SEASON RESULTS
Picks - Straight Up: 8-8
Picks - Against The Spread: 8-5-3
Knockout Pool - Alive in Round 1 (1-0, Teams Used: NYG)
Start 'Em/Sit 'Em Three-Play - 2-1 (QB (W, 1-0): J. Cutler CHI 31, D. McNabb WSH 7; RB (W, 1-0): R. Brown MIA 12, S. Jackson STL 8; WR (L, 0-1): D. Mason BAL 2, M. Crabtree SFO 1)
PICKS
Straight up (win/loss)
Locals: PHL (W at DET), NE (W at NYJ), NYJ (L vs. NE), NYG (L at IND)
Big Game Winners: TEN (vs. PIT), MIN (vs. MIA), SFO (vs. NO)
Other Winners: BAL (at CIN), CHI (at DAL), ATL (vs. ARZ), KCY (at CLE), GBY (vs. BUF), CAR (vs. TBY), OAK (vs. STL), SEA (at DEN), HOU (at WSH), SDG (vs. JAX)
Against the Spread (spreads in parentheses)
Locals: PHL (-6 at DET), NE (-3 at NYJ), IND (-5 vs. NYG)
Big Game Covers: TEN (-5 vs. PIT), MIN (-5.5 vs. MIA), SFO (+5.5 vs. NO)
Other Covers: BAL (-2.5 at CIN), CHI (+7.5 at DAL), ATL (-6.5 vs ARZ), KCY (+2 at CLE), GBY (-12.5 vs. BUF), CAR (-3.5 vs. CAR), STL (+3.5 at OAK), SEA (+3 at DEN), HOU (-2.5 at WSH), SDG (-7 vs. JAX)
Knockout Pool
Philadelphia (at DET)
PREDICTIONS
Start 'Em/Sit 'Em Three-Play
QB: Start Michael Vick PHL (at DET), Sit Carson Palmer CIN (vs. BAL)
RB: Start Rashard Mendenhall PIT (at TEN), Sit Joseph Addai IND (vs. NYG)
WR/TE: Start Dez Bryant DAL (vs. CHI), Sit Greg Jennings GBY (vs. BUF)
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Week 1 Picks & Predictions
PICKS
Straight up (win/loss)
Start 'Em/Sit 'Em Three-Play
Straight up (win/loss)
- Locals: NYG (W vs. CAR), NYJ (W vs. BAL), PHL (L vs. GBY), NE (W vs. CIN)
- Big Game Winners: IND (at HOU), ATL (at PIT), DAL (at WSH)
- Other Winners: MIA (at BUF), DET (at CHI), CLE (at TBY), JAX (vs. DEN), TEN (vs. OAK), SFO (at SEA), ARZ (at STL), SDG (at KCY)
- Locals: NYG (-6.5 vs. CAR), NYJ (-2.5 vs. BAL), GBY (+3 at PHL), NE (-4.5 vs. CIN)
- Big Game Covers: IND (-2 at HOU), ATL (-2 at PIT), WSH (+3.5 vs. DAL)
- Other Covers: MIA (-3 at BUF), DET (+7 at CHI), CLE (+3 vs. TBY), JAX (-2.5 vs. DEN), TEN (-6 vs. OAK), SFO (-3 at SEA), ARZ (-4 at STL), SDG (-4.5 at KCY)
- N.Y. Giants (vs. Carolina)
Start 'Em/Sit 'Em Three-Play
- QB: Start Jay Cutler CHI (vs. DET), Donovan McNabb WSH (vs. DAL)
- RB: Start Ronnie Brown MIA (at BUF), Sit Steven Jackson STL (vs. ARZ)
- WR/TE: Start Michael Crabtree SFO (at SEA), Sit Derrick Mason BAL (at NYJ)
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Sports With The StatMan #75: Show Notes
Preseason football is just that...the preseason. So, why do fans call for coaches to be fired after a preseason game? We talk about that and the new and improved "Bridge to Mariano". We look over the September schedules for the contenders and compare. Plus, the local teams are featured in the 2010 StatMan NFL Preview of the AFC East and NFC East.
