of urgency at all. (Obviously, there are exceptions, but far more are following this rule this year than are exceptions to it.)
Teams that are on the Bubble do care. Teams that are out of the Tournament entirely do care. That's why you see Baylor beating Kansas. Or Maryland beating Wake. Or Mississippi State beating LSU. Or Ohio State thumping Michigan State.
And, yet, the system gives away NCAA Tournament bids to the conference-tourney champs -- and seems to overvalue conference-tourney wins -- even though those wins may be iffy.
If Wake or Kansas or LSU or Xavier or Michigan State don't really seem to give a shit, does Maryland or Baylor or Mississippi State or Temple or Ohio State beating them really prove those winners are Tournament-worthy? Maybe it does, but maybe we shouldn't overrate the wins.
I'm just saying: We place this out-sized value on conference tournaments (and even individual wins in conference tournaments), when many of the leading participants -- at least the ones that care more about the national title than a provincial one -- have no reason to care.
We'll see if UNC joins the group, in a battle with Florida State.
By the way, if every Bubble spot is accounted for by these shady conference-tournament results -- does the Bubble even exist this year? I would argue it doesn't.
-- D.S.
Saturday 03/14 (Very CBB) Quickie
I mean: How can you NOT be rooting for Baylor?
Sure, it seems a little weird that you can overrule an entire season's body of work by simply winning 4 straight games in mid-March. But that's part of the Tournament's charm.
On the other end of the spectrum, there are the teams that simply don't get it done when they need to. I'm talking about Florida -- who will miss the Tournament after losing to Auburn last night, and (even as a Florida fan) I have no sympathy. Too many opportunities (throughout the season) to control their own destiny that they weren't able to take advantage of. The Gators don't deserve it -- for a 2nd straight year.
(Speaking of taking advantage of opportunities, there is Maryland, which should have punched its ticket by beating Wake Forest -- sure seems like a lot of Tournament locks are simply "taking off" the conference tournament season: Wake, Pitt, UConn, Kansas, Oklahoma. They didn't need to do anything in these tournaments, and thus played with zero sense of urgency.)
But, hey, how about Duquesne!
(Here's a weird one: St. Mary's got shellacked by Gonzaga in the West Coast final. That should have been the final word on their Tournament resume for the Selection Committee -- but then they scheduled a random non-conference game against Eastern Washington, who they clocked. Will the Committee pay attention to that? Is it the tiny nudge they need to make the field? Imagine if, after losing last week, Davidson had quickly scheduled power-conference Bubble team in the Top 50, giving both the chance to add one more impressive W.)
Wow, Syracuse is on some kind of roll. Hope for their sake they don't peak this week, rather than next week (or the week after).
Today's Games to Watch:
Big 12: Baylor-Mizzou (Go Baylor.)
America East final: Binghamton vs. UMBC (15-16 record!)
ACC Semi: Maryland-Duke (Amazing hatred)
P-10: USC-Ariz St (USC win would bump a Bubble team)
C-USA: Memphis-Tulsa (Go Tulsa.)
SEC: Miss St-LSU (MSU playing for bid?)
A-10: Duquesne-Temple (some Bubble team is screwed)
Big West: SD St-Utah (SD St in, even if they lose? Hmm)
Big East: Syracuse-L'ville (Cuse all the way?)
Enjoy a great day of hoops. A whole bunch of Bubble teams are screwed already, with more holding their breath today. But, as I said: No sympathy. They had their chances. Plenty of 'em. (Not that I'm bitter about Florida. Oh no, not at all.)
-- D.S.
Sure, it seems a little weird that you can overrule an entire season's body of work by simply winning 4 straight games in mid-March. But that's part of the Tournament's charm.
On the other end of the spectrum, there are the teams that simply don't get it done when they need to. I'm talking about Florida -- who will miss the Tournament after losing to Auburn last night, and (even as a Florida fan) I have no sympathy. Too many opportunities (throughout the season) to control their own destiny that they weren't able to take advantage of. The Gators don't deserve it -- for a 2nd straight year.
(Speaking of taking advantage of opportunities, there is Maryland, which should have punched its ticket by beating Wake Forest -- sure seems like a lot of Tournament locks are simply "taking off" the conference tournament season: Wake, Pitt, UConn, Kansas, Oklahoma. They didn't need to do anything in these tournaments, and thus played with zero sense of urgency.)
But, hey, how about Duquesne!
(Here's a weird one: St. Mary's got shellacked by Gonzaga in the West Coast final. That should have been the final word on their Tournament resume for the Selection Committee -- but then they scheduled a random non-conference game against Eastern Washington, who they clocked. Will the Committee pay attention to that? Is it the tiny nudge they need to make the field? Imagine if, after losing last week, Davidson had quickly scheduled power-conference Bubble team in the Top 50, giving both the chance to add one more impressive W.)
Wow, Syracuse is on some kind of roll. Hope for their sake they don't peak this week, rather than next week (or the week after).
Today's Games to Watch:
Big 12: Baylor-Mizzou (Go Baylor.)
America East final: Binghamton vs. UMBC (15-16 record!)
ACC Semi: Maryland-Duke (Amazing hatred)
P-10: USC-Ariz St (USC win would bump a Bubble team)
C-USA: Memphis-Tulsa (Go Tulsa.)
SEC: Miss St-LSU (MSU playing for bid?)
A-10: Duquesne-Temple (some Bubble team is screwed)
Big West: SD St-Utah (SD St in, even if they lose? Hmm)
Big East: Syracuse-L'ville (Cuse all the way?)
Enjoy a great day of hoops. A whole bunch of Bubble teams are screwed already, with more holding their breath today. But, as I said: No sympathy. They had their chances. Plenty of 'em. (Not that I'm bitter about Florida. Oh no, not at all.)
-- D.S.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Friday 03/13 A.M. Quickie:
6OT, Baylor, Pitt, Oklahoma, More
Here's the question of the day/week/month: How much stock do you put in a team's performance in the conference tournament?
Because if you put any, then you best be avoiding Pitt, Oklahoma, Kansas and UConn going particularly far on your bracket, come Sunday night.
I appreciate the "won't tire themselves out" thing (Pitt), along with the "they played a much more motivated team" thing (Oklahoma), but isn't that mitigated by the idea that it's not like they lost in the conference finals to another heavyweight -- they lost in the quarters. In Kansas' case, they lost to a team that isn't even very good.
Now, West Virginia was probably underrated (no longer a problem), and Syracuse is a very good team that matches up well with UConn.
But you can't help wondering if you should factor these losses in when you're filling out your bracket. It's a huge mind-frak, that's for sure. And it leads today's SN column.
That said, the best thing that could happen to Pitt or to Oklahoma or to Kansas is this:
SIX OVERTIMES.
It's all anyone will, can or should be talking about this morning -- instantly, the most memorable game of the season so far, arguably the greatest Big East Tournament game ever and arguably the most thrilling conference-tournament game in a generation (AI vs. Ray Allen in Big East '96 comes to mind, but you really can't beat the endless amazing of six -- SIX -- overtimes.)
Whether we're talking about Pitt or Oklahoma or Kansas or UConn or Syracuse, there is a lesson to be gleaned from yesterday's games -- a reminder that we'd all be well to consider heading into Selection Sunday:
In the end, no one knows anything. Not you. Not me. Not "experts." Not anyone. It's why the NCAA Tournament is the best event in sports, and it's why the biggest fan can have the worst bracket picks.
Over the season -- even starting before it -- I come up with a couple of bracket biases that I know are going to come into play. My preseason pick of Louisville to win it all. Watching Pitt play so dominantly down the stretch. My unease with picking UNC to win it all after the past three seasons' failures. Even a carry-over from last year's UCLA bias.
I mean, cripes: I was all set to pencil Pitt into the Final Four (obviously depending on their actual path, but I was having a hard time seeing a team that could stop them before the Final Four) -- yesterday's loss rocked my confidence:
Do I take the early exit as a motivator that they will carry through the first 4 games of the NCAA Tournament? Do I take it as foreshadowing that they're going to, once again, fall short of expectations? Do I need to worry when they are bracketed to meet, specifically, a "WVU-like" team? Confidence yields to doubt yields to insanity. It's an annual rite.
In recent years, I have tried not to over-think: To go with my first instinct as much as possible. But maybe this year -- after last year's debacle -- I should go with the "Opposite George" strategy.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Because if you put any, then you best be avoiding Pitt, Oklahoma, Kansas and UConn going particularly far on your bracket, come Sunday night.
I appreciate the "won't tire themselves out" thing (Pitt), along with the "they played a much more motivated team" thing (Oklahoma), but isn't that mitigated by the idea that it's not like they lost in the conference finals to another heavyweight -- they lost in the quarters. In Kansas' case, they lost to a team that isn't even very good.
Now, West Virginia was probably underrated (no longer a problem), and Syracuse is a very good team that matches up well with UConn.
But you can't help wondering if you should factor these losses in when you're filling out your bracket. It's a huge mind-frak, that's for sure. And it leads today's SN column.
That said, the best thing that could happen to Pitt or to Oklahoma or to Kansas is this:
SIX OVERTIMES.
It's all anyone will, can or should be talking about this morning -- instantly, the most memorable game of the season so far, arguably the greatest Big East Tournament game ever and arguably the most thrilling conference-tournament game in a generation (AI vs. Ray Allen in Big East '96 comes to mind, but you really can't beat the endless amazing of six -- SIX -- overtimes.)
Whether we're talking about Pitt or Oklahoma or Kansas or UConn or Syracuse, there is a lesson to be gleaned from yesterday's games -- a reminder that we'd all be well to consider heading into Selection Sunday:
In the end, no one knows anything. Not you. Not me. Not "experts." Not anyone. It's why the NCAA Tournament is the best event in sports, and it's why the biggest fan can have the worst bracket picks.
Over the season -- even starting before it -- I come up with a couple of bracket biases that I know are going to come into play. My preseason pick of Louisville to win it all. Watching Pitt play so dominantly down the stretch. My unease with picking UNC to win it all after the past three seasons' failures. Even a carry-over from last year's UCLA bias.
I mean, cripes: I was all set to pencil Pitt into the Final Four (obviously depending on their actual path, but I was having a hard time seeing a team that could stop them before the Final Four) -- yesterday's loss rocked my confidence:
Do I take the early exit as a motivator that they will carry through the first 4 games of the NCAA Tournament? Do I take it as foreshadowing that they're going to, once again, fall short of expectations? Do I need to worry when they are bracketed to meet, specifically, a "WVU-like" team? Confidence yields to doubt yields to insanity. It's an annual rite.
In recent years, I have tried not to over-think: To go with my first instinct as much as possible. But maybe this year -- after last year's debacle -- I should go with the "Opposite George" strategy.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
ZOMG: NCAA Tourney Live on My iPhone
This is a game-changer: CBS Sports is going to let me watch streaming video of the NCAA Tournament LIVE on my iPhone for $4.99. Done. (Don't screw this up, CBS!)
-- D.S.
-- D.S.
Thursday 03/12 A.M. Quickie:
Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Big Day
The success of the Big East this season won't be defined by its epic regular season -- it will be defined by how many of the 8 teams playing in today's quarterfinals make the Sweet 16... or even the Final Four. The gold standard is 1985: 3 teams in the Final Four, including the champ.
So: How may of the Big East quarterfinalists will make the Sweet 16: 2? 4? 6? In the meantime, you can marvel that there probably hasn't been a quarterfinal round of any conference tournament ever that has been as loaded as this one is today. That leads today's SN column.
Meanwhile: Of course all the other Big Ten first round games are on TV... except Northwestern-Minnesota at noon. Not like NU isn't the best story of the Big Ten this season or anything.
Sporting News forced my hand: By naming Blake Griffin as SN's national Player of the Year now, that forces me to name my own Player of the Year now: Pitt's DeJuan Blair. (Now, now: I'm not saying Griffin isn't a great player -- just like no one is saying Hansbrough isn't a great player by naming Griffin as POY. I just think Blair has been better. Would love to see them match up.)
