The Man in Blak

Tyler Johnson has to stay in the majors the whole year, since he was a Rule V draft pick, which means the A's are going to be stuffed with pitchers. I'm guessing that Meyer gets some more seasoning in AAA...but that still leaves twelve spots for thirteen pitchers. (Etherton got guaranteed money, didn't he?)

...that's weird. Got the article from BTF and just waltzed in and read it. Must be another tactic in that riveting Cubs/Marlins rivalry. EDIT: Here's the c/p of the article:

Interesting article from Le Batard critiquing the Marlins signing of Delgado from a financial perspective.

So you were working the board all along?!

Even though I own all of the other entries in the series, I wanted to rent it before I bought it, just because I got burned by coughing up retail price for Suikoden III when it came out. This game's been getting hammered in the press, though. GameRankings had an average rating of 65% or so for it when I looked at it a couple of days ago.

Topic of the paper?

Actually, I believe I've got that on my laptop at home. I'll check it out and PM you if I find the file.

Honestly, I think Alone in the Dark became popular again just because people were looking for any ammunition to fuel the Resident Evil series backlash. Any argument about Resident Evil seemed to always come down to: 1) But the character controls like a tank! 2) But they already did this in Alone in the Dark! Even though maybe 15% of the people had actually played Alone in the Dark. I haven't played the original in years, but I have it filed under "bleh", right next to The New Nightmare.

I'm not a big fan of the Mientkiewicz deal. I know he's a smooth operator at first base, but he "hit" at a clip of .238/.326/.350, which was nearly a one hundred point drop in slugging between two hitters parks in the AL. Why not slot Eric Valent in LF and move Cliff Floyd to first? Floyd played 1B when he came into the league, so he can play the position, and there's less physical strain at first than in left, which increases the chances that Cliff might actually play more than 120 games this season. Plus, Valent's 27 years old and he's coming off of a very nice year of .267/.337/.481 with 13 homers in 270 ABs. Sure, he's no great shakes defensively but, according to BPro's defensive metrics, he's no less of a butcher out there than Floyd is. Or, if you want to strengthen your bench a little bit (which is a defensible aspect of the Mientkiewicz deal), why not pick up Travis Lee on the cheap, instead of giving up a prospect? Both hit lefty, both play spectacular defense at 1B, but Lee probably hits the books with a nicer figure than the $3.75 million and (more importantly) allows you to keep Bladergroen for the future. It just seems like there were better alternatives available.

I *hate* Yahoo's "next day" policy when it comes to making roster moves on your fantasy teams - I tried to open up a spot for Jamal Crawford to come off the IL in my league (I hadn't checked the team in a while) for last night's Phoenix game, but he doesn't hit the roster until today...meaning that I just left a 40 point game on the bench.

If you consider the second part of the analysis ("automatic FG" vs. 50/50 TD), the probability still wins out. And, frankly, I don't think it's unrealistic to presume a 50% success rate for a touchdown from the two yard line.

What? It took like 30 minutes, if even that.

Frankly, if you bring momentum (omg intangiblez) into play, that makes the case for the touchdown even stronger: there's only one case where taking the field goal positively impacts the Steelers' chances of winning the game. The players probably knew it - the fans, who booed them off the field, certainly did. Why do I feel like I'm proving the existence of gravity here?