This is a new way of putting together the notes for our show. Instead of summarizing the show, I will try to break the show down into smaller pieces so you can listen to the segments of the show that interest you.
Here is the list of topics we talked about:
HOW TO FIND THE SHOW
VISIT the show page: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/The-StatMan
FOLLOW the show on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/gstatman
READ the Random Musings blog: http://gstatman.blogspot.com
DOWNLOAD the show on iTunes: Search "Sports With The StatMan"
This is a new way of putting together the notes for our show. Instead of summarizing the show, I will try to break the show down into smaller pieces so you can listen to the segments of the show that interest you.
Here is the list of topics we talked about:
- 00:00-02:00 – Intro
- 02:00-07:15 – Value of NFL Preseason games
- 07:15-12:45 – New and improved Bridge to Mariano
- 12:45-14:30 – Around the AL East
- 14:30-16:00 – Phillies' West Coast swing
- 16:00-18:00 – Around the NL (Reds-Cardinals, Padres, Giants)
- 18:00-20:00 – MLB disappointing teams of 2010
- 20:00-22:15 – Coming up on the show, Nationals-Marlins brawl
- 22:15-29:00 – Show information, Upcoming September shows, NFL Week 1 local schedules
- 29:00-51:00 – September contender schedules (games left, games vs. .500+ teams, home games, games vs. competition, standings)
- 29:00 – Yankees (29 games left, 19 vs. .500+ teams, 13 home games, 7 vs. TB/6 vs. BOS, 1 GA of TB in AL East/8 GA of BOS in AL East)
- 31:45 – Rays (29, 13, 12, 7 vs. NYY/3 vs. BOS, 1 GB of NYY in AL East/7 GA of BOS in AL Wild Card)
- 34:15 – Red Sox (29, 19, 12, 6 vs. NYY/3 vs. TB, 8 GB of NYY in AL East/7 GB of TB in AL Wild Card)
- 37:30 – Phillies (29, 14, 16, 6 vs. ATL/0 vs. SF, 3 GB of ATL in NL East/1.5 GA of SF in NL Wild Card)
- 40:30 – Braves (29, 16, 14, 6 vs. PHL, 3 GA of PHL in NL East)
- 43:00 – Giants (28, 16, 12, 7 vs. SD/0 vs. PHL, 3 GB of SD in NL West/1.5 GB of PHL in NL Wild Card)
- 45:00 – Padres (30, 26, 17, 7 vs. SF, 3 GA of SF in NL West)
- 48:00 – Twins (29, 10, 17, 3 vs. CHW, 4 GA of CHW in AL Central)
- 49:15 – White Sox (29, 10, 16, 3 vs. MIN, 4 GB of MIN in AL Central)
- 51:00-55:15 – MLB: Big Series over the next week
- 55:15-57:30 – How to get in touch with the show
- 57:30-58:30 – Next week on Sports With The StatMan (9/8, 9pm ET)
- 58:30-1:00:00 – Show review
- 1:00:00- – 2010 StatMan NFL Preview - AFC East, NFC East (2009 actual record/2010 predicted record)
- 1:00:00 – AFC East: Buffalo Bills (6-10/3-13)
- 1:05:15 – AFC East: Miami Dolphins (7-9/9-7)
- 1:11:00 – AFC East: New England Patriots (10-6/13-3)
- 1:15:45 – AFC East: New York Jets (9-7/11-5)
- 1:24:45 – NFC East: Dallas Cowboys (11-5/9-7)
- 1:29:00 – NFC East: New York Giants (8-8/10-6)
- 1:35:00 – NFC East: Philadelphia Eagles (11-5/7-9)
- 1:38:30 – NFC East: Washington Redskins (4-12/5-11)
- 1:42:30 – Big Questions recap, predicted standings, next week's preview
- 1:42:45-1:43:15 – Next week: Playoff Predictions and Fantasy Preview as 2010 StatMan NFL Preview finishes up
- 1:43:15-1:53:00 – MLB: Fantasy Update – Last 7 days (Alex Rios/Edwin Jackson), Season-to-date (Albert Pujols/Roy Halladay), Triple Crown Chase
- 1:53:00-1:54:30 – Show Close: Recap and Next Week's Preview
HOW TO FIND THE SHOW
VISIT the show page: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/The-StatMan
FOLLOW the show on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/gstatman
READ the Random Musings blog: http://gstatman.blogspot.com
DOWNLOAD the show on iTunes: Search "Sports With The StatMan"
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Was Dan Duquette Right?