Enjoy the sprint to Sunday. Complete column here.
-- D.S.
So: How may of the Big East quarterfinalists will make the Sweet 16: 2? 4? 6? In the meantime, you can marvel that there probably hasn't been a quarterfinal round of any conference tournament ever that has been as loaded as this one is today. That leads today's SN column.
Meanwhile: Of course all the other Big Ten first round games are on TV... except Northwestern-Minnesota at noon. Not like NU isn't the best story of the Big Ten this season or anything.
Sporting News forced my hand: By naming Blake Griffin as SN's national Player of the Year now, that forces me to name my own Player of the Year now: Pitt's DeJuan Blair. (Now, now: I'm not saying Griffin isn't a great player -- just like no one is saying Hansbrough isn't a great player by naming Griffin as POY. I just think Blair has been better. Would love to see them match up.)
Enjoy the sprint to Sunday. Complete column here.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Thursday 03/11 A.M. Quickie:
Bubble, NoDak, Netherlands, LT, More
Lots of things I'm loving in today's SN column:
Butler crashing the Bubble after losing to Cleveland State: Not only does this force out an undeserving Bubble team, but it exposes Butler as entirely overrated.
North Dakota State: First year of NCAA Tournament eligibility, they get a bid. Amazing. And the way they did it? Oakland ties the score late -- does ND St take a TO to set up a play? No. NO! They come back down and score the winning basket.
Who else loathes the micro-managing way coaches call a time-out late to set up a game-winning shot, only to give the defense plenty of time to stop it?
I'm sure there is plenty of analytics out there -- Gasaway, I mean you! -- that quickly running your play (presuming you've actually spent practice time preparing for the moment) gives you a better shot than taking a T.O. and setting up a play, but giving the opposing team its own chance to set up. It's college hoops coaching micro-management at its worst.
Georgetown losing, DePaul winning: Yes, I was sort of hoping that the Hoyas would make a 5-game run to make the NCAA Tournament -- I'm a sucker on them this season to the end -- but having them lose in the first round is just so symbolic of the season, the final affirmation that all those other losses weren't aberrations at all...this team just underachieved.
Meanwhile, how amazing that DePaul could go 0-18 in the Big East regular season, then waltz into MSG and win. Hypothesize with me for a second: If DePaul ran the table in the Big East Tournament, what kind of seed would they get? On the one hand, they would have the worst record in the Tournament; on the other, they would have beaten, like, 4 Top 20 teams in a row. Would that make them a 14 or a 15? Would the NCAA put them in the Tuesday play-in game?
Western Kentucky: Any chance they repeat last season's run to the Sweet 16? If you had to pick between WKU and Siena -- which pulled a 1st-round upset last year and returns all 5 starters to this year's Tournament -- which team will go further next week?
The Netherlands: Greatest. Baseball Upset. Ever. And while I am sort of taking advantage of the best kind of Instant History, please post to the Comments what upsets would be bigger... Dodgers over A's in '89? Reds over A's in '90? Not really.
Maybe Marlins over Yankees in '03? Hmm... MAYBE Marlins over Yankees in '03. But Josh Beckett was the best player on the field for either team that series, and has the MVP ring to prove it -- there wasn't a position on the field where Netherlands had an advantage over the D.R. Also, when you win a best-of-7 series, it can hardly be called an "upset" -- not in the same way an "elimination" tournament can present.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Butler crashing the Bubble after losing to Cleveland State: Not only does this force out an undeserving Bubble team, but it exposes Butler as entirely overrated.
North Dakota State: First year of NCAA Tournament eligibility, they get a bid. Amazing. And the way they did it? Oakland ties the score late -- does ND St take a TO to set up a play? No. NO! They come back down and score the winning basket.
Who else loathes the micro-managing way coaches call a time-out late to set up a game-winning shot, only to give the defense plenty of time to stop it?
I'm sure there is plenty of analytics out there -- Gasaway, I mean you! -- that quickly running your play (presuming you've actually spent practice time preparing for the moment) gives you a better shot than taking a T.O. and setting up a play, but giving the opposing team its own chance to set up. It's college hoops coaching micro-management at its worst.
Georgetown losing, DePaul winning: Yes, I was sort of hoping that the Hoyas would make a 5-game run to make the NCAA Tournament -- I'm a sucker on them this season to the end -- but having them lose in the first round is just so symbolic of the season, the final affirmation that all those other losses weren't aberrations at all...this team just underachieved.
Meanwhile, how amazing that DePaul could go 0-18 in the Big East regular season, then waltz into MSG and win. Hypothesize with me for a second: If DePaul ran the table in the Big East Tournament, what kind of seed would they get? On the one hand, they would have the worst record in the Tournament; on the other, they would have beaten, like, 4 Top 20 teams in a row. Would that make them a 14 or a 15? Would the NCAA put them in the Tuesday play-in game?
Western Kentucky: Any chance they repeat last season's run to the Sweet 16? If you had to pick between WKU and Siena -- which pulled a 1st-round upset last year and returns all 5 starters to this year's Tournament -- which team will go further next week?
The Netherlands: Greatest. Baseball Upset. Ever. And while I am sort of taking advantage of the best kind of Instant History, please post to the Comments what upsets would be bigger... Dodgers over A's in '89? Reds over A's in '90? Not really.
Maybe Marlins over Yankees in '03? Hmm... MAYBE Marlins over Yankees in '03. But Josh Beckett was the best player on the field for either team that series, and has the MVP ring to prove it -- there wasn't a position on the field where Netherlands had an advantage over the D.R. Also, when you win a best-of-7 series, it can hardly be called an "upset" -- not in the same way an "elimination" tournament can present.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Tuesday 03/10 A.M. Quickie:
VCU, Zags, Siena, Big East, A-Rod, Vick
I make a startling confession in today's SN column. Do you know who my favorite coach in college basketball is?
(Hint: It's NOT Billy Donovan.)
It is Anthony Grant at VCU -- who almost replaced Donovan at Florida (during Billy D's NBA flip-flop) and whose Rams are back in the NCAA Tournament after being the mid-major upstart of 2007's tournament. (Who WASN'T cheering on VCU when they took out Duke in Round 1?)
Obviously, it depends on their path, but I could see taking VCU to the Elite Eight -- they will undoubtedly also be one of the most "sexy" picks of the mid-majors to break through.
(If it's any consolation, Donovan is my 2nd-favorite coach in college basketball. But, yes, as I lead in the column, I was more than happy to replace Donovan with Grant after the 2007 Tournament and Donovan seemed to be off to the NBA. What is NOT a consolation is that I can't see any reasonable scenario where Georgia doesn't hire Grant away next month. At least, if they had any idea about what they were doing.)
Meanwhile: Speaking of sexy picks, there's Siena, back in the Dance... Chattanooga takes Davidson's spot in the field from the Southern auto-bid... And is it too much to ask Georgetown to win 5 games in 5 days, including what would have to be wins over two likely NCAA 1-seeds?
Plus:
*Dwyane Wade for NBA MVP! (What a shot!)
*George Steinbrenner may have financed the hit on Nancy Kerrigan!
*Michael Vick could be playing in the UFL!
*A-Rod's surgery will have him back by May!
*And more!
Complete column here. Don't forget to sign up for the Tournament Challenge -- group name: Daily Quickie Readers.
-- D.S.
(Hint: It's NOT Billy Donovan.)
It is Anthony Grant at VCU -- who almost replaced Donovan at Florida (during Billy D's NBA flip-flop) and whose Rams are back in the NCAA Tournament after being the mid-major upstart of 2007's tournament. (Who WASN'T cheering on VCU when they took out Duke in Round 1?)
Obviously, it depends on their path, but I could see taking VCU to the Elite Eight -- they will undoubtedly also be one of the most "sexy" picks of the mid-majors to break through.
(If it's any consolation, Donovan is my 2nd-favorite coach in college basketball. But, yes, as I lead in the column, I was more than happy to replace Donovan with Grant after the 2007 Tournament and Donovan seemed to be off to the NBA. What is NOT a consolation is that I can't see any reasonable scenario where Georgia doesn't hire Grant away next month. At least, if they had any idea about what they were doing.)
Meanwhile: Speaking of sexy picks, there's Siena, back in the Dance... Chattanooga takes Davidson's spot in the field from the Southern auto-bid... And is it too much to ask Georgetown to win 5 games in 5 days, including what would have to be wins over two likely NCAA 1-seeds?
Plus:
*Dwyane Wade for NBA MVP! (What a shot!)
*George Steinbrenner may have financed the hit on Nancy Kerrigan!
*Michael Vick could be playing in the UFL!
*A-Rod's surgery will have him back by May!
*And more!
Complete column here. Don't forget to sign up for the Tournament Challenge -- group name: Daily Quickie Readers.
-- D.S.
Monday, March 09, 2009
Tournament Challenge: Sign Up Now
For The "Daily Quickie Readers" Group
The original is back: The Daily Quickie Readers group in the Tournament Challenge.
Not quite sure it'll ever get back to the 2006 level, when it was the 3rd-largest group on ESPN.com (and my unborn son -- picks via his mom -- came in 10th out of more than 1,000 entrants).
Join in now! Just search for the "Daily Quickie Readers" group -- open to all, no password necessary. Winner gets the glory of a post in their honor, among other things.
-- D.S.
Not quite sure it'll ever get back to the 2006 level, when it was the 3rd-largest group on ESPN.com (and my unborn son -- picks via his mom -- came in 10th out of more than 1,000 entrants).
Join in now! Just search for the "Daily Quickie Readers" group -- open to all, no password necessary. Winner gets the glory of a post in their honor, among other things.
-- D.S.
Monday 03/09 A.M. Quickie:
UNC, Davidson, N'western, TO, More
...And the dream is over for Northwestern. Dammit. Came very very close.
The dream may be over for Davidson, too. In today's SN column, I presume that they would get an at-large bid on the strength of last year's Tournament performance and the star power of Stephen Curry. But apparently the numbers say that their inclusion (as an at-large) would be laughable. It's going to be very very interesting to see how this develops.
Meanwhile, the C-Week game of the week could be tonight's Gonzaga-St. Mary's West Coast final: The Zags are in, whether they win or not. I think St. Mary's MIGHT be in, even if they lose, by putting up a tough fight that shows they would be competitive in the NCAA Tournament; obviously, if they win, they get the league's auto-bid -- and will be everyone's 1st-round Cindy.
I actually led the column with UNC and Tyler Hansbrough, reminding everyone that unless he wins the national title, he is this generation's Ralph Sampson -- super-talented, super-dominant...but ultimately not a champion. (No: The ACC regular-season and Tournament championships don't count as much -- not when you consider yourself a "national" power.)
More in the column: Yankees without A-Rod (pitching is more important), Bills with T.O. (instant relevancy, if not likeability, for the franchise), Magic > Cavs as it relates to being able to take down the Celtics in the playoffs (neither will anyway, so it's moot) and More.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
The dream may be over for Davidson, too. In today's SN column, I presume that they would get an at-large bid on the strength of last year's Tournament performance and the star power of Stephen Curry. But apparently the numbers say that their inclusion (as an at-large) would be laughable. It's going to be very very interesting to see how this develops.
Meanwhile, the C-Week game of the week could be tonight's Gonzaga-St. Mary's West Coast final: The Zags are in, whether they win or not. I think St. Mary's MIGHT be in, even if they lose, by putting up a tough fight that shows they would be competitive in the NCAA Tournament; obviously, if they win, they get the league's auto-bid -- and will be everyone's 1st-round Cindy.
I actually led the column with UNC and Tyler Hansbrough, reminding everyone that unless he wins the national title, he is this generation's Ralph Sampson -- super-talented, super-dominant...but ultimately not a champion. (No: The ACC regular-season and Tournament championships don't count as much -- not when you consider yourself a "national" power.)
More in the column: Yankees without A-Rod (pitching is more important), Bills with T.O. (instant relevancy, if not likeability, for the franchise), Magic > Cavs as it relates to being able to take down the Celtics in the playoffs (neither will anyway, so it's moot) and More.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Sunday, March 08, 2009
Sunday 03/08 (Very) Quickie
Loved that Morehead State-Austin Peay game: That the 4-seed toppled the 1-seed made it all the more amazing.
Louisville deserves a 1-seed in the NCAA Tournament for winning the Big East regular-season title outright and for being the No. 1 team in the country right now, capped with that win at West Virginia. As long as Pitt, Louisville and UConn all make the Big East semis, they should all be considered top contenders for a 1-seed, with UNC.
(My preseason pick for Louisville to win the national title looks really good right now, although the bandwagon is going to get super-crowded this week.)
Um, so what was that about Missouri being a team to watch? (Honestly, that really just speaks to the underrated depth at the top in the Big 12.)
Blake Griffin: 33 and 14 and the new single-season rebounding record in the Big 12. I think Oklahoma has a tougher path to a 1-seed than UNC or the Big Three from the Big East. But if they win the Big 12 Tournament, I could see the Committee wanting a little geographic parity among the 1-seeds, with one to OU, one to UNC and two to the top 2 out of L'ville, Pitt and UConn in the Big East Tournament.
Props to Washington for coming out of nowhere (compared to preseason expectations) and winning their first outright Pac-10 regular-season title since the mid-1950s. I'll admit to being totally baffled as to how to evaluate the Huskies' chances in the NCAA Tournament. (But I probably give them a better shot of going further than any other team from the Pac-10, except UCLA, for whom I remain in the tank for, bracket-wise.)
I said this last week and meant it: The SEC deserves one team in the NCAA Tournament -- the conference tournament winner. LSU losing at Auburn says less about Auburn (although Auburn IS underrated) than it does about LSU being absurdly overrated. I'd could see Auburn, hotter than any team in the conference, win the conference tournament.
(Tennessee? Meh: If they can win the SEC Tournament, they earned it -- otherwise...really? South Carolina? Feh. And Florida? You saw what I had to say about the Gators yesterday; as I project them to lose in the first round of the NCAA Tournament, regardless of opponent, they'll be stealing an NCAA bid from a team that deserves it more, and I say that as a huge fan.)
T.O. to the Bills: There's not a lot of glitz or cachet to his new home city -- not like Dallas or Philly or San Francisco.
But the fans are arguably the best in the NFL, and they deserve the attention/circus that will come from having T.O. on the team. Not sure if they'll end up liking it...
WBC: Netherlands over the D.R. -- the D.R. is the A-Rod of the WBC. (Meanwhile: Does Adam Dunn's start in the WBC bode well for his new stint with the Nats?)
Counting down to Northwestern's play-in-to-play-in today at 5 at Ohio State. Biggest regular-season game for the program in its history...
-- D.S.
Louisville deserves a 1-seed in the NCAA Tournament for winning the Big East regular-season title outright and for being the No. 1 team in the country right now, capped with that win at West Virginia. As long as Pitt, Louisville and UConn all make the Big East semis, they should all be considered top contenders for a 1-seed, with UNC.
(My preseason pick for Louisville to win the national title looks really good right now, although the bandwagon is going to get super-crowded this week.)
Um, so what was that about Missouri being a team to watch? (Honestly, that really just speaks to the underrated depth at the top in the Big 12.)
Blake Griffin: 33 and 14 and the new single-season rebounding record in the Big 12. I think Oklahoma has a tougher path to a 1-seed than UNC or the Big Three from the Big East. But if they win the Big 12 Tournament, I could see the Committee wanting a little geographic parity among the 1-seeds, with one to OU, one to UNC and two to the top 2 out of L'ville, Pitt and UConn in the Big East Tournament.
Props to Washington for coming out of nowhere (compared to preseason expectations) and winning their first outright Pac-10 regular-season title since the mid-1950s. I'll admit to being totally baffled as to how to evaluate the Huskies' chances in the NCAA Tournament. (But I probably give them a better shot of going further than any other team from the Pac-10, except UCLA, for whom I remain in the tank for, bracket-wise.)
I said this last week and meant it: The SEC deserves one team in the NCAA Tournament -- the conference tournament winner. LSU losing at Auburn says less about Auburn (although Auburn IS underrated) than it does about LSU being absurdly overrated. I'd could see Auburn, hotter than any team in the conference, win the conference tournament.
(Tennessee? Meh: If they can win the SEC Tournament, they earned it -- otherwise...really? South Carolina? Feh. And Florida? You saw what I had to say about the Gators yesterday; as I project them to lose in the first round of the NCAA Tournament, regardless of opponent, they'll be stealing an NCAA bid from a team that deserves it more, and I say that as a huge fan.)
T.O. to the Bills: There's not a lot of glitz or cachet to his new home city -- not like Dallas or Philly or San Francisco.
But the fans are arguably the best in the NFL, and they deserve the attention/circus that will come from having T.O. on the team. Not sure if they'll end up liking it...
WBC: Netherlands over the D.R. -- the D.R. is the A-Rod of the WBC. (Meanwhile: Does Adam Dunn's start in the WBC bode well for his new stint with the Nats?)
Counting down to Northwestern's play-in-to-play-in today at 5 at Ohio State. Biggest regular-season game for the program in its history...
-- D.S.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Weekend In College Hoops, Part 1:
Radford, Pitt, Florida, Louisville, More
A little bummed to not see run-and-gun VMI advance to the NCAA Tournament out of the Big South...
You all know how I feel about Pitt-UConn -- it won't impact No. 1 seeding, because even though UConn lost today, if they win the Big East Tournament, they'll be a No. 1 seed. (Pitt may have locked in a No. 1 seed, regardless of finish in the Big East Tournament.)
However, I view everything through the lens of: Hmm, but what does this mean when I'm filling out my NCAA bracket?
In that context, Pitt looks very very strong as a team to win six and go all the way. Obviously, if they struggle next week in NY at the B.E.T., momentum can shift dramatically, but -- wow -- they look good.
Speaking of which: Florida did NOT look good while beating Kentucky. They haven't looked good all season. They haven't looked good in two seasons.
They don't deserve an at-large bid, to be honest, although they'll probably get one now. Here's the reality: I just can't see myself picking them to win their 1st-round game, no matter who the opponent is -- even if the Gators are a 12-seed.
(Is that wrong to not pick your team to win in the NCAA Tournament? To not even win their 1st-round game, aspirationally? Or is it being more honest than a fan who knee-jerks their team through the bracket, just because of their fandom?)
Looking ahead to tonight: Please keep in mind that in the preseason, my pick to win the national title was Louisville. If they beat West Virginia at WVU to win the Big East regular-season title, there will be a TON of folks jumping on the Louisville bandwagon next Sunday night.
(If they lose to WVU? Probably not enough to keep me from remaining bullish on the Cards -- WVU is a strong team, particularly in Morgantown.)
I hope to get into this more tomorrow morning, but I have not been as excited about a Northwestern basketball game (tomorrow's "play-in-to-play-in" the NCAA Tournament vs. Ohio State) since the team advanced to the 2nd-round of the NIT in 1994. There are a lot of reasons that the team faded away from me, but I feel a sincere sense of anticipation and excitement about the ramifications of tomorrow's game, if they can win.
-- D.S.
You all know how I feel about Pitt-UConn -- it won't impact No. 1 seeding, because even though UConn lost today, if they win the Big East Tournament, they'll be a No. 1 seed. (Pitt may have locked in a No. 1 seed, regardless of finish in the Big East Tournament.)
However, I view everything through the lens of: Hmm, but what does this mean when I'm filling out my NCAA bracket?
In that context, Pitt looks very very strong as a team to win six and go all the way. Obviously, if they struggle next week in NY at the B.E.T., momentum can shift dramatically, but -- wow -- they look good.
Speaking of which: Florida did NOT look good while beating Kentucky. They haven't looked good all season. They haven't looked good in two seasons.
They don't deserve an at-large bid, to be honest, although they'll probably get one now. Here's the reality: I just can't see myself picking them to win their 1st-round game, no matter who the opponent is -- even if the Gators are a 12-seed.
(Is that wrong to not pick your team to win in the NCAA Tournament? To not even win their 1st-round game, aspirationally? Or is it being more honest than a fan who knee-jerks their team through the bracket, just because of their fandom?)
Looking ahead to tonight: Please keep in mind that in the preseason, my pick to win the national title was Louisville. If they beat West Virginia at WVU to win the Big East regular-season title, there will be a TON of folks jumping on the Louisville bandwagon next Sunday night.
(If they lose to WVU? Probably not enough to keep me from remaining bullish on the Cards -- WVU is a strong team, particularly in Morgantown.)
I hope to get into this more tomorrow morning, but I have not been as excited about a Northwestern basketball game (tomorrow's "play-in-to-play-in" the NCAA Tournament vs. Ohio State) since the team advanced to the 2nd-round of the NIT in 1994. There are a lot of reasons that the team faded away from me, but I feel a sincere sense of anticipation and excitement about the ramifications of tomorrow's game, if they can win.
-- D.S.
Saturday 03/07 (Sorta) Quickie
A surprisingly loaded news cycle:
Celtics beat Cavs -- without KG: Was it a "statement game?" I think, if nothing else, it proved that the Cavs aren't going to dethrone the Celtics in the East without playoff home-court adv.
Florida State NCAA sanctions: Bowden to lose 14 wins? Normally, taking away wins in hindsight is pretty ineffective -- yeah, Michigan hoops fans really "forget" those wins.
(Although, and this applies mostly to college football: The difference in either bowl-eligibility or what bowl you go to when you get that win back from FSU could be worth millions of dollars. Who makes up for that? The sanctions cover the team that cheated; what about the teams that were the victim of the cheating? Could an opponent sue FSU over lost bowl revenue?)
But in this story, those lost wins are much bigger, because we're talking about the difference between Bobby Bowden potentially being the winningest coach -- and being way too far behind Joe Paterno to ever catch up, given Bowden's age (and JoePa's endless career prospects).
Naturally, FSU is outraged -- outraged! -- that the NCAA would take away those wins. Nevermind that they are embroiled in what might be the most systemically broken academics-athletics situation since the heyday of the mid-90s, where EVERYONE was doing it.
Instead of worrying about Bobby's win total, maybe FSU should be more concerned that his football program (along with the other sports programs) dragged the university into this mess. Four years' probation? If it wasn't for the fact that I think the NCAA is too scared to sanction FSU more severely -- even if they violate probation -- I'd put my money on another violation.
Should A-Rod have surgery now, rather than later? Short answer: Yes. If it's going to happen one way or another -- and if his productivity will be sketchy while he waits.
CBB: I'm bummed Wichita St didn't upend Creighton in the Mo Valley quarters -- the Shockers deserved the W, coming back from being 22 down. The Jays are the best the MVC has to offer?
T.O.: Deal next week? Um, which team would actually sign him?
NFL Draft: Is Mark Sanchez the Jets' QB of the future? (I can understand NYJ bringing him in; Rex Ryan knows that a decent rookie QB can get a team to the playoffs in the AFC -- why would the Colts want to look at Sanchez? They don't have other pressing needs, given that they're trying to win a Super Bowl NOW?)
Prep Hoops: Oak Hill beats Montrose Christian. (I like that Keith Gallon for Oak Hill -- headed to Oklahoma and a load (but shifty!) at 6-9, 315.) That said: Let's not confuse these teams with high school teams. They are quasi-professional basketball factories that have about as much to do with "high school" as the schools where teenaged Hollywood actors go.