Okay, then let's do some risk analysis. First, before we consider all of the possibilities, let's establish how we want to measure success. The bare minimum that the Steelers should want to shoot for is to tie the ballgame up on the last play of the game (clock = 0:00) - anything better than that is just gravy. So, in terms of probability, that particular scenario would give both New England and Pittsburgh a 50% chance of winning the game going into overtime. At the 4th down play, the Steelers were down by 14 points. If we say that every point that the Steelers would score would increase their probability of winning by 2%, that means that - at that moment in the game - the Steelers had a 22% chance of winning the game; this seems pretty intuitive to me - the Steelers had an outside shot, but they were going to have to make some serious plays to pull it off. The other factor the Steelers had to overcome was the clock: at the 4th down play at the 2, they had 13:45 left on the clock. If we consider the scenario where neither the Steelers and the Patriots score anything for the remainder of the game, that means that the 13:45 that would elapse on the clock would reduce the Steelers probability of winning the game to 0% (they can't win the game if there's behind in points and there's no time left). That means the time on the clock (825 seconds) is equal to 22% of the Steelers' probability to win the game; after we do some crazy math, which I'm not going to throw down here (the post is already a novella), we find that each minute that passes reduces the Steelers chance of winning/tying by 1.6% So, to review: - every point the Steelers score = +2.0% - every point the Patriots score = -2.0% - every minute off the clock = -1.6% Now, let's consider the possibilities and apply the appropriate weights - for the sake of brevity, I'll abbreviate the list of possibilities into three minute intervals: Field Goal Block: PIT miss FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 3 minutes = -4.8 PIT miss FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 6 minutes = -9.6 PIT miss FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 9 minutes = -14.4 PIT miss FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 12 minutes = -19.2 PIT miss FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 3 minutes = -10.8 PIT miss FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 6 minutes = -15.6 PIT miss FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 9 minutes = -20.4 PIT miss FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 12 minutes = -25.2 PIT miss FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 3 minutes = -18.8 PIT miss FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 6 minutes = -23.6 PIT miss FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 9 minutes = -28.4 PIT miss FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 12 minutes = -33.2 PIT gets FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 3 minutes = +2.8 PIT gets FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 6 minutes = -3.6 PIT gets FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 9 minutes = -8.4 PIT gets FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 12 minutes = -13.2 PIT gets FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 3 minutes = -4.8 PIT gets FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 6 minutes = -9.6 PIT gets FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 9 minutes = -14.4 PIT gets FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 12 minutes = -19.2 PIT gets FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 3 minutes = -12.8 PIT gets FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 6 minutes = -17.6 PIT gets FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 9 minutes = -22.4 PIT gets FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 12 minutes = -27.2 Number of positive possibilities: 1 Total number of possibilities: 24 Probability of increasing chances to tie with FG: 4.1% Touch Down Block: PIT miss FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 3 minutes = -4.8 PIT miss TD, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 6 minutes = -9.6 PIT miss TD, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 9 minutes = -14.4 PIT miss TD, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 12 minutes = -19.2 PIT miss TD, NE gets FG on drive of less than 3 minutes = -10.8 PIT miss TD, NE gets FG on drive of less than 6 minutes = -15.6 PIT miss TD, NE gets FG on drive of less than 9 minutes = -20.4 PIT miss TD, NE gets FG on drive of less than 12 minutes = -25.2 PIT miss TD, NE gets TD on drive of less than 3 minutes = -18.8 PIT miss TD, NE gets TD on drive of less than 6 minutes = -23.6 PIT miss TD, NE gets TD on drive of less than 9 minutes = -28.4 PIT miss TD, NE gets TD on drive of less than 12 minutes = -33.2 PIT gets TD, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 3 minutes = +9.2 PIT gets TD, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 6 minutes = +4.4 PIT gets TD, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 9 minutes = -0.4 PIT gets TD, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 12 minutes = -5.2 PIT gets TD, NE gets FG on drive of less than 3 minutes = +3.2 PIT gets TD, NE gets FG on drive of less than 6 minutes = -1.6 PIT gets TD, NE gets FG on drive of less than 9 minutes = -6.4 PIT gets TD, NE gets FG on drive of less than 12 minutes = -11.2 PIT gets TD, NE gets TD on drive of less than 3 minutes = -4.8 PIT gets TD, NE gets TD on drive of less than 6 minutes = -9.6 PIT gets TD, NE gets TD on drive of less than 9 minutes = -14.4 PIT gets TD, NE gets TD on drive of less than 12 minutes = -19.2 Number of positive possibilities: 3 Total number of possibilities: 24 Probability of increasing chances to tie with TD: 12.5% By using this, we can see that Cowher reduced his team's chance of tying by 8.4% by taking the FG instead of the touchdown (12.5% versus 4.1%). However, you're probably thinking - a 50/50 chance on field goals? No way! So, let's even take out all of the possibilities where the Steelers miss the FG - that's the impetus of the conservative strategy, right? Guaranteed points over risk? Field Goal Block (no misses) PIT gets FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 3 minutes = +2.8 PIT gets FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 6 minutes = -3.6 PIT gets FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 9 minutes = -8.4 PIT gets FG, NE held scoreless on drive of less than 12 minutes = -13.2 PIT gets FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 3 minutes = -4.8 PIT gets FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 6 minutes = -9.6 PIT gets FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 9 minutes = -14.4 PIT gets FG, NE gets FG on drive of less than 12 minutes = -19.2 PIT gets FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 3 minutes = -12.8 PIT gets FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 6 minutes = -17.6 PIT gets FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 9 minutes = -22.4 PIT gets FG, NE gets TD on drive of less than 12 minutes = -27.2 Number of positive possibilities: 1 Total number of possibilities: 12 Probability of increasing chances to tie with "automatic" FG: 8.3% Even if you consider the field goal to be automatic, going for the field goal reduces the chance for the Steelers to win/tie by 4.2% (12.5% versus 8.3%). Probability states that the touchdown yielded a greater reward that outweighs the risks that faced Pittsburgh for the rest of the game. QED