Roger Clemens is back in the news. Federal indictments and the threat of jail time seem to do that. Clemens has been charged with one count of obstruction of Congress, three counts of false statements to Congress, and two counts of perjury. There are six counts in all and each count is a felony, which is punishable by five years each for a grand total of up to 30 years in prison. Clemens and his trusty attorney, Rusty Hardin, have their work cut out for them. The question I keep having is: "Where did Roger Clemens go wrong?" Was he always a steroid user? Was his 1984 Rookie of the Year and 1986 Cy Young and MVP Awards tainted as much as his Cy Youngs he won in Toronto (1997-98), the Bronx (2001), and Houston (2004)? His major league total of 354 wins cannot be ignored, nor can his total of more than 4,600 strikeouts. Like Barry Bonds, his career records demand that you talk about him.
Did Clemens go wrong after he left the Red Sox? Boston General Manager Dan Duquette made his infamous quote that Clemens was in the "twilight of his career" when the Sox could not re-sign Clemens. It has been 14 years since the quote and does not look nearly as bad as it was portrayed by the media to be. What's more, Duquette may have been exactly right.
Clemens's next contract ended up paying Clemens $52.15 million over six years for a per-season average of $8.69 million. Up to Duquette's comment, Clemens had been averaging about $5 million a season over the last few seasons with the Red Sox. One thing is for sure, Duquette only needed to look at the back of Clemens's baseball card to surmise he may have been washed up. Would you offer Clemens 60% more money for the next five years if his last four seasons looked like this?
Down the stretch in his final season in Boston, he tied his own Major League record by striking out 20 Tigers in one game. He led the league in strikeouts in 1996 and strike-shortened 1994 season was solid. But, his 1993 season (4.46 ERA) and his 1995 season (1.436 WHIP) were awful by his standards. Clemens blew up at the Duquette's accusation and looked like it was the main motivating factor to pressing on to his next stop. Toronto, in the same division as Boston, was a perfect place for Clemens to plot his revenge. After two Cy Young seasons in Toronto, he was traded to the Yankees, where he pitched for another five seasons. It was seven seasons of revenge for Clemens within the division against the Red Sox and their fans, who turned against him. Was his career renaissance based on adrenaline and revenge or was it based on something more?
In his 13 seasons with the Red Sox, Clemens had five "great" seasons and three more "good" seasons. Was Clemens a Hall of Famer? At the time, no. He was 192-111 with a 3.06 ERA. Not bad, and his 2,590 strikeouts would garner some votes. At the age of 33, he would have pitched a few more seasons and may have had a slight uptick before the inevitable pre-Steroid Era mid-30s age-induced decline. I am sure you can determine the average decline for a major leaguer and even though Clemens was above-average, how many more wins would he have? 40? 50? Clemens would have stuck around on the ballot for several years, but he would not have made the Hall of Fame.
After Boston, Clemens pitched 11 more seasons following his 33rd birthday. His career numbers with Boston and after Boston show some similarities. The hits he allowed per nine innings stayed about the same, as he allowed 7.6 hits per nine innings in his Boston years and 7.7 hits per nine after he left. His strikeouts per nine went up from 8.4 in Boston to 8.8 in his post-Boston career. Considering the explosion of offensive numbers in the Steroid Era, the fact that Clemens's ERA only went up by 0.15 earned runs per nine innings is suspicious.
All Duquette was saying was Clemens was entering the type of decline that was common for players his age to encounter during the life of that next contract. Adrenaline and revenge are a potent mix, but steroids and HGH have a little more staying power.
Source: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/clemero02.shtml
Did Clemens go wrong after he left the Red Sox? Boston General Manager Dan Duquette made his infamous quote that Clemens was in the "twilight of his career" when the Sox could not re-sign Clemens. It has been 14 years since the quote and does not look nearly as bad as it was portrayed by the media to be. What's more, Duquette may have been exactly right.
Clemens's next contract ended up paying Clemens $52.15 million over six years for a per-season average of $8.69 million. Up to Duquette's comment, Clemens had been averaging about $5 million a season over the last few seasons with the Red Sox. One thing is for sure, Duquette only needed to look at the back of Clemens's baseball card to surmise he may have been washed up. Would you offer Clemens 60% more money for the next five years if his last four seasons looked like this?
Down the stretch in his final season in Boston, he tied his own Major League record by striking out 20 Tigers in one game. He led the league in strikeouts in 1996 and strike-shortened 1994 season was solid. But, his 1993 season (4.46 ERA) and his 1995 season (1.436 WHIP) were awful by his standards. Clemens blew up at the Duquette's accusation and looked like it was the main motivating factor to pressing on to his next stop. Toronto, in the same division as Boston, was a perfect place for Clemens to plot his revenge. After two Cy Young seasons in Toronto, he was traded to the Yankees, where he pitched for another five seasons. It was seven seasons of revenge for Clemens within the division against the Red Sox and their fans, who turned against him. Was his career renaissance based on adrenaline and revenge or was it based on something more?
In his 13 seasons with the Red Sox, Clemens had five "great" seasons and three more "good" seasons. Was Clemens a Hall of Famer? At the time, no. He was 192-111 with a 3.06 ERA. Not bad, and his 2,590 strikeouts would garner some votes. At the age of 33, he would have pitched a few more seasons and may have had a slight uptick before the inevitable pre-Steroid Era mid-30s age-induced decline. I am sure you can determine the average decline for a major leaguer and even though Clemens was above-average, how many more wins would he have? 40? 50? Clemens would have stuck around on the ballot for several years, but he would not have made the Hall of Fame.
After Boston, Clemens pitched 11 more seasons following his 33rd birthday. His career numbers with Boston and after Boston show some similarities. The hits he allowed per nine innings stayed about the same, as he allowed 7.6 hits per nine innings in his Boston years and 7.7 hits per nine after he left. His strikeouts per nine went up from 8.4 in Boston to 8.8 in his post-Boston career. Considering the explosion of offensive numbers in the Steroid Era, the fact that Clemens's ERA only went up by 0.15 earned runs per nine innings is suspicious.
All Duquette was saying was Clemens was entering the type of decline that was common for players his age to encounter during the life of that next contract. Adrenaline and revenge are a potent mix, but steroids and HGH have a little more staying power.
Source: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/clemero02.shtml
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Kovalchuk's Box
Before Pandora was a planet in Avatar, or a cool iPhone app, it was a box that you did not want to open. The meaning is the same across the board. In Avatar, Pandora was a planet that humans should not have trolled. The iPhone app, like many others, is an addictive time waster. Ilya Kovalchuk’s first Devils contract, rumored to be a 17-year deal worth $102 million, was denied by an arbitrator last week after being challenged by the NHL. Kovalchuk is a free agent again, but the NHL may not be stopping there.
Four other contracts have been rumored to be called into question as Kovalchuk-like contracts, or as Justin Bourne calls them, “Kovalcontracts”. Three of the four “Kovalcontracts” are contract extensions that take effect this upcoming season. These contract extensions belong to the Bruins’ Marc Savard, the Flyers’ Chris Pronger, and the Canucks’ Roberto Luongo. One other contract is already underway: the Blackhawks’ Marian Hossa. These contracts were picked from the litter because of their similar structure, but how alike are they?