They exist to support the basketball team, and they develop great players -- but it's apples and oranges to try to compare teams like Oak Hill and Montrose with your run-of-the-mill, local high school team. (That came across like I'm some kind of purist crank; I'm fine with their existence -- I simply reject that they represent "high school basketball.")
Tiger will play at Doral next week: The golf industry breathes a big sigh of relief -- if Tiger wasn't participating, no one would bother to pay attention to the event (or the sport). As with the Match Play, as long as Tiger is playing (meaning: he makes the cut into the weekend), folks will keep the event in mind... if only to see how Tiger is doing. Not because they care about Doral or the rest of the sport, of course. But it's better than nothing.
New Media: Very nice job by both Henry Abbott (via Twitter) and Jonah Keri (via WSJ Sports live-blogging) on the Celtics-Cavs game last night. Fun way to supplement watching on TV.
-- D.S.
Celtics beat Cavs -- without KG: Was it a "statement game?" I think, if nothing else, it proved that the Cavs aren't going to dethrone the Celtics in the East without playoff home-court adv.
Florida State NCAA sanctions: Bowden to lose 14 wins? Normally, taking away wins in hindsight is pretty ineffective -- yeah, Michigan hoops fans really "forget" those wins.
(Although, and this applies mostly to college football: The difference in either bowl-eligibility or what bowl you go to when you get that win back from FSU could be worth millions of dollars. Who makes up for that? The sanctions cover the team that cheated; what about the teams that were the victim of the cheating? Could an opponent sue FSU over lost bowl revenue?)
But in this story, those lost wins are much bigger, because we're talking about the difference between Bobby Bowden potentially being the winningest coach -- and being way too far behind Joe Paterno to ever catch up, given Bowden's age (and JoePa's endless career prospects).
Naturally, FSU is outraged -- outraged! -- that the NCAA would take away those wins. Nevermind that they are embroiled in what might be the most systemically broken academics-athletics situation since the heyday of the mid-90s, where EVERYONE was doing it.
Instead of worrying about Bobby's win total, maybe FSU should be more concerned that his football program (along with the other sports programs) dragged the university into this mess. Four years' probation? If it wasn't for the fact that I think the NCAA is too scared to sanction FSU more severely -- even if they violate probation -- I'd put my money on another violation.
Should A-Rod have surgery now, rather than later? Short answer: Yes. If it's going to happen one way or another -- and if his productivity will be sketchy while he waits.
CBB: I'm bummed Wichita St didn't upend Creighton in the Mo Valley quarters -- the Shockers deserved the W, coming back from being 22 down. The Jays are the best the MVC has to offer?
T.O.: Deal next week? Um, which team would actually sign him?
NFL Draft: Is Mark Sanchez the Jets' QB of the future? (I can understand NYJ bringing him in; Rex Ryan knows that a decent rookie QB can get a team to the playoffs in the AFC -- why would the Colts want to look at Sanchez? They don't have other pressing needs, given that they're trying to win a Super Bowl NOW?)
Prep Hoops: Oak Hill beats Montrose Christian. (I like that Keith Gallon for Oak Hill -- headed to Oklahoma and a load (but shifty!) at 6-9, 315.) That said: Let's not confuse these teams with high school teams. They are quasi-professional basketball factories that have about as much to do with "high school" as the schools where teenaged Hollywood actors go.
They exist to support the basketball team, and they develop great players -- but it's apples and oranges to try to compare teams like Oak Hill and Montrose with your run-of-the-mill, local high school team. (That came across like I'm some kind of purist crank; I'm fine with their existence -- I simply reject that they represent "high school basketball.")
Tiger will play at Doral next week: The golf industry breathes a big sigh of relief -- if Tiger wasn't participating, no one would bother to pay attention to the event (or the sport). As with the Match Play, as long as Tiger is playing (meaning: he makes the cut into the weekend), folks will keep the event in mind... if only to see how Tiger is doing. Not because they care about Doral or the rest of the sport, of course. But it's better than nothing.
New Media: Very nice job by both Henry Abbott (via Twitter) and Jonah Keri (via WSJ Sports live-blogging) on the Celtics-Cavs game last night. Fun way to supplement watching on TV.
-- D.S.
Friday, March 06, 2009
WSJ Hops On Northwestern Bandwagon
Northwestern's never-been-Dancing surge for an NCAA Tournament bid made the lead -- the lead -- of today's Daily Fix at WSJ.com. (Now, that's the way to re-launch a sports section!)
Friday 03/06 A.M. Quickie:
Conf Tourneys, Bubble, A-Rod, T.O., More
C-Week is a great week. Unlike this weekend's ultimately meaningless UConn-Pitt, UNC-Duke or Michigan St-Purdue "big" games (really: all of them will make the tournament as high seeds), conference tournament title games (at least in the mid-major and low-major leagues) truly win or bust. Especially if you won the regular-season title and can't deliver in the league tourney.
Today's SN column leads with a breakdown of the three kinds of games this weekend: Conference tournaments, Bubble battles (Northwestern!) and -- yawn -- the "big" games featuring the teams listed above.
(Even if you buy into the value of being a No. 1 seed -- versus a 2-seed -- in the NCAA Tournament, these games aren't as meaningful as some folks would have you believe -- like Pitt "loses" a No. 1 seed if they lose to UConn? Not if they win the Big East Tournament. Same with UNC. And Michigan St could beat Purdue, but without a Big Ten Tourney title? No 1-seed shot.)
For the teams at the very top -- the ones who consider themselves legit contenders for the national title this season -- do regular-season conference championships matter? Hell, do conference tournament championships matter? Do rivalry games matter? They shouldn't. All that matters is winning the national title. (For some, making the Final Four would be enough. For Duke, maybe just escaping the first weekend.
But for teams like UNC, UConn, Pitt, Oklahoma -- any team that fancies itself worthy of a 1-seed -- it's national title or bust. Regardless of what happens this weekend in the regular-season finales or even next week in the conference tournament. Win 6 straight in late March. Period.
Complete column here.
-- D.S.
Today's SN column leads with a breakdown of the three kinds of games this weekend: Conference tournaments, Bubble battles (Northwestern!) and -- yawn -- the "big" games featuring the teams listed above.
(Even if you buy into the value of being a No. 1 seed -- versus a 2-seed -- in the NCAA Tournament, these games aren't as meaningful as some folks would have you believe -- like Pitt "loses" a No. 1 seed if they lose to UConn? Not if they win the Big East Tournament. Same with UNC. And Michigan St could beat Purdue, but without a Big Ten Tourney title? No 1-seed shot.)
For the teams at the very top -- the ones who consider themselves legit contenders for the national title this season -- do regular-season conference championships matter? Hell, do conference tournament championships matter? Do rivalry games matter? They shouldn't. All that matters is winning the national title. (For some, making the Final Four would be enough. For Duke, maybe just escaping the first weekend.
But for teams like UNC, UConn, Pitt, Oklahoma -- any team that fancies itself worthy of a 1-seed -- it's national title or bust. Regardless of what happens this weekend in the regular-season finales or even next week in the conference tournament. Win 6 straight in late March. Period.
Complete column here.
-- D.S.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Tomasson Post: Follow-Up, Featuring the New Blog InsideTheRockies.com
See this post from the other day about what ex-Rocky sports reporters -- or any laid-off newspaper sports journalists -- can do. Here is what the baseball crew did: They started a blog.
OK: Points for taking the at-bat. (Extra credit for your 5-blog blogroll -- you'll quickly learn to be more generous, both in the roll and your posts.)
But the effort begs this key question: How will you pay your bills? (AdSense? Hmm.)
And how are you going to finance your reporting, or... hmm... do you plan to "blog from your couch?" That's sort of what it looks like. Reporting ain't cheap or easy.
-- D.S.
OK: Points for taking the at-bat. (Extra credit for your 5-blog blogroll -- you'll quickly learn to be more generous, both in the roll and your posts.)
But the effort begs this key question: How will you pay your bills? (AdSense? Hmm.)
And how are you going to finance your reporting, or... hmm... do you plan to "blog from your couch?" That's sort of what it looks like. Reporting ain't cheap or easy.
-- D.S.
NBA Non-Competitiveness, Cont'd
"Almost every team in the NBA is playing for something": I appreciate Henry's optimism here.
But regardless of who makes the playoffs, only a handful of teams are actually -- y'know -- sincerely competing for a championship. Maybe, for some, "making the playoffs alone" or "developing young talent" is the competitive goal. Maybe.
But those can also be called euphemisms for "If we try too hard to win, it might cost too much. And we can't have THAT."
I'm sorry: My cynicism about the NBA owners' essential cynicism is kind of insurmountable right now. I would like nothing more than to have a little of Henry's optimism rub off on me.
There are obvious exceptions to this: How can you not like what Sam Presti is trying to build -- from scratch -- in OKC. Even if it's now obvious the Thunder is actually better without Kevin Durant. (Kidding!*)
-- D.S.
*- Sort of.
But regardless of who makes the playoffs, only a handful of teams are actually -- y'know -- sincerely competing for a championship. Maybe, for some, "making the playoffs alone" or "developing young talent" is the competitive goal. Maybe.
But those can also be called euphemisms for "If we try too hard to win, it might cost too much. And we can't have THAT."
I'm sorry: My cynicism about the NBA owners' essential cynicism is kind of insurmountable right now. I would like nothing more than to have a little of Henry's optimism rub off on me.
There are obvious exceptions to this: How can you not like what Sam Presti is trying to build -- from scratch -- in OKC. Even if it's now obvious the Thunder is actually better without Kevin Durant. (Kidding!*)
-- D.S.
*- Sort of.
Northwestern As NCAA Bubble Team
No, really: If you don't believe me, take it from Andy Katz.
No, wait: Check out this post from Lindsey Willhite from the Arlington Heights Daily Herald. It really lays out the resume impressively. (h/t: Lake the Posts)
I said it on Twitter last night: "Never-been-Dancing Northwestern is one win away from being one win away from the NCAA Tournament." Never been closer.
-- D.S.
No, wait: Check out this post from Lindsey Willhite from the Arlington Heights Daily Herald. It really lays out the resume impressively. (h/t: Lake the Posts)
I said it on Twitter last night: "Never-been-Dancing Northwestern is one win away from being one win away from the NCAA Tournament." Never been closer.
-- D.S.
Thursday 03/05 A.M. Quickie:
TO, WBC, CFB Playoff, Northwestern Hoops
Totally loaded SN column this morning. I could have led with the start of the World Baseball Classic (that was my plan). Of course, does anyone even CARE about the WBC at this point?
...or the Mountain West's lame playoff proposal (you know I'm obsessed with THAT topic -- hint: the MWC's plan isn't even really a playoff. Forget the Big Ten and Pac-10 never going for it. You can even forget that they keep the 6 BCS-league "auto-bid" cabal intact...they just want to be included. If there is a scenario where consensus unbeaten No. 1 USC plays consensus unbeaten No. 2 Ohio State in a "quarterfinal" game in the Rose Bowl, IT'S NOT A PLAYOFF SYSTEM.
... or even Northwestern's sudden "if they win the next one then win the next one they should be in the NCAA Tournament" status -- don't give me your RPI bunk... not when the Cats have never -- ever -- been to the NCAA Tournament before. Give 'em a 15 seed, I don't care; this is as close as NU has ever been this late in the season -- or perhaps will ever get.
Instead, I was compelled to lead with the Cowboys cutting T.O. I hope that's the last that we speak of the subject.
Really: Check out the whole thing. Tons to discuss in there. More later.
-- D.S.
...or the Mountain West's lame playoff proposal (you know I'm obsessed with THAT topic -- hint: the MWC's plan isn't even really a playoff. Forget the Big Ten and Pac-10 never going for it. You can even forget that they keep the 6 BCS-league "auto-bid" cabal intact...they just want to be included. If there is a scenario where consensus unbeaten No. 1 USC plays consensus unbeaten No. 2 Ohio State in a "quarterfinal" game in the Rose Bowl, IT'S NOT A PLAYOFF SYSTEM.
... or even Northwestern's sudden "if they win the next one then win the next one they should be in the NCAA Tournament" status -- don't give me your RPI bunk... not when the Cats have never -- ever -- been to the NCAA Tournament before. Give 'em a 15 seed, I don't care; this is as close as NU has ever been this late in the season -- or perhaps will ever get.
Instead, I was compelled to lead with the Cowboys cutting T.O. I hope that's the last that we speak of the subject.
Really: Check out the whole thing. Tons to discuss in there. More later.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Wednesday 03/04 A.M. Quickie:
CBB, G'town, Manny, Shaq, A-Rod, More
Back to the SN column this morning, and even though I'm for having every team in the NCAA Tournament and eliminating Championship Week, that doesn't mean I don't appreciate C-Week.
Plus: Georgetown burns us for the last time... Manny to the Dodgers -- done-deal?... Jay Cutler is in Denver THIS season (but not next, you can be sure)... Dwight > Shaq... and More.
-- D.S.
Plus: Georgetown burns us for the last time... Manny to the Dodgers -- done-deal?... Jay Cutler is in Denver THIS season (but not next, you can be sure)... Dwight > Shaq... and More.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
My Memoir Will Be Fakey From The Start
Yikes. I'm not saying my memoir will be full of fakery -- but I will certainly use phrases right up-front like, "Now, I'm not sure I remember this right, but let me embellish thusly..."
-- D.S.
-- D.S.
NBA: Tanking As Strategy, League-Wide
Wall Street Journal follows my lead: I believe I wrote a few weeks ago both here and in the SN column about this. Now, please stop insisting that your NBA teams aren't tanking.
And, as I pointed out then: (1) It will get even worse next season, and (2) Plenty of teams will use "2010!" as a diversion to cut costs -- and stay non-competitive -- well beyond 2010.
-- D.S.
And, as I pointed out then: (1) It will get even worse next season, and (2) Plenty of teams will use "2010!" as a diversion to cut costs -- and stay non-competitive -- well beyond 2010.
-- D.S.
Tuesday 03/03 (Rehab) Quickie
Hopefully back to the SN column tomorrow morning. Just stretching my legs today...
LeBron 42, D-Wade 41. (But more impressive was the Cavs' 11-point 4th-quarter comeback, which makes up for last week's tank vs. Houston.)
If the Seahawks weren't going to spend on a premier WR free agent like TJ Houshmandzadeh, how else were they going to spend their money? At least he knows he'll be The Man there.
Kurt Warner to the 49ers? He could be leading his 2nd straight NFC West turnaround job.
Where will Jason Taylor end up? I'll say: Not Miami. Do they really need that drama queen?
Said it last year, will say it again this year: What contender in their right mind couldn't use Barry Bonds? (In the NFL, this would never happen.)
Enjoy the NIT, Notre Dame fans.
Wait: The Nuggets expect their players to listen to George Karl? Why start now?
WBC: If I was a team exec, I wouldn't let my pitcher come close to the WBC roster. The USA infield has got star power, though: Jeter, Rollins, Pedroia, Wright, Youk.
Eh: Still feeling sore. And watch out for the rust raining down on you as you read this. Hopefully, SN column returns tomorrow.
-- D.S.
LeBron 42, D-Wade 41. (But more impressive was the Cavs' 11-point 4th-quarter comeback, which makes up for last week's tank vs. Houston.)
If the Seahawks weren't going to spend on a premier WR free agent like TJ Houshmandzadeh, how else were they going to spend their money? At least he knows he'll be The Man there.
Kurt Warner to the 49ers? He could be leading his 2nd straight NFC West turnaround job.
Where will Jason Taylor end up? I'll say: Not Miami. Do they really need that drama queen?
Said it last year, will say it again this year: What contender in their right mind couldn't use Barry Bonds? (In the NFL, this would never happen.)
Enjoy the NIT, Notre Dame fans.
Wait: The Nuggets expect their players to listen to George Karl? Why start now?
WBC: If I was a team exec, I wouldn't let my pitcher come close to the WBC roster. The USA infield has got star power, though: Jeter, Rollins, Pedroia, Wright, Youk.
Eh: Still feeling sore. And watch out for the rust raining down on you as you read this. Hopefully, SN column returns tomorrow.
-- D.S.
Monday, March 02, 2009
Chris Tomasson: Future of NBA News?
I feel for Chris Tomasson, Nuggets beat reporter for the Rocky Mountain News -- as I feel for everyone at the shuttered paper. (I work with a ton of ex-Rocky folk, and they are awesome.)
So what should Chris do? The 2008-ish thing to do would be to immediately launch a Nuggets blog and use all of his unique resources and insights (previously funded by the Rocky) to establish himself as the pre-eminent Nuggets blog. He has the reporting skills and the credibility among mainstream NBA reporters to make it work.
But how to pay for it?
Maybe he can cut a deal with SB Nation. Actually, they already have good one: Pickaxe and Roll. Or maybe hook up with Henry Abbott's TrueHoop Network on ESPN.com. They already have a fine Nuggets blog, too: Roundball Mining Company.
And here's the thing about those very good team blogs: The great work they do? It's on the side -- neither blog pays for doing the job full-time, so consider the quality work they do is on top of their "day job."
So here's the problem: Chris can't get paid full-time by a newspaper (or its online-media proxy) to cover the Nuggets. (God bless him if he can find that work, btw.) He could start a blog, but he'd have to (a) find a rent-paying job first, and (b) cut a distribution deal, with the two leading players off the table.
Oh, and on top of that, tirelessly (but not too shamelessly) attempt to market his own work to generate the audience -- the links on higher-traffic blogs, maybe a link-back, maybe a blog-roll, ideally reaching his absolute core audience of Nuggets fans -- enough to make it worth it for a partner to give him more exposure and perhaps the chance at a few bucks in ad revenue -- provided he take all that work to create an audience and assign it to the network.
And he still needs that day-job, which -- as any blogger with a day-job will tell you -- saps time and energy like nothing else. It's what makes most team blogger output -- most blogger output, period -- so amazing. This all, of course, presupposes that he can wrap his mind around blogging -- because it's not like reporting and great info, alone, doesn't win.
I can think of one other option (and I believe Mark Cuban wrote about this a few weeks ago): Cut a deal directly with the team to create and write a blog on behalf of the team.
The team gets the credibility of an established journalist covering the team; the reporter gets access and just enough funding to continue his work. Can he write the expose about the two players violating the NBA substance-abuse policy? No. Can he write about a Jason Hart signing? Or analyze the team's performance on the floor? Or preview the next opponent? Or write feature-y puff pieces about how great LeBron is? All day.
(Then again, it's not like NBA teams are flush with cash to carry full-time bloggers. I will say that the teams doing this best -- the Hawks and Suns and Rockets come to mind, though I don't mean to dis others -- are getting a terrific ROI.)
Here's the reality: NBA fans -- particularly at the local level -- have a tremendous appetite for content. NBA team blogs are arguably the best of any pro-league blogging ecosystem. It is getting more crowded by the week; it is getting harder and harder to "break through" without a legacy of audience or an existing mass-distribution system. And it is certainly harder than ever to make money doing it.
So there are two choices for him: Get very very innovative (and lose the reporter's notebook for a little while and practice up on running some Excel spreadsheets and PowerPoint presentations to convince someone to pay you to do what you love)... or get a day job and cover the Nuggets for fun.
You will be welcome either way.
-- D.S.
PS: This was totally inspired by a post by Rob Neyer (itself inspired by a post by FanGraphs' Dave Cameron, himself in the "gold standard" tier among team-specific bloggers.)
So what should Chris do? The 2008-ish thing to do would be to immediately launch a Nuggets blog and use all of his unique resources and insights (previously funded by the Rocky) to establish himself as the pre-eminent Nuggets blog. He has the reporting skills and the credibility among mainstream NBA reporters to make it work.
But how to pay for it?
Maybe he can cut a deal with SB Nation. Actually, they already have good one: Pickaxe and Roll. Or maybe hook up with Henry Abbott's TrueHoop Network on ESPN.com. They already have a fine Nuggets blog, too: Roundball Mining Company.
And here's the thing about those very good team blogs: The great work they do? It's on the side -- neither blog pays for doing the job full-time, so consider the quality work they do is on top of their "day job."
So here's the problem: Chris can't get paid full-time by a newspaper (or its online-media proxy) to cover the Nuggets. (God bless him if he can find that work, btw.) He could start a blog, but he'd have to (a) find a rent-paying job first, and (b) cut a distribution deal, with the two leading players off the table.
Oh, and on top of that, tirelessly (but not too shamelessly) attempt to market his own work to generate the audience -- the links on higher-traffic blogs, maybe a link-back, maybe a blog-roll, ideally reaching his absolute core audience of Nuggets fans -- enough to make it worth it for a partner to give him more exposure and perhaps the chance at a few bucks in ad revenue -- provided he take all that work to create an audience and assign it to the network.
And he still needs that day-job, which -- as any blogger with a day-job will tell you -- saps time and energy like nothing else. It's what makes most team blogger output -- most blogger output, period -- so amazing. This all, of course, presupposes that he can wrap his mind around blogging -- because it's not like reporting and great info, alone, doesn't win.
I can think of one other option (and I believe Mark Cuban wrote about this a few weeks ago): Cut a deal directly with the team to create and write a blog on behalf of the team.
The team gets the credibility of an established journalist covering the team; the reporter gets access and just enough funding to continue his work. Can he write the expose about the two players violating the NBA substance-abuse policy? No. Can he write about a Jason Hart signing? Or analyze the team's performance on the floor? Or preview the next opponent? Or write feature-y puff pieces about how great LeBron is? All day.
(Then again, it's not like NBA teams are flush with cash to carry full-time bloggers. I will say that the teams doing this best -- the Hawks and Suns and Rockets come to mind, though I don't mean to dis others -- are getting a terrific ROI.)
Here's the reality: NBA fans -- particularly at the local level -- have a tremendous appetite for content. NBA team blogs are arguably the best of any pro-league blogging ecosystem. It is getting more crowded by the week; it is getting harder and harder to "break through" without a legacy of audience or an existing mass-distribution system. And it is certainly harder than ever to make money doing it.
So there are two choices for him: Get very very innovative (and lose the reporter's notebook for a little while and practice up on running some Excel spreadsheets and PowerPoint presentations to convince someone to pay you to do what you love)... or get a day job and cover the Nuggets for fun.
You will be welcome either way.
-- D.S.
PS: This was totally inspired by a post by Rob Neyer (itself inspired by a post by FanGraphs' Dave Cameron, himself in the "gold standard" tier among team-specific bloggers.)
Johah Lehrer on March Madness
Having been offline (and mostly out of it) for nearly a week now, I'm only now finally catching up -- particularly with some of my favorite posts of the past week (or more) that I'm late on.
Jonah Lehrer is amazing, as is his new book (his old one, too). I come to find out he's also a sports fan (like all great writer/researchers are -- let's not attribute yet another thing as Gladwellian...).
Here is his neuroscientifically marked take on March Madness.
-- D.S.
Jonah Lehrer is amazing, as is his new book (his old one, too). I come to find out he's also a sports fan (like all great writer/researchers are -- let's not attribute yet another thing as Gladwellian...).
Here is his neuroscientifically marked take on March Madness.
-- D.S.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Sports Media Development of the Year:
ESPN.com Goes Hyper-Local In Chicago
I'm waaay late on this, but I've been a little pre-occupied. Anyway, I think that this is the sports media development of the year.
Not only does it make a ton of sense, but it's infinitely scalable -- local sports (and maybe local crime coverage) were the only thing keeping local papers going. Yoink.
Here's how ESPN should fill out the site strategy:
They already have a deal with By The Horns (a leading Bulls blog) -- cut more deals with leading bloggers of the Bears, Cubs, White Sox, Blackhawks, Notre Dame and Northwestern (think True Hoop Network, but by city vertical, rather than by sport vertical). The citizen-journalism/user-generated opportunities are endless (and inexpensive). They already own audio content. They already have a vast trove of recruiting content.
As always, success will come down to ad revenue. But the consumer value proposition -- and execution -- is a layup. Very very smart move.
-- D.S.
Not only does it make a ton of sense, but it's infinitely scalable -- local sports (and maybe local crime coverage) were the only thing keeping local papers going. Yoink.
Here's how ESPN should fill out the site strategy:
They already have a deal with By The Horns (a leading Bulls blog) -- cut more deals with leading bloggers of the Bears, Cubs, White Sox, Blackhawks, Notre Dame and Northwestern (think True Hoop Network, but by city vertical, rather than by sport vertical). The citizen-journalism/user-generated opportunities are endless (and inexpensive). They already own audio content. They already have a vast trove of recruiting content.
As always, success will come down to ad revenue. But the consumer value proposition -- and execution -- is a layup. Very very smart move.
-- D.S.
Sunday 03/01 (Very) Quickie
The Chiefs get a face for their franchise and it's Matt Cassel: The interesting twist is it sounds like the Pats could have gotten more than a 2nd-rounder if they had traded Cassel to Josh McDaniels Broncos (with Jay Cutler going to the Bucs), but instead dealt with Pioli -- and perhaps the team they ID'ed as being far less of a short-term threat in the conference?
The most interesting thing that happened in college hoops yesterday was... Georgetown beating Villanova in Philadelphia. What a reminder of how good this G'town team can be. They have a rough NCAA Tournament resume right now, but if they got in, they would be a bracket-busting decision to make on your pool sheet.
(By the way, Blake Griffin seems to be back: 20 and 19... one more double-double... OU obvioulsy needs him to be healthy for the Sooners to make any noise in the Tournament.)
MLB: And that's the end of Jim Bowden as the Nats GM, after this signing-bonus scandal investigation overwhelmed him.
Sorry it's light today (and non-existent yesterday). Back to the prone position.
-- D.S.
The most interesting thing that happened in college hoops yesterday was... Georgetown beating Villanova in Philadelphia. What a reminder of how good this G'town team can be. They have a rough NCAA Tournament resume right now, but if they got in, they would be a bracket-busting decision to make on your pool sheet.
(By the way, Blake Griffin seems to be back: 20 and 19... one more double-double... OU obvioulsy needs him to be healthy for the Sooners to make any noise in the Tournament.)
MLB: And that's the end of Jim Bowden as the Nats GM, after this signing-bonus scandal investigation overwhelmed him.
Sorry it's light today (and non-existent yesterday). Back to the prone position.
-- D.S.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Friday 02/27 (Very) Quickie
The problem with golf's addiction to Tiger is that in the cases of, say, him losing in the 2nd round of a Match Play Tournament, consumer interest is instantly gone.
Redskins sign Albert Haynesworth for $100M: Nah, no way THAT ends badly. (And that was on top of DeAngelo Hall -- beyond the "WHAT recession?" insta-analysis, how do they afford both of these huge deals under the cap? I'm sure the numbers work out, but it's odd.)
Wow, what happened to the Cavs last night? (Daryl Morey's Moneyball-ish wizardry strikes again? Actually, if anything, it should re-raise expectations that the Rockets could make noise in the playoffs. Well, except for the fact that no one is stopping the Lakers.)
I keep doubting Washington, and they keep winning big Pac-10 games. Obviously, it's all meaningless unless they convert it into a run against the rest of the country in March; how do you evaluate UW's chances of making the Sweet 16? They'll bust some brackets, I'm sure.
(CBB Weekend: Been wavering on the March legitimacy of Marquette all season long? Here's the acid test: At Louisville without Dominic James. It's not if they win -- they won't -- but if they even make it competitive, maybe there's March hope for them yet. I don't think so, though.)
Manny turns down Dodgers...again: At some point, you'd think L.A. would have the self-respect to say, "Go cram it with walnuts, ugly." (Obviously, they know that with Manny, they win the division, but without him, they don't.)
Why is A-Rod still hanging out with his cousin Yuri Sucart? For a guy who is so obsessive about his public image, this is about as tone-deaf of a mistake as he can make. (Sounds like Yuri has been banned from the Yankees clubhouse anyway.)
Tough day for Chicago sports fans: RIP Norm Van Lier AND Johnny "Red" Kerr.
Tom marries Gisele: Didn't that happen, like, months ago? News only if you rank TMZ ahead of KSK. I just can't get enthusiastic about this as "news."
-- D.S.
Redskins sign Albert Haynesworth for $100M: Nah, no way THAT ends badly. (And that was on top of DeAngelo Hall -- beyond the "WHAT recession?" insta-analysis, how do they afford both of these huge deals under the cap? I'm sure the numbers work out, but it's odd.)
Wow, what happened to the Cavs last night? (Daryl Morey's Moneyball-ish wizardry strikes again? Actually, if anything, it should re-raise expectations that the Rockets could make noise in the playoffs. Well, except for the fact that no one is stopping the Lakers.)
I keep doubting Washington, and they keep winning big Pac-10 games. Obviously, it's all meaningless unless they convert it into a run against the rest of the country in March; how do you evaluate UW's chances of making the Sweet 16? They'll bust some brackets, I'm sure.
(CBB Weekend: Been wavering on the March legitimacy of Marquette all season long? Here's the acid test: At Louisville without Dominic James. It's not if they win -- they won't -- but if they even make it competitive, maybe there's March hope for them yet. I don't think so, though.)
Manny turns down Dodgers...again: At some point, you'd think L.A. would have the self-respect to say, "Go cram it with walnuts, ugly." (Obviously, they know that with Manny, they win the division, but without him, they don't.)
Why is A-Rod still hanging out with his cousin Yuri Sucart? For a guy who is so obsessive about his public image, this is about as tone-deaf of a mistake as he can make. (Sounds like Yuri has been banned from the Yankees clubhouse anyway.)
Tough day for Chicago sports fans: RIP Norm Van Lier AND Johnny "Red" Kerr.
Tom marries Gisele: Didn't that happen, like, months ago? News only if you rank TMZ ahead of KSK. I just can't get enthusiastic about this as "news."
-- D.S.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Thursday 02/26 (Very) Quickie
Anyone still disagree with my theory that the sport of golf relies entirely on Tiger Woods, and that as great as he is, it is fundamentally terrible for the sport?
A-Rod homers in spring debut: Of course he did.
Celtics-Marbury only ends one of two ways: Either Marbury gets a ring, which feels wrong, or Marbury keeps the Celtics from repeating, which would serve Boston right for signing him.
(Meanwhile, the Celtics lost to the Clippers, which should give them an indication of the karmic issues related to signing Marbury.)
I wasn't sold on Marquette (at all), and I'm not sold on UConn. Then again, I thought that Pitt was the clear No. 1 team in the country...right up until they lost at Providence (PC underrated?)
This is what it has come to for Indiana hoops fans: You lost to Northwestern at home. For the first time in 30-some games. (By 22 points.)
How many more offers will the Dodgers give Manny before they simply stop trying? (Or before he just sucks it up and accepts?)
It's the end of the Rex Grossman Era in Chicago. But where will he end up?
Back to recouperating on the couch for me...
-- D.S.
A-Rod homers in spring debut: Of course he did.
Celtics-Marbury only ends one of two ways: Either Marbury gets a ring, which feels wrong, or Marbury keeps the Celtics from repeating, which would serve Boston right for signing him.
(Meanwhile, the Celtics lost to the Clippers, which should give them an indication of the karmic issues related to signing Marbury.)
I wasn't sold on Marquette (at all), and I'm not sold on UConn. Then again, I thought that Pitt was the clear No. 1 team in the country...right up until they lost at Providence (PC underrated?)
This is what it has come to for Indiana hoops fans: You lost to Northwestern at home. For the first time in 30-some games. (By 22 points.)
How many more offers will the Dodgers give Manny before they simply stop trying? (Or before he just sucks it up and accepts?)
It's the end of the Rex Grossman Era in Chicago. But where will he end up?
Back to recouperating on the couch for me...
-- D.S.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Tuesday 02/24 (Very Very) Quickie
Taking a few days off. Will try to drop a Twitter comment from time to time.
*Beating Oklahoma without Griffin is meaningless, as it relates to projecting March success.
*Pitt as No. 1? Sounds about right.
*Aaron Curry for No. 1 overall NFL pick in 2009? He ran a 4.56 40, fastest of any LB. (Maybe not No. 1, but certainly Top 3 or 5.)
*Devin Harris FTW!
*Charles Barkley in jail for 5 days demands all-access cameras and a reality-TV special.
-- D.S.
*Beating Oklahoma without Griffin is meaningless, as it relates to projecting March success.
*Pitt as No. 1? Sounds about right.
*Aaron Curry for No. 1 overall NFL pick in 2009? He ran a 4.56 40, fastest of any LB. (Maybe not No. 1, but certainly Top 3 or 5.)
*Devin Harris FTW!
*Charles Barkley in jail for 5 days demands all-access cameras and a reality-TV special.
-- D.S.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Monday 02/23 A.M. Quickie:
Combine, Duke, KG, Ovie, Kenseth
I'm pretty sure that by the time the NFL Draft rolls around, Andre Smith will have gotten his act together. But I'm also pretty sure he has lunked himself out of being the No. 1 overall pick.
Who says the NFL Combine has no value? If nothing else, it exposes who is prepared (Sanchez) and who isn't (Smith) and may even break some news (Crabtree foot injury + height adjustment).
And so the Combine led today's SN column, despite the fact that I think this weekend marked the start of the 5-week stretch that college hoops dominates: Final 2 weeks of the regular season (plus small-conference tournaments); major-conference tournaments; and, of course, the Big Dance.
Here's what we know from this weekend: Without Blake Griffin, Oklahoma isn't a top contender... I'm not sure I'm buying Davidson this year... Greivis Vasquez may have had the single-best individual performance of the season on Saturday...
...And I'm actually torn about Duke. (I know.) I cannot possibly believe in them after their recent March chokery, but putting up 101 on Wake -- a great defensive team -- and letting Gerald Henderson be the star (35 pts) and making Jon Scheyer the main PG (you all know how conflicted I feel about him) seems to have turned the team around. Ultimately, they will choke -- maybe this time, they will even make it out of the first weekend of the Tournament.
More you'll find in the column today:
*KG's knee is a big deal.
*Delonte West: Cavs 2nd-most MVP?
*Is Jim Bowden about to be fired?
*Ovechkin-Crosby mutual hate is GREAT for the NHL.
That, and a lot more, in today's column. Check it out here. More later.
-- D.S.
Who says the NFL Combine has no value? If nothing else, it exposes who is prepared (Sanchez) and who isn't (Smith) and may even break some news (Crabtree foot injury + height adjustment).
And so the Combine led today's SN column, despite the fact that I think this weekend marked the start of the 5-week stretch that college hoops dominates: Final 2 weeks of the regular season (plus small-conference tournaments); major-conference tournaments; and, of course, the Big Dance.
Here's what we know from this weekend: Without Blake Griffin, Oklahoma isn't a top contender... I'm not sure I'm buying Davidson this year... Greivis Vasquez may have had the single-best individual performance of the season on Saturday...
...And I'm actually torn about Duke. (I know.) I cannot possibly believe in them after their recent March chokery, but putting up 101 on Wake -- a great defensive team -- and letting Gerald Henderson be the star (35 pts) and making Jon Scheyer the main PG (you all know how conflicted I feel about him) seems to have turned the team around. Ultimately, they will choke -- maybe this time, they will even make it out of the first weekend of the Tournament.
More you'll find in the column today:
*KG's knee is a big deal.
*Delonte West: Cavs 2nd-most MVP?
*Is Jim Bowden about to be fired?
*Ovechkin-Crosby mutual hate is GREAT for the NHL.
That, and a lot more, in today's column. Check it out here. More later.
-- D.S.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Sunday 02/22 (Very) Quickie
Great day in college hoops yesterday, wasn't it?
Maryland stunned UNC (Greivis Vasquez with the triple-double and one of the great performances in MD history -- made me think of Len Bias vs. UNC back in '84.)
Texas beat Oklahoma -- poised to hit No. 1 -- after Blake Griffin's concussion led to 2 points and 3 rebounds in 11 minutes. Needless to say: Without Griffin, Oklahoma isn't a top team.
So who's No. 1? Has to be Pitt, which KO'ed UConn to start the week and hasn't looked back.
I've been a Marquette doubter all season long, but I've also thought that Georgetown would eventually turn it around -- a win vs. Marquette would have helped a lot. Then, Marquette beats G'town; I still don't buy Marquette, but G'town has basically sealed its NIT fate.
It'll help the "UCLA is overrated" bandwagon that they couldn't beat Wazzu in L.A.
Bracket Buster: What we learned? Davidson isn't ready for prime-time, but Butler shook off whatever was bothering them the past week or so to get the biggest win of B-B Saturday... Even without Patrick Mills, St. Mary's handled Utah St.... They might not be a Tournament sleeper pick after winning their 1st-round game last year, but Siena looks very tough.
(Oh, and Jim Calhoun's post-game press conference is a must-see: Is he overpaid in a time when the state budget is in shambles? Or does he create so much new revenue for the school system (and the state) that the ROI is more than worth the cost? My favorite part was when the journalist in question said, referring to the beat reporters, "If you guys did your jobs..." and the reporters all scoffed. Tough room. I suspect they're all under the thumb of Calhoun anyway.)
NFL Combine: Andre Smith...is out? So much for him being the No. 1 overall pick. I prefer my massive investments in massive players to be accompanied by massive commitment from said player. Give me the OTs from UVA or Baylor at the top.
Oh, and Michael Crabtree not only has a stress fracture in his foot, but he is 2 inches shorter than he was listed at all season -- why do colleges DO that? Don't they realize that the truth comes out eventually? Who do they think they're fooling?
KG out 2-3 weeks with a knee strain? Hmm...keep an eye on that this spring, too.
I didn't post yesterday, but I think with Amare's injury, we've seen the last of the 140-point splurges from Phoenix, unfortunately.
Last night: I know the Warriors ran over the Thunder, but how can you not love the Thunder's Young Three of Durant (36 pts, 6 reb), Jeff Green (27 pts, 15 reb, 6 ast) and Russell Westbrook (31 pts, 11 ast)... and that's with another Lottery pick coming in June. How sick would Blake Griffin look with this group?
So about this trainer from the D.R. who seems to be in the middle of both steroids and A-Rod? He also worked with David Ortiz, who always seems to avoid PED scrutiny, yet seemed to find his power at precisely the apex of the PED problem in MLB.
(One more knock against MLB in all this: If they were so "concerned" about the trainer, going back years, why didn't they do anything about it? Think the NFL wouldn't have done something about it? At least the NFL is smart about keeping their rampant PED use on the down low.)
You won't have Emmitt Smith to kick around as an NFL analyst anymore. ESPN isn't renewing his contract -- two years was more than enough to figure out that he's a good guy, but a lousy, malaprop-laden analyst.
-- D.S.
Maryland stunned UNC (Greivis Vasquez with the triple-double and one of the great performances in MD history -- made me think of Len Bias vs. UNC back in '84.)
Texas beat Oklahoma -- poised to hit No. 1 -- after Blake Griffin's concussion led to 2 points and 3 rebounds in 11 minutes. Needless to say: Without Griffin, Oklahoma isn't a top team.
So who's No. 1? Has to be Pitt, which KO'ed UConn to start the week and hasn't looked back.
I've been a Marquette doubter all season long, but I've also thought that Georgetown would eventually turn it around -- a win vs. Marquette would have helped a lot. Then, Marquette beats G'town; I still don't buy Marquette, but G'town has basically sealed its NIT fate.
It'll help the "UCLA is overrated" bandwagon that they couldn't beat Wazzu in L.A.
Bracket Buster: What we learned? Davidson isn't ready for prime-time, but Butler shook off whatever was bothering them the past week or so to get the biggest win of B-B Saturday... Even without Patrick Mills, St. Mary's handled Utah St.... They might not be a Tournament sleeper pick after winning their 1st-round game last year, but Siena looks very tough.
(Oh, and Jim Calhoun's post-game press conference is a must-see: Is he overpaid in a time when the state budget is in shambles? Or does he create so much new revenue for the school system (and the state) that the ROI is more than worth the cost? My favorite part was when the journalist in question said, referring to the beat reporters, "If you guys did your jobs..." and the reporters all scoffed. Tough room. I suspect they're all under the thumb of Calhoun anyway.)
NFL Combine: Andre Smith...is out? So much for him being the No. 1 overall pick. I prefer my massive investments in massive players to be accompanied by massive commitment from said player. Give me the OTs from UVA or Baylor at the top.
Oh, and Michael Crabtree not only has a stress fracture in his foot, but he is 2 inches shorter than he was listed at all season -- why do colleges DO that? Don't they realize that the truth comes out eventually? Who do they think they're fooling?
KG out 2-3 weeks with a knee strain? Hmm...keep an eye on that this spring, too.
I didn't post yesterday, but I think with Amare's injury, we've seen the last of the 140-point splurges from Phoenix, unfortunately.
Last night: I know the Warriors ran over the Thunder, but how can you not love the Thunder's Young Three of Durant (36 pts, 6 reb), Jeff Green (27 pts, 15 reb, 6 ast) and Russell Westbrook (31 pts, 11 ast)... and that's with another Lottery pick coming in June. How sick would Blake Griffin look with this group?
So about this trainer from the D.R. who seems to be in the middle of both steroids and A-Rod? He also worked with David Ortiz, who always seems to avoid PED scrutiny, yet seemed to find his power at precisely the apex of the PED problem in MLB.
(One more knock against MLB in all this: If they were so "concerned" about the trainer, going back years, why didn't they do anything about it? Think the NFL wouldn't have done something about it? At least the NFL is smart about keeping their rampant PED use on the down low.)
You won't have Emmitt Smith to kick around as an NFL analyst anymore. ESPN isn't renewing his contract -- two years was more than enough to figure out that he's a good guy, but a lousy, malaprop-laden analyst.
-- D.S.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Friday 02/20 A.M. Quickie
Tiger, Trades, Combine, Oscars
Tiger's back -- golf is saved. And it's a pleasant change of pace from A-Rod.
Plus: NBA Trade Dud-line, why Kyle Lowry is the new Shane Battier, why the Lions will draft Andre Smith (not Matt Stafford) and more. Complete column here.
-- D.S.
Plus: NBA Trade Dud-line, why Kyle Lowry is the new Shane Battier, why the Lions will draft Andre Smith (not Matt Stafford) and more. Complete column here.
-- D.S.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Thursday 02/19 A.M. Quickie:
NBA Trades, A-Rod's Cousin, Combine, CBB
After toying around with it throughout the week (and foreshadowing here yesterday), I finally up and lost it in the lead of today's SN column: The NBA is broken.
Why? Because there are about 4 teams actually playing to win (a title) -- the rest are businesses merely trying to manage costs.
I'm not offended by that, per se; I'm offended that they cynically expect fans not to recognize it. Trading Tyson Chandler? Motivated by money. VC? Jamison? All about money.
And, as I said yesterday: "2010" is, for a handful of teams, a worthwhile thing to plan for -- even if it means, by extension, that they're basically giving up on both this season and next season.
But then there's something you can see on the horizon: There will only be a handful of "winners" in 2010 -- LeBron and Wade and Bosh can only play for one team each. And that's if they don't stay with their current teams.
For all of the other teams hording cap space and sacrificing competitiveness, what do you think they'll do with all that money they have saved up. Spend it? I wouldn't bank on that.
I think that the dire economic times plus the dire state of player movement in the NBA -- literally, where we are waiting 2 years for something important to happen -- suggests that the NBA should adopt a model similar to the NFL: No guaranteed contracts.
Oh, the NBA union will never go for that, but it would dramatically change the NBA for the better.
More you'll find in the column today:
*A-Rod's cousin: His life is going to suck this week.
*Guess what: Looks like fans increasingly don't care about PEDs.
*Jeter dares me to ask: Hey, Jetes, you ever take a stimulant?
*The Suns are kind of awesome now.
*I have low expectations for the trade deadline.
*Is this the best class of OTs in NFL Draft history?
*Ken Griffey is a Mariner again. And that's amazing.
*Yikes: What happened to Illinois? Notre Dame? Butler?
*I can't wait for the Fab Five reunion.
Complete column here.
-- D.S.
Why? Because there are about 4 teams actually playing to win (a title) -- the rest are businesses merely trying to manage costs.
I'm not offended by that, per se; I'm offended that they cynically expect fans not to recognize it. Trading Tyson Chandler? Motivated by money. VC? Jamison? All about money.
And, as I said yesterday: "2010" is, for a handful of teams, a worthwhile thing to plan for -- even if it means, by extension, that they're basically giving up on both this season and next season.
But then there's something you can see on the horizon: There will only be a handful of "winners" in 2010 -- LeBron and Wade and Bosh can only play for one team each. And that's if they don't stay with their current teams.
For all of the other teams hording cap space and sacrificing competitiveness, what do you think they'll do with all that money they have saved up. Spend it? I wouldn't bank on that.
I think that the dire economic times plus the dire state of player movement in the NBA -- literally, where we are waiting 2 years for something important to happen -- suggests that the NBA should adopt a model similar to the NFL: No guaranteed contracts.
Oh, the NBA union will never go for that, but it would dramatically change the NBA for the better.
More you'll find in the column today:
*A-Rod's cousin: His life is going to suck this week.
*Guess what: Looks like fans increasingly don't care about PEDs.
*Jeter dares me to ask: Hey, Jetes, you ever take a stimulant?
*The Suns are kind of awesome now.
*I have low expectations for the trade deadline.
*Is this the best class of OTs in NFL Draft history?
*Ken Griffey is a Mariner again. And that's amazing.
*Yikes: What happened to Illinois? Notre Dame? Butler?
*I can't wait for the Fab Five reunion.
Complete column here.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Wednesday 02/18 A.M. Quickie:
A-Rod, NBA Trade Rumors, NFL Combine
It's not that I don't care that A-Rod cheated. It's just that -- in the grand scheme of the era -- I simply can't get outraged about it. And I certainly can't get sanctimonious about it, like so many mainstream sports pundits.
There has got to be some data out there confirming that the outrage is as artificial as A-Rod's inflated stats; I haven't seen it, although there are folks out there (like Neyer) who do a damn good job articulating just how value-less the sanctimonious outrage from some corners can be.
Here's a great quote from another sage sports pundit, King Kaufman:
Far more interesting, at least to me, is that the Hornets gave up on contending for a title yesterday. And, approaching the NBA Trade Deadline, will the Rockets join them?
There are only a handful of teams actually competing for the NBA title this season -- Lakers, Spurs, Celtics, Cavs, Rockets...maybe the Magic (although losing Nelson hurts). That's it.
As I said in yesterday's column: Everyone else appears to be either preparing for the 2010 free agent class -- which, by inference, means that they are basically punting (even tanking, depending on how you define "tanking") on both this season AND next season -- or by SAYING they are preparing for the 2010 free agent class, but are really just trying to cut costs in the face of a terrible economy. The NBA: Where...cost-cutting happens.
(I loved that Michael Lewis article on Battier this past weekend, although Battier came across as weirdly defensive -- and not in reference to his on-court talents.)
Here is what I would like to see -- REAL "Moneyball" in the NBA. Given, say, a $20 million budget, could a savvy GM put together a playoff team made out of bargain and/or cast-off parts? You can't field a team of 5 Battiers and hope to win -- you could definitely find the underappreciated values at each position, though, and win. But who would be on that team?
Meanwhile, today starts the NFL Draft Combine, which has gotten very big -- it is the NFL, after all. I'm looking forward to finding out who runs the eye-popping 40 times; who is the next Chris Johnson?
Get the complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
There has got to be some data out there confirming that the outrage is as artificial as A-Rod's inflated stats; I haven't seen it, although there are folks out there (like Neyer) who do a damn good job articulating just how value-less the sanctimonious outrage from some corners can be.
Here's a great quote from another sage sports pundit, King Kaufman:
That's the bottom line in this whole steroid business. It was the culture. That shouldn't absolve anybody of blame or deprive you of the right to get on your high horse if you want to -- nothing should deprive you of that --- but if you're looking to honestly figure out what happened in baseball in the late 1900s and early 2000s, you can't ignore the context. There weren't as many question asked. Not by players, not by management, fans, the union, reporters or anybody else.And so today's SN column leads with the A-Rod spectacle from yesterday, but I hope it's the last time that happens -- beyond things that happen on the field. Did he try to self-flagellate? Yes. Did he leave a bunch of reasonable questions unanswered? Yes. That's all to be expected.It's easy to click and cluck about moral relativism, but if a few years from now our culture decides that jaywalking -- which is against the law now -- is a heinous crime, we're all going to have to look contrite at our own press conferences.
Far more interesting, at least to me, is that the Hornets gave up on contending for a title yesterday. And, approaching the NBA Trade Deadline, will the Rockets join them?
There are only a handful of teams actually competing for the NBA title this season -- Lakers, Spurs, Celtics, Cavs, Rockets...maybe the Magic (although losing Nelson hurts). That's it.
As I said in yesterday's column: Everyone else appears to be either preparing for the 2010 free agent class -- which, by inference, means that they are basically punting (even tanking, depending on how you define "tanking") on both this season AND next season -- or by SAYING they are preparing for the 2010 free agent class, but are really just trying to cut costs in the face of a terrible economy. The NBA: Where...cost-cutting happens.
(I loved that Michael Lewis article on Battier this past weekend, although Battier came across as weirdly defensive -- and not in reference to his on-court talents.)
Here is what I would like to see -- REAL "Moneyball" in the NBA. Given, say, a $20 million budget, could a savvy GM put together a playoff team made out of bargain and/or cast-off parts? You can't field a team of 5 Battiers and hope to win -- you could definitely find the underappreciated values at each position, though, and win. But who would be on that team?
Meanwhile, today starts the NFL Draft Combine, which has gotten very big -- it is the NFL, after all. I'm looking forward to finding out who runs the eye-popping 40 times; who is the next Chris Johnson?
Get the complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Tuesday 02/17 A.M. Quickie:
A-Rod, Pitt, MJD, NBA 2nd Half
The Monday after the NBA All-Star Game is typically one of the slowest days of the sports year.
Sure, there was a very illuminating Pitt-UConn game (revealed: Pitt rules the Big East now), but otherwise, it feels like we're waiting on today's A-Rod press conference -- you hate it, but it's unavoidable. It leads today's SN column, even though I did that with no small measure of self-loathing.
Meanwhile: Am I wrong that Maurice Jones-Drew suddenly becomes the most interesting contender to be the No. 1 overall player drafted in fantasy football?
Complete column here. More later. Still rocking the Carvel ice-cream cake hangover.
-- D.S.
Sure, there was a very illuminating Pitt-UConn game (revealed: Pitt rules the Big East now), but otherwise, it feels like we're waiting on today's A-Rod press conference -- you hate it, but it's unavoidable. It leads today's SN column, even though I did that with no small measure of self-loathing.
Meanwhile: Am I wrong that Maurice Jones-Drew suddenly becomes the most interesting contender to be the No. 1 overall player drafted in fantasy football?
Complete column here. More later. Still rocking the Carvel ice-cream cake hangover.
-- D.S.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Monday 02/16 (Very Birthday) Quickie
Last night's performance by Shaq in the All-Star Game -- from his pre-game dance routine (with those freaky Jabbawockeez) to his MVP performance (in 11 minutes!) -- was surreal because it felt like his Last Hurrah. That leads today's SN column.
What makes it even stranger for me is that as of today -- at least for another two weeks -- he and I are the same age. (My previous gold standard for life-comparisons was Chris Webber, who was born two weeks apart from me. Yeah: Our freshman years of college were EXACTLY the same.)
As both Shaq and C-Webb might agree, 36 is a cachet-less age -- as I posted on my Facebook update today, "too young to be a phenom, too old for gravitas."
I guess in sports, where athlete careers wind down at (or are over by) age 36, that doesn't apply. ("Phenom," however, still applies for coaching jobs -- see Mike Tomlin or Josh McDaniels or Dan Mullen -- or front-office jobs -- see Theo Epstein or Andrew Friedman.)
Don't quite think it applies to folks who fancy themselves as sports pundits. Where Shaq is near the end (and C-Webb is past the end and into his new life as a TV analyst), I'd qualify myself as firmly in "mid-life." (No, not "mid-life crisis," but thanks.)
Last year, I celebrated the end of my relevance as part of the coveted "male 18-to-34-year-old" demographic. This year, I'm thrilled -- as always! -- to be around to celebrate... but for the first time, I spy that "40" hanging out there in the not-so-distant future.
What's the chance I can start a new "36 is the new 26" trend?
Enjoy your day off, if you're taking one. If you're working -- well, enjoy that, too.
More you'll find in today's column:
*A NASCAR non-fan's take on yesterday's debacle.
*NBA ASW round-up
*BC rules! So does Blake Griffin!
*Will Jeter support A-Rod tomorrow?
*Oil Can Boyd, the Wii Fit at Spring Training and More
-- D.S.
What makes it even stranger for me is that as of today -- at least for another two weeks -- he and I are the same age. (My previous gold standard for life-comparisons was Chris Webber, who was born two weeks apart from me. Yeah: Our freshman years of college were EXACTLY the same.)
As both Shaq and C-Webb might agree, 36 is a cachet-less age -- as I posted on my Facebook update today, "too young to be a phenom, too old for gravitas."
I guess in sports, where athlete careers wind down at (or are over by) age 36, that doesn't apply. ("Phenom," however, still applies for coaching jobs -- see Mike Tomlin or Josh McDaniels or Dan Mullen -- or front-office jobs -- see Theo Epstein or Andrew Friedman.)
Don't quite think it applies to folks who fancy themselves as sports pundits. Where Shaq is near the end (and C-Webb is past the end and into his new life as a TV analyst), I'd qualify myself as firmly in "mid-life." (No, not "mid-life crisis," but thanks.)
Last year, I celebrated the end of my relevance as part of the coveted "male 18-to-34-year-old" demographic. This year, I'm thrilled -- as always! -- to be around to celebrate... but for the first time, I spy that "40" hanging out there in the not-so-distant future.
What's the chance I can start a new "36 is the new 26" trend?
Enjoy your day off, if you're taking one. If you're working -- well, enjoy that, too.
More you'll find in today's column:
*A NASCAR non-fan's take on yesterday's debacle.
*NBA ASW round-up
*BC rules! So does Blake Griffin!
*Will Jeter support A-Rod tomorrow?
*Oil Can Boyd, the Wii Fit at Spring Training and More
-- D.S.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Sunday 02/15 (Very) Quickie: HORSE, Dunks
I love AI's new hairstyle -- not that was averse to the cornrows; the short cut just reminds me of how he looked when he was at Georgetown.
Normally, I'm all for the populist vote, but America got it wrong voting Nate Robinson as Slam Dunk Champ over Dwight Howard.
Yes, for theater, I give Robinson huge credit for going "Lex Luthor" to Howard's "Superman," but I give Howard even more credit for letting Robinson dunk over him.
Robinson's signature dunk -- dunking on Howard -- was impressive only because of Howard, because Howard was willing to be a good sport about it.
Between Dwight's dunk on the 12-foot rim (how easy it looked!) and the off-the-side-of-the-backboard dunk (plus his role as Robinson's prop), Howard was the best. (It didn't help Howard that after last season, he didn't have much room to go up. Speaking of which, the judges' scores are ludicrous. You get an 8 for showing up; what's the point?)
But it certainly builds drama for next year (especially if LeBron participates -- btw, whether it's up to judges or fans, there's no way LeBron doesn't win next year. Sorry, Superman.)
(By the way: Technically, Robinson's dunk where he jumped off of Wilson Chandler was illegal, and he should have been penalized for it.)
As for HORSE, if you saw my Twittering about it, you know how I feel. Here's a recap: It was a bust. The shots were mostly mundane, they missed way too many of them (any idiot fan can MISS trick shots) and felt like it dragged on.
Couple of suggestions for next year:
(1) If you make the first shot and the next two guys make it, too, you get a letter (or you at least have to "prove it.")
(2) Players should have celebrity caddies to help them devise more interesting shots.
(3) At least one fan should be invited to participate -- again, there were moments where I feel like I could have beaten any of them. (And I'm not saying I'm any good.)
But let no one say that Kevin Durant doesn't have a flair for the dramatic -- he came back from last place to win it. But his shot selection at the end was lame: Ooh! You can make 3s! That's not a HORSE shot; that's a shootaround shot.
More:
*Blake Griffin: 40 and 23...absurd numbers in OU's win over Texas Tech. Any doubt he's the best player in the country?
*Arizona was impressive in dismantling UCLA, but pick the Cats in March at your own risk.
*Ken Griffy Jr. to the...Braves?
*Daytona 500 is today: Who's watching?
-- D.S.
Normally, I'm all for the populist vote, but America got it wrong voting Nate Robinson as Slam Dunk Champ over Dwight Howard.
Yes, for theater, I give Robinson huge credit for going "Lex Luthor" to Howard's "Superman," but I give Howard even more credit for letting Robinson dunk over him.
Robinson's signature dunk -- dunking on Howard -- was impressive only because of Howard, because Howard was willing to be a good sport about it.
Between Dwight's dunk on the 12-foot rim (how easy it looked!) and the off-the-side-of-the-backboard dunk (plus his role as Robinson's prop), Howard was the best. (It didn't help Howard that after last season, he didn't have much room to go up. Speaking of which, the judges' scores are ludicrous. You get an 8 for showing up; what's the point?)
But it certainly builds drama for next year (especially if LeBron participates -- btw, whether it's up to judges or fans, there's no way LeBron doesn't win next year. Sorry, Superman.)
(By the way: Technically, Robinson's dunk where he jumped off of Wilson Chandler was illegal, and he should have been penalized for it.)
As for HORSE, if you saw my Twittering about it, you know how I feel. Here's a recap: It was a bust. The shots were mostly mundane, they missed way too many of them (any idiot fan can MISS trick shots) and felt like it dragged on.
Couple of suggestions for next year:
(1) If you make the first shot and the next two guys make it, too, you get a letter (or you at least have to "prove it.")
(2) Players should have celebrity caddies to help them devise more interesting shots.
(3) At least one fan should be invited to participate -- again, there were moments where I feel like I could have beaten any of them. (And I'm not saying I'm any good.)
But let no one say that Kevin Durant doesn't have a flair for the dramatic -- he came back from last place to win it. But his shot selection at the end was lame: Ooh! You can make 3s! That's not a HORSE shot; that's a shootaround shot.
More:
*Blake Griffin: 40 and 23...absurd numbers in OU's win over Texas Tech. Any doubt he's the best player in the country?
*Arizona was impressive in dismantling UCLA, but pick the Cats in March at your own risk.
*Ken Griffy Jr. to the...Braves?
*Daytona 500 is today: Who's watching?
-- D.S.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