Here's something to chew on: If he had went for the touchdown and came up dry, would we be sitting here, arguing that he should have went for the field goal? Or would we be sitting here saying "well, they took their best shot, it just wasn't meant to be"? The only reason the field goal even enters the mind, in my opinion, is because that's what Cowher chose to do. It just seems far too intuitive to go for the touchdown to me.

I think going conservative, kicking the field goal when you're down by two touchdowns, and causing the home crowd to revolt did a pretty good number on their morale. You're essentially conceding victory because you're banking on scoring two touchdowns in one quarter against a defense that has been stout the whole game. Even if you blow the 4th down and don't make it, you've got them pinned, with no regrets. But if you make the 4th down play for the touchdown and - all of a sudden - the momentum takes a huge turn. Now, all of a sudden, the Patriots *know* they have to score and they *know* they have to stop you because you're one score away from making the comeback.

well, they might be giants. (San Francisco Giants?) He certainly would fit in with the youth movement.

It's a minor league deal, which is probably all that Aurilia is worth about now. Tony Womack he's not, but he'll probably make the team is because they need some insurance for Lopez, what with Larkin furiously charging after windmills this offseason.

And while you're furiously typing up your response (tap tap tap tap), how exactly are the Eagles DUE to win a Super Bowl? What about the Vikings, who have lost all four Super Bowls that they've played in? What about the Saints, who have never even been to a Super Bowl? Framing the Eagles as though they're a success-starved team would be a little inaccurate, in my opinion.

Do they not know what they're talking about because they're ignorant? Or just because they disagree with you?

The Eagles have had an annoying habit of losing to lesser teams over the last three years, so I think most people have been rightfully conditioned to believe that Minnesota and Atlanta had a legitimate shot. But they're not playing a lesser team in the Super Bowl. They're playing the Patriots, who thumped them to the tune of 31-10 in Philly last season (2003) and, while time has certainly passed and the Eagles defense is better, the Patriots are a whole 'nother beast this year. Given Philly's history, the NFC's notoriety this year, New England's performance in the last two games, and New England's performance in the last two Super Bowls, I don't think the predictions are really all that wild.

McNabb is probably the more talented quarterback, but the gap isn't as wide as you'd believe. Furthermore, I'd say that Brady is the more proven commodity in the big game, even with McNabb's improvements this year and, by virtue of that, I'd say he could be the better quarterback in the Super Bowl. But the matchup isn't Brady versus McNabb. It's Brady versus the Philly D and McNabb versus the Patriot D and, frankly, I think New England wins both of those. McNabb is dangerous but, without Terrell Owens, the Eagles can't really challenge on the downfield threat, which means that their passing game gets pulled back into the range where the linebackers can make an impact. And, with that in mind, the defense gets to key more on Westbrook. As for Brady, he's facing a nasty, nasty secondary, but he's got a wide variety of weapons to use in the passing game to spread them out, he rarely turns the ball over (which is one of Philly's primary strengths) and - most importantly - he has Corey Dillon to keep the Eagles honest. Where the Eagles take a hit when Westbrook gets taken out of the picture, the Patriots are very balanced, perhaps moreso than any other team in the league. And, while the Philly defensive personnel is very talented, it's very hard to beat both the run and the pass - you can stop one, but it's a difficult task to take care of both when the opponent is as efficient as the Patriots are. The Patriots do have weaknesses (inexplicably, teams still haven't really attacked the corners deep), but the Eagles don't have the tools to exploit them.

Except that the Broncos won that Super Bowl, if you're talking about '97.

Patriots, 41-17. I want to root for Philly (which, in itself, should be a sign of the apocalypse), but the Patriots outmatch them in almost every facet of the game.

I would think the old fogeys would be actively rooting for a stereotype that involved a sexy, young (er, well, younger) woman dropping her towel in front of them.