First, the structure of the Ilya Kovalchuk’s denied contract that was offered by the Devils:
If we dissect Kovalchuk’s denied contract, the first year is an “average” year by this contract’s standards, as $6 million is the average of the 17-year/$102 million deal. The number goes up to $11.5 million (+91.7% change from previous season), which would be somewhere near a “max” contract the NHL would allow, which is 20% of the salary cap figure for a season. The salary cap is at $59.4 million for the 2010-11 season and $11.5 million works out to 19.4% of the total cap number. Conceivably, this number may change, as the salary cap is redefined from year to year and the provision may change for the next labor contract, which would take effect no earlier than the 2012-13 season. A drop-off to $7.5 million (-34.8% change from previous season) and $6.5 million in consecutive seasons is not that appalling, considering Kovalchuk would be aged 36 and 37, respectively.
The drop-off between season 11 of the deal is worse, as Kovalchuk’s pay would fall from $6.5 million to $3.5 million in 2020-21 (-46.2% from previous season), almost halving his salary. The final thud in the contract is the following season (2021-22), when the pay falls from the millions to the hundreds of thousands, from $3.5 million to $750,000 (-78.6% from previous season). This was the eye-opener and, more so than the length of the deal, should have caused the NHL to have heart palpitations. If the Devils offered similar dollars throughout the life of the ultra-long-term deal, such as what the Islanders offered goaltender Rick DiPietro, the NHL would most likely not have investigated the legality of the contract. It was the lower amount of money in the final six seasons of the contract that was most responsible for its rejection. With the diminutive salary figures in years 12 through 17 of the contract, there was an overwhelming probability Kovalchuk would retire before playing out the contract, as only a handful of players have still played the game at the highest level at the age of 44.
Also, after 11 years of the deal, 96.6% of the total dollars in the deal were paid out. At that point, the percentage of length of the contract (64.7%) was greatly outpaced by the percentage of total dollars paid by that point in the contract. The difference between the two percentages was 31.9%, which is staggering and defines a “front-loaded” contract. Think of it as a rollercoaster. You start to climb the initial hill, and the higher you go, the more you will have to have to fall quickly at the end of the ride because the start and the end of the ride has to be at the same height. If a player makes the same amount for an entire contract, the rollercoaster is completely level. A perfectly acceptable contract is one where the first couple of years are a little less than average, the middle of the contract is a little more than average, and the last couple of years are a little less than average. This makes for a nice hill in the middle for a very easy-going coaster. Kovalchuk’s contract has a rapid rise and an even more extreme fall.
The NHL drew the line in the sand for these types of contracts, sure to be addressed in the next labor agreement. In the meantime, executives, player agents, and fans can only guess where that line truly is.
For term, let’s draw the line in the sand at 40 years old, beyond which the term would be prohibitively long for the realistic possibility of a player fulfilling the length of the contract, never mind the difficult task in finding someone to insure the guaranteed contract. For dollars, let’s raise the red flag when the drop-off of any year-over-year salary is more than half of the previous season’s salary. For the variance between term and money paid out to that point in the contract, let’s set the variance at 25%, by which if it reaches this number or goes over, we will call it a “front-loaded” contract.
Kovalchuk’s denied contract hits all of these sweet spots: the term concludes when Kovalchuk is 44 years old and season 12 of the 17-year deal caused a 78.6% drop-off. For Kovalchuk, Years 1 and 2 were level and Year 3 started the climb up to Year 10. Year 11 started the downward spiral and Years 12 through 16 represented a free fall. For the five seasons that represent Years 7 through 11 of the deal, the variance between term and money paid out to that point in the contract is over 25%.
Now, to the other four player contracts questioned as a result of the denial of Kovalchuk’s contract:
Marc Savard (Bruins) - 7 years/$28.05 million extension taking effect in 2010-11
Four other contracts have been rumored to be called into question as Kovalchuk-like contracts, or as Justin Bourne calls them, “Kovalcontracts”. Three of the four “Kovalcontracts” are contract extensions that take effect this upcoming season. These contract extensions belong to the Bruins’ Marc Savard, the Flyers’ Chris Pronger, and the Canucks’ Roberto Luongo. One other contract is already underway: the Blackhawks’ Marian Hossa. These contracts were picked from the litter because of their similar structure, but how alike are they?
First, the structure of the Ilya Kovalchuk’s denied contract that was offered by the Devils:
- 2010-11 through 2011-12 (2 seasons): $6 million per season
- 2012-13 through 2016-18 (6 seasons): $11.5 million per season
- 2018-19 (1 season): $7.5 million
- 2019-20 (1 season): $6.5 million
- 2020-21 (1 season): $3.5 million
- 2021-22 (1 season): $750,000
- 2022-27 (5 seasons): $550,000
If we dissect Kovalchuk’s denied contract, the first year is an “average” year by this contract’s standards, as $6 million is the average of the 17-year/$102 million deal. The number goes up to $11.5 million (+91.7% change from previous season), which would be somewhere near a “max” contract the NHL would allow, which is 20% of the salary cap figure for a season. The salary cap is at $59.4 million for the 2010-11 season and $11.5 million works out to 19.4% of the total cap number. Conceivably, this number may change, as the salary cap is redefined from year to year and the provision may change for the next labor contract, which would take effect no earlier than the 2012-13 season. A drop-off to $7.5 million (-34.8% change from previous season) and $6.5 million in consecutive seasons is not that appalling, considering Kovalchuk would be aged 36 and 37, respectively.
The drop-off between season 11 of the deal is worse, as Kovalchuk’s pay would fall from $6.5 million to $3.5 million in 2020-21 (-46.2% from previous season), almost halving his salary. The final thud in the contract is the following season (2021-22), when the pay falls from the millions to the hundreds of thousands, from $3.5 million to $750,000 (-78.6% from previous season). This was the eye-opener and, more so than the length of the deal, should have caused the NHL to have heart palpitations. If the Devils offered similar dollars throughout the life of the ultra-long-term deal, such as what the Islanders offered goaltender Rick DiPietro, the NHL would most likely not have investigated the legality of the contract. It was the lower amount of money in the final six seasons of the contract that was most responsible for its rejection. With the diminutive salary figures in years 12 through 17 of the contract, there was an overwhelming probability Kovalchuk would retire before playing out the contract, as only a handful of players have still played the game at the highest level at the age of 44.
Also, after 11 years of the deal, 96.6% of the total dollars in the deal were paid out. At that point, the percentage of length of the contract (64.7%) was greatly outpaced by the percentage of total dollars paid by that point in the contract. The difference between the two percentages was 31.9%, which is staggering and defines a “front-loaded” contract. Think of it as a rollercoaster. You start to climb the initial hill, and the higher you go, the more you will have to have to fall quickly at the end of the ride because the start and the end of the ride has to be at the same height. If a player makes the same amount for an entire contract, the rollercoaster is completely level. A perfectly acceptable contract is one where the first couple of years are a little less than average, the middle of the contract is a little more than average, and the last couple of years are a little less than average. This makes for a nice hill in the middle for a very easy-going coaster. Kovalchuk’s contract has a rapid rise and an even more extreme fall.
The NHL drew the line in the sand for these types of contracts, sure to be addressed in the next labor agreement. In the meantime, executives, player agents, and fans can only guess where that line truly is.
For term, let’s draw the line in the sand at 40 years old, beyond which the term would be prohibitively long for the realistic possibility of a player fulfilling the length of the contract, never mind the difficult task in finding someone to insure the guaranteed contract. For dollars, let’s raise the red flag when the drop-off of any year-over-year salary is more than half of the previous season’s salary. For the variance between term and money paid out to that point in the contract, let’s set the variance at 25%, by which if it reaches this number or goes over, we will call it a “front-loaded” contract.
Kovalchuk’s denied contract hits all of these sweet spots: the term concludes when Kovalchuk is 44 years old and season 12 of the 17-year deal caused a 78.6% drop-off. For Kovalchuk, Years 1 and 2 were level and Year 3 started the climb up to Year 10. Year 11 started the downward spiral and Years 12 through 16 represented a free fall. For the five seasons that represent Years 7 through 11 of the deal, the variance between term and money paid out to that point in the contract is over 25%.
Now, to the other four player contracts questioned as a result of the denial of Kovalchuk’s contract:
Marc Savard (Bruins) - 7 years/$28.05 million extension taking effect in 2010-11
- 2010-11 through 2011-12 (2 seasons): $7 million per season
- 2012-13 (1 season): $6.5 million
- 2013-14 (1 season): $5 million
- 2014-15 (1 season): $1.5 million
- 2015-16 through 2016-17 (2 seasons): $525,000
- The line in the sand: Term (39 y.o. at end of deal), Dollars (2014-15 is a 70% drop-off, 2015-16 is a 65% drop-off), Front-Loading (2012-13: 30.2%, 2013-14: 33.8%)
- Prediction: The drop-offs in this contract is enough cause for this contract to be DENIED. The Bruins are looking to trade him, so if this is denied, it may work out in the Bruins’ favor, who are trying to get under the salary cap.
- 2010-11 through 2011-12 (2 seasons): $7.6 million per season
- 2012-13 (1 season): $7.2 million
- 2013-14 (1 season): $7 million
- 2014-15 (1 season): $4 million
- 2015-16 through 2016-17 (2 seasons): $525,000
- The line in the sand: Term (42 y.o. at end of deal), Dollars (2015-16 is a 86.9% drop-off – worse than Kovalchuk), Front-Loading (2013-14: 28.2%)
- Prediction: The extension was signed before Pronger turned 35, but the extension takes effect around his 36th birthday. So, retirement will not ease the burden of the cap hit, but the drop-off is worse than Kovalchuk, as the final two years of the deal are about one-eighth of the fifth season’s salary. I am predicting this will be DENIED on those grounds.
- 2010-11 (1 season): $10 million
- 2011-12 through 2017-18 (7 seasons): $6.7 million per season
- 2018-19 (1 season): $3.4 million
- 2019-20 (1 season): $1.6 million
- 2020-21 through 2021-22 (2 seasons): $1 million per season
- The line in the sand: Term (43 y.o. at end of deal), Dollars (2019-20 is a 52.9% drop-off), Front-Loading (no seasons above 25%; highest percentage in 2017-18: 22.4%)
- Prediction: I think this will be APPROVED because though the deal goes until Luongo turns 43, the drop-off is smooth enough to be approved.
- 2009-10 through 2015-16 (7 seasons): $7.9 million per season
- 2016-17 (1 season): $4 million
- 2017-18 through 2020-21 (4 seasons): $1 million per season
- The line in the sand: Term (39 y.o. at end of deal), Dollars (2014-15 is a 70% drop-off, 2015-16 is a 65% drop-off), Front-Loading (2012-13: 30.2%, 2013-14: 33.8%)
- Prediction: The drop-off of the dollars is enough to deny the contract. The contract is also excessively front-loaded, which is also grounds for dismissal. But, the biggest sticking point of this or any contract under suspicion is that one year has already been played under this agreement. If they reverse the validity of this contract, the Blackhawks would have played the 2009-10 season with an illegal player for 57 games, in which the Blackhawks earned 77 points (36-16-5), not to mention the 16 wins in 22 games in the Stanley Cup Playoffs. If they deny this, expect fire and brimstone from just about everyone. So, I predict the NHL will figure that “discretion is the better part of valor” and APPROVE the contract.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Sports With The StatMan #72: Show Notes
We analyzed the rivalry series of the past weekend (Red Sox/Yankees, Mets/Phillies). The Sox are keeping pace and inching closer to Tampa for the Wild Card. The Rookