F*ck if We Know

Music Tuesdays - Stronger (What Doesn't Kill You) by Kelly Clarkson

2012-01-30T20:19:00.000-08:00

Every night for the last week or so Violet and I have been listening and dancing to this song. Love the song. Love the video. Love the energy. Love all the fan videos choreographed to the song. And I especially love the girls dancing underwater. Just all kinds of cool going on there.

FIWK the NBA: Fantasy basketball time!

2012-01-28T14:48:00.000-08:00

[note: this article was written before Christmas Day but I was unable to post until now... the strategies herein still apply however]

Drafting a fantasy NBA squad is like trying to assemble a team of Action Movie All-Stars out of the cast of Hollywood actors. Some are better suited for the all-offense role, others are legitimately good actors who aren’t great holding a gun.

If you were drafting the Action Movie All-Stars, Jason Statham would be a top pick. Awesome in Crank, Transporter, etc. Probably not going to carry you to an Oscar as a lead man, however. Bruce Willis gets you a little closer; amazing in Die Hard, has a slightly funny side, can be dramatic in Pulp Fiction for instance. Viggo Mortensen is even more of a good actor/great action guy mix. Denzel Washington: the total package. Great in action movies like Man on Fire and Book of Eli, an amazing all-around actor, he can do it all.

Fantasy basketball is the same way. Steph Curry is your Statham in this scenario – offensive dynamo; fills it up in 3s, assists, pts, steals, and percentages; sucks on defense. He is a potential top 10 pick in fantasy but is nowhere near the top 10 in real life. Kevin Love is like a Bruce Willis – way better in the fantasy game than in real life, but still could be a lynchpin of a very good squad. Dirk’s like Viggo here, great in real life and in fantasy. And LeBron James is your Denzel Washington. He’s the Barry Badrinath of fantasy – best at everything. Well, almost everything. Because the actual secret to winning at fantasy basketball isn’t just to pick the Action Movie All-Stars to your squad, it’s to assemble a squad built to a specific strategy.

(As an aside, I am having trouble figuring out who to compare Blake Griffin to. He is WAY better in real life than in fantasy, super fun to watch, but may not be your fantasy/action movie star that his entertainment value would suggest. Who is his comparable actor?)

The way everyone plays head-to-head, you get a win/loss for each of eight categories (or nine with turnovers). Winning a category by 20 pts or 200 pts doesn’t matter, it’s still a win. Winning a week 5-3 in categories helps less than winning 7-1, obviously. What you need is to figure out how to consistently win 5 categories against almost every opponent.

Look at the ESPN Draft Kit for a great primer in category strategy. Here are the eight cats: Points, Rebounds, 3-pt FGs Made, Assists, Steals, Blocks, FG%, FT%. (Maybe add TOs as the 9th cat.) What stands out to you? If you want to pick up stats in multiple categories at once, you will see that two different styles of players cover about half of the categories: centers dominate Rebs, Blocks, and FG%, and PGs dominate 3pts, Assists, Steals, and FT%.

Your first 2 rounds of draft picks are going to completely determine which categories you want to focus on. Ideally you want to think long and hard about who you’re taking up top, then craft the entire rest of your draft around taking advantage of those stars’ strengths. Matthew Berry would espouse his favorite strategy as "Point Guards, Power Forwards" because those two positions would cover his categories. It involves a focus on PGs backed up with some rare big man stats like blocks. The alternative is a focus on Cs and sprinkle in rare guard stats like assists.

Both are viable in fantasy NBA. The point guards/power forwards strategy is what I call the Fantasy Kahn, because Minnesota GM David Kahn assembled the real life T-Wolves roster completely out of PGs and PFs. The big man stats strategy is what I call the Dwight-Rondo, because the most successful implementation of it I’ve seen was by our very own Aaron last season and featured those 2 guys as its anchor.

I’ll do a separate post on each. For today, some general fantasy NBA guidelines that remain age-old truths:

Draft Young
I don’t mean draft Nick Young. I mean draft young players; they are always the sleepers and breakout candidates. In the first two rounds you can generally get established superstars who will perform at expectations… just draft Durant or Pau or Dirk and feel good about it. But by rounds 3 and on, you can get absolute bargains by drafting young players poised to break out. Can I interest you in the next Jason Momoa? In last year’s draft you could get Derrick Rose and Blake Griffin in the 3rd and 4th rounds. Those guys are going in the 1st and 2nd rounds this year (although Blake is overrated, as mentioned above). Generally players entering their 2nd, 3rd, or 4th seasons qualify as potential breakout guys. (I didn’t say 1st season – rookies are generally overrated.)

Other good young sleepers:
Tyreke Evans, coming off a disappointing year (4th round)
Ty Lawson, with less competition at PG this year (5th)
Serge Ibaka, ready to get even more minutes (6th)
DeMarcus Cousins (6) – *note: he might be insane, you’ve been warned
Mike Conley (7)
Greg Monroe (7)
James Harden (8)
Marcus Thornton (late 9th) – potential steal of the draft
DeAndre Jordan (9)
Jeff Teague (12)
Paul George (13)

Draft Opportunity
Last season, the Timberwolves had a studly young forward with great per-minute stats coming off the bench, even though the players ahead of him on the depth chart were crap. His average draft position was late 4th round in fantasy. But given the opportunity he had to earn starters minutes, he ended up being a steal and producing a LOT in fantasy terms, while leading the NBA in rebounding. Kevin Love is now a 1st round draft pick this season.

When a player gets a big minutes increase, and is good enough to take advantage, he will outperform his fantasy draft position. That simple. We all knew that Christian Bale could kick some ass, he just needed to be Batman to take it to the next level. Guys like Ibaka, Harden, and Lawson above will get a chance to play Batman on their team this year.

Other guys with more opportunity this season:
Kyle Lowry (5th round)
Marcin Gortat (6)
JaVale McGee (6)
Roy Hibbert (8) – if he can stop fouling
Jarrett Jack (10)
Toney Douglas (10)
Ed Davis (11)
JJ Barea (11)
Tyrus Thomas (12)
Landry Fields (12)
Gordon Hayward (undrafted)
Eddy Curry’s corpulent form (undrafted) – just kidding

Remember Specialists
This is where the action movie analogy really works. You would much, much rather have Vinny Jones play the ‘slightly crazy muscle guy’ member of the team than Paul Giamatti, because is a better fit for that specialist role despite Giamatti’s overall acting chops. Same thing applies for fantasy. Rip Hamilton might be a better actual basketball player than Lou Williams or Anthony Morrow, but from a fantasy standpoint most owners would rather have Williams and Morrow bombing 3s than Rip’s steady mid-range efficiency. At the end of a draft – and especially in free agency if you’re plugging holes – it’s worthwhile to get specialists who consistently fill a rare category. Some examples:

Assists
Jose Calderon (9th round)
Andre Miller (12)
Ramon Sessions (undrafted)

Threes
Antawn Jamison (10)
Jamal Crawford (10)
Lou Williams (11)
Ryan Anderson (12)
Morrow (U)
Rashard Lewis (U)

Steals
Tony Allen (12)
Andrei Kirilenko (12) – combined with his blocks
Trevor Ariza (U)

Blocks
Sam Dalembert (12)
Andrei Kirilenko (12) – combined with his steals
Darko Milicic (U) – this is all he’s good at apparently
Marcus Camby (U)
Ekpe Udoh (U) – keep an eye on him… he averaged 1.5 blocks in 17 minutes/game (!!) last year

That’s the early-season fantasy primer. For more on the prevailing fantasy strategies, I’ll be writing up the Fantasy Kahn and the Dwight-Rondo in the next few days. And thank you for not taking any of my sleepers in my drafts.

FIWK the NFL: Pro Bowl

2012-01-27T09:39:00.000-08:00

For the absolute ridiculousness it is trying to predict a winner in the Pro Bowl, I took ridiculous to a scientific level. I added up all the points scored and allowed in each conference. The NFC scored 6022 points and allowed 5889 points for a Pythagorean winning percentage of 51.3%. The AFC scored 5334 and allowed 5467 for a 48.6%. This means that on a neutral field, the NFC should win 52.7% of the time, which corresponds to a 2.5 point spread. Since the spread is 4, I am taking the AFC +4.

Music Tuesdays - Punching In A Dream by the Naked and Famous

2012-01-24T22:40:00.001-08:00

This is another song from the Naked and Famous' same album as 'Young Blood' which was on Music Tuesdays about a year ago. I just heard this song in a car commercial, randomly enough.

FIWK the NFL: Playoffs Conference Championships

2012-01-20T10:38:00.000-08:00

As friends of mine, I want Scott and Mik to be happy in general. In fact, I'd like to think I want all my friends and family to be happy. So why would I want the 49ers to lose this weekend? A few years ago my wife and I moved from San Diego (where I grew up) to the San Francisco Bay Area (where she grew up). We already had many friends from UCLA who lived in the area so it was a relatively easy transition. They knew I loved the Chargers and Padres and I knew all my friends and family in the area supported the San Francisco 49ers and San Francisco Giants. So in 2010, after I recovered from the Padres' epic collapse and the SF Giants were working their way to the World Series, I didn't support the Giants by any means, but I was happy for my friends and family in the area to see their team doing well. It took a few days or so before I learned of the folly of my emotions. Everyone was wearing "SF Giants 2010 World Series Champs" apparel and asking me something along the lines of "Are the Padres ever going to have clothes like this?" Days turned in to weeks and weeks turned in to months and it was relentless. People going to the parade. Jessica asking me if I would fly down to San Diego for a playoff game or parade. Yim coming over in said apparel saying "I wore this just for you." Now with the 49ers playing so well, and my own analysis concluding that I am going to pick them in every game they play, I feel a sense of dread coming upon me. It's not an impending sense of doom, because I am still uplifted by the thought of my friends and family being happy. It's just a sense of dread...maybe frustration... It's people bringing up all kind of SF vs. SD talk. It's friends blasphemously saying that Violet will want to be a 49ers fan. It's me wondering if I will ever get to cheer for a championship team...

Baltimore @ New England (-7): The Ravens and Patriots respective offenses each threw 12 interceptions in the regular season. But the Ravens only attempted 544 passes, while the Patriots threw it 612 times. So the Patriots are less likely to throw an interception. The Patriots' defense also caught more interceptions than the Ravens defense, which surprised me a little considering Football Outsiders have the Ravens pass defense as the best in the NFL this year. And, as always, (am I starting to sound like Simmons or TMQ or Peter King by using the exact same phrases and ideas? Or is consistency a good thing?) when we have a dominant offense against a dominant defense, we look the other way. This game will be decided by how the Patriots defense does against the Ravens offense. The Patriots were a 11.5-4.5 team masquerading as a 13-3 team while the Ravens should have been 11.1-4.9 instead of their actual record of 12-4. Since the Patriots were better on both offense and defense and have a better Pythagorean winning percentage, they have to be the obvious pick, right? Of course not. I never answer my rhetorical questions in the positive. Wait no, I never answer my rhetorical questions in the way you would expect just based on how I set up the rhetorical question. On a neutral field the Patriots should win 53% of the time and at home they win 59% of the time. This would correspond to a 3.5 spread, not the current 7 points they are giving. So my pick is for the Patriots to win outright, but the Ravens will cover the spread.

Nyg @ San Francisco (-2.5): Whoo boy, this one's a doozy. Only 2.5 points? Is it even possible for me to pick one team to win outright and the other to cover when the spread is so small? Technically, yes, but realistically no. And honestly, for me, this one isn't even that close. I have this weird thing about preferring larger sample sizes and discounting the most recent game more than most people. In fact, for the playoffs, I have completely ignored the previous result. This means that I am comparing a Giants team with a negative point differential to a 49ers team that had the best Pythagorean winning % in the NFL. I am comparing the team that threw the fewest interceptions to the team that threw the T-most interceptions among teams that made the playoffs. And it may surprise you to learn that the Giants actually have a good offense while their defense was their weak link this year. So when comparing a good offense (Giants) vs. a good defense (49ers) we look the other way (seriously, I need a better phrase than this) and try to guess how the 49ers offense will do against the Giants defense. It was Alex Smith and Vernon Davis that were the heroes for the 49ers last week. But really, this game comes down to how important you think sample sizes are. Do you think the Giants are the team that played 16 games in the regular season is less than spectacular fashion or the team that played two playoff games outstandingly. I err on the side of sample sizes. Based on their points scored and allowed and the 49ers being at home, this game should have a double digit spread. I am picking the 49ers to win and cover...and I really hope I'm wrong.

Music Tuesdays: Home - Edward Sharpe and The Magnetic Zeros Acoustic Cover (Jorge & Alexa Narvaez)

2012-01-18T10:00:00.000-08:00

My daughter is 11 months old and I have so much fun every second I am with her. Either she is playing with me, smiling and laughing, or she is exploring by herself, astounding and amazing me. This video makes me want to get good at music, but I know that will never happen. My daughter and I will create our own beautiful moments.

FIWK the NFL: Playoffs Week 2

2012-01-12T15:07:00.000-08:00

What? A picture that isn't the Chargers? Is Aaron feeling ok? Yes. But just in case the Saints emerge victorious this weekend, I wanted Scott and Mik to be a little happy. As for last weekend...that Texans-Bengals game pretty much went exactly as I called it. That was the big news right? I mean, you couldn't turn on the TV without seeing JJ Watt, right? In much more boring news, every home team won. Every home team was the higher seed and they won, meaning there were no upsets. In every game, the victor threw fewer interceptions than the loser (or tied at zero, meaning they weren't a factor). Even in the Denver-Pittsburgh game, the Broncos quarterback played significantly better than his Steelers counterpart and won. But in actually making my predictions, especially against the spread, I did not do so well. When the Saints-Lions was at 24-21, choosing the underdog and all those points seemed like a really good idea. Thirty minutes later at 45-28, not so good. As for the Falcons laying an egg? (Does that even count as a pun?) I guess I was smart not to put $ on them. And if the Saints and Lions were to play again this weekend, I'd probably still pick the Lions and the points. And while I picked the Broncos and the points, I was very, very confident the Steelers would win. In fact, I'm participating in a pool where you get to pick a winner for each of the eleven playoff games straight up and assign it a confidence 1-11, where you can only use each confidence number once. I picked the Steelers with confidence of 11. Now, that I've convinced you just how good I am at predicting the outcome of NFL playoff games, on to the picks...

New Orleans (-3.5) @ San Francisco: Remember from last week, the Saints throw quite a few interceptions and their defense does not catch any. Well, the 49ers are the complete opposite. Their offense threw the fewest interceptions in the league and even after you adjust for the number of pass attempts, they are still best in the league at not throwing interceptions. Their defense is only second best in the league at intercepting the ball. Remember from last week where I said we calculate the Pythagorean winning percentage? The actual formula, derived from Points Scored (PF) and Points Allowed (PA), is PF^2.33 / (PF^2.33 + PA^2.33). The reason I am getting this technical is because even though the Saints finished with the best point differential in the league (547-339=208), even better than the Packers (560-359=201), and the 49ers (380-229=151) finished 4th behind the Patriots (513-342=171), San Francisco had the BEST Pythagorean winning percentage. Wait, does that mean what you think it means? Yes. On a neutral field, I would pick the 49ers against any team in the NFL. So obviously I'm taking the 49ers +3.5. But next week I'll explain why I'll don't want the 49ers to make it to the Super Bowl.

Denver @ New England (-13.5): Ok, I guess I can't write the entire column without mentioning Tim Tebow. How long did it take you to figure out that was my goal in the intro? I'm guessing at the word "news" or "JJ Watt". Last week, Tebow was a legitimately good quarterback, in every sense of the word. The Steelers put 10 and 11 guys in the box and dared Tebow to beat them by throwing and he did. The Steelers were also greatly hampered by Ben Roethlisberger's ankle. You could tell for the first half he wasn't effective at all. And with the Steelers defense not holding up against the Broncos, he pushed himself, started scrambling and was much more productive in the second half. But do you know what all this means for the Broncos game against the Patriots? Absolutely nothing. And not nothing like this is a new game and different defense and a healthy opposing quarterback. I mean nothing at all. I just finished reading Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, a behavioral psychologist who won the Nobel Prize in Economics, and one thing I learned is that humans are wired to attempt to use a narrative and cause to explain past events that were actually caused by luck within the wide range of possibilities. So when making predictions, humans like to rely on a narrative that makes sense. I used to do this, and this column used to be funnier. But now I am trying to develop a more systematized approach to making my predictions and thusly have to rely more on making up words oftener to be funny. Apparently my spell check informs me that oftener is not a made up word. Oh well. So why does the Broncos victory mean nothing at all? Because my algorithm only looks at the regular season stats. Oh, Tebow throws two more interceptions than Tom Brady and I'd take the Patriots up until -14.5. So I am taking New England -13.5.

Houston @ Baltimore (-7.5): I don't know what the under is, but I am probably going to take the under. Both teams are led by competent, but not outstanding quarterbacks and great defenses. Quick, without looking, who allowed the fewest points in the NFL? Well, it's the Steelers of course, you weren't surprised by that. So between the Ravens and Texans, who allowed the fewest points. It's the Ravens. You expected me to try and surprise you with the Texans, but I played a little psychological misdirection. Now, if you did look it up, you will see that the four best scoring defenses were the Steelers, 49ers (not exactly a surprise), Ravens and then the Texans at 4th. I've been trying to tell you all season that the Texans are going to win by running the ball and playing great defense. The Texans offense was third best in the NFL at not throwing interceptions and their defense was actually better than the Ravens at intercepting the ball. But do you see what all this is doing? Didn't we learn anything from five minutes ago? This is a narrative trying to predict the future. But I guess this is also me explaining my algorithm? So maybe it's helpful? On a neutral field, Baltimore wins 51% of the time and at home they win 58% of the time, which means this really should only be a three point spread. I don't know who wins, but I'm guessing they win by 3, so I'm taking the Texans +7.5.

Nyg @ Green Bay (-7.5): Eli Manning throws two more interceptions than Aaron Rodgers and the Packers win by 10 or more. Packers -7.5, Done.

Oh, you want more? See, just giving you the results is neither fun nor informative. AND doesn't require any made up words. I meant to mention this when talking about Tebow. Most people will try to figure out if last week was an aberration or a sign of improvement by Tebow. Was the Giants 24-2 trouncing of the Falcons an aberration or an indicator that they are more focused now? In both cases, neither. Both are results possible in the entire range of what they are capable. I don't try to think of Tebow as a quarterback who can throw from 316 yards or 60 yards. I think of the Broncos as a team that threw 13 interceptions in 16 games. The Giants are a team that went 9-7, that with their negative point differential should have finished under 8 wins. Sometimes they play like a 9 win team and sometimes they play like a 7 loss team. You know what I'm saying? Yeah, me either. Bill Barnwell actually has a good phrase that I wish I came up with, the Giants "need to take shots down the field to rack up the kind of points that will be needed to beat the Packers, but that leaves them susceptible to turnovers. It's almost like the Packers planned it this way, huh?" The Packers are the much better team and we're lucky the spread isn't 11.

Music Tuesdays - Keep You Right by Blind Pilot

2012-01-11T09:45:00.001-08:00

FIWK the NFL: Playoffs Week 1

2012-01-06T14:37:00.000-08:00

This picture is honor of Eric Weddle being named to the All-Pro team. Which is about the only good thing going for the Chargers right now. If you want to know if any 49ers made the All-Pro team, you'll have to ask Scott or Mik. I'm already thinking about next year and fantasy football for next year. I won our keeper league, but we'll have to see how I do without Adrian Peterson next year. I guess I'll just have to console myself with Ray Rice in the 3rd round, Matthew Stafford in the 5th round and Vincent Jackson in the 8th round. I think I'll be ok. As for this weekend, the only good thing I can think of for Royce and myself is that we can make completely objective thoughts and analysis. Before I get to the actual games, a little reminder about how I do things around here. First, I take the team's points scored and points allowed to calculate a Pythagorean winning % that is more accurate than a team's actual winning percentage. Then taking the two winning percentages, I determine how often the favorite is likely to win. Yeah, you learned all of this from Bill Barnwell a couple months ago. Then, using data from Spreadapedia, I determine how often a favorite with a given spread has won historically. Additionally, for the playoffs I take a look at interceptions. It is easy to say that the team that turns the ball over the least is probably going to win. And fumble recoveries tend to be very random. But interceptions are not. So I look how many pass attempts and offense and defense should expect to see before an interception is thrown. I don't have a specific algorithm, but there are only four data points and the sample size is a little small, so I prefer to eyeball this one. Then I check Football Outsiders just because I like their DVOA efficiency stat. And then I just make up the rest. I'll walk you through it, but it's probably easier with an example. That way I don't have to be explaining this for every game, every week.

Cincinnati @ HOUSTON (-3): Houston scored 381 points and allowed 278 points for a Pythagorean winning % of 0.676. The Bengals scored 344 points and allowed 323 to get to 0.537. Already we see that the Texans scores more points and allows fewer points than the Bengals, which is much more descriptive than looking at 10-6 Houston vs. 9-7 Cincinnati. We'll come back to the point differential conclusions. In 467 pass attempts Houston quarterbacks threw 9 interceptions. Why am I not determining the difference between Matt Schaub and Matt Leinart, TJ Yates and Jake Delhome? Because I'm lazy. Come on. You had to see that joke coming. But seriously folks, it doesn't matter as much as you think it does. There is a big difference in quarterbacks overall, but scheme, play calling, receivers, running game, opposing defense, etc. all factor into interceptions thrown. Houston's defense has caught 17 interceptions in 538 opposing pass attempts. When you divide these numbers you see that the Texans offense throws an interception every 51.9 pass attempts while their defense catches an interception every 31.6 pass attempts. Considering a team usually runs 40-60 plays, you can probably guess that against a neutral/average opponent, Houston will throw 0 or 1 interceptions and will catch 1 or 2 interceptions. For Cincinnati, with the offense throwing an interception every 535/14=38.2 pass attempts and their defense catching an interception every 539/10=53.9 pass attempts, they are probably going to throw 1 or 2 interceptions and only catch 0 or 1. So when You combine the Texans and Bengals, I'm going to guess that the Texans have an expected value around .25-.5 interceptions thrown and the Bengals are going to throw 1.5-2.5 interceptions. This looks pretty good for the Texans, even with TJ Yates at QB. As for how often the Texans would expect to win this game based on both teams point differentials? The Texans, should win 70% of the time, which means this should be a 6 or 7 point spread. A 3 point favorite only wins 58% of the time (which is just slightly more than the 56-57% that the home team wins). I say the Houston Texans win and cover.
Not so bold prediction: The Texans run for a touchdown. And my analysis of all the other games is much shorter.
Bold prediction: Both AJ Green and Andre Johnson catch a touchdown. And my analysis gets funnier.

Detroit @ NEW ORLEANS (-10.5): Whew! 10.5 points?!?! In a playoff game? What does the betting public think this is? A guy who just set the single season passing yards record against a defense that allowed a backup QB to throw six touchdowns? Preposterous! No way a playoff game matches up one team so vastly superior to another. Why, that would be like matching up a conference champ with an 8-8 team on an 0-3 losing streak. New Orleans biggest problem is going to be their defense that didn't catch any interceptions, while the Lions defense does catch a lot of interceptions. Although the Saints did finish with the best point differential in the NFL. Even better than the Packers. And in Football Outsiders Weighted DVOA, which gives more weight to recent games, the Saints are their #1 tea with the Steelers second and the Packers third. After crunching all my numbers, I think this should be a 7 point spread, not 10.5. So I am picking the Saints to win, but the Lions to cover.
Not so bold prediction: Drew Brees throws a touchdown pass.
Bold prediction: This game goes over 60.

Atlanta @ NYG (-3): The Falcons are the better team. In every capacity. Except how often each defense catches interceptions. In that category they are virtually equal. But in every other category the Falcons are far superior. They score more point and allow fewer points than the Giants. They throw fewer interceptions. They have a better record. Even when you account for home field advantage, they should still be winning this game outright. But that's saying the Falcons odds of winning drop from 59% to 53% when you account for home field. Still, to be able to take the Falcons plus three points? Thank you.
Not so bold prediction: The lead changes at least once this game.
Bold prediction: The Giants are so decimated by injury, Eli Manning steps in to play safety, intercepts the ball and returns it for the winning touchdown and becomes a hero in New York. Is there any other way New York will love Eli?

Pittsburgh (-8.5) @ Denver: Beware the home dog. These teams win against the spread a lot and even win outright more than you think. But remember where I said the Falcons were better than the Giants from every perspective? The Steelers are A LOT better than the Broncos from every perspective. Mendenhall's injury won't be a factor in this game because their backup running backs are just as good. That's a knock on Mendenhall's effectiveness more than it's a compliment to the backups. It is going to feel like the Steelers are dominating all day long, but when you look up, the score is going to be closer than you realized. I think it ends 17-10 Steelers, which means, like the other huge spread this weekend, I think the favorite wins, but the underdog covers.
Not so bold prediction: This game is under 50.
Bold prediction: This game is under 30.

Music Tuesdays - Jazz at the Bookstore by Ron Sexsmith

2012-01-04T13:21:00.000-08:00

FIWK the NFL: Week 17

2011-12-30T14:33:00.000-08:00

The sadness before the playoffs. I really go nothing on the Chargers...um...I hope AJ Smith doesn't get fired? As for the rest of the NFL, the Packers are locked into the first seed in the NFC and the Texans are locked into the third seed in the AFC. Every other seed is up for grabs. The Saints move from 3 to 2 and get a first round bye with a win and a 49ers loss, so both those teams will be trying. The winner of the Cowboys-Giants game gets the 4 seed and the loser is out of the playoffs, so they will both be trying. Atlanta can leapfrog Detroit from the 6 to the 5 seed with a win and a Lions loss, and both teams would much rather face the NFC East champ than Drew Brees and the Saints, so they will both probably be trying. In the AFC, A Patriots loss combined with a Ravens loss and Steelers win means the Steelers get the 1 seed, the Patriots get the 2 seed and the Ravens get the 5 seed. A Patriots win locks up the 1 seed, then the Ravens hold the tiebreaker for the AFC north and the 2 seed over the Steelers, meaning the Steelers would need to win and for the Ravens to lose to get a first round bye...so the Ravens, Steelers and Patriots will all probably trying. Houston gets the 3 seed. The Broncos get the 4 seed with a win or a Raiders loss. The Raiders need to win and a Broncos loss to win the AFC West. The Bengals get the last playoff spot with a win, but a loss opens the door to the Jets, Titans and Raiders for a wild card spot. There is no way the Broncos can lose the AFC West and still get a playoff spot. So that means the Broncos, Raiders, Jets, Titans and Bengals will all be trying. By my count half the teams in the league still have something to play for on the last day. That's actually pretty entertaining. So did I take any of this into consideration when making my picks? Of course not. The spreads already take this into account and I just pick the games according to the line that is put in front of me.

GREEN BAY (+3.5) over Detroit: This is the exact reason why I really don't like making picks on Week 17 and why every decent fantasy league has its championship game during week 16. We're trying to pick a game based on how hard the Packers try, or how long their starters play, or how good their backups are? Ok, one quarter of the entire first unit + one quarter of the backup QB and the remainder of the first unit + one quarter of three backup linemen, the backup QB and the starting WRs + one quarter composed entirely of backup players = 50% of the Packers at full strength? More? Less?

San Francisco (-10.5) over ST. LOUIS: Every reason for the 49ers to try and no reason for the Rams to try. Even if this was the middle of the season, I would still be picking the 49ers -10.5.

MIAMI (-2.5) over Nyj: Man, apparently I dislike the Jets strongly enough that it made me particularly happy to see the Dolphins favored here. The Jets NEED to win to have a shot at the playoffs and the Dolphins have already fired their head coach. And the Dolphins are still favored over the Jets. That really does make me happy.

Chicago (+1) over MINNESOTA: This game is going to feel like a very well organized try out. Joe Webb or Christian Ponder at QB for the Vikings? Toby Gerhart or a new young RB? A bad Bears quarterback or a worse Bears quarterback?

Buffalo (+11) over NEW ENGLAND: I was actually a little surprised to see that even without the Week 17 "who's trying" consideration, I am taking the Bills in this one. I mean, this spread shouldn't be one iota over 10.5.

Carolina (+8) over NEW ORLEANS: Sean Payton is currently my favorite coach in the NFL. Just aggressive enough, creative play caller, knows his team's strengths and weaknesses. He put winning as the biggest priority, but doesn't simply ignore the stats and records. He takes advantage of Brees' incredible accuracy and throws more than any team in the NFL. And when his guy has a chance to break an amazing record, he doesn't shy away from it. You know he's going to have Brees throwing all game to put this record out of reach for the near future.

Washington (+8.5) over PHILADELPHIA: What? Seriously? Who does this guy think he is? Now that the Eagles have been eliminated from the playoffs, this is exactly the type of game that they will win 45-10.

JACKSONVILLE (-3.5) over Indianapolis: Sometimes the Suck for Luck isn't intentional, sometimes it's just Suck.

HOUSTON (+3) over Tennessee: Much like the Redskins-Eagles pick, every fiber of my being says to go the opposite way, but for a completely different reason. The Eagles have nothing to play for and therefore will play outstandingly. Here it's a normal, the Texans have everything locked up and their best 3+ players out, while the Titans have everything to play for and Chris Johnson sucked a lot less in December than in September.

ATLANTA (-12) over Tampa Bay: This feels about right. The Buccaneers are a case of the pendulum swinging too far the other way. Bill Barnwell has been saying all year that they shouldn't have won ten games last year, but probably should have more than 4 this year. Oh, wait. Checked the stats and this 4-11 team has actually overperformed. They really are just a bad team this year.

Baltimore (-2) over CINCINNATI: Baltimore really doesn't want to be the 5th seed...again. And have to play in Pittsburgh...again.

Pittsburgh (Off(0)) over CLEVELAND: Steelers thinking "The Browns? We can beat them even with our backup quarterback in."

DENVER (-3.5) over Kansas City: This was Tebow's plan all along. He couldn't just keep winning outright and clinch a playoff spot in Week 15. That's not his style. He wants everyone, even the opposing teams, to have hope. Because hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. He wants to keep it close, build more doubters and overcome those doubters to emerge victorious in the end. Who here has read the Bible and knows the story of Doubting Thomas? Well, it doesn't really apply, but he is known as Doubting Thomas. That's Tim Tebow's M.O. He builds up his opponent's hope and other's doubt. And wins it in the end.

San Diego (+3) over OAKLAND: Remember what I said about the Eagles? Now that the Chargers have been eliminated, they are going to win by 40.

Seattle (+3) over ARIZONA: This could be the most competitive, evenly matched game by two teams that JUST missed the playoffs. And will vex many people [me] as to how to predict where they will finish next year.

Dallas (+3) over NYG: Should be a great, sloppy, high stakes Sunday Night Football game. Going in to this game, I can promise you, both quarterbacks will have great games, but whoever loses will be considered a fraud and a goat and the single reason why his team lost. It's not fair to either quarterback, but unfortunately, that's how it's going to play out with these guys and teams.

Music Tuesdays - 123 Stop by The Postelles

2011-12-28T11:34:00.000-08:00

Classic British indie rock sound to this song. Maybe it's the accent, but it reminds me strongly of The Kooks. Big fan.

FIWK the NFL: Week 16

2011-12-23T12:26:00.000-08:00

So apparently I forgot to make my picks last week. Just plum forgot. I was on vacation (who takes a vacation two weeks before Christmas?) and thought I would have time on Thursday, but alas, family, friends, games and drinks got in the way. Oh well. I think I would have done horribly anyways. But you know what happened since the last time we met? The Broncos lost and the Chargers won three in a row, including a beat down of the Ravens. It may be too little too late, but if the Broncos lose two and the Chargers win two, the Chargers win the division at 9-7. Any other situation, the Broncos have the fourth tiebreaker of record against common opponents (or the Raiders or Chiefs win the division). And also, all of a sudden, the Chargers have wild card hopes. They are still behind the Jets and Bengals, but other than head to head with the Jets, the Chargers hold most tie breakers for multiple teams tied for the last wild card spot. So this week Scott and Mik are cheering for the 49ers and the Falcons to beat the Saints, while Royce and I are cheering for the Chargers, Bills, Cardinals, Jaguars, Giants and the Chiefs. But the Chiefs losing wouldn't be particularly harmful. Isn't projecting playoff scenarios fun?

Houston (-6) over INDIANAPOLIS: The Texans win this game 86% of the time and a 6 point favorite only wins 2/3rd of the time. What? Orlovsky threw a touchdown to Reggie Wayne with 19 seconds left in the game to beat the Texans? Why was the game so close in the first place? Not so bold prediction: Arian Foster scores a touchdown. Bold prediction: Dan Orlovsky throws a touchdown to Reggie Wayne with 19 seconds left to win the game.

BUFFALO (+3) over Denver: This is not an anti-Broncos, pro-Chargers homer pick. I actually have the Bills favored by a couple points and winning outright 52% of the time. Come on Harvard!!! Not so bold prediction: Tim Tebow runs the ball. Bold prediction: Harvard is smarter than Jesus.

Arizona (+4) over CINCINNATI: This four point spread should only be three and a half points. Tons of value. I'm not even sure how many names I can think of in this game. Um, I'm pretty sure John Skelton is the current starting quarterback and he's throwing to Larry Fitzgerald. Andy Dalton would be winning the rookie of the year if Cam Newton didn't throw for 400 yards in his first two games and led the league in rushing touchdowns for a couple weeks. It also hurts him that the third best rookie is the guy catching his passes. Well hurts him in rookie of the year voting, but not in actual games. AJ Green really helps him in the real life games, which is why the torn-something in Green's shoulder could be particularly harmful. Not so bold prediction: The announcers mention AJ Green's injured shoulder a dozen times. Bold prediction: Anyone actually watches this game.

Jacksonville (+7.5) over TENNESSEE: More of a spread decision than thinking the Jaguars are the better team. AND I swear this is not another homer/hopeful pick that one of the other potential wild cards lose. Although, the more I think about it, that Chargers can't win the wild card in a tie with only the Jets. They need to finish in the lead outright, meaning the Chargers are the only 9-7 wild card team OR they need to finish in a tie with any combination of two or three teams EXCEPT the Jets alone. So do you want the Titans to win to be a third team in a tiebreaker or do you want every other team losing? Not so bold prediction: Maurice Jones-Drew has more rushing yards than Chris Johnson. Bold prediction: Chris Johnson scores 30 fantasy points.

Oakland (+1.5) over KANSAS CITY: See, I'm not making all homer picks. I swear I only have one or zero per week. Also, this line is way overrated from the Chiefs beating the Packers and the Raiders losing three games in a row, including one to those same Packers. So the Packers beat the Raiders by 30 and the Chiefs beat the Packers by 5, so obviously the Chiefs will beat the Raiders by 35? Not so bold prediction: Someone uses Arrowhead as a reason for why the Chiefs will beat the Raiders. Additional not so bold prediction: Carson Palmer turns the ball over at least once.

Miami (+9.5) over NEW ENGLAND: This should only be a 7 point spread. I wonder what the record for wins by a team that started 0-7 is? This 5-9 team should be 7.5-6.5 and in position for a wild card spot. That happens when you lose not one, but two game by exactly one point. The Dolphins and the Eagles are the only teams with losing records and positive point differentials. While the Broncos are the only team with a winning record and a negative point differential. Ok...I kind of got off track there. Not so bold prediction: Rob Gronkowski or Aaron Hernandez will score a touchdown. Bold prediction: Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez will score a touchdown.

NYJ (-3) over Nyg: This was the shortest Team A (spread) over Team B line I have ever written. In fact, my description was longer. Let's keep the analysis of two quarterbacks that I strongly dislike brief as well. The spread should be 4 or 5. They don't even deserve two predictions.

PITTSBURGH (Off(0)) over St. Louis: So I'm guessing, even though I am usually pretty bad at guessing the lines of games, that with Ben Roethlisberger playing, the Steelers would be favored by at least double digits and probably as high as 15. Without him, they will only be favored 9 or 10. Almost no matter what the spread is, I'm taking the Steelers. Not so bold prediction: Pittsburgh comes out of the locker room with decals on only one side of their helmets. Bold prediction: The Rams come out of the locker room looking like the team that lost to the Patriots in the Super Bowl...I mean, they will be wearing the same uniform. Once they start to play, they will bear no resemblance to the Greatest Show on Turf.

Minnesota (+6.5) over WASHINGTON: I'm only half way? I want to call this game the Fortress of Sucktitude, but it's not really a place. but Sucktitude is the right word. Moving on from a game that cannot currently impact any potential playoff team.

Tampa Bay (+7.5) over CAROLINA: The Panthers beat the Bucs 38-19 three weeks ago. Seriously, it was December 4th. You can look it up and everything. So I'm predicting something totally different. I mean, Carolina should only be favored by 7...so you have half a point of value. So let's take a touchdown away from the Panthers and give it to the Bucs and all of a sudden you have Carolina winning 31-26. Sure, that sounds about right. Not so bold prediction: Cam Newton throws or runs for a touchdown. Bold prediction: Carolina wins 31-26 exactly. Trust me, if I get this exactly, you'll hear about it.

BALTIMORE (-13) over Cleveland: Um, Baltimore is at home? Not so bold prediction: Ray Rice helps me win a fantasy championship this week. Bold prediction: Anyone else playing in this game helps anyone win a fantasy championship. With Anquan Boldin out...I guess Torrey Smith could help someone.

San Diego (+2.5) over DETROIT: Three weeks ago I was just kind of waiting around for the Chargers to be eliminated from the playoffs. Now, I've spent way, WAY too much time analyzing the different scenarios that could lead to the Chargers making the playoffs. Way too much time.

DALLAS (-2) over Philadelphia: If the Eagles win and the Giants lose and something else, the Eagles could still win the NFC East at 8-8. I thought this division was supposed to be good.

San Francisco (-2.5) over SEATTLE: Technically, the Seahawks and Cardinals can still win out and get some help from the Lions and the Falcons and make the playoffs. This was supposed to be the worst division and going in to Week 16, they could have three teams make the playoffs, while the AFC West and NFC East could still have 8-8 division champs. And yes, these three scenarios could all play out simultaneously, none contradict any other.

Chicago (+13) over GREEN BAY: Too many points.

Atlanta (+6.5) over NEW ORLEANS: Go Drew Brees!!! You can carry my dad and I to fantasy championships in separate leagues.

Yeah, It's Christmas and I'm going home. You can probably tell that I was getting a little shorter there towards the end.

Merry Christmas!!

Music Tuesdays - Chains of Love by Ryan Adams

2011-12-21T11:45:00.000-08:00

Aaron can safely skip this one

Music Tuesdays - Thin Line by honeyhoney

2011-12-13T12:58:00.000-08:00

When I hear this song, all I can think of is Mik's description of the White Stripes' "old-school, ass-kicking, hillbilly vibe" because that's exactly what this song reminds me of - as if the Jack White sang as a woman. It has the same dirty, rockin' gaucho sound.

Bonus points go to our entire comment thread on the above link... that was hands down our best series of random comments ever. MP is the Adlai Stevenson of FIWK.

FIWK the NFL: Week 14

2011-12-09T14:17:00.000-08:00

There are two rules the NFL has that I absolutely hate. While I don't like the current confusion surrounding what constitutes a completed catch before the end zone or in the end zone, and I don't like the ability of a judgment call to award a 60 yard penalty, the refs in the NFL are fucking spectacular and do an outmazing job and you should try your darndest to avoid criticizing them. But I hate the NFL awarding a monopoly on the Sunday Ticket to Direct TV and I hate that the NFL blacks out the local team when the game doesn't sell out. Normally, moving from San Diego to the bay area would take care of both of these issues. The Chargers are rarely on TV locally, and since I can't get Sunday Ticket through my cable provider, I need to go to the local BJ's to watch the Chargers on their Sunday Ticker. This kind of works out as a win-win, as I get to enjoy quality craft brews and watch multiple NFL games at once. Also, since I no longer live in San Diego, I never have to fear the dreaded local black out. But this weekend, I will visiting San Diego and the Chargers game will be blacked out and now I'm just as mad at Roger Goodell and the NFL as Royce is at David Stern. So will it be a crappy streaming foreign internet feed or $50-$100 to go to the game?

PITTSBURGH (-14) over Cleveland: Yeah, I know this game happened last night, but I'm being honest here. Pittsburgh was supposed to be favored by 14+, but there aren't really enough games with spreads greater than 14 for me to be confident in any analysis out that far. Although, I just realized that I did my analysis based on the stats as of today, which includes the Steelers 11 point victory over the Browns. So maybe my analysis before the game would have determined the value to be at Cleveland +14, but if they were to play next week, the line should be Pittsburgh -14? Not so bold prediction: Pittsburgh wins. Bold prediction: Antonio Brown has 5 catches for 151 yards and a touchdown.

Houston (+3) over CINCINNATI: Yates hasn't been too bad. And it's not like Matt Schaub was carrying this team before. Like I said last week, it's Arian Foster and the Texans' defense...and the points. Not so bold prediction: The phrase "Is AJ Green the next Andre Johnson?" gets said at least once. Bold prediction: Andre Johnson pulls a third hammy.

DETROIT (Off(0)) over Minnesota: I'm pretty sure both starting quarterbacks are going to be healthy for this one. In fact, I don't quite get why there are so many Off lines this week. After checking, apparently Ponder is a game time decision...but I don't think he's been good enough to warrant an Off line.

New Orleans (-3.5) over TENNESSEE: Even though it's only 3.5 points, this is the right line. Kind of surprising for the 2nd or 3rd best team in the NFC vs. an AFC team that is barely contending for the wild card. What's that? The Titans are 7-5? When the hell did that happen? Oh, when CJ## was rushing for 343 yards in two games? Ok, so now he's on pace for 1,136 yards, which is a pretty decent season. I'll stop insulting him. Now, I'll just console him when he loses to Drew Brees, who is still on pace to break the single season passing yards record.

MIAMI (Off(0)) over Philadelphia: This Off line is kind of a reverse off line. Michael Vick has been injured and he might be back, but we don't know yet. I wonder if the Eagles will be favored if Vick starts. I hope so. Because I will take the Dolphins plus any points. In fact, I'll take the Dolphins all the way up to being a three point favorite. I need to get 3.5 before I take the Eagles with Michael Vick or Vince Young. In fact, I still don't know why this line is Off. Young has produced just as well as Vick. Not so bold prediction: The Eagles starting quarterback runs the ball at least twice. Bold prediction: The Dolphins get more rushing touchdowns from their quarterbacks than the Eagles do.

NYJ (-9) over Kansas City: Just so you know, I'm staying up late to get this done. That's how much respect I have for my readers. Not enough to prepare in advance and post this at a reasonable time, but enough to have it up at least one full day before the games start. The Chiefs are tied with the Chargers at 5-7. But their -105 point differential means they should only be 2.8-9.2. They are way overperforming.

New England (-8) over WASHINGTON: This line is actually perfect. Half a point either way would make me take that team. But, since I have to pick it at -8, do I lean slightly towards the home team (which I give an advantage to, but not as much as Bill Barnwell) or do I lean slightly towards the team with a competent quarterback. I guess when you look at it like that, it's a lot easier to pick Tom Brady over Rex Grossman. Not so bold prediction: Tom Brady throws a touchdown pass. Bold prediction: Roy Helu gets 100 yards.

Atlanta (-2.5) over CAROLINA: I'm already preparing myself not to take Cam Newton in next year's fantasy drafts. I think he is going to go higher than I feel comfortable taking him. I think his passing will come down, but I just can't see him leading the league in rushing TDs. So when you take those away, then how does he compare to Rodgers, Brady, Brees? If he's available in the third round, I'll take him, but I don't think he will still be there. As for Atlanta, Michael Turner goes in the first round, Roddy White in the 2nd and Matt Ryan goes in the 13th. Still good enough to win this game though. Not so bold prediction: Michael Turner or Roddy White gets a touchdown. Bold prediction: Jonathan Stewart has more catches than Roddy White.

JACKSONVILLE (Off(0)) over Tampa Bay: Wow, what happened to Tampa Bay? They went from 4-2 to 4-8 in a hurry. And Jacksonville didn't exactly inspire a lot of confidence Monday night against the Chargers. They were picking people up and throwing them on to the Chargers bandwagon.

BALTIMORE (-16.5) over Indianapolis: If this line was at -20, I'd take the Colts. Just like I did last week. But at 16.5, I take the Ravens. And I will continue to enjoy Ray Rice's fantasy goodness along the way. Not so bold prediction: The Ravens win by more than the 7 points the Patriots won by last week. Bold prediction: The announcers mention the Baltimore Colts only 43 times.

Chicago (+3.5) over DENVER: At 7-5 the Broncos are now tied with the Raiders for first in the AFC West. And their point differential and Pythagorean winning percentage are almost identical. They are both 7-5 teams playing like 5-7 win teams. Last week I told you the Raiders were the only team at 7-4 or better with a negative point differential. The Broncos caught them and now both Denver and Oakland are the only teams with winning records who have allowed more points than they have scored. Not so bold prediction: John Elway is seen on TV, both in the owner's booth during most of the game, then on the sideline in the fourth quarter. Bold prediction: The Broncos are trailing most of the game then get a great defensive or special teams play that allows Tebow to win the game in the last two minutes.

GREEN BAY (-11) over Oakland: Here's betting that the Raiders have a worse point differential after Sunday.

San Francisco (-4) over ARIZONA: Only 4 points? I am genuinely confused by this. I would probably be taking the 49ers with a double digit spread. Now, will Scott put mucho dinero on his team, thereby jinxing them?

SAN DIEGO (-7) over Buffalo: The line is probably too high and the game is blacked out and we need to get five starters back from the IR (literally, at least five opening day starters are out for the year on the IR) and we need a high draft pick... but if the Bears beat the Broncos and the Packers beat the Raiders and the Chargers beat the Bills...we're only a game back... hhmmmmm....

DALLAS (-3.5) over Nyg: I don't necessarily like picking NFC East games. Here are some examples: Washington 28 - NYG 14, NYG 29 - Philadelphia 16, Philadelphia 17 - NYG 10, Philadelphia 34 - Dallas 7. But my numbers say the Cowboys are 6 points better than the Giants, not 3.5.

SEATTLE (Off(0)) over St. Louis: Ugh. Horrible Monday Night Football. HMNF.

Music Tuesdays - Lonely Boy by The Black Keys

2011-12-06T10:48:00.000-08:00

FIWK the NFL: Week 13

2011-12-02T14:50:00.000-08:00

Another good week last week. Somewhere between not sucky and back up to even for the year. If I can just keep this momentum going...and the Chargers can win out to get to 9-7, things will be looking good. Where did that come from? The Chargers win out to get to 9-7? Is that supposed to be some unconscious calculation of what the Chargers and Raiders need to do to make the playoffs? Why am I doing this? Why am I checking the Raiders schedule? Oakland is 7-4. The Chargers are 4-7. I want Norv Turner demoted to offensive coordinator and Bill Cowher hired. But the Raiders play the favored Dolphins this week and still have to play the Packers and the Lions. Those three losses puts them at 8-7 or 7-8 (if they also lose to the Chiefs) going into the last game of the year against the Chargers...in San Diego. STOP IT!! I CAN'T HELP MYSELF!! AAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!! As for the sane/objective analysis of everyone else...

Tennessee (+1.5) over BUFFALO: I kind of miss my bold and not-so-bold predictions. I thought I'd give it a try this column. Especially since I've been skimping on my normal analysis and going pure quant. Tennessee should actually be favored by 2.5 or so. NSB prediction: Chris Johnson has more rushing yards than Fred Jackson. Six weeks ago, this would have been a HUGE Bold prediction. But that's what tearing your ACL will do to you. I wonder if Fred Jackson will be drafted next year? I mean, he was a huge performer this year, especially for being drafted as low as he was...but he's 31 this year. And he doesn't have as much time to heal as Jamaal Charles or Kenny Britt (huge draft choice for the three weeks you got to use him). I'm gonna say he gets drafted in a 12 team league, but not a ten. And he is the most dropped player after week 2. Bold prediction: Chris Johnson gets over 100 yards. It's so sad that that has to be a bold predictions.

I thought about inserting this extra aside down by Drew Brees, but I'll do it here. I honestly can't remember if I have discussed my father's first fantasy football team. His new office recruited him, and he correctly came to me for advice. The first thing I did was analyze the leagues's scoring. Very unusual. See if you can follow me here. + will mean a positive point or fractional point because I can't remember every exact detail. In addition to the normal fantasy scoring, and two Individual Defensive Players, + for pass attempts and completions, - for incompletions, +.25 for rushing attempts, +.75 for receptions, +1 for every 10 return yards. Kickoff return, punt return, interception/fumble return, etc. That means the return guy getting 1400 return yards scores as many points as the running back rushing for 1400 yards. So, going in, the draft strategy I designed for him was 1) a running back who gets 300+ carries and also some catches (Chris Johnson in the middle of the first round) 2) Drew Brees, who regularly leads the league in pass attempts AND completion percentage, so he won't be hurt by the negative for incomplete passes. 3) Another RB (Ahmad Bradshaw) 4) Darren Sproles. This guy was a top five player in this scoring for most of the season, still top 15. The rest would be primary return guys (taking kickoffs AND punt returns) who are also starters on offense. Devin Hester, Josh Cribbs, Antonio Brown, Jacoby Ford, etc. Drew Brees and Darren Sproles have carried my dad to first place. You need to start getting your loved ones involved in fantasy football. It genuinely gets them interested in watching NFL games.

CHICAGO (-7) over Kansas City: But Chicago is starting a backup quarterback who screwed up the last play of the game. [Yep, here's another aside [and a tangent within an aside: I liked using links to published Google Word docs, but that takes just a little more time than I really want to spend on it. Quick poll: should I use the links, or just type it in here] Caleb Hanie did something that was kind of stupid, but totally understandable. With 4 seconds on the clock, after signaling his team to spike, he took the snap and faked the spike. This in itself can be an effective move as Peyton Manning has shown many times. But from a philosophical point of view, spiking the ball should be intentional grounding. There is a specific rule that makes spiking the ball to stop the clock an exception. As soon as he doesn't spike the ball and drops back a step, this exception no longer applies and it goes to normal intentional grounding rules. Technically, he should have thrown an incomplete pass towards an eligible receiver, but by obviously spiking the ball, it was intentional grounding. And when the clock is running, a penalty that stops the clock requires a 10 [or 5, I forget] second run off, and with only 4 seconds left in the game, the game was over. Looks really stupid, but kind of understandable.] That's ok, because the Chiefs are countering with their own inept backup quarterback. So I guess since the two backup quarterbacks cancel each other out, my normal quantitative analysis still applies. NSB prediction: One of these quarterbacks throws an interception or two. Bold prediction: Devin Hester gets a touchdown.

Oakland (+3) over MIAMI: The 3-8 Dolphins actually have a positive point differential. They are playing like a 5.6-5.4 team. They have the dubious distinction of being the only team with a losing record and a positive point differential. While the Raiders are the only 7-4 or better team with a negative point differential. So why did I pick the Raiders? Because this spread should be less than 3 (but greater than 2.5, go figure). I'm actually confidently picking the Dolphins to win outright. (And just so you know, confidently picking them to win means they have a 57% chance of winning. There's a difference between confidently picking the Patriots to win outright with their 97% chance of winning and confidently picking the the Dolphins. I guess the former means you would be stupid to pick the underdog and the latter means I don't have to hem and haw when making my decision.)

Denver (+1) over MINNESOTA: I feel like I've been working on this for an hour and I only have three games done. And I forgot to add a bold and not-so-bold prediction to the last game. And now I remember why I stopped doing them in the first place. They add time and I'm not 100% sure they are worth it. Especially when I added the time of trying to track how well my predictions did. Denver should be favored in this game by 2.5 or 3. Not so bold prediction: Tim Tebow thanks Jesus. Bold prediction: Tebow actually is Jesus.

Indianapolis (+20) over NEW ENGLAND: The spread is just too big. I saw a few articles talking about the 4 or 5 times there has been a spread of 20 or greater and how the underdogs dominate ATS and even won once SU. NSB prediction: The Patriots win. Bold prediction: Peyton Manning suits up, just to scare the living bejeezus out of the Patriots defenders who had been planning for...who is the Colts current starting quarterback , again?...Dan Orlovsky!

Cincinnati (+6.5) over PITTSBURGH: Apparently I didn't learn my lesson three weeks ago. But the Bengals only lost by 7. That could easily be 6 and all of a sudden the Bengals are covering and I look like a genius for sticking to my guns. And where is Royce and all of his aphorisms? This spread should be three. You know, like it was three weeks ago when the Bengals lost by seven? Shit.

Carolina (+3.5) over TAMPA BAY: Carolina should be favored by three, not getting three points. Sometimes I like to use the Not-so-bold prediction as a joke (You the Reader, "only sometimes?"), and by this I mean something that may not actually happen, but happens a lot and should be called attention to. This game's NSB prediction: Cam Newton runs for a touchdown. Usually a quarterback running for a TD should be a bold prediction (or I'll use a misleading statement as a bold prediction, when it actually occurs more than you think), but Cam Newton has 10 rushing touchdowns in 11 games. He's third in the league in rushing touchdowns after LeSean McCoy and Adrian Peterson. 10!!! Bold prediction: Carolina's quarterback runs for a touchdown. (Now you don't know where I'm coming from.)

Nyj (-3) over WASHINGTON: Matthew Berry tells better jokes about the ineptitude of the Redskins than I have about the ineptitude of the rest of the NFL combined. Maybe that's because he's a professional comedic writer with such credits as Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles. I originally wrote Crocodile Dundee II because I didn't even realize there was a third one made. That's hilarious.

HOUSTON (+3) over Atlanta: Remember, Houston's success this year has been primarily due to their defense (even without Mario Williams) [I miss Wade Phillips as a defensive coordinator] and the great running combination of Arian Foster and Ben Tate. Andre Johnson is still a super stud in need of a nickname, and I could probably throw up a few balls that he would come down with. With Schaub, the Texans would be favored by 7. Their third quarterback, TJ Yates, doesn't cost them 10 points. NSB prediction: Either Foster or Tate scores a TD. Bold prediction: Derrick Ward gets a touchdown.

Baltimore (-6.5) over CLEVELAND: The Ravens should be favored by 11. They really are a good team, but it feels like they themselves don't believe me. The 49ers are good and the Ravens handled them. I'm pretty sure I'm going to pick them every week because I'll keep getting value on the points. I just have to suffer through the few times they lose outright as a 7-10 point favorite.

Green Bay (-7) over NYG: The Packers stand alone as the best team in the NFL by any metric I care to use and the Giants are a 4.9-6.1 team masquerading as a 6-5 team. Green Bay could give away another couple points and I would take them. NSB prediction: Aaron Rodgers throws or runs for at least 2 TDs. Bold prediction: Eli Manning scores more fantasy points than Aaron Rodgers.

Dallas (-4.5) over ARIZONA: Ummm....DeMarco Murray looks like a stud, doesn't he?

SAN FRANCISCO (-13) over St. Louis: The Rams are worse than the Packers are good. Wait, no, that's the Colts. The Rams can't even be a record bad, they're just a normal bad. I have the Patriots beating the Colts 96.9% of the time and the 49ers beating the Rams 96.5% of the time. So, either this line is too low or the Patriots line is too high. I say both and I'm taking the middle on both games. NSB Prediction: Frank Gore gets a touchdown. Bold prediction: Kendal Walker ALSO gets a touchdown.

Detroit (+9) over NEW ORLEANS: Man, I really don't want to go against the Saints. My gut tells me they are the second best team in the NFC and therefore better than the 49ers. But my numbers say this spread should be closer to 3. Should be an interesting game between two good passing offenses. First to 50 wins!

San Diego (-2.5) over JACKSONVILLE: If the Chargers lose and the Raiders win, that still doesn't officially eliminate them from the playoffs...so let's go for hope. Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things.

Music Tuesdays - Lights Out, Words Gone by Bombay Bicycle Club

2011-11-29T08:27:00.000-08:00

Very chill song... great band name, too.

FIWK the NFL: Week 12

2011-11-23T11:47:00.000-08:00

That picture looks familiar. Maybe it's because I used the same exact picture seven weeks ago. but it's such a great picture for the Chargers vs. Broncos matchup. I mean, I guess I could have gone with Ryan Mathews. Or any of the photos from the game. But I really like this standard photo of the line of scrimmage with the offensive lineman facing the defensive linemen. And when I get a chance to use it, I jump at the opportunity. Last week I was 10-4 SU, 7-5-2 ATS and 4-2-1 in games I chose to put $ on. You know what, that doesn't suck. So let's keep the not sucking going on.

DETROIT (+6) over Green Bay: I am really excited about football on Thanksgiving. I LOVE the NFL, but you know what I like more than watching NFL games? Actually playing in football games. So tomorrow morning, while the Packers and Lions kick off at 9:30am Pacific time, I will be at some random field in San Francisco playing touch football. My priorities, in order, 1) Don't injure anyone. 2) As quarterback, make sure everyone on my team gets a catch. 3) Win. 4) Don't get injured myself. As for the Packers-Lions, the spread is three points too high.

Miami (+7) over DALLAS: So Does Miami suck or don't they? Are they an 0-7 team or a 3-0 kind of team? They should have stuck with being an 0-7 team, because this was the one team that was at the perfect nexus of sucking really bad AND needing a quarterback, meaning they should have been striving for Andrew Luck. But I guess Tony Sparano wants to keep his job (weird, huh?) and will get these guys to win another game or two. I'm not saying they win this one, just that they shouldn't be 7 point underdogs.

San Francisco (+3.5) over BALTIMORE: So, in the three Thanksgiving games, I'm picking the underdog in all three. I am going to go either 2-1 or 1-1-1 on these three picks. One favorite is going to blow out the underdog, one favorite is going to lose outright in a close game and one favorite is going to win a close game. But I don't know which is which. As the the Har-bowl, I kind of wish the head coached weren't brothers because this would be an amazing game without that media-overblown subplot. Which Ravens team shows up? The team that is 5-0 at home and defeated the Steelers twice? Or the team that lost to the Seahawks and Jaguars? I remember having the same exact questions last week when the Ravens were favored by 7...and they won by exactly seven, providing no insight whatsoever.

Minnesota (+9.5) over ATLANTA: Atlanta is a 5.5-4.5 team masquerading as a 6-4 team. The 2-8 Vikings really should be 3-7. What, those aren't really big differences? Atlanta should be favored by 7.5. That's not very far from the 9.5? Ok, I got nothing else. Feels really close. Atlanta wins outright, but do they win by 7 or 10?

CINCINNATI (-7) over Cleveland: I remember when both Ohio teams wore orange and sucked. Why do they both wear orange? This spread is right on. No value here.

TENNESSEE (-3) over Tampa Bay: I like that Matthew Berry called this the only other time Chris Johnson has a good game. Remember when I said he was going to have to change his nickname to CJ700? I was wrong. At 50.9 yards per game, he is currently on pace for 814 yards. Will you take him in the third round of your fantasy draft next year? Maybe...if it's late in the third round.

Carolina (-3.5) over INDIANAPOLIS: You know what Cam Newton needs to do to win in the NFL? Play really, really crappy teams. Jaguars? Check. Redskins? Check. Colts? Check.

Arizona (Off(0)) over ST. LOUIS: I don't know why this game is Off? Is there really that big of a difference between Kolb and Skelton?

Buffalo (+9) over NYJ: I don't know how to feel about this game. Are the Bills the team that started 4-1 or the team that is 1-4 since then? And the Jets don't exactly inspire confidence either. And apparently Fred Jackson is out for this game. So why am I picking the Jets? I guess because it makes sense that two 5-5 teams should have a spread closer to 3 or 3.5 So maybe I'm just enjoying 9 points and predicting something like a 17-10 game. Yeah, that sounds plausible. You believe me, right?

Houston (-3.5) over JACKSONVILLE: Houston's defense carries them in this surprisingly low scoring game.

OAKLAND (-4.5) over Chicago: This is the one game that I went against the stats and it is solely because of Jay Cutler's injury. Why did his broken thumb allow him to continue to play against the Chargers, but not the Raiders? This season sucks. Wait, back to my going against the number. Why discount the Bears, but not the Texans or Cardinals? Mostly because the Rams and Jaguars su-, are cra-...hmmm, I need another adjective... lack victorious qualities.

Washington (+3.5) over SEATTLE: Do I ask a lot of rhetorical questions? Well, I'm 8/10 on using rhetorical questions when commenting on the matchups, so yes. I guess that's just my style. Use a rhetorical question, use a stat that depends on just enough research to make you think I do a lot more research than I actually do. Continue rambling about a tangent or an aside that does not really impact the game or my decision making process. Remember that I should be talking about the game. Realize the game/matchup suc- is a bad one and why I started rambling in the first place. Try to think of another adjective to replace "sucks". End with one line about the game. This spread should be under 3.

New England (Off(0)) over PHILADELPHIA: I will pick the Patriots whether or not Vick is healthy. But I guess this is off because the Patriots would be a 3-4 point favorite with Vick in the game and 6-10 point favorites with Vick out of the game. New England wins this 65% of the time, which means I take the Patriots if the line comes out at 6.5 or less and I take the Eagles if the line is greater than 7.

SAN DIEGO (-6) over Denver: I'm only a little bit of a homer this week, instead of the huge homer I was the last two weeks.

Pittsburgh (-10.5) over KANSAS CITY: This is just barely lower than the line probably should be. I say it should at least 11. Not much of a difference. Staying away from this one. Steelers win easily...although...the Chiefs are still using Tyler Palko...hmmm... so my number say the Steelers should be 11 point favorites based on the Chief's performance with Matt Cassel... but he's out...maybe there is some opportunity here...

Nyg (+7) over NEW ORLEANS: Should be a great game. I think the Saints win, but the Giants cover. Should be an interesting contrast of styles. The Giants should be able to pressure with four down linemen. Brees is still completing 70% of his passes while leading the league in attempts. I don't know if the Giants linebackers or safeties can help us much stopping Sproles and Graham in the passing game. But we're going to look the other way. How will the Saints defense hold up against the Giants offense? Not as well as you think. The Giants will have an effective balance of run with Bradshaw and Jacobs and passing with Nicks, Cruz and Manningham.

Music Tuesdays - Party on Fifth Ave by Mac Miller

2011-11-22T09:00:00.001-08:00

FIWK the NFL: Week 11

2011-11-18T11:00:00.000-08:00

Last week didn't go that well for me. I mean my picks weren't that great, but the real killer was the Chargers losing to the Raiders. I guess our 4th-8th linemen aren't that great. And our 1st-3rd were injured. As for my picks, I think I blindly followed my statistical analysis just a little bit too much. As I pointed out, I actually picked the Bengals to beat the Steelers outright, even though I knew this looked fishy due to their respective strength of schedules. So, this week, I'm relying heavily on the Pythagorean winning percentage compared to the spread historical winning percentage, but in a few cases, I am going to interject just a little bit of common sense.

Nyj (-6) over DENVER: Common sense piece #1. Actually analyze the game before it happens. I got my Nyj pick in before the game...but upon analyzing it this morning, it turns out that this game should have been a 3 or 3.5 point spread, so with the spread at 6, I would have picked the Broncos. And even if Tebow doesn't run in that touchdown late, the game ends 13-10 and Den +3.5 covers. So, analyze the picks before the game happens; check.

CLEVELAND (0) over Jacksonville: More of a home team advantage than anything else. Two kind of bad teams with frisky defenses and just enough weapons to shock you if you don't show up ready to play. I'm going with the HOME TEAM (0) over Visitors.

DETROIT (-7) over Carolina: Common sense piece #2. If the starting quarterback is injured, maybe discount that team's previous performance just a little? But it looks like Stafford's broken finger isn't going to keep him out of the game or hinder him all that much. This game should have a double digit spread. Cam Newton has come back to Earth a bit after such blazingly hot start to his career, so the question arises, is he still the favorite for Offensive Rookie of the Year? Newton has 800 more passing yards on a two win team. Andy Dalton now has more touchdowns and fewer interceptions than Newton. And AJ Green is on pace for 1,128 yards and 11 TDs. That's a pretty impressive year for a WR, much less a rookie. But Cam Newton is throwing to Steve Smith, who is on pace for 1691 yards. I say it is still up in the air, and we'll have to see how the Bengals do against the Ravens and Steelers over the remainder of the season.

GREEN BAY (-14) over Tampa Bay: This spread actually isn't big enough. The Packers win 93% of the time, but 14 point favorites only win 80% of the time. It feels weird to say that only giving 14 points may be good value.

Buffalo (+2.5) over MIAMI: This line feels confusing. My gut says the Bills should be favored and my analysis says they win 57% of the time. So the Dolphin's two game winning streak over the Chiefs and Redskins is enough to make them favored? Doesn't feel right.

Oakland (-1) over MINNESOTA: Oakland should be favored by 3. And I'm really cheering hard for Ponder, AD and the Vikings this weekend. The crappy AFC West is the only thing keeping the Chargers playoff hopes alive.

WASHINGTON (+7.5) over Dallas: There is an unusually big jump from 7 to 7.5. 7 point favorites win 72%, which is right where this game should be. 7.5 point favorites win 78%. In fact, the difference between 7.5 point winning percentage and 10 point winning percentage is smaller than the difference between 7 and 7.5. Common sense piece #3, actually pay attention to the differences even small changes can make. Since I'm saying that you take Was +7.5, but Dal -7, that means you stay away from this game. I'm also not considering the Washington QB, because I don't think there is any drop off or improvement going from one to the other.

Cincinnati (+7) over BALTIMORE: Just like last week, my number say take the Bengals ATS. Not straight up, but ATS because this spread should be 3 or 3.5. But the Ravens have gotten a little too schizophrenic (I really like that word) for me. Is this a team that swept the Steelers or the team that lost outright to the Seahawks and Jaguars. If anything, I feel the Ravens will win by 14+ or lose. This is actually a regularly defined strategy when trading options called a straddle, where you buy a call and a put outside the money and if the security trades inside the range, you lose money and if it goes outside the range, either up or down, you make money.

Seattle (+1.5) over St. Louis: At 2-7, St. Louis is actually playing better than their Pythagorean winning %, which says they should be 1.5-7.5. The Seahawks should be favored and win 66% of these game, but we need to go back to common sense piece #2. Who is starting at QB for Seattle this weekend? Checking, ok it looks like their normal starter is probable, so now we feel a little more confident picking the Seahawks.

SAN FRANCISCO (-9.5) over Arizona: Still thinking about the Seahawks. They have singled handedly ruined many survivor pools by defeating the Giants and the Ravens. Looking ahead, with the combination of the 49ers possibly clinching the #2 seed and playing in Seattle, I wonder what kind of line I could get on the Week 16 SF @ Sea game? I only mention this because it is much more interesting that talking about the AZ @ SF game.

Tennessee (+6) over ATLANTA: These teams are really, really close and home field advantage should be making the only difference. They have identical records and nearly identical Pythagorean %, so why the six points? I don't know, but I'll take it.

San Diego (+3.5) over CHICAGO: Homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer, homer homer. My wife tells me all the time "At least I know when I'm being irrational. It would be a lot worse for me to be irrational and think I was being rational."

NYG (-4.5) over Philadelphia: Vince Young.

NEW ENGLAND (-14.5) over Kansas City: Tyler Palko.

Music Tuesdays - The Sound of Winter by Bush

2011-11-15T10:32:00.000-08:00

In the spirit of musical compromise that Aaron gifted me last week, I would like to present this new Bush song. I was really surprised to hear Bush with a new single on the radio. Big fan.

What the F*WK? "Android Fragmentation"

2011-11-13T14:28:00.000-08:00

According to Nielsen, Google's Android OS runs 43% of America's Smartphones - that's a lot, and sounds like Google should be flying high considering they've only been around for a few years. Not so fast my friends. Android is open source & free, meaning any OEM can leverage it to create the next great Android device. ~~This is great for Google.~~ This has resulted in a tremendously fragmented ecosystem that, according to app developers, presents a significant problem (see chart below).

Michael DeGusta presents this another way: it's also incredibly troubling for the end consumer. Little-to-no high-end devices run on the latest version of Android; how frustrating is it for a consumer to spend $200 on a device that's outdated 3-weeks later?

Image via Phandroid.

FIWK the NFL: Week 10

2011-11-10T21:33:00.000-08:00

I obviously picked the Chargers this week. For everything else I'm going totally quantitative. For a while I had been trying to figure out how to relate points differential or yards/play differential into a way to attempt to pick against the spread. Bill Barnwell and Bill James provided the answer this week. Taking the Pythagorean winning % for the two opponents and Bill James' formula, you can determine how often the favorite should win. Then I used Spreadapedia to look at how often a favorite at each spread has won outright and added 3% for the home team. For example, based on the Chargers and Raiders points scored and points allowed, the Chargers should win 60.8% of the time. But 7 point favorites win 72.2% of the time. If we expect the Chargers to win 60% of the time, they should probably be favored by 3 or 3.5. So, strictly quantitatively, I would pick the Chargers to win outright and the Raiders ATS, but I never pick against the Chargers. I just can't.

Unfortunately, all of this makes for fairly boring analysis of each individual game.

SAN DIEGO (-7) over Oakland: Part of me is going to pretend this game hasn't happened yet. But the majority of me wanted to fire Norv Turner at half time.

New Orleans (0) over ATLANTA: The Falcons win 39.9% of the time. I still think the Saints are the second best team in the NFC, but the Giants and the 49ers are making me think long and hard about it.

CINCINNATI (+3) over Pittsburgh: Apparently I'm picking the Bengals straight up? When you look at team a vs. TEAM B with their stats, team a wins 38.9% of the time. There may be one huge flaw with my method and this game exposes it. Can you figure out what it is? *I'll reveal it at the end.

CLEVELAND (-2.5) over St. Louis: Cleveland should be favored by 7... you know, according to my arbitrarily chosen quantitative method.

Buffalo (+5.5) over DALLAS: No one is going to be surprised to pick against the schizophrenic Cowboys.

Jacksonville (-3) over INDIANAPOLIS: Wait, is Curtis Painter the quarterback or are the Colts starting someone worse?

Denver (+3) over KANSAS CITY: Not so much Tebow as the Chiefs and Matt Cassel being frauds. (Remember, I'm just making up reasons to go along with my arbitrarily chosen quantitative method.)

Washington (+3.5) over MIAMI: Um, taking the points between two sucky teams? But my method does indicate the Dolphins should win 53% of the time.

PHILADELPHIA (Off(0)) over Arizona: There probably is some bigger spread somewhere...

Houston (-3) over TAMPA BAY: Houston's defense is actually looking pretty good. Just by my numbers, the Texans should win 80% of the time. This would be an 11 or 12 point spread.

Tennessee (+3) over CAROLINA: I don't even need my quantitative method to pick a 4-4 team plus points over a 2-6 team.

Baltimore (-6.5) over SEATTLE: I don't need any method to pick in favor of Baltimore and against the Seahawks.

Detroit (+2.5) over CHICAGO: I think the Lions are the better team. Many, many stats agree with me.

SAN FRANCISCO (-3.5) over Nyg: SF probably gets a 2 seed with a win. The Giants are the leaders for the 2 seed with a win, but the NFC East is too competitive and the NFC South champ would also be pretty close. The 49ers are lucky this specific game is at home.

NYJ (-1.5) over New England: Pretty much every way you look at it, this is a 50/50, with the Jets being at home giving them the slight edge, maybe 52-53%? A team favored by 1.5 should win about 52% of the time, so this spread is right on. This is a coin flip guess and I see no opportunity. I will not be putting $ down on this game.

GREEN BAY (-13.5) over Minnesota: When you get this far out (on the scale of spreads) the sample sizes get really small and the minute differences are more like noise than statistically significant. The Packers should win this game 79% on a neutral field and with home field advantage, maybe bump it up to 82%. Every spread from 11 to 14 has the favorite winning 80-82% of the time. This doesn't feel like a coin flip... more like rolling two dice. Under 7, Vikings win; over 7, Packers win; exactly 7 roll again. You are still getting resolving a 50/50 decision, just doing it in a more complicated way.

*So, the big flaw in my system...did you figure it out? The Steelers have played and lost to the Ravens twice. The Bengals have played neither the Ravens nor the Steelers yet and these will probably be the four hardest games on their schedule. My strategy does not account for quality of opponents. Just like how the Chiefs made the Bills and Lions look amazing by losing by 34 and 41 in the first two weeks.

Music Tuesdays - If I Die Young by The Band Perry

2011-11-08T22:19:00.000-08:00

Don't know why I like this one. Hopefully it's a compromise for me and Royce

FIWK the NFL: Week 9

2011-11-04T15:57:00.000-07:00

There weren't very many pictures of Chargers and Packers playing. And there are even fewer stats in this weeks picks. I made my choices mostly based on the spread and location. In general, the underdog wins ATS and loses SU more often than not. So I'll be leaning towards the underdog when I can. And for a little quiz, when picking straight up, I picked every favorite except one. If you can't figure out the underdog I picked to win outright, then shame on you.

BUFFALO (-2) over Nyj: I almost forgot, home teams also win more often than visitors. A pretty good, Freakonomics-like book, Scorecasting, explains that there is a subconscious officials bias to agree with a very one-sided crowd. It's a psychological effect called group think. So a large, loud crowd does not affect the opposing offense, but it does affect the officials in those split-second 50/50 calls. This is the kind of game/spread that the favored home team wins something like 51-54% of the time. All this was a long distraction from the fact that I have no real opinion on this game. Fred Jackson > Dirty Sanchez.

Seattle (+11.5) over DALLAS: And I'm already abandoning the home team thing? No, I think the Cowboys win this game. But that is just too many points. Look at last week. There were three double digit spreads, all three lost ATS. In fact double digit favorites are something like 4-8 ATS. So I feel it should really read: +11.5 over Favorite.

INDIANAPOLIS (+7) over Atlanta: Another case of feeling like too many points AND taking a home-dog. And I really don't know how to feel about the Falcons. There is a 90% chance that Painter will throw at least one long bomb to Pierre Garcon, but only a 60% chance he will catch it.

Miami (+4) over KANSAS CITY: A strange low spread where I picked the favorite SU and the underdog ATS. I will be cheering hard for the Dolphins to take care of an AFC West team, but I think the Dolphins keep the inside track on the Andrew Luck sweepstakes.

NEW ORLEANS (-8) over Tampa Bay: It's the home team thing more than anything else. I still think the Saints are the second best team in the NFC. Yes, better than the 49ers and Lions and Giants. Mostly because of how I think they will perform in any given game. I'd pick the Saints to beat any of those previous three teams. And Josh Freeman has been very, very average. He was a late round keeper for me and I already dropped him a while ago, but that was mostly due to having drafted Matthew Stafford.

San Francisco (-3.5) over WASHINGTON: I like how Matthew Berry says the Redskins are going 3-13 the hard way. (If you don't get the joke, they are already 3-4.) The Redskins won't be able to run against the 49ers and they already can't pass. I guess I think their best chance to cover is to lose 10-7.

Cleveland (+11) over HOUSTON: You know what's going to happen, right? Both the Cowboys and the Texans are going to cover their double digit spreads making me look very foolish. But the jokes on them. I don't need these two games to make me look foolish. I've been doing that all season long. And you can meander over to our "US is a Platform" discussion to see more examples of me being foolish.

Cincinnati (+3) over TENNESSEE: Looking at this now, I thought I would have picked the Dalton-Green Bengals over the CJ700 Titans. I mean, I obviously did ATS, but I feel like they have a decent chance to win this outright. It was probably the home team thing that swayed me.

OAKLAND (-8) over Denver: Remember that league where I drafted Matthew Stafford and dropped Josh Freeman? Well the Stafford-Megatron Lions are on Bye, so I am starting Tim Tebow. So I am cheering for the Broncos doubly hard this week. For Tebow to have a good fantasy game (because there's no way he's going to have a good passing game) and lead Denver to a glorious defeat of the Raiders.

NEW ENGLAND (-9) over Nyg: Is David Tyree even in the NFL any more? (Checking...no.) No Tyree, no Giants victory...because today, we've just decided to skip ration and logic, can't you tell?

ARIZONA (-2.5) over St. Louis: Man the Rams looked good beating the Saints last week. And the Cardinals looked good bea- almost beating the Ravens last week. Don't let it fool you. Just take the home team and don't tune in.

SAN DIEGO (+5.5) over Green Bay: Of course this is the one underdog I picked to win SU. AND they are at home. Not that being in San Diego is going to do them any good. For the first time, the Chargers coaches are blasting crowd noise at practice in anticipation of a home game. This game sold out easily and it wasn't all Chargers fans...but there's this tiny little feeling I have...the Packers can be thrown on and Rivers is capable of winning a game throwing every down...

PITTSBURGH (-3) over Baltimore: This line is exactly right. I might even bet on a push. What kind of odds can I get on a push?

PHILADELPHIA (-7.5) over Chicago: More of a home team call than anything. I think Forte can run and catch against the Eagles linebackers, but Philly looked awfully scary last week.

Music Tuesdays - I've Handled Myself Wrong by Grace Woodroofe

2011-11-01T22:20:00.000-07:00

Aaron you can skip this one - it's definitely a 'Royce special'

FIWK the NFL: Week 8

2011-10-28T09:56:00.000-07:00

I got nothing. I can't figure out anything. And I'm not even bringing the funny very well. I really wanted to ignore all the stats and go with my gut. But it only took me two games before I realized I don't even have a gut feeling about any of these games. SO! World Series Game 7, huh? Pretty exciting. Can the Rangers become the Buffalo Bills of the World Series or will Matt Harrison (who?!?) lead the Rangers to their first Fall Classic title? All the numbers you could possibly use are below, but I'm not going to mention them in the matchup discussions. Winning %, Pythagorean %, Pt. Dif/G, Offensive Yards/Play, Defensive Yards/Play, Yards/Play differential, DVOA. Finally, one of my favorite Tweets of the week to show you just how hard this is; Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders told us they had the Colts and the Jaguars as good chances to win outright. The Jaguars upset the highly favored Ravens and ruined many a Survivor pool. The Colts lost 62-7.

TENNESSEE (-8.5) over Colts: After the season will Chris Johnson change his nickname from CJ2K to CJ700? And I like our friend Adam-the-Colts-fan's status: Peyton Manning = 2011 MVP.

New Orleans (-13.5) over ST. LOUIS: And the jokes are done. Currently Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady are on pace to break Dan Marino's passing yards record and Brees and Rodgers are both currently above Brees completion percentage record. But I say Brees ends up the highest on both these stats at the end of the year, in part because Brees leads the league in pass attempts and completions. In fact, Brees has 41 more completions than Rodgers. Extra stat that violates my rule from the intro, but not really because I didn't use it in deciding this game: Based on Pythagorean Win %, the 0-6 Dolphins should have one win, the 0-7 Colts should have one win and the 0-6 Rams should have no wins. The Rams (6.9%) are worse than the best team is good (Baltimore 81.1%).

NYG (-10) over Miami: The Colts have Peyton Manning and the Rams have Sam Bradford. The Dolphins are the one team at the perfect nexus of having no wins AND really needing a good quarterback. On on fantasy team where we start 2 WR, I have Hakeem Nicks, Dez Bryant and Steve Smith, while Jamaal Charles injury has left me very week at RB. I just completed a trade of Hakeem Nicks for Ahmad Bradshaw. That really seemed to be where the market for a #5-6 WR was. And I think Bradshaw will continue to be a starting fantasy RB, mostly because even when Jacobs returns from injury, he just hasn't looked as effective as in the past.

Minnesota (+3.5) over CAROLINA: I agree with Nate Ravitz that this week's slate of games just doesn't look very interesting other than New England @ Pittsburgh. 6 of the 13 games have a spread of 8.5 points or more. And I ended up picking the favorites in every one of those games. The Vikings were one of three underdogs I picked this week and I have no particular reason why.

BALTIMORE (-13) over Arizona: Arizona is the only double digit underdog that actually has a win and I really want to pick them. But after losing to Jacksonville, this really good Baltimore team wants to send a message that last week was fluke. In fact, if I could go back, I'd still end up betting $100 on the Ravens. I think I'll do it again this week.

HOUSTON (-9.5) over Jacksonville: I can't remember why I did this. I think I might have used a stat on accident? Or it was the 41-7 domination of a decent Titans team. And Jacksonville coming back to Earth on the road. Oh, I remember what the stat was. The Texans actually have the fourth best differential in yards/play and the Jaguars have the fourth worst. Man, I just can't help myself from going back to the stats. Or is it that I can't follow what I say I'm going to do in the intro? Or is this the exception that proves the rule? (Not the rule of which stats I use, but the rule that I can follow through with my intentions laid out in the intro.)

BUFFALO (-6) over Washington: Apparently John Beck made the defense worse. And maybe Toronto will still feel like a home game for the Bills. And Fred Jackson has been a very pleasant surprise in fantasy. You know, for those people who actually drafted him, not me. I went with the Rices (great), Johnsons (CJ700 sucky, Megatron awesome, Andre - TBD), Turners (better than expected), Charleses (sucky) and McCoys (good) of the world. Although I have really benefited from drafting Steve Smith late all over the place.

DETROIT (-3) over Denver: I fear the Tebow-mania. Not because I think he will win, but because this goes against every form of statistical analysis and I really like statistical analysis. But there's a part of me that wonders, what if he does win. What if there is some unquantifiable winning awesomeness that he exudes that I can't explain. I don't like it. It would be like finding out the Scientology is factually correct. That would scare the bejeezus out of me.

PITTSBURGH (+3.5) over New England: Great defense vs. great offense, right? Good job for those still reading me. We look the other way. The Steelers offense is going to shred the Patriots defense. But there's no way I'm putting $ against Tom Brady.

SAN FRANCISCO (-8.5) over Cleveland: You want to know why I married my wife? Because she knows me better than I do. There are a couple SF fans here who just watched their Giants win the World Series, something I have never seen my Padres do. You know what my wife has been saying to me for three weeks? "How are you going to feel when my 49ers win another Super Bowl before your Chargers do? Especially right after the Giants just won last year." That hurts honey. Right to my core. And that is much better smack talk than anything I have heard from any male 49ers fan.

Cincinnati (-3) over SEATTLE: I' mentioned how I don't like spelling Cincinnati before, right? The two n's and one t get to me for some reason. And Royce's law of always betting against the Seahawks and Chiefs has been dead for three weeks now. In fact, I think it only lasted two weeks. But I am picking against both of them this week, so maybe we'll declare it a zombie law just for this week.

Dallas (+3.5) over PHILADELPHIA: I have no fucking clue. It's one talented schizophrenic team vs. another talented schizophrenic team. (I don't like spelling Cincinnati, but I have no problem spelling schizophrenic.) Taking the points is just fine with me.

San Diego (-3.5) over KANSAS CITY: Bill Barnwell tweeted how this line has moved 10.5 points from the Chargers hosting the Chiefs just a few weeks ago (after accounting for the traditional three point home team advantage). And that the Chargers "slid" plus the Chiefs run haven't brought these teams that close together. It does scare me a little that the Chiefs can get into first place in the division with a win, but I don't think it happens. The homer in me says the Chargers get to 5-2 and maintain that 1+ game lead throughout the season.

NFL	W	L	G	PCT	Pyth %	Dif/G	O Yds/ Play	D Yds/ Play	Dif Yds/ Play	DVOA
Pittsburgh	5	2	7	71.4%	62.2%	4.1	6	4.7	1.3	11.40%
Dallas	3	3	6	50.0%	58.8%	3.5	6.3	5	1.3	17.20%
Baltimore	4	2	6	66.7%	81.1%	12.0	5.2	4.3	0.9	21.50%
Houston	4	3	7	57.1%	68.3%	7.3	6	5.2	0.8	20.10%
New Orleans	5	2	7	71.4%	72.4%	11.6	6.5	5.8	0.7	20.90%
Philadelphia	2	4	6	33.3%	50.0%	0.0	6.5	5.8	0.7	0.30%
Cincinnati	4	2	6	66.7%	62.0%	4.3	5.2	4.6	0.6	11.20%
Green Bay	7	0	7	100.0%	75.8%	12.7	6.8	6.2	0.6	30.70%
Detroit	5	2	7	71.4%	69.2%	8.1	5.6	5.1	0.5	11.20%
NY Giants	4	2	6	66.7%	52.7%	1.2	5.9	5.5	0.4	15.30%
New England	5	1	6	83.3%	67.6%	8.3	6.9	6.6	0.3	21.90%
Carolina	2	5	7	28.6%	44.3%	-2.4	6.4	6.1	0.3	-7.60%
San Diego	4	2	6	66.7%	52.1%	0.8	5.7	5.4	0.3	-9.20%
Oakland	4	3	7	57.1%	43.8%	-2.6	5.8	5.5	0.3	-0.40%
San Francisco	5	1	6	83.3%	78.0%	11.7	5.2	5.2	0	27.50%
Tennessee	3	3	6	50.0%	39.3%	-3.8	5.3	5.3	0	0.00%
NY Jets	4	3	7	57.1%	57.2%	2.9	5	5.1	-0.1	28.60%
Minnesota	1	6	7	14.3%	39.4%	-4.3	5.5	5.6	-0.1	-4.30%
Washington	3	3	6	50.0%	50.0%	0.0	5.3	5.4	-0.1	-4.50%
Chicago	4	3	7	57.1%	57.2%	2.9	5.6	5.9	-0.3	5.70%
Arizona	1	5	6	16.7%	34.4%	-6.2	5.4	5.8	-0.4	-30.60%
Buffalo	4	2	6	66.7%	64.0%	6.8	6.1	6.5	-0.4	23.70%
Cleveland	3	3	6	50.0%	37.9%	-3.8	4.3	4.8	-0.5	-11.90%
Denver	2	4	6	33.3%	36.8%	-5.3	5	5.5	-0.5	-13.10%
Kansas City	3	3	6	50.0%	30.3%	-7.5	5	5.6	-0.6	-8.80%
Seattle	2	4	6	33.3%	34.4%	-5.2	4.5	5.1	-0.6	-19.80%
Atlanta	4	3	7	57.1%	48.2%	-0.7	5.2	5.9	-0.7	10.90%
Miami	0	6	6	0.0%	24.5%	-9.3	5.1	5.8	-0.7	-21.40%
Jacksonville	2	5	7	28.6%	23.6%	-7.9	4.1	4.9	-0.8	-20.70%
Tampa Bay	4	3	7	57.1%	35.6%	-5.4	5.3	6.2	-0.9	-3.00%
Indianapolis	0	7	7	0.0%	16.2%	-16.3	5.1	6	-0.9	-37.30%
St. Louis	0	6	6	0.0%	6.9%	-19.2	4.6	6.1	-1.5	-47.00%

The US is a Platform

2011-10-26T14:55:00.000-07:00

Two weeks ago, Steve Yegge publicly posted a rant lambasting Google for approaching tech architecture from a product standpoint instead of a platform perspective. In other words, Yegge wants Google to produce a platform on which the public can build applications & products for the masses. Instead, Google releases finalized products that often miss the mark. The genesis for the rant stems from Google's lack of success with Google+ compared to it's chief rival Facebook, which has built one of the most widely adopted platforms in the world.

I had this in mind when reading a debate on American exceptionalism between Stephen Walt & Thomas Friedman.

Image via Foreign Policy.

It is Friedman's response to the rhetorical "Can America respond to [country's four major challenges] in appropriate fashion?" that reads strikingly similar to Yegge's praise for those companies that have embraced the Platform. Summarized, Friedman's response says that we can, and will, if we embrace our role as a platform. This is all you truly need to read to understand how this is the case:

"That is how America remains as 'exceptional' in this century as it was in the last two -- not by launching another moon shot but by becoming the world's favorite launching pad for millions of moon shots."

The only way to read this is: we need to embrace the fact that our unique infrastructure (from our universities to the legal system to our market economy) is the best in the world at launching the next big thing. I can't argue with this. Our greatest asset isn't a tangible asset at all. It's our ability to work within a unique, dynamic, and ridiculously powerful framework. It's our culture and mindset. Our platform.

What the F*WK? "Occupy [fill in the blank]"

2011-10-25T12:51:00.000-07:00

To all the "Occupy" movements out there: what the hell do you want? Your 'movement' means nothing, has no goals nor organization, and cannot be compared to the Tea Party Movement given this lack of clarity. For me to take you seriously, organize yourselves (no, camping out in public spaces does not constitute organization) and find a goal!

Image via Occupy California.

FIWK the NFL: Week 7

2011-10-21T13:18:00.001-07:00

I feel like I've lost my picking mojo. Or at least that this season is both really clumped together and very volatile. I can't really get anything going, but I'm not doing poorly. You could say that I was performing average or within one standard deviation of the mean. Which I consider a disappointment for myself. All the way below I have listed every stat I consider when picking games. That's not to say these are my only determining factors, just that if I don't use these stats, I'm probably relying on more subjective analysis. The stats are Pythagorean Win % (which is just another calculation based on point differential), Points For - Points Against = point Differential and divided by the number of Games played = Differential per Game. Then we also have Offensive Interception (thrown) rate, Defensive Interception (caught) rate and Football Outsiders DVOA. And with the Redskins, Raiders, Vikings, Broncos and possibly Rams going with new quarterbacks, I just don't know what to think.

CLEVELAND (-3) over Seattle: This game is actually pretty close and I considered taking the Seahawks and the points, but the Browns are doing a good job not throwing interceptions and the Seahawks are all around bad.

Atlanta (+3.5) over DETROIT: The point differential indicates the Lions, and it's not that close. but the DVOA was a little more convincing. I like the fact that despite being on the road, the Falcons are still playing in a dome and the Lions are currently auditioning running backs. This is another game that I think will be close and I'm much happier taking the Falcons +3.5 than 3 or 2.5. And I still haven't found a game I would put $ on below.

TENNESSEE (-3) over Houston: This is the game that determines the favorite in the AFC South. I'd even be willing to bet that the winner of this game makes the playoffs and the loser doesn't. It's probably too early to make that decision because this may only be the first half of a tiebreaker and the Titans probably have a slightly better chance at getting a wild card spot, while the Texans are probably division champs or bust. Their differentials and interception rates are close, so I am deferring to the big discrepancy in DVOA. Please, please, please let Chris Johnson have a good game that turns his horrible fantasy season around.

Denver (+2) over MIAMI: Tim Tebow is trying to win this game. The Dolphins are trying to get Andrew Luck. And I just realized I haven't been funny at all so far. But I'm not turning it around here.

San Diego (-2) over NYJ: All homer here. If I was to try and make some impartial analysis, I might say something like the winner of this game makes the playoffs and the loser doesn't or that instead of looking at the Chargers offense vs. the Jets defense, we look the other way. How is the Chargers defense going to do against the Jets offense? I say Mark Sanchez is extra sucky, LT is getting the start and proves AJ Smith right, and the post-game handshake takes forever because Rex Ryan is fat and Norv Turner is old.

TAMPA BAY (+1) over Chicago: I hate lines like this. How often does a team favored by one, win outright, but lose ATS? Strangely enough, despite only playing six games, these guys have four common opponents. Chicago beat Atlanta 30-12, Tampa Bay beat Atlanta 16-13. Tampa Bay lost to Detroit 27-20, Chicago lost to Detroit 24-13. Chicago lost to New Orleans 30-13, Tampa Bay beat New Orleans 26-20. Chicago beat Minnesota 39-10, Tampa Bay beat Minnesota 24-20. So three of those teams have the same result against the Bears and Bucs, with the Bears looking like the better team based on scores. But the Bucs beat the Saints, while the Bear lost handily. Now, this was the Sean Payton-less Saints, but I think these teams are really close and DVOA agrees with me that the Bucs are slightly better. (And they are at home.)

Washington (+2.5) over CAROLINA: The Redskins are better pretty much every way you look at them. While Cam Newton is exciting and could be a great fantasy quarterback for year to come, he's 1-5 and isn't capable of carrying a poor Panthers team to a victory. The Redskins are 3-2 despite Rex Grossman, not because of him. Going from Grossman to Beck is not a downgrade. It may not be an upgrade, but it won't make that big of a difference. In fact, I'm putting $100 on it below. And if I lose this one, it will be in a damn exciting fashion.

OAKLAND (-4.5) over Kansas City: I don't think Carson Palmer does anything in this game. In fact, I really hope he throws a pick six and costs them the game. But he doesn't have to do anything more than hand off to Darren McFadden and let the Raiders defense and the black hole take care of Matt Cassel and the horrible Chiefs. Man, I hate U$C QBs. I hope one or both suffer season ending ACL tears. And I really, really want the Raiders to lose.

Pittsburgh (-3.5) over ARIZONA: Another game I'm putting $100 on. The Steelers are much better than the Cardinals and it isn't even close.

St. Louis (+13) over DALLAS: Green Bay giving 15 against the Rams makes complete sense (especially since they won 24-3 and helped Scott a lot in our little game). But for the Cowboys to be giving that much feels a lot like a popular team premium. The Cowboys (I use "I think" too much and I'm going to try and make a conscious effort to cut back.) win outright, but I don't trust them giving so many points. One interesting caveat is whether Sam Bradford can play through the pain of his high ankle sprain, but even if he doesn't, I'll still take the Rams +13.

Green Bay (-9) over MINNESOTA: Green Bay is looking incredible. But they are still behind Baltimore in both DVOA and point differential. But that really speaks to how good the Ravens are than any slight on Green Bay. I might move the Vikings out of totally sucky territory, but this is still a rookie quarterback making his first start against one of the top two teams in the NFL.

NEW ORLEANS (-14) over Indianapolis: Sean Payton doesn't give up his play-calling duties at half time, Curtis Painter throws a couple picks under constant blitz. Not a $100 call, but maybe a $20 call.

Baltimore (-8) over JACKSONVILLE: Baltimore is really, really good. In fact, I'll take Baltimore Def/ST (+2) over JACKSONVILLE.

Team	W	L	G	PCT	Pyth %	PF	PA	DIFF	Diff/G	Off INT %	Def INT %	DVOA
Baltimore	4	1	5	0.80	0.85	148	71	77	15.40	2.31%	3.21%	27.80%
Green Bay	6	0	6	1.00	0.78	197	114	83	13.83	1.90%	4.56%	25.40%
San Francisco	5	1	6	0.83	0.78	167	97	70	11.67	1.24%	3.29%	27.50%
Detroit	5	1	6	0.83	0.74	178	114	64	10.67	1.68%	3.60%	9.50%
New England	5	1	6	0.83	0.68	185	135	50	8.33	3.38%	3.40%	21.10%
Buffalo	4	2	6	0.67	0.64	188	147	41	6.83	3.45%	5.41%	23.90%
Cincinnati	4	2	6	0.67	0.62	137	111	26	4.33	2.49%	1.05%	12.30%
New Orleans	4	2	6	0.67	0.59	177	151	26	4.33	3.03%	1.29%	10.40%
Pittsburgh	4	2	6	0.67	0.59	119	102	17	2.83	3.05%	0.52%	13.00%
Houston	3	3	6	0.50	0.57	141	124	17	2.83	2.49%	2.96%	5.50%
Washington	3	2	5	0.60	0.58	96	83	13	2.60	5.00%	2.89%	1.60%
Chicago	3	3	6	0.50	0.56	146	132	14	2.33	2.00%	1.69%	-2.40%
NY Jets	3	3	6	0.50	0.56	145	131	14	2.33	2.53%	4.84%	25.20%
San Diego	4	1	5	0.80	0.56	120	109	11	2.20	3.76%	3.79%	-7.50%
Tennessee	3	2	5	0.60	0.56	105	94	11	2.20	2.20%	3.14%	17.00%
Oakland	4	2	6	0.67	0.54	160	150	10	1.67	2.22%	1.91%	13.60%
NY Giants	4	2	6	0.67	0.53	154	147	7	1.17	2.55%	3.26%	18.90%
Philadelphia	2	4	6	0.33	0.50	145	145	0	0.00	5.07%	3.83%	1.80%
Dallas	2	3	5	0.40	0.47	115	121	-6	-1.20	3.94%	3.17%	8.00%
Atlanta	3	3	6	0.50	0.45	135	147	-12	-2.00	2.75%	4.23%	12.00%
Minnesota	1	5	6	0.17	0.40	121	145	-24	-4.00	1.15%	2.58%	-1.50%
Arizona	1	4	5	0.20	0.37	96	121	-25	-5.00	3.93%	2.33%	-29.00%
Carolina	1	5	6	0.17	0.38	133	163	-30	-5.00	3.93%	1.85%	-18.70%
Cleveland	2	3	5	0.40	0.36	91	117	-26	-5.20	1.38%	2.16%	-10.40%
Tampa Bay	4	2	6	0.67	0.36	113	145	-32	-5.33	2.68%	2.42%	0.20%
Seattle	2	3	5	0.40	0.35	94	122	-28	-5.60	2.84%	2.92%	-15.20%
Denver	1	4	5	0.20	0.34	105	140	-35	-7.00	4.24%	1.80%	-8.90%
Indianapolis	0	6	6	0.00	0.26	104	163	-59	-9.83	1.00%	1.55%	-26.90%
Jacksonville	1	5	6	0.17	0.20	72	132	-60	-10.00	3.61%	3.13%	-27.60%
Miami	0	5	5	0.00	0.22	75	128	-53	-10.60	4.07%	1.16%	-26.80%
Kansas City	2	3	5	0.40	0.17	77	150	-73	-14.60	3.55%	3.11%	-22.80%
St. Louis	0	5	5	0.00	0.08	49	137	-88	-17.60	1.00%	2.38%	-36.90%

Music Tuesdays - While You Wait for the Others by Grizzly Bear

2011-10-19T15:54:00.000-07:00

FIWK the NFL: Week 6

2011-10-14T10:07:00.000-07:00

These are just a few of the great activities the San Diego Chargers can enjoy during their bye week.

Last week, point differential went 6-6-1 after an impressive 12-4 the prior week. So maybe we take it into consideration, but not just follow it blindly. Also, now that some teams have had their bye and only played four games, we have to focus on point differential per game. I'll provide the list below. I used Football Ousiders DVOA, point differential per game, the spread and some of my own observations in my picks this week.

Carolina (+4) over ATLANTA: The Falcons are 2-3 and 1-4 ATS. The Panthers may be 1-4, but they are 4-1 ATS. Carolina has a better point differential (I'm going to use PD/G for point differential per game). While I may be picking the Falcons to win at home SU, a Panthers back-door cover or even a straight up win wouldn't surprise me. Steve Smith has been my best value pick in many of my leagues.

CINCINNATI (-7) over Indianapolis: The Colts are 0-5, but the keep looking like they are so close to winning. Then you check the stats and realize they actually have been pretty bad. The Bengals are 3-2, but when you look at their opponents, it's still really hard to get any idea about them. If anything, their 13-8 loss to the 49ers makes San Francisco look all that much better. All the stats agree with me, the Bengals are better than the Colts. Um, Jermaine Gresham has a better fantasy game than Dallas Clark?

San Francisco (+4.5) over DETROIT: Surprising game of the week featuring two teams with a combined 9-1 record. These guys are 2nd and 3rd in PD/G, but while the 49ers are 2nd in DVOA and actually have the highest odds of making the playoffs, the Lions are 13th in DVOA. If nothing else, I think this game can be close and I'll take the points.

GREEN BAY (-15) over St. Louis: I really hate trying to pick games like this. I mean the Packers are one of the best teams in the NFL and the Rams are one of the worst. But 15 points is HUGE. Packers 35 - Rams 21 means the Rams weren't even close, but still won ATS. I'll pick the Packers here, but not confidently enough to put $ on it below.

Buffalo (+3.5) over NYG: You know, I think the Bills win this outright.

PITTSBURGH (-12) over Jaguars: The Steelers looked a lot more like the Steelers last week than the Steelers. A 21 point win over the Titans was impressive, not very impressive, just impressive. The Jaguars are looking worse and worse by the week.

WASHINGTON (+1.5) over Philadelphia: Everything I see and think tells me the Redskins are the better team and win this game outright. But if the Eagles go to 1-5, are they "officially" eliminated from playoff contention? Well, right now I don't think they are going to the playoffs anyways. Redskins it is.

OAKLAND (-6.5) over Cleveland: I really should have picked Oakland last week. Not because I thought they would beat the Texans in Houston, but because they were getting 6 points. Oakland is looking not sucky and continues to have me as a Chargers fan looking over my shoulder. I would LOVE for them to lose this game. I would LOVE to gain an extra game over them. I'm not worried about the Chargers missing the playoffs, but it's definitely up in the air and there is a lot of excitement/anxiety (exciety?) along the way.

BALTIMORE (-7.5) over Houston: Baltimore is looking really good right now. REALLY good. Houston is chugging along, setting a good pace and is going to try and win the division in the last few weeks. The Titans are tied with the Texans and they play each other next week and the last week of the season. I honestly don't know which team emerges. But it wouldn't surprise me if they were both 9-7 or 10-6. The Ravens are thinking 13-3 or 14-2 and the #1 seed. They show how good they are and rough up the Andre Johnson-less Texans this week.

NEW ENGLAND (-7) over Dallas: While the Ravens are working really hard for the #1 seed, the Patriots feel like they are boringly going about their business winning games and getting the #1 seed. It's like an NBA player stepping into a pickup game at a local gym. He's so good he looks bored even as he keeps winning. The Cowboys are a high draft pick who just missed two big free throws in March Madness and is suffering a crisis of confidence despite incredible talent. Does he suck it up and take it to the NBA player or decide to defend someone else and both guys get a ton of points, but the current NBA player walks away with the victory?

New Orleans (-4.5) over TAMPA BAY: I really thought this game would be closer, but the Saints are looking great and the Bucs can't get their sh- act together. New Orleans really is that much better than Tampa Bay. Drew Brees is doing his regular leading-the-league-in-pass-attempts-AND-completion-percentage thing.

Minnesota (+3) over CHICAGO: This one is hard for me. I mean, is this a gut thing? Minnesota has a better PD/G and a better DVOA. So is it a stats thing? Chicago is 2-3 and Minnesota is 1-4, so there doesn't seem to be that much difference between them. And while Jay Cutler has looked below average, Donovan McNabb has looked bad. Is it an Adrian Peterson vs. Matt Forte game? I can't really explain why I like this game, but I really like the points.

NYJ (-7) over Miami: I really, really wanted to pick against the Jets. Their offense is bad and their defense isn't nearly as good as people think it is. They are 2-3 and that actually feels about right. But the Dolphins look really bad. Especially losing their already not that great starting quarterback for the year. I don't think the Dolphins do anything particularly well in this game and it gets horrible ratings for ESPN on Monday Night. The only saving grace might be a large New York audience, but even they might tune out if it's 30-10 at 10pm Eastern as the the fourth quarter starts.

NFL	W	L	G	DIFF	Dif/G
Baltimore	3	1	4	62	15.5
Detroit	5	0	5	70	14
San Francisco	4	1	5	64	12.8
Green Bay	5	0	5	62	12.4
New England	4	1	5	46	9.2
Buffalo	4	1	5	44	8.8
New Orleans	4	1	5	32	6.4
Houston	3	2	5	32	6.4
Washington	3	1	4	20	5
Cincinnati	3	2	5	16	3.2
Pittsburgh	3	2	5	13	2.6
San Diego	4	1	5	11	2.2
Tennessee	3	2	5	11	2.2
Minnesota	1	4	5	5	1
NY Giants	3	2	5	4	0.8
Oakland	3	2	5	3	0.6
Dallas	2	2	4	-2	-0.5
NY Jets	2	3	5	-4	-0.8
Philadelphia	1	4	5	-7	-1.4
Chicago	2	3	5	-15	-3
Carolina	1	4	5	-16	-3.2
Cleveland	2	2	4	-19	-4.75
Arizona	1	4	5	-25	-5
Atlanta	2	3	5	-26	-5.2
Seattle	2	3	5	-28	-5.6
Denver	1	4	5	-35	-7
Tampa Bay	3	2	5	-38	-7.6
Miami	0	4	4	-35	-8.75
Indianapolis	0	5	5	-49	-9.8
Jacksonville	1	4	5	-56	-11.2
Kansas City	2	3	5	-73	-14.6
St. Louis	0	4	4	-67	-16.75

Music Tuesdays - Go To Sleep by Radiohead

2011-10-11T09:51:00.000-07:00

Radiohead was in the news recently because of their rumored gig at Occupy Wall Street. That got me listening to them, and I got this song in my head of all things.

FIWK the NFL: Week 5

2011-10-07T14:08:00.000-07:00

I have a friend and fellow Chargers fan coming in to town this weekend and we are going to watch the game at BJ's together. I am actually more excited to watch this game than the Chargers first four matchups because it is always more fun to watch a game with a friend. Last week, my point differential stat du jour went 12-4 so you bet your sweet ass I'm going with that again. PLUS I don't have to think nearly as much. So take the picks, grab a friend and some good beer, and here...we...go!

BUFFALO (+2.5) over Philadelphia: Buffalo +37, Philadelphia 0. You know what, I don't want to have to type the point differential for every team, when I can just link to them. And I'll also post them in point differential order at the bottom. Something is wrong with the Eagles. They just don't look as good as they should be. And the Bills actually look much better than they should be. There's a decent chance I'm going to be picking against the Eagles ATS for a few more weeks.

INDIANAPOLIS (-2.5) over Kansas City: I still think the 1-3 Chiefs are horrible. And I don't know if it's just playing in prime time two weeks in a row, but the Peyton Manning-less Colts don't look all that sucky. I mean, they are deservedly 0-4, but they are giving some not sucky teams (Pittsburgh and Tampa Bay) a little trouble.

Arizona (+2.5) over MINNESOTA: This is actually the only game that disagrees with Football Outsiders (because I still think about the games, I don't just pick a random stat and follow it blindly). In every other game my point differential stat lines up with their DVOA efficiency stat. Now, that is really better designed to compare games straight up, but it worked ATS last week, so we're going to keep riding the wave...but back to the Vikings and Cardinals. I don't like either of these teams. The Vikings look better than 0-4, but lost to the Chiefs (the Chiefs!). The Cardinals won by 7, then lost the next three games by a total of 8 points. I want to think they are bad, but they're trying to show me they just aren't that bad. Arizona plus points is fine.

NYG (-10) over Seattle: And the Seahawks!

Tennessee (+3) over PITTSBURGH: Remember what I said about the Eagles? It pretty much all applies here as well. The O-line is bad/old and Big Ben isn't saving them. The defense is good, but not dominant enough. They are taking care of business against bad teams, but losing to good teams. And Tennessee has definitely moved a group or two up. In fact, if I have time, I might take a look at those groups again.

New Orleans (-6.5) over CAROLINA: Cam Newton is legit and 1-3 and yes, those can be mutually exclusive. New Orleans is making a strong case as the second best team in the NFC, which makes Green Bay's opening night victory look all that much more impressive.

Cincinnati (+2.5) over JACKSONVILLE: I know, right? I can't believe I'm picking them either.

HOUSTON (-6) over Oakland: The Texans are looking like they really want a three seed and probably think they can get a first round bye. It also feels really good to be able to cheer against the Raiders and have it mean something.

SAN FRANCISCO (-3) over Tampa Bay: Ok, this is getting weird. The 49ers are favored against a team with a winning record? And I even like the Buccaneers. And I'm going with the Alex Smith led 49ers? Well, let's clarify one thing. Alex Smith may be the starting quarterback, but he is not leading the 49ers anywhere. Their only loss was in overtime. I'm going to start allowing some cautious optimism. Not that they are going to be among the best tin the NFL. And I still think they are more likely to finish 8-8 than 10-6, but they are no longer in the chase for Andrew Luck.

San Diego (-4) over DENVER: The Chargers need one of those old fashion butt-whoopings on a vastly inferior team. I think Philip Rivers plays out of his mind, throwing for 400 yards and/or 3 TDs and the defense gets a couple turnovers. It will look like the Chargers are dominating, but you'll look up at the end of the game and see Chargers 35 - Broncos 28 and think, hmm...that final score was a little closer than the game felt. Why couldn't the Chargers blow them away on the scoreboard?

NEW ENGLAND (-9) over Nyj: When I re-do my groups, I will have to mix conferences. One group will be the Falcons, Steelers and Jets and I think there's a decent chance all three miss the playoffs. Mark Sanchez looks like the horrible quarterback I always wanted him to be. Antonio Cromartie and LaDainian Tomlinson are making AJ Smith look smarter and smarter. And overall, these guys are playing less like a team and more like a random assortment of talented players. New England's defense is bad, but the Dirty Sanchez won't be able to do anything with it.

Green Bay (-6) over ATLANTA: Losing to the Bears and Bucs doesn't look THAT bad, but beating the Seahawks and Eagles is looking less impressive by the week. Green Bay is looking like the best team in the NFL and the best chance for back to back Super Bowl winners in...well, seven years. The Patriots did it only seven years ago and that just doesn't seem like that long ago, but it should be rarer.

DETROIT (-5.5) over Chicago: I like this a little more because the Lions are playing at home on MNF. Who would have thought before the season that the Colts two prime time games would be a bad decision while the Lions on MNF looked like a great game in advance. Who would have thought the Lions would be favored over a non-Seahawks playoff team? I can tell you this; the Lions and the Bills are going to get their own group.

TEAM	DIFF
Baltimore	62
Detroit	59
Green Bay	51
Buffalo	37
New England	37
Houston	37
Tennessee	32
New Orleans	29
Washington	20
San Francisco	19
NY Giants	15
Tampa Bay	7
San Diego	6
Cincinnati	6
NY Jets	5
Philadelphia	0
Arizona	-1
Oakland	-2
Dallas	-2
Chicago	-4
Pittsburgh	-8
Carolina	-13
Atlanta	-15
Cleveland	-19
Minnesota	-19
Denver	-30
Miami	-35
Seattle	-39
Indianapolis	-45
Jacksonville	-46
St. Louis	-67
Kansas City	-77

Music Tuesdays - Trouble Man by Electric Guest

2011-10-04T09:03:00.000-07:00

FIWK the NFL: Week 4

2011-09-30T15:51:00.000-07:00

The NFL right now is a volatile muddled middle. Remember that week in August where the stock market had four consecutive days of triple-digit movement and at the end of the week we were right back where we started? That's the NFL so far. Overall the teams are really close in quality, but that doesn't mean you can just take the underdog and the points because the games are much more volatile. You're going to have underdogs winning outright and one point favorites winning by double digits. You're going to have Team A beat Team B by two touchdowns, Team B defeat Team C handily and then Team C takes care of business against Team A. Go ahead and look at Tennessee, NYJ, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Jacksonville and Oakland and figure out what's going on there. I'm pretty sure there is a Super Bowl contender and 6-10 team in that group. Go ahead and add Washington, Dallas, NYG, Philadelphia (wait, that's all the same division), New Orleans, Tampa Bay, Atlanta. I would only feel confident picking 3-0 Green Bay and against 0-3 Kansas City and 0-3 Seattle...wait, no Seattle beat Arizona last week, who beat Carolina, who beat Jacksonville, who beat Tennessee, who beat Baltimore, who beat Pittsburgh, who beat Seattle. See that vicious little circle we're dealing with? For no particular rhyme or reason, I'm going to use point differential unless I have some reason not to.

Carolina (+6.5) over CHICAGO: Carolina -8, Chicago -9. Matt Forte good.

Buffalo (-3) over CINCINNATI: Buffalo +40, Cincinnati +3. Ryan Fitzpatrick good.

Tennessee (+1.5) over CLEVELAND: Tennessee +14, Cleveland -1. Chris Johnson has his best game of the year so far.

Detroit (+1.5) over DALLAS: Detroit +55, Dallas +2. Lots and lots of fantasy goodness.

Minnesota (-1.5) over KANSAS CITY: Minnesota -14, Kansas City -82. Adrian Peterson, duh.

Washington (-1.5) over ST. LOUIS: Washington +13, St. Louis -60. Tim Hightower good.

San Francisco (+8.5) over PHILADELPHIA: San Francisco +18, Philadelphia +1. Ok, let's slow down and take a look at this. I have picked every road team so far and I don't like that. I think the Eagles are better than the 49ers. But the Eagles haven't looked all that great...you know what, I don't care enough, it's a lot of points and I'm going to try and stay consistent with my system of the week. LeSean McCoy good.

New Orleans (-7) over JACKSONVILLE: New Orleans +16, Jacksonville -33. Drew Brees good.

HOUSTON (-4) over Pittsburgh: Hey, a home team!! Houston +30, Pittsburgh -1. Andre Johnson scores a touchdown.

Nyg (+1.5) over ARIZONA: Nyg +11, Arizona +3. Ahmad Bradshaw, Brandon Jacobs, Hakeem Nicks, Larry Fitzgerald...lots of fantasy above-averageness.

Atlanta (-4.5) over SEATTLE: Atlanta -17, Seattle -37. Michael Turner good.

GREEN BAY (-12.5) over Denver: Green Bay +25, Denver -4. Denver lost by three, won by two, lost by three and I think they'll lose by 13? Yes, yes I do. James Starks good.

New England (-4.5) over OAKLAND: New England +25, Oakland +10. This has the potential to be a very entertaining game. I hope the Patriots demoralize the Raiders and break their spirit for the rest of the season. Tom Brady and Darren McFadden are good.

SAN DIEGO (-7) over Miami: I didn't even have to break out my homerness for this pick. San Diego -4, Miami -25.

BALTIMORE (-3.5) over Nyj: Baltimore +45, Nyj +22. Ray Rice good.

TAMPA BAY (-10) over Indianapolis: Tampa Bay 0, Indianapolis -38. LaGarette Blount good.

I'm actually surprised I didn't have to violate my system of the week. The closest for me were SF-PHI, HOU-PIT and TB-IND. My gut says Philly wins and covers, Pittsburgh wins outright (thank you for the points) and Tampa Bay can't cover 10...but I like this system, so I will stick with it.

BPL or EPL? Filling out your lineup

2011-09-30T08:20:00.000-07:00

After the Rooney scratch last week, I've become hyper sensitive to unexpected injuries taking a toll on our players. Fantasy NFL owners of Jamaal Charles and Peyton Manning know all too well how injuries can drastically change your fantasy team. In the vein of using your bench of effectively, make sure that you are actively checking the Guardian Squad Sheets the night before game day. As of right now they and other fantasy sources are saying that both Rooney and Chicharito are going to play for Man United tomorrow.

That being said, I'm skittish enough about their injuries to yank my captaincy from Rooney. I'll be giving it to either Silva or Aguero since Man City faces hapless Blackburn this week. This is going to explode in my face when Rooney has 4 more goals against Norwich this weekend. I'm not quite ready to go 3-5-2 out of striker-injury fear though.

I don't have the capacity to do a full-blown defenders and goalkeepers analysis today, but do keep in mind that real value happens at Mid and Forward. I strongly recommend reading the Premier League Fantasy blog run by Chris Glover to get some good value-minded picks each week. He is in a different system than the ESPN Premier League fantasy, so the values and scoring are different, but the basic value plays are the same. Of particular interest are his in-depth numbers analysis posts, where he looks at stats like most shots taken, 'key passes' made, etc. I absolutely love these stats for trying to predict where value might lie in the future.

Now, in a nod to Men in Blazers, I'd like to solicit your Most and Least Disappointing players in Premier League fantasy through the first 6 weeks. Who is on your list?

Bonus question for my benefit: I'm dropping the mediocre Gary Cahill ($6 salary) for someone cheaper - do you like Jose Enrique of Liverpool for $5.4 (classic D on a good team option) or Ashley Williams of Swansea City also for $5.4 (not as good a team, but for a D he gets forward and could score)?

Music Tuesdays - F-Stop Blues by Jack Johnson

2011-09-27T09:05:00.000-07:00

Classic Jack Johnson song for the end of summer.

BPL or EPL? Use your bench players intelligently

2011-09-23T14:40:00.001-07:00

Before the Premier League season started, Aaron had a theory that he'd roster attacking players from the teams that scored the most goals last season - Chelsea, Arsenal, and United. (Click the 10/11 pull-down for last year.) Similarly, defenders from the teams that allowed the fewest goals were ranked highly. Using this same logic, take a look at the high-scoring teams for this season - United has 21 goals, City has 17, and the next closest team is Chelsea with 8. The lesson, as always, is roster all the Manchester players.

For fantasy purposes, consider your budget to be $81 and lock in Rooney (9 goals) and Aguero (8) for $19.1. They are the two highest scorers on the two highest-scoring teams; if you don't roster them you give yourself lower odds of keeping pace. How you treat the rest of your lineup, however, depends upon whether you're rolling out a 3-4-3 or a 3-5-2 formation. The reason it's different is because of the way the ESPN fantasy game treats subs.

What ESPN considers the 'standard' formation is a 4-4-2, and no matter what formation you choose, you will have total roster spots for 5 defenders, 5 midfielders, and 3 forwards. This means that in the 3-4-3 or the 3-5-2, one of your attacking positions will have no subs at all. Rafael van der Vaart injured for a game? Tough luck. Edin Dzeko unexpectedly got sat by his manager? Too bad. Rather than ESPN automatically swapping in a sub for the empty spot, you just get a fat 0 in the score line.

This is the reason I can't stomach owning Dzeko in a 3-4-3. The plan is to spend huge on attacking players - you can't spend $8.2 on Dzeko then get a 0 from him in a week. It murders your potential high score. Other than Dzeko, other top options for the 3rd striker spot are Luis Suarez at $7.8 and Adebayor at $5.9. Based on current production, Adebayor seems like a great value. If you're a gambler then maybe you like Torres at $7.5 or Van Persie at $8.6; all I can say to you is good luck with those guys. After last weekend Torres could implode or go gangbusters and Van Persie could get hurt at any moment. I am personally rolling out Suarez still, because he's talented, but based on his price and current scoring rate Adebayor seems like he's the most secure bet of that group. Paying $6 for a reliable 3rd striker (whether to start or sub) gives you plenty of money to spend on your midfield, as well.

Sticking with the highest-scoring teams theme for midfielders, it's convenient that both United and City have two star midfielders each. I wouldn't blame anyone for rostering all four of Nani, Ashley Young, Silva, and Nasri. These guys run the most explosive offenses in the Premier League, create assists for the league's best strikers, and get goals on their own as well. If you have a 3-5-2, your 5th mid could be: Juan Mata or Frank Lampard of Chelsea, the 3rd highest-scoring club so far, at $8.5 each; Charlie Adam of Liverpool at $6 (when he's back from the suspension); Clint Dempsey of Fulham at $6.6, currently the 7th highest-scoring midfielder in the game; or Luka Modric of Tottenham at $6.8. I personally would stay far, far away from Rafael van der Vaart and Dirk Kuyt, because they're expensive and have missed games/minutes this season out of the blue. You simply can't afford missed games with no subs. Among these, I am rostering the affordable Charlie Adam in my 3-4-3 as a sub since his corner kick duties give him good chances for a quality team, but I also think Juan Mata is very dynamic for a potentially high-scoring team. He would be a reliable - but expensive - 5th midfielder in a 3-5-2.

Finding defenders basically involves combing the teams conceding the least goals for budget defenders. I will probably elaborate on this next week, when we have another week of games to give us scoring data. The top defending teams aren't as straightforward as the top scoring teams; likewise, because we want their attacking players, we probably won't have any Manchester defenders. (Unless, like me, you are so enraged by the pricing inefficiencies of guys like Phil Jones that you picked him in protest.)

Who do you feel most comfortable with at 3rd forward in your 3-4-3, or at 5th midfielder at your 3-5-2? Anyone you're avoiding like the plague?

FIWK the NFL: Week 3

2011-09-23T10:46:00.000-07:00

Yeah, I did pretty bad last week. I guess I took my own theme of not overreacting just a little too far and ended up underreacting. (Why is overreact a word, but underreact gets the red spell check squiggly?) I may have ended up underreacting all the way back to 2009. So let's try and find a happy middle ground. Let's start considering strength of opponents. The Bills and the Lions are both 2-0, with huge point differentials. But I'm pretty sure that's more an indictment of how bad the Chiefs are (L 41-7 to the Buffalo and L 48-3 to Detroit) than an early proclamation those two teams are going to the playoffs. In fact, I kind of like Royce's early "Always pick against KC and SEA" rule. So, with just the right amount of reaction...

New England (-8.5) over BUFFALO: I don't think New England is going to go undefeated. I think they are going to come up against a team, probably in their own division that runs the ball amazingly well (something like averaging 10 yds/carry, with several home runs) and Brady gets one ball tipped at the line and a defender returns it for a touchdown New England is going to lose a fluky game like that...but not this week. Fitzpatrick could throw for 300 yards and 3 TDs and still lose by 21.

San Francisco (+2.5) over CINCINNATI: SF won a little convincingly in week 1. Well as much as playing the Seahawks and getting two return touchdowns from Ted Ginn (when did he drop the Jr.? Does he still use it?) can be considered 'convincingly'. Andy Dalton would be getting a ton of praise for his efficiency as a rookie QB if not for Cam Newton's craziness. With St. Louis at 0-2 and the NFC West looking worse than last year, I think the 49ers will make the playoffs, while the Bengals finish 4th...with identical 6-10 or 7-9 records. I guess all this is saying that I think these two teams are kind of close and I'm taking the points.

Miami (+2.5) over CLEVELAND: Just like in my season preview, I think these teams are close, and I am taking the points. Brandon Marshall does not lead this game in catches.

TENNESSEE (-6.5) over Denver: Denver looks bad. Not KC/SEA bad, but bad. but they are still right in the middle of that bottom heavy AFC losers group. Remember the seven teams? Denver, Oakland, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Cincinnati and Tennessee & Buffalo. I separated those last two because I'm going to bump them up into another group. Maybe even up three groups above the NFC West. In fact, if I was allowed to go back and make changes, I would replace the Jaguars with the Bills and then create a three team AFC South group. Houston, Jacksonville and Tennessee belong together. One of Miami, Cleveland and Buffalo will make the playoffs. Ok, got a little off track there...Tennessee is better than Denver. Chris Johnson gets his first 100 yard game of the season.

Detroit (-3.5) over MINNESOTA: I find it much easier to say that I like Matthew Stafford more than Donovan McNabb than actually expressing my support of the Lions. I'll take them this week, but still take a 'wait and see' approach. Ndomokung Suh has more penalties than Donovan McNabb has passing touchdown.

NEW ORLEANS (-4) over Houston: Not too many teams have a better offense than the Texans. The Saints are one of them. Many, many teams have a better defense than the Texans. The Saints are also one of them...although, the Texans defense is not as bad as it has been in the past. The Chargers do an amazing job of having great coordinators that make poor head coaches (Cam Newton, Wade Phillips, Norv Turner...let's hope Ron Rivera can break this trend) and now that Wade Phillips is back in the defensive coordinator role, he is doing very well.

PHILADELPHIA (Off(0)) over NYG: I'm taking the Eagles even if Kafka plays in place of Philadelphia. The Giants are suffering a lot of injuries and nothing has looked very good about them. The running game is just ok, but still better than their passing game.

Jacksonville (+3.5) over CAROLINA: I like the points a lot more than I like trying to pick one of these teams to win. Does Cam Newton get his first win (remember, despite all the passing yards he is 0-2) or does Jacksonville step up to 2-1 to keep pace in the division?

NYJ (-3.5) over Oakland: The Raiders beat a bad Broncos team then lost to an unknown Bills team. The Jets came back to beat Dallas, then creamed the Jags. I think this game is much closer to last week and they win by at least 17. It won't even be close.

Baltimore (-4) over ST. LOUIS: So one of the stud AFC teams, which beat the Steelers by 28 is playing an NFC West team? I think this is another big mismatch. Ray Rice scores two touchdowns, the Rams only get one.

SAN DIEGO (-14.5) over Kansas City: Always picking against the Chiefs. Now, just for fun, how many points would you need to pick the Chiefs? 17? 21?

Green Bay (-3.5) over CHICAGO: Should be a great game. The Bears might be a little better than I thought. The Packers have given up the most passing yards in the NFL. I feel like people are overlooking this because 1) they are 2-0 2) Their offense is so good their opponents are playing catch up 3) Drew Brees is just that good and maybe Cam Newton is also? I think the Packers win and I would much rather have Green Bay -3, but I wouldn't be surprised if Jay Cutler throws for a lot of yards and keeps the Bears in it.

Arizona (-3.5) over SEATTLE: Always pick against the Seahawks.

Atlanta (+1.5) over TAMPA BAY: The Falcons are the noticeably better team, right? I meanthe Bucs are a nice 'up and coming' story, but the Falcons are still better? What am I missing here? I'd take the Falcons and give points, but I'll be happy to take the points.

Pittsburgh (-10.5) over INDIANAPOLIS: I think the Colts are dangerously close to 'always pick against them' territory. The Steelers have one game where they lost 7 (SEVEN!!) turnovers and then shutout the Seahawks. At the very least, we don't know where they are yet. But more likely, they are as good as we thought before the season and Peyton Manning continues to roam the sidelines in a polo shirt tucked into jeans with an ear piece under his ballcap.

DALLAS (Off(0)) over Washington: So apparently Tony Romo's punctured lung was the least severe punctured lung possible? He had a punctured lung, took an imprecise x-ray, then went back into an NFL game. Punctured lung!! NFL!! But it really does sound to be mild. They aren't doing any kind of procedure, going to let it heal on its own and may have already done so. Even with Jon Kitna instead of Tony Romo, I would still pick the Cowboys. But with Felix Jones, Miles Austin and Dez Bryant injured (only Miles is definitely out), the Cowboys look a lot less explosive. The best compliment I can think of for the Redskins is that Rex Grossman and Tim Hightower don't suck.

MANCHESTER CITY over Everton: I really got into a groove there, but ran out of games to talk about, so we took a little hop across the pond to take a look at the other football. Tim Howard, keeper for the US National team, is the keeper for Everton and this game is going to be on ESPN 2 for his family and native country to see. To bad he's going to be completely embarrassed by Manchester City. Another interesting note, apparently Everton just signed another white, bald American keeper. How many white, bald American keepers have there been now? 8? 37?

Beer Wednesday: Cherry Chocolate Stout by Stone, Jason Fields and Kevin Sheppard, and Troegs

2011-09-21T13:08:00.000-07:00

A new beer is available from the Stone collaborations series, and I was really excited to give it a try. You don't see an ambitious flavor mix like 'Cherry Chocolate Stout' every day, so I was pretty excited about this one. The short version: it tastes a lot like a beer version of a Cherry Coke. Make of that what you will.

The long version: this is a sweet stout (not unlike a milk stout in that regard) with Cherry Coke flavors and very little carbonation. It has a medium-light body, which surprises me because that goes against the grain of most stouts. There are very few coffee or roasted malt flavors in this stout; it is instead dominated by a syrupy sweet flavor which is balanced a bit by a slight bitterness of chocolate.

To me the flavors were agreeable, and I liked the beer. However, it lacks the depth and complexity of flavors which characterize the best stouts - a rich, dark chocolate, bitter coffee, or roasted malt for example. A fuller body would help add depth of flavor as well. Alternatively, a more carbonated beer might have popped more on the tongue.

Regardless I found it up my alley and would recommend it to fans of sweet beers, or those who want to try an unusual flavor combination in a stout. It cost me $2.49 for a 12oz bottle and has 7.3% ABV.

I imagine there would be a wide range of reactions to this beer. A quick look at its Beer Advocate reviews confirms this: they range from A to D-. So, there's that. The ratebeer scores are extremely positive (98 out of 100). Other interesting reviews of this beer can be found at San Diego Magazine (calls it one-dimensional), the great Dos Beerigos (they found it more bitter than sweet like I did), and The Full Pint (calls it 'dessert-like').

If you've tried this, what did you think? Have you had any Stone collaboration beers recently?

Music Tuesdays - Paganini Rocks by Robortom ft. Au Revoir Simone

2011-09-20T12:44:00.000-07:00

FIWK the NFL: 2011 Week 2

2011-09-16T16:08:00.001-07:00

Ok, this week is going to be fast. And my overarching theme is to not overreact to Week 1.

Oakland (+3) over BUFFALO: It's the Bills. You're going to take the Bills and give points? The Raiders showed some toughness last year and last week. If the Bills win by 30 point this week, then maybe I'll take them as the favorite next week. Darren McFadden is the only non-QB to get 10 fantasy points.

Kansas City (+8) over DETROIT: The Chiefs won the AFC West last year. The Lions went 0-16 a few years ago. Let's not start sucking each other's popsicles yet. Calvin Johnson gets two TDs...again.

Baltimore (-6) over TENNESSEE: Man, Baltimore looked really good last week. But if I've learned one thing from Football Outsiders (and then again from Bill Barnwell) it's that fumble recoveries are very random. Interceptions are not. So, the Ravens looked better than they are and the Steelers looked worse because the Ravens recovered every fumble. Still, they looked damn good. I'd even considering switching them with the Steelers in my season preview, BUT we're not overreacting to Week 1 so I am just going to take them to beat the Titans. Ray Rice has the best day among all fantasy running backs.

INDIANAPOLIS (+2.5) over Cleveland: Let's see something from the Browns and the Bengals before we determine what really happened last week. And same for Kerry Collins. Kerry Collins throws more touchdowns than Colt McCoy.

Tampa Bay (+3) over MINNESOTA: Tampa Bay did not look that bad and Minnesota looked way too dependent on Adrian Peterson. Good for fantasy, not good for the Vikings winning games. Neither quarterback gets over 200 yards passing.

Chicago (+7) over NEW ORLEANS: At the very least, this game should be much closer than 7 points. The Bears may not be as good as they showed hosting the Falcons and the Saints defense may not be as bad as they showed visiting the defending Super Bowl champs on Opening Night. I'll take the 7 points and re-evaluate next week. Darren Sproles scores a touchdown.

Jacksonville (+9.5) over NYJ: I'm just going to type NYJ and NYG for those two teams from now on. Well maybe not permanently, but at least for the time being. You know who did not have a good fantasy day against the Jacksonville defense? Chris Johnson and the Titan's running game. Who know who is a little extra dependent on the run and actually got a little lucky last week? The NYJ. While the Jets are the better team, the spread is way too big. Maurice Jones-Drew has more fantasy points against the Jets defense than Shonn Greene and LaDainian Tomlinson combined.

PITTSBURGH (-14.5) over Seattle: The Steelers lost 34-7 last week. They are favored by 14.5. Actually that feels about right because the Seahawks are just that bad.

WASHINGTON (-3.5) over Arizona: Arizona's defense made Cam Newton look really good and I think they do the same favor for Rex Grossman.

Green Bay (-10) over CAROLINA: I say Cam Newton throws for 200 yards less than he did last week. Green Bay has four different guys score touchdowns.

Dallas (-3) over SAN FRANCISCO: The Cowboys actually looked pretty good against a good Jets team. Despite Tony Romo's idiocy, I am going to put Dallas in the lead of the group vying for the NFC wild card. Felix Jones, Miles Austin and Dez Bryant all score more fantasy points than Alex Smith.

Cincinnati (+4) over DENVER: Nothing I saw from the Broncos gives me any confidence to pick them. And nothing I saw from the Bengals last week makes me think they will be horrible. But we're not overreacting. I think both of these teams are bad and I'm taking the points.

Houston (-3) over MIAMI: I don't think either of these teams are that bad. But I think Houston looked a little more ready to take care of business than the Dolphins who had more of a "Let's give it our best shot and see what happens" feel to them.

San Diego (+7) over NEW ENGLAND: I'm not a homer. Both have great offenses and Philip Rivers is going to throw for a ton against the Pats. And the Chargers defense is probably better than the Pat's defense. I'm not a homer. Well, I'm trying to be objective at least. Seven points is too big a spread. Yeah, I can't convince myself I'm objective either.

Philadelphia (-2.5) over ATLANTA: It just feels more fun to pick the Eagles here. No other reason in particular.

St. Louis (+6) over NYG: Both these teams are 0-1. And some supposed playoff contender is going to be 0-2. Of course the Rams are only in that discussion because of their division, which they could still win even starting 0-2. The only other game with two 0-1 pre-season playoff contenders is Tampa Bay @ Minnesota. I think the Giants are the better, but injured team. The Rams take this seriously and keep it close.

BPL or EPL? Just roster all the Manchester players

2011-09-16T11:42:00.001-07:00

I'm legitimately not even trying to bring anything original to the table anymore. The Manchester teams are incredible and score a ton of goals - just roster as many of their players as possible. Additionally, you have to keep Rooney in your lineup and captain him. Seriously, you have no other choice. It's a baseline requirement just to keep up with the Joneses in the ESPN fantasy game.

By far the most important advice I can give you: listen to the Men in Blazers podcast on the Grantland Network. Best thing I've ever put in my ears.

In lieu of providing any original or worthwhile analysis this week, I want to take a moment to rage at the ESPN Premier League Fantasy player prices. Who the hell is running this game?? Anybody? As just one example from the many, look at the price of Phil Jones for $6.0 (speaking of the Joneses, I guess). He appears to be a safe starter for the best team in the Premier League, has played the full 90 minutes in each of the past three games, has two clean sheets in those three, and in the most recent game got an assist and displayed some attacking dribble skills that rivaled most midfielders. He's a double-threat for a fantasy fullback - can rack up clean sheets for a top squad, and can come forward and attack and get bonus points that way. He currently has the 11th-most points at that position in ESPN fantasy. ESPN, WHY DOES HE COST ONLY $6.0?! That is cheaper than the cost of such immortal defenders as Fulham's Brede Hangeland and Everton's Phil Jagielka. Jones' teammate in the backfield, Chris Smalling, costs $6.5 even though he was benched in the most recent game but Jones was not. Also David Silva still costs only $7.0, which I think is just about the funniest thing I've ever seen in any salary game. Great work, ESPN.

Anyway, until Rooney and Aguero cost $20 and $15, respectively, you need to keep them in as your strikers. For your 3rd you might have some flexibility, although to me it really comes down to Luis "Anne Hathaway" 'Suarez' Suarez or Javier Cheech & Chong Hernandez. Sure there are other good strikers in the league, but the others seem MUCH more volatile in terms of appearances and performances than those two.

Any other EPL fantasy thoughts? What other salaries by ESPN that are particularly heinous?

Music Tuesdays - Perth by Bon Iver

2011-09-13T15:39:00.000-07:00

Another song from the recent Bon Iver album, which I've enjoyed quite a bit. If you didn't like any of the previous Bon Iver songs, don't bother listening to this one (Aaron).

FIWK the NFL

2011-09-09T15:20:00.000-07:00

The first game of the season was yesterday and I couldn't be more excited. I mean, it's one NFL team playing another NFL team. There's a pretty good chance I would have watched the game, no matter who was on the schedule. But the fact that it was the last two Super Bowl Champions made it all that much more enticing. I have a standard policy that any time there is a relevant untimed down, it was probably a great game. But that's not really the point of this post. I'll get to all the week 1 predictions later. Today I'm giving a quick hit on every team in the league. I will probably end up focusing on which teams have new quarterbacks and head coaches and which players I like from a fantasy perspective. Now, based on my random number generator, I will be starting with the AFC North.

And I'm already changing my format. I wanted to go division by division, but when I looked at the AFC North, I realized there were two teams in contention for the AFC Championship and two teams in contention for a top five draft pick. And don't you really care more about how the Ravens and Steelers match up against the Patriots and Chargers and Jets? So I am going to start at the top with my favorites to reach the Super Bowl and work my way down. That way, I'm not stringing you along, making you read everything to find out who I think the best team is. AND some other readers of this blog will have to read every word to find out how bad I think the 49ers are.

Pittsburgh Steelers, New England Patriots, San Diego Chargers
At least one of these three teams will get a first round bye and I'd be willing to bet even money that, barring an injury to their starting quarterbacks, two of them get the first round byes. The big question is which team gets left out and has to play the extra game? Honestly, I don't know and I think it's stupid to try and predict something that close. I'll randomly guess it will come down to the third tiebreaker and the second and third seed both finish with identical 9-3 conference records. (How's that for a bold prediction...I forgot about my bold predictions. I like them and will start incorporating them right now.) Tom Brady will be his usual great self, but Philip Rivers will surpass him in practically every statistical measure. Roethlisberger will be than people think because the Steelers throw more than people think. Brady and Rivers will both be top five fantasy QBs and Roethlisberger will be in the 6-9 range. No other Patriot will be top ten in their position, but pay attention to Aaron Hernandez and Rob Gronkowski. Bill Belichik finds matchups better than any coach in the NFL and he will exploit a mismatch over and over and completely ignore his other options. This means both of these guys will have at least two two-TD games each, but will also have at least three games each of 1 or fewer catches. These guys will look great on TV, will look volatile in the game by game stats and will look below average by their overall stats at the end of the season. The Steelers defense will finish outside the top ten in points or yards allowed. The Chargers will lead the league in points scored.

Philadelphia Eagles, New Orleans Saints, Green Bay Packers
These will be the next three teams, and I don't think it is coincidence that the first three are AFC teams and the next three are NFC teams. While the NFC may actually be a little deeper, the AFC is more top heavy and bottom heavy. The Eagles got two great corners and won the off-season and were declared a Dream Team, then people started realizing they still have several problems at offensive line and linebacker and that they could lose their first two games on the road and the hate went too far. They will make the playoffs and probably win 80% of Michael Vick's starts. The Packers looked great last night and possibly better than last year. If Ryan Grant and James Starks produce a more effective running game than last year, then they will certainly be better. BJ Raji is a top five nose tackle and Jermichael Finley was supposed to be a stud last year before he got injured. And I haven't even mentioned Super Bowl MVP Aaron Rodgers. My dad is playing in his first fantasy football league and his office has a very unusual scoring system that rewards pass attempts (and penalizes incompletions), rushes, receptions and return yards. So I made sure he drafted Drew Brees who will attempt the most passes in the NFL this season AND have the highest completion percentage. I also recommended he draft guys like Darren Sproles, who will contribute some on offense, but even more in the return game.

New York Jets, Atlanta Falcons, Baltimore Ravens
One of these teams will miss the playoffs. Maybe two. This goes against everything this offseason would indicate. All three teams have the same quarterback, same head coach and a good defense. So how is one of them going to miss the playoffs? Because that's just the way the NFL works. But really it's because their quarterbacks just aren't good enough. These three quarterbacks are fine to good, but not even close to great. These QBs can't carry their team, but can contribute to a good team effort in a win. There will come a few games where the defense and running game aren't coming through and the quarterback won't be able to come away with a win. Other than Michael Turner and Ray Rice, I'm really not a fan of anyone on these teams from a fantasy perspective. And I'm really not the biggest Turner fan. I guess it's more of an overuse thing.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers, New York Giants, Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bears, Minnesota Vikings, Detroit Lions
Your two NFC wild card teams will come from this group. These are all talented teams with legitimate stars and each of their fan base is thinking their team can make the playoffs and win a playoff game. Of all the quarterbacks new to their team this season, Donovan McNabb is in the best position with Adrian Peterson and the running game being the focus of the offense and a huge playmaker in Percy Harvin. I like all the Cowboys on offense partly because they put up numbers and I don't trust their defense. They will be in a lot of shootouts and put up a ton of numbers...but will they win enough games to make the playoffs? Honestly, I don't like picking any of these teams. I really don't feel like the Bears will go to the playoffs two years in a row and if not for the AFC and NFC Western division champs I'd pick them as the one playoff team from last most likely to miss the playoffs this year. But does that mean I'm hopping on the Lions bandwagon? No. And I like the Bucs, but I think they are more likely to reduce their 10 wins from last year than increase. The Giants have already lost several guys for the season to injury and I just have a visceral dislike of Eli Manning. See what I just did their? I eliminated every team from this group except the Vikings, which just feels wrong. Two of these teams will make the playoffs and I have absolutely no idea which two.

Miami Dolphins, Cleveland Browns, Jacksonville Jaguars
One of these teams will make the playoffs. One will finish with 6 or fewer wins. And I have no idea which one is which. Basically this group is the "hate has gone too far" group. These teams are more likely to be bad than good. But not as bad as people think. The Dolphins are in the same division as the Patriots and the Jets, but I would not be surprised at all to see the Jets miss the playoffs and the Dolphins make it. Or the Browns make it and the Ravens watching from home. Or the Jaguars ride Maurice Jones-Drew and a rookie QB for the most improbable division title...wait no, that was the 7-9 NFC West champ last year. Honestly, residing in the AFC South this year is the best thing the Jaguars have going for them. But they are in this group anyways.

Houston Texans
They get their own group thanks to Peyton Manning's neck vertebrae. The Colts are going to be really bad and the AFC South is now wide open. And by default it is the Texans' division to lose. They are the only team in the division with the same quarterback from last season. I'm not entirely convinced the Texans make the playoffs, and it wouldn't surprise me of they went 8-8 and made the playoffs. In fact, that's exactly what I think will happen. The Texans go 8-8 like they always seem to do, but this year it's good enough to win the division. I guess I'm saying it's either the Texans or the Jags from the last group that makes the playoffs. And Andre Johnson is the best receiver in football, Matt Schaub can throw it in huge numbers, Owen Daniels is productive tight end...oh, and Arian Foster was the best fantasy player last year. But I really don't trust Foster's hamstring and avoided him in every fantasy league and am paying a lot of attention to Ben Tate and Derrick Ward in their first game. Kind of like how I was paying a lot of attention to James Starks and Ryan Grant last night. Probably a time share, but there is some fantasy value somewhere in there.

NFC West
I feel like this group doesn't even deserve to have their names listed. But I guess they are going to be better than the AFC South, so the Arizona Cardinals, San Francisco 49ers, St. Louis Rams and Seattle Seahawks all have the same strategy to make the playoffs. Just try to be adequate and let the rest of the division suck. Football Outsiders says the 49ers actually have the best chance of making the playoffs. The Cardinals probably have the best quarterback in Kevin Kolb (but we really don't know), the Rams are the media darling with Sam Bradford emerging as the next great young QB and the Seahawks won the division last year. So I honestly have no idea who is going to emerge and I really don't care who gets the #4 seed in the NFC playoffs. Oh, and Larry Fitzgerald should be much better than he was last year, which really wasn't as bad as you think.

Carolina Panthers, Washington Redskins
These two teams will be bad. Probably the worst in the NFC. But one of them will have a winning record against the spread. They're frisky and can probably run the ball. Or Cam Newton is a little electrifying. Or Rex Grossman looks like the Chicago Bears NFC champion version. If DeAngelo Williams or Jonathan Stewart can get a nice, season-ending injury, then the other becomes significantly more valuable. And Tim Hightower could good if Mike Shanahan ever decides that he doesn't hate fantasy players.

Cincinnati Bengals, Denver Broncos, Oakland Raiders, Tennessee Titans, Kansas City Chiefs, Indianapolis Colts, Buffalo Bills
That's seven AFC Teams and they are all going to be horrible. Not one of these teams will win eight games. This is the very bottom heavy part of the AFC. If the Lions hadn't gone 0-16 a few years ago or the 1976 Tamp Bay Bucs hadn't gone 0-14 in their first season (and 0-8 the next season, going 0-26 before their first franchise win), then the Bengals would have a chance to be historically bad. And they won the division two years ago! They dropped from 10-6 to 4-12 and are going from Carson Palmer to rookie Andy Dalton. This is a 4-12 team that got noticeably worse. The Broncos, Raiders and Chiefs probably aren't in line for the first overall draft pick, but the combination of playing in the same division as the Chargers and all getting a little worse than last year tells me they will each finish with 4-7 wins. The Bills could be ok if they weren't going 0-6 in their division. The Colts would probably be better served designing Peyton Manning's rehab with missing the season in mind. Let him take this season off and give you five more in the future. The Titans are the only team that could have gotten up in to the Jaguars group, but Football Outsiders says they actually have the worst odds of making the playoffs in the AFC and combined with the Seahawks are the odds on favorites for the first overall draft pick. The NFL is weird. I could easily paint a picture that the Seahawks and Titans get the first overall draft pick OR they win their division and make the playoffs.

IT'S FOOTBALL TIME!!! YAY!! NFL!!! WOOO-HOOO!!

And for Week 1:
I already picked the Packers (-4) last night and had a pretty good take on James Starks. And it turns out he was more impressive than Ryan Grant. Now I'm glad I drafted him as a flier in a few leagues.
Atlanta (-3) over Chicago: The Bears take their first step to not making the playoffs.
Cleveland (-6.5) over Cincinnati: Cleveland has a quarterback who started a game for them last season.
Buffalo (+6) over Kansas City: Both teams are bad, so take the points. And Matt Cassel has bad ribs and isn't as good as people think.
Philadelphia (-5) over St. Louis: Being in St. Louis is how some people think the Eagles could lose this game to the up and coming Rams. I don't think it's even that close.
Tampa Bay (-2) over Detroit: Stafford puts up big numbers, Freeman wins the game.
Tennessee (+2) over Jacksonville: bad teams, points. If it was the Titans favored by two, I would take the Jags and the points.
Pittsburgh (+2.5) over Baltimore: Should be a great game, but I think the Steelers are better on both offense and defense.
Indianapolis (+8.5) over Houston: I don't trust Houston to cover 8.5, but I think they'll win.
Carolina (+7) over Arizona: I don't trust Arizona to cover 7, but I think they'll win.
San Diego (-8.5) over Minnesota: I'd take San Diego -17...but that could be the homer in me.
Seattle (+5.5) over San Francisco: I don't trust San Francisco to cover 5.5, but I think they'll win. (This is getting easy.)
New York Giants (-3) over Washington: I feel like the score will be a little close, but if you watch the game, you'll never feel like the Redskins could emerge victorious.
Dallas (+4.5) over New York Jets: Man, I hate having to type 'Giants' and 'Jets'. And I hate Mark Sanchez. I think a field goal decides this game.
New England (-7) over Miami: I picked New England in my eliminator pool.
Oakland (+3) over Denver: I feel much more comfortable taking the points than trying to pick the outright winner.

Packers vs. Saints

2011-09-08T16:36:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow I'm going to have a NFL season preview AND a week 1 predictions. But I want to get my Packers (-4) pick published tonight. The Super Bowl champ at home, week 1 with the fans all excited. Should be a good game, but I think the Packers take it.

For more detailed analysis, I think both teams have great quarterbacks, but the Packers have a better defense. I like to look at interceptions and I think Brees is more likely to throw more interceptions than Aaron Rodgers.
Bold prediction: Ryan Grant and James Starks both score touchdowns for the Packers.

Music Tuesdays - The Dive by Fool's Gold

2011-08-30T09:16:00.000-07:00

I love this song. It has a great summer sound; it makes me imagine I'm at a beach barbecue. Sipping a Corona.

Because it was somewhat hard to find an embeddable link to this song, I took to searching blogs for it and found a couple of interesting blogs that had recently featured it. One is called One Sweet Song and covered it in early August; the other is the amusingly titled BlahBlahBlah Science. I encourage checking out both of them for their song recommendations.

BPL or EPL? An American tries to identify fantasy opportunities

2011-08-24T08:29:00.000-07:00

Fantasy is fun because it has a blend of random chance (game to game stat volatility) and fan skills (identifying players on upward trends). Keep this in mind and don't overreact to weekly performances, especially early in the season when things are shaking out.

For a fantasy NFL example: In week 2 in the NFL last year, Jason Snelling was a top fantasy rusher and Kevin Walter was a top fantasy receiver. So don't overreact to Ivan Klasnic scoring some goals early on. On the other hand, Darren McFadden and Arian Foster were already putting together consistent running performances. So do keep an eye on Matthew Jarvis and Danny Welbeck. The key is to identify trends and not overreact to outliers. Recap blogs like this are useful.

In Premier Fantasy, it's easier to pick up your favorites (everyone can own every player) but it's costly to whiff on too many gambles (you only get 20 transfers). While Danny Welbeck did have a great game for Man U and looked really good, you have to weigh that performance against the possibility of Javier 'Chicharito' Hernandez eating into his playing time. When looking for opportunities, I am looking for players whose playing time is more of a sure thing.

Forwards
For the above reasons, Wayne Rooney is the only Man U striker I'd be really comfortable owning. He has played the entirety of their matches and seems like the focal point of their offense at all times. Other top teams have similar timeshare issues - Man City looks awesome, but even Kun Aguero has lost some time (to Carlos Tevez), and he didn't score last week while Edin freaking Dzeko got points. Meanwhile, Tevez still costs more than Aguero but barely plays and has done nothing. And yet a fourth Man City striker, Mario Balotelli, has yet to play a single minute this season but costs the same as Luis Suarez of Liverpool - and Suarez has scored a goal in each game he's played!

I'm sure you see my point. Pay attention to opportunity, cause the current pricing makes no sense. I wouldn't want to touch Chelsea's expensive forwards Fernando Torres or Didier Drogba because they are doing a great DeAngelo Williams-Jonathan Stewart impression this year, meaning they're eating each other's opportunities up. I strongly prefer a player like the aforementioned Luis 'Suarez' Suarez or Darren Bent of Aston Villa, each of whom is unquestionably the lead striker for their team and should continue to receive lots of minutes and scoring chances.

Midfielders
To me, it feels like nearly all the high-priced midfielders are underperforming to start the year. But it's early, and several big-name transfers just happened - Nasri to Man City and Juan Mata to Chelsea. Getting a player with plenty of chances to score fantasy points is more about attacking chances than minutes, with the top midfield players. Another way to go about it is to identify the guys who take the set pieces (penalty kicks, free kicks, and corners). Every team gets several corners per game and a few free kicks, every one of which could be an assist for the person kicking it.

Since I'm an uninformed foreign viewer, I've turned to several blogs to try to come up with good potential set piece takers. Each list by these blogs shows a few players from each team who are expected to take the kicks:
Fantasy Premiere League Transfers
Fantasy Football Scout
Fantasy Football Info
Premier League Fantasy (my favorite because it shows the most recent week each player took a kick)

My main focus has been corner kicks. Even for mid-level teams, the player taking their team's corners gets maybe 3-5 extra assist opportunities per game. That can be huge. Players like Brunt of West Brom or Larsson of Sunderland may continue to provide value for this reason.

I have promised myself to wait until after this weekend to make any transfers, in order to give the Premier League fully 3 game weeks to establish trends. So far player market values haven't changed too much so it's not overly critical to rearrange for budgetary reasons. But don't wait too long - David Silva is inevitably going to cost $8.50 before you know it.

How are your strategies holding up so far? Are you making any roster adjustments? What trends are you watching?

Music Tuesdays - Silver Tongue by Zulu Winter

2011-08-23T12:16:00.000-07:00

Silver Tongue by Zulu Winter

BPL or EPL? An American tries to figure out the other fantasy football

2011-08-19T11:41:00.000-07:00

When I hear the term football, I think of NFL football like most Americans. Yet somehow, over the past few years, soccer has crept into my life. I lived with a soccer player; we played FIFA on Xbox. I slowly learned the major teams in the English Premier League, Spain's La Liga, and Italy's Serie A. I adopted Tottenham Hotspur - before Simmons did - because of their name's reference to a historical figure and Shakespeare character (I'm a Shakespeare nerd). I started learning rosters and key players. I enjoyed the relegation drama.

To learn more, I think it's time to go even deeper. To really know the contours of the Premier League, it's necessary to do for the other football what we all do for American football - join a fantasy league. This will be one U.S. idiot's endeavor to do just that.

First the basics:
- I am playing in ESPN Soccernet's 'Premier Fantasy' game. It's free to sign up. Read the Rules for all the details.
- It is a basic roster management game (for example: ESPN Best Ball); the budget is $100 and you have 15 roster spots to fill (i.e. starting 11 + 4 subs)
- You get to choose your formation - I'll go into this below
- Your team can be entered into multiple groups, aka leagues
- During the season you get a limited number of transfers (20), meaning when to add/drop players is a critical resource
- Halfway through the season (I think at the start of 2012) you can re-make your entire roster, and scoring re-sets
- Points scoring I haven't totally figured out... as best I can tell it's got the basic stuff like goals, assists, clean sheets, etc. (see Rules)

In order to make sense of playing the other football in a fantasy setting, I went about applying some basic fantasy principles such as opportunity, budgeting, expected value, and sleepers. But first - the unique wrinkle of formation selection.

Formation
The most interesting choice, from an American perspective, because it seems to be the biggest determinant of strategy. ESPN Premier Fantasy has 7 options for formation:
4-4-2
4-3-3
3-4-3
3-5-2
5-3-2
5-4-1
4-5-1
(note: formations are listed in the order of Defenders-Midfielders-Forwards)

This seems to me to give an oddly wide range of team choices. Imagine being in an NFL fantasy league in which you could choose to have 2 QBs and no kicker, competing against a team with a traditional roster and another team with five RB/WR/TE flex spots and one QB. It would seem to imbalance team selection, right? Unlike most NFL fantasy leagues, there is no draft and therefore players can be shared, but all positions on a fantasy soccer team are not created equal.

My initial reaction: you want the most possible attacking players. After all, don't they touch the ball the most in attacking positions, giving them the most chances to participate in scoring plays?

In my search for answers, it led me to such blogs as this best formation post from Fantasy Premier League Transfers.com. Their stats, albeit two seasons old, confirm that top forwards and midfielders scored the most (in whatever scoring system they were using) on the order of 20-40 pts more than top defenders.

Conclusion: the 3-4-3 formation is the way to go... or possibly 3-5-2, depending on how much you like certain midfielders. But minimize defenders and maximize attacking players, because they seem to get the most scoring chances. In other words - it's the classic fantasy principle of opportunity.

Opportunity
Having settled on the most attacking-oriented formation, it seems logical to allocate the budget in a similar way. Despite the scoring trying to give defenders a fairer shake - things like double pts for defender goals (8 vs. 4), and 3 points for a defender clean sheet (meaning a shutout) - the sheer volume of greater opportunities for forwards and attacking midfielders should help them pile up goals and assists points. As FPL Transfers advises in this strategy post, focusing on the best attacking players gives the most scoring chances.

However, you need players that actually see action. On top of that, you get 1 fantasy point for a player who sees game action, and 2 extra pts if the player surpasses 60 minutes of playing time. The clubs only can make 3 subs per game, and just like NFL game-day scratches are common due to injury, or the whims of coaches, etc. Therefore, identifying guys who actually get game time is doubly important. My resource has been to check the player stats (click a player's name in the ESPN fantasy roster) and see how many minutes they played recently. A good resource are previews like the Fantasy EPL Blog with its regular updates, or the Guardian's Squad Sheets which will run down injured and inactive players.

Budget
$100 for 15 roster spots = $6.7 per slot. The most expensive players are just under $9 and the least expensive players with pulses are $4.5, meaning there is a relatively small margin of discretionary salary to work with. Factor in four subs at, let's say, $5 per person, and we can take $20 out of our budget.

The remaining $80 will, at a minimum, be need to spread around at $4.5 per position just to fill out 11 spots. That means $50 is the minimum for a full squad. How best to spend the remaining $30 of salary?

Referring back to FPL Transfers' strategy post, we could save about $3 by going with a cheaper keeper and a total of about $10 by going with cheaper defenders in the backfield, giving more money to spend on the best forwards and midfielders.

I am personally looking to focus on getting 3 really good strikers up front, then very good (but not super expensive) midfielders to round it out. The key is finding the players who deliver the most bang for the buck; in other words, the best values.

Expected Value
Finding players who outperform their acquisition cost is the heart of any fantasy draft or roster budgeting. The search for value has led me to read a variety of useful articles such as the Bleacher Report's fantasy recommendations and, of all things, About.com's Fantasy Premier League Tips. Both contain advice for the best values for money at each position.

In Premier fantasy, player value is relative to the position they play. If we were really fancy, we would do a Christopher Harris -style 'value-based drafting' analysis of how many points the top 20 players at each position scored, the spread of scores from top to bottom, and therefore the incremental value of each dollar spent at each position. But I don't have time to do those calculations, so I'm gonna wing it.

Keepers - every team has exactly one keeper, and they are all going to score baseline points for minutes played and for some saves. The keepers on the best teams are likely to have more shutouts, but they also may get fewer saves since their team will prevent the other team from shooting as much. The bargain play here is to find guys from mid-pack teams with good defenses, such as Stoke City and Fulham. The aggressive play is to roster a keeper from a top team such as Chelsea, Manchester City, or Manchester United. I've opted for the Man City keeper; we'll see if he provides enough additional points to be worth the extra $3.

Defenders - a similar bargain theory as above applies... look for defenders on mid-pack teams with good defenses. The bargain play here would be guys from squads such as Stoke City, Fulham, and maybe Everton. The aggressive play would be to find an attacking right or left back, who comes up and gets involved in the offense with more changes for goals and assists. I believe Patrice Evra of Man Utd would fall into this category. I went with Stoke, Fulham, and Tottenham defenders.

Midfielders - this is where the value picks really come into play. My theory for EPL fantasy is that most leagues are won and lost based on the best decisions of who you play in the midfield (being that D is less relevant and the best strikers are obvious). To that end, the people who get the most bang for their buck here will probably win out. We'll see if my theory holds. The bargain play is to get standout players from mediocre teams and hope their opportunities result in points. The more aggressive play is to take non-superstar midfielders from the top teams, and hope they participate in the success of the team and can feed their strikers, get assists, etc. The most aggressive play is to take the absolute top-tier players like Nani, Florent Malouda, Steven Gerrard, and Rafael Van der Vaart and hope to cash in as they lead their teams' elite offenses. I personally went for a mix of good middies on top-flight teams (the Manchesters, Liverpool) and mid-level teams (Tottenham, Aston Villa).

Forwards - the striker position is the most glamorous in real life and on my EPL fantasy squad. Guys like Wayne Rooney, Didier Drogba, Dimitar Berbatov, and Robin Van Persie are perennially among the EPL's top scorers. These guys will definitely get the most chances to score based on their pedigree and the fact that their teams will likely be dominating most matches. The bargain play is to get up-and-coming strikers from lesser squads and hope they can capitalize on the chances they get. The aggressive play is to take 3 of the guys above (or their ilk) and watch the fireworks. I also think there is something to be said for taking second-tier strikers with good opportunities - or who are just straight-up underpriced - like Sergio "Kun" Aguero, Luis "Suarez" Suarez, Darren Bent, and Javier "Chicharito" Hernandez. That's what I've done.

Subs - no matter your formation, you get 1 Goalie, 2 Defenders, and 1 Midfielder on your bench. Since they automatically get swapped into your lineup only in case of injury to your top guys, you can treat this one of two ways: 1) you can get the cheapest possible guys (or extreme values, you might say) because they'll rarely do anything, or 2) you might be able to use the subs as a place to hold onto potential sleepers, swapping them in for good matchups.

Sleepers
In addition the players you roster now because of their value, one trait of a fantasy winner is to identify who the up-and-coming stars are and to hitch up to those gravy trains early. (Yes, my analogies are becoming loopier as this column stretches.) I have found general Premier League columns such as The Reducer by Chris Ryan of Grantland very useful in this regard. His league preview article identifies several such players, from teams good and bad, who might develop into standouts this year.

I won't go too deep into individual sleepers here. We can discuss that later. But make a list of guys who are young or returning from injury, and track how they are doing. For example, here is a Bleacher Report list of the Top 12 Teenagers in the Premiership. Keeping in mind the opportunity and value principles above, I'm watching a the attacking players who are getting opportunities and might start capitalizing on them. That means even bottom- to mid-tier teams could be mined for good fantasy sleepers. Stay tuned for updates.

So there you have it, the FIWK English Premer League Fantasy Preview. Written by dummies, for dummies. Do you have any strategy or player recommendations? Who are your top picks this year?

And no matter what happens, remember to have fun.

Music Tuesdays - No Church in the Wild by Kanye & Jay-Z

2011-08-17T10:15:00.000-07:00

From the new Jay-Z/Kanye team-up album Watch the Throne.

Tech Thursday: Nobelist Harold Kroto on 60 Second Science

2011-08-11T14:01:00.001-07:00

In a recent episode of Scientific American's "60 Second Science" podcast, Nobel laureate Harold Kroto is quoted on the importance of each individual finding the evidence to support the facts they believe, rather than believe what they're told.

This seems self-evident, but think of his example - do you know the actual evidence behind the Copernican claim that the Earth orbits the sun? How to prove it given the astronomical facts? I sure don't. A very simple, thought-provoking mental exercise.

Music Tuesdays - Some Are Lakes by Land of Talk

2011-08-09T11:11:00.000-07:00

This is another song by Land of Talk. It actually came from the album before "Cloak and Cipher". Big fan.

Which photo is better? Korean War Memorial

2011-08-03T16:44:00.000-07:00

I guess this is the dilemma I had in mind when creating this new segment. These are both photos of the Korean War Memorial in Washington D.C. Both are very similar photos of the same subject, yet entirely different. We are no longer looking at lighting or shadow or action or landscape vs. portrait. Which do you think is better? I mean, I couldn't even come up with an effective label to distinguish the photos for the poll below.

Music Tuesdays - Must Be Losing My Mind by Brett Dennen

2011-08-02T08:23:00.000-07:00

Another song from FIWK favorite Brett Dennen, with that unique sound of his.

Music Tuesdays - Good Life by OneRepublic

2011-07-19T09:22:00.000-07:00

I feel like OneRepublic is a really good compromise band between Royce and me. I do genuinely like their music and especially enjoy this song and Secrets. They make me happy and glad to be alive and enjoying life. Jessica and I have been listening to this song a lot recently because we really are happy with where are lives are right now. I hope to teach my kids that enjoying life is about relationships and experiences. Friends and family and having good times with them.

Which photo is better? Tomb of the Unknown Soldier

2011-07-18T11:45:00.001-07:00

These were taken at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery in Washington D.C. This was a special wreath laying ceremony for a foreign prime minister. Based on my research, I believe she was Jadranka Kosor, Prime Minister of Croatia. Do you think they look better marching or standing at Present Arms?

Which photo is better? Grasshoppers

2011-07-15T15:34:00.000-07:00

These are the exact same shot of a grasshopper at the Smithsonian Institute National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. The only difference is that the photo on the left uses a flash while the photo on the right is sans flash.

7-19-11 update: The photo below was what I meant to include as the non-flash photo. Still gets all the detail, with slightly better lighting and color. What do you think?

Beer Wednesday: Solace by Firestone Walker

2011-07-14T09:57:00.000-07:00

There is a new seasonal beer out from Firestone Walker called Solace. Firestone Walker is the maker of my favorite pale ale, their Pale 31. I was excited to see that the Solace is another light style, which they describe as a hefeweizen-saison fusion of styles.

Solace smells absolutely fantastic, which I loved. The floral and citrus blast makes me want to treat it like a wine, just appreciating the aroma for a while before drinking. The flavor doesn't quite back up the promise of the nose. While I like the depth and complexity of citrus, fruit, honey, and warm spice flavors, there is a little too much sweetness which is not balanced by quite enough hop flavors to give it crispness. It is a light style, which makes it very drinkable, but the body comes across as a little too rich and rounded for me.

I do like the beer and won't mind finishing the 6-pack I got for $6.99, but in the future I would probably choose their Pale 31 over the Solace in almost all occasions. I generally agree with the overall Beer Advocate and ratebeer scores for Solace. I think this beer has a lot of potential to bring out its great flavors, but isn't quite the balance my palate prefers. Recommended if you want to try an interesting fusion take on the hefweizen style, or try it if you're a big Firestone Walker fan like me.

Music Tuesdays - Bizness by Tune-Yards

2011-07-12T09:07:00.000-07:00

Music Tuesdays - Waste by Foster the People

2011-07-08T13:45:00.000-07:00

Somehow this wasn't posted on Tuesday when I thought it was, but here it is nonetheless. Another song by Foster the People, who have been getting a lot of radio play lately.

Beer Wednesday: 50 Best Beers in America

2011-07-06T14:31:00.000-07:00

Rather than a beer review this week, I am passing along a link from MP (who was not bold enough to post this himself) about the 50 Best Beers in America as named by the American Homebrewers Association. Or maybe as named by readers of Zymurgy, the AHA's magazine. Not quite sure. (Fun etymology fact - Zymurgy is named after zymology, which means the process of fermentation and frequently is used as a fancy term for the study/process of beer-making. Class dismissed.)

Keep in mind that people who brew their own beer about as hardcore as beer aficionados get, so it is not too surprising that the list is dominated by IPAs and Imperial Stouts, the extreme manifestations of their respective styles. Pliny the Elder by Russian River, which we tasted in the FIWK IPA Tasting, came out on top. There are lots of beers on here that I haven't had before, so I'm very excited to try to work through this list.

(pictured: #2 finisher Two Hearted Ale by Bell's)

Anything on here that you would personally rate higher? Any beers listed that you want to go find now?

Initial thoughts on fixing US public education

2011-06-30T10:31:00.000-07:00

Ok, the first thing I want to share is a few premises. These are determined by a lot of different books, articles and statistical analyses and from this point forward I am considering them facts. If you want to disagree or argue with these premises I completely understand, but it is based on these that my ideas come from. Most of them are correlations rather than causations, so if you want to provide an alternative theory as to what actually causes the correlation, I am open to that as well. Also, most of these are looking backwards on a large society wide scale. They may or may not be the case moving forward, but they have actually already happened and I believe/agree with the interpretations.

Also, for the purposes of this discussion I am going to use the word 'success' a lot and for now we are going to assume that means something on the scale of being admitted to a four year college, graduating from a four year college, adult salary and/or lifetime earnings, not committing crimes or going to jail. Something on that scale that has the data for long term studies. It may or may not look at standardized test scores, but overall, those are not a great indicator of success of the student, teacher, or system. We are not looking at happiness or contentedness with life, getting married, having kids, etc. According to this definition becoming a plumber who provides for a family is actually a failure of the education system if he did not go to college.

Last preface, my mom teaches first grade, so while I understand her situation on an individual basis (time she spends on tasks, what she pays for out of pocket, how difficult parents are), there is a good chance I would disagree with her on large scale changes.

Premises/Observations:
-One of the biggest indicators of success is socioeconomic status.
-One of the biggest indicators of children going to college is whether or not their parents went to college.
-A good analysis I agree with showed that a cause (not necessarily the only cause) of the difference above differences comes in the summer. Higher socioeconomic student barely gain, or at least don't lose skills over the summer. Lower socioeconomic student lose a measurable difference in their skills over the summer. This makes a huge difference over 12 years. During the school year, lower socioeconomic student do just as well, if not better, than higher socioeconomic students.
-Very few schools or systems have found a strategy that works (although there are a few lottery based charter schools that are showing good early results. These are featured in Waiting For Superman and the kids often are at school more days and longer hours than a traditional school year)
-Increasing funding to a school or district does not increase the success of those students.
-Years of teacher experience do not improve success of those students.
-Advance degrees by teachers do not improve success of those students.
-Bonuses [or really, performance based pay] for teachers (like good results on standardized testing) do not work.
-One of the biggest indicators of how well a student will improve from one year to the next is the individual teacher. But it is really hard to measure what makes a good teacher. Genuinely caring about the success of the student seems to be one aspect that makes a big difference. The children themselves (even as young as kindergarten or first grade) are one of the better barometers of the quality of the teacher. (At least better than parents or principals)

A couple of quick correlations that help make an interesting point:
If you take two families and everything about them is the same except for one fact:
1) If the parents take their children to the library regularly while the other family does not, there is no difference in the success of the children.
2) The parents of one family have books in the house, while the other does not, the children with books in the house will be more successful. (Notice that I didn't say the parents read those books to the children. That is a different variable.)

These two correlations are pretty accurate and my personal take on them. It does speak a little to the socioeconomic difference between the two families. Maybe one family is more readily able to buy books and the other is not. I also think it plays in to what the parents want of the kids. Making HUGE assumptions, let's say the library-going family (family A) isn't able to afford to buy books or there aren't books the parents care to read, but they want their kids to like reading. It can be assumed that the parents in family A probably didn't go to college. But they want their kids to go to college. They are HOPING their kids go to college. The parents that owns books and like reading themselves probably did go to college and they EXPECT their kids to go to college. I think there is an important and subtle distinction that has huge implications across many families and society as a whole. I KNOW my daughter will go to college because I expect her to. She is going to do everything necessary to get into a good college.

Now, my initial ideas on how to improve education:
1) Get rid of teacher tenure. It becomes increasingly more expensive and removes an incentive for teachers to try hard. It is ok if government/civil employees are treated more like private sector employees.
2) Increase days in the school year and hours in the school day. I think we can expect more of our kids and they will catch up to our expectations. This may be the biggest hurdle because it will initially be expensive, but I think in the long run, there are two direct results of this kind of investment. One, working class families will have to worry less about childcare while they are working. Childcare is really, REALLY expensive. And the ones that need it the most are the uneducated single moms working two jobs. These parents will be more productive workers (increasing tax revenue) and better spenders (a big part of the US economy). Second, the children will grow up and be better workers. If we are adding 3 months worth of education time to their schedules the leaps we see in the abilities of school age children will be HUGE. I mean, we are adding a full extra grade for every 3-4 years. We will be teaching calculus in 8th and 9th grade. We can probably start teaching a variety of business/sales/marketing principles in high school so that even the individuals who don't want to go to college (or can't) could start their own business and still be successful. Having three summer months off is a relic of a school system designed around children working on a farm in the summer. How many people under 40 have ever touched a tractor? Also, if you have teachers getting paid at the same rate, but make sure they are working the same 2000 hours per year (40 hours/wk, 50 weeks per year) that everyone else works, they won't be complaining about the low pay ever again.

3) Figure out a way to reward successful teachers. THIS is the hardest part. [You know, other than figuring out how to increase the education budget by 30-50%] You can't use standardized test scores and probably not principal or parent observation. You might be able to use exit interviews (or on going evaluations) by students, but it's hard to get people to agree their pay increases should be determined by 6 and 7 year olds.

Ok, that is enough to get the discussion going. I'm ready to hear how politics is going to make all this super impractical.

Music Tuesdays - Six Foot Seven Foot by Lil Wayne ft. Cory Gunz

2011-06-28T10:38:00.000-07:00

Which photo is better?

2011-06-25T13:18:00.001-07:00

OR

I took both of these at sunset just outside my place. Just put Violet down to bed, saw these colors through the window, grabbed the camera and went outside. So what do you like better? The silhouette of the bushes with the colors in the background? Or the colors reflected on the water?

Which photo is better?

2011-06-24T13:43:00.000-07:00

OR

I'm unveiling a new regular addition to the blog today. I really like to take photos and have recently invested in a really nice dSLR camera. In the world of digital photography and memory cards where people are upset when a card hold only 1000 photos, there are many, many occasions where I have two similar but different shots of the same scene or subject and I often have trouble determining which one turned out the best.

So I am going to post them both and let the public decide. Eventually I'll open this up to competing photos by others, I'll add a better voting system and I will probably come up with a better/catchier name. But for now, here are a couple photos from Paris to whet your appetite. I know MP will be ready to expound all things Paris.

Chocolate Wednesday - Chocolate Palette by Trader Joe's

2011-06-22T08:45:00.000-07:00

I might be stretching the 'Wet Wednesday' template a bit for this one, but my chocolate review is in the same spirit as a beer review or anything else. If you are the type of person who likes tasting and experiencing new flavors to expand your palette, and you like chocolate, then I strongly recommend Trader Joe's Chocolate Palette.

The link above from the Chocablog review has some descriptive (if effusive) tasting notes on the different chocolates, as does this review by Choco Check. I personally loved the Tanzania, Ghana, and Peru chocolates. They were all very interesting and educational, however.

More so than the delicious factor, the educational aspect is why I would recommend this set. The reason, as described by The Chocolate Bottle's review, is that single origin chocolate helps you learn much more about the character of the chocolate you're eating. This makes perfect sense - the same is true for single origin wine (from a specific vineyard or plot in a vineyard, even) and single origin coffee. Just like tasting a Sauvignon Blanc from California vs. France vs. New Zealand will reveal different characteristics, so too does the dark chocolate from Ecuador vs. Papua New Guinea vs. Sao Thome have different traits. I loved experiencing flavors that ranged from spicy with dark fruits to smooth, creamy vanilla as I went through the palette.

It was $10 for a pack of eight 45 gram chocolates, and I'd recommend picking it up from Trader Joe's if you want to explore different expressions of dark chocolate. It has definitely made me a bigger dark chocolate fan.

Music Tuesdays - Calgary by Bon Iver

2011-06-21T08:18:00.000-07:00

Bon Iver is one of my favorite recent artists, and in honor of the self-titled new album that comes out today, here is the first single they've released for it.

Music Tuesdays - Pull Me Back to Earth by Friendly Fires

2011-06-15T09:43:00.000-07:00

I recently heard Friendly Fires perform on KCRW and really enjoyed them.

Beer Wednesday: Mother's Milk Stout by Keegan Ales

2011-06-09T09:44:00.000-07:00

While in New York recently, I tried a local beer from Hudson Valley-based brewer Keegan Ales. I usually prefer to try local brewers when I'm somewhere new, and I'm glad I did, because I really enjoyed Keegan's Mother's Milk Stout.

The rare milk stout / cream stout style is right up my alley, because it involves the bold, rich flavors of a stout typically smoothed out by a creamier texture. Well-distributed examples you may have seen before include Sam Adams Cream Stout, Left Hand Milk Stout, or St. Peter's Milk Stout. Mother's Milk has now become my favorite example of the style.

Despite its very dark color, the beer has none of the bitterness you might expect from a dark stout (unlike, say, the Bourbon County by Goose Island). It is actually somewhat sweet, although there is a slight chocolate, nutty flavor that comes through. I even thought it went a little towards subtle hazelnut flavors (or a sweet, nutty flavor anyway). The malt of the stout comes through, but I would have preferred a slightly more roasted malt backbone to give a fuller body. As it is, Mother's Milk has a medium body and is very smooth to drink. The milk component manifests itself primarily as a creamy flavor on the back end of the taste, and as a sweet aftertaste.

Both the Beer Advocate score and the ratebeer score seem low to me. But it could also be that this beer is a great match for my palate. I am more in line with these reviews from Twin Beer and Brew York City. I think that The Brew Club, one of my favorite review sites, pegged Mother's Milk well when they compared it to a sweet stout with the smoothness of a Guinness.

I paid $5 for a pint on draft at a restaurant; I don't know its cost at a store. It has 6% ABV. I would definitely recommend this beer, especially to people who are curious to try this rarely seen but interesting style.

Music Tuesdays - Souls of Gold by Sister Crayon

2011-06-07T11:26:00.001-07:00

Beer Wednesday: Maduro Oatmeal Brown Ale by Cigar City

2011-06-01T17:20:00.000-07:00

I have long been intrigued by Cigar City Brewing, based in Tampa, but their beers don't make it to me in Los Angeles. On a recent trip to New York I was finally able to try their Maduro Oatmeal Brown Ale and I was very impressed.

Although Maduro is billed as an "oatmeal brown ale," it trends more towards brown ale than oatmeal as far as I can tell. It has a medium body which strikes me as a bit too light to term 'oatmeal'. I like its weight and think it strikes a very good balance between richness and drinkability. Its flavors are full and trend towards nutty and a slight caramel taste; it is not at all overpowering. My reaction is that it is kind of like a lighter-bodied version of the Rigor Mortis by Dieu de Ciel - and I mean that as a big compliment. This is one of my favorite brown ales that I can recall having, and I really wish I could drink it regularly.

Maduro scores very highly on ratebeer and I agree with that. I am a bigger fan of the beer than the Dos Beerigos are. They still like it though; I'd be surprised if anyone flat-out disliked this beer. It has 5.5% ABV and cost me $2 for a 12oz bottle. I would recommend it to everyone who can find it, and I especially recommend it to fans of brown ales and nut ales because it's a superb example of that style.

Music Tuesdays - Undertow by Warpaint

2011-05-31T10:20:00.000-07:00

Another song by a FIWK favorite artist Warpaint. Like it.

On the Death of Osama Bin Laden

2011-05-26T07:35:00.000-07:00

Note: this post first appeared on my other blog, Left of Center. Since this is a topic that touches on such a wide range of subjects, I figured the least I could do is put it up on FIWK and get a larger discussion going.

Enough time has passed - both on this blog and in the real world - for me to feel comfortable writing about this. There are two reasons why I'm choosing to come back now, and on this topic. The first is that, after months of inanity, a story that cuts across the political spectrum - that actually seems to matter - was finally front page news. It may seem strange that I, someone who wrote about leafblowers, was not sufficiently inspired by all the other inanity to comment. But, I felt then and I feel now that not commenting is in a sense making a statement on how I feel about the place of those stories in our political discourse. The second, more personal, reason has to do with my own reaction to the killing of Osama Bin Laden. As in, when I heard the news I wasn't sure how to react. At all. For me, this is strange, as any bit of news - no matter how trivial - will usually elicit at least a visceral reaction from me.

Perhaps it was the way I found out - on the Metro, on my way in to work on a Monday morning, on my iPhone, on ESPN's mobile site of all places. I'm still unsure whether Bin Laden's death will ultimately become a "Where Were You When...?" moment on the lines of the JFK assassination (for my parents' generation) and the September 11th attacks (for my generation), but there I was taking a mental note of the surroundings to file them away. Perhaps it is the ambiguity of it all, at least as it compares to the cold, stark shock of 9/11. Then, I remember sitting bolt upright as the news trickled in, transfixed to the TV after having slept in the living room the night before, incredulous as to what was happening before my very eyes because, of course, no one my age had ever seen anything like this before. My reaction was both intensely personal - at the time, my cousin was a United flight attendant on the San Francisco-Boston route, and one of my close friends from high school was living in Lower Manhattan - and intensely patriotic. In something I wrote in the week following the attacks, I did not hesitate to refer to George W. Bush as "my President" and ardently, even stridently, hoped he would find those responsible for the carnage and bring them to justice in any matter he saw fit.

It was a simple and straightforward reaction that day and those many years ago; evil had scored a triumphant victory over good, and I felt no shame or moral ambiguity in wishing pain & suffering on those who had unleashed so much of each on so many innocent victims. As the years passed, however, that certainty began to fade: both due to the passage of time and its singular ability to dull emotion, and due to actions taken & causes justified in the name of justice for the 9/11 attacks. Anyone who knows my political slant won't need a recitation of the events to which I am referring, but the they should be familiar to everyone: Guatanamo, the Iraq War, yellowcake, Abu Ghraib, "Mission Accomplished", warrantless wiretapping...the list goes on.

And the list continued to go on in such a way that, by the time I stared down at my phone at the Tolbiac Metro stop and read "Osama Bin Laden Dead", I didn't know what to feel. Was I happy that an avowed enemy of the United States was dead? Yes. Was I worried about the retribution that might come from the killing? Yes. Was I relieved that the family members of 9/11 victims could extract some measure of justice? Yes. Was I proud of the way that the US Armed Forces had carried out the operation with such precise swiftness? Yes. Was I taken aback, even a bit ashamed, at seeing images of crowds waving flags and chanting "U-S-A!" in front of the White House and in Times Square? Yes. Did I feel that Osama Bin Laden had long ago become more of a symbol than an actual target, and that his death now would do very little to change the course of history? Yes. Did I feel that this outcome justified all that is listed above, and the deaths of thousands first in Afghanistan and then Iraq? No. Ah, there we go. Cue ambiguity. And this was in the moment, before Dick Cheney took to the airwaves triumphantly proclaiming that the death of Bin Laden was an air-tight justification of the policies of torture - excuse me, "enhanced interrogation techniques" - put in place by the Bush Administration, even though Bin Laden's death was brought about on an order from the same President who had ordered his Administration to end those same, noxious, antithetical-to-all-that-is-good-and-human-and-American policies. This was before Sarah Palin, whose pettiness seems to know no bounds, set a new standard for petty by refusing to even mention Obama's name when congratulating those responsible for bringing about Bin Laden's death. Because, I guess, those Navy SEALs had "gone rogue" with the mission, and were never given an order by their Commander-in-Chief.

You see, I had sincerely hoped beyond hope that Bin Laden's death would not (like so many other things: judicial nominees, Planned Parenthood, Social Security...) become just another political football to slap around to the benefit of exactly no one. And, for about 48 hours, I was able to hold on to that hope. But I think that the myriad questions that ran through my head in the minutes following the news (only partially delineated here, for your sake and mine) - and the ambiguity that followed - came from a sense of foreboding of how the news would be treated and used. To avoid any kind of moral ambiguity, I would have to acknowledge that a wholehearted, full-throated celebration of Bin Laden's death also meant a tacit endorsement of all that had been done - either directly or tangentially - in the avowed pursuit of bringing him to justice. And that, of course, was never going to happen.

And so, here I am today. While I sincerely hope that many of the families of the victims of 9/11 have been able to get some closure out of Bin Laden's death, I know that this won't be the case for all the families. While I am sufficiently awed by the training and tactics of US Special Forces, the moral absolutist in me stays awake at night wondering whether the order given was "kill or capture" or simply "kill". And while I, perhaps foolishly, believe that the death of Bin Laden will lead to at least a forceful reexamination of the Afghanistan War - if not a concerted effort to draw down forces sooner rather than later -, I can't help but be overwhelmed to think of the lives already lost and families torn apart by US military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I don't think clarity will come soon, so the best way to end this is to share something that I feel captures the state of my mind right now. It should come as no great surprise that it is from "The West Wing", and it is a passage I have returned to many times - not for an answer, but for acknowledgement that someone, somewhere, even in a fictional universe, was grappling with the same ambiguity. In my head, the voices have the following exchange:

Leo: Just stop it already. This is the most horrifying part of your liberalism: you think there are moral absolutes.
Bartlett: There are moral absolutes.
Leo: Apparently not. He's killed innocent people, he'll kill more, so we have to end him. The village idiot comes to that conclusion before the Nobel Laureate.
Bartlet: Il Principe has justified every act of oppression -
Leo: This is justified. This is required.
Bartlett: Says who?
Leo: Says me, Mr. President. You want to go ask some more people, they'll say so, too.

Music Tuesdays - Mars by Natalie Walker

2011-05-24T13:53:00.001-07:00

Music Tuesdays - Mispalced by The Boxer Rebellion

2011-05-10T09:07:00.000-07:00

Music Tuesdays - Little House by Goldenspell

2011-05-03T07:58:00.000-07:00

Watch the video and tell me that's not a cool idea. That is a COOL idea. And very well done too... it reminds me vaguely of the HTC "You" commercial in its shorthand approach and its tone.

Beer Wednesday: Vrienden by New Belgium and Allagash

2011-04-29T09:36:00.000-07:00

New Belgium Brewing has a line of beers called "Lips of Faith" which involves a variety of creative beer styles that have a funky or sour element. They are often brewed with brettanomyces, a type of yeast that results in "wild ales" - beers like Flanders red ales that have a sour flavor, for example, or fruit-beer lambics. Lips of Faith usually tames the wild side of the funk and will balance it with other interesting flavors. That is what they've done with their new beer Vrienden, which is a collaboration with Allagash.

First of all, you know how I love beer collaborations. To me they are kind of like song covers in music - at their best, they take the traits of two things you know and love, and combine them into something new and awesome which builds on your familiarity with the constituent parts.

Vrienden (which apparently means "friends" in Flemish) succeeds in this. It has the yeasty, flavorful quality of Allagash's White Ale, and the rich, slightly tart flavor from Lips of Faith's efforts. New Belgium describes it as "a beer brewed with hibiscus and endive," which doesn't sound very appealing on paper. However, I completely agree with Josh Bernstein's review on Slash Food that this seemingly awkward mix of sour / vegetables / flowers is very well balanced, crisp, and delicious. I found myself sipping it constantly, and the flavors stayed interesting throughout.

I highly recommend it if you like lighter styles that still have a lot of flavor. It has 8.5% ABV and cost me $6.50 for a 22oz bottle, which I consider a good price if you want to get something interesting to share with friends.

Music Tuesdays - Surprise Surprise by Brett Dennen

2011-04-26T09:00:00.000-07:00

Music Tuesdays - Always Spring by I'm from Barcelona

2011-04-19T14:21:00.000-07:00

The band is Swedish, the name makes them sound Spanish, they sing in English, and the music is energetic pop. I'm confused yet entertained.

Tech Thursday: Sportaneous, the app to find pickup games

2011-04-14T15:43:00.000-07:00

I just read about an app called Sportaneous which helps the user find pickup games in the area. It's not out on Android so I can't try it yet, but conceptually this is a great idea.

I play a lot of basketball, and finding pickup games in a new area can be tough. Generally I just look up all the gyms/courts in the area, then go to them and see if someone there knows when pickup games usually happen. This works, but it usually takes a few weeks/months to figure out the pattern. I love the idea that there is a place where I could look these up, and hopefully share the time/location easily with friends.

Apparently this app recently showed well at NYC BigApps 2.0. The linked video/write up there does a good job of summarizing the features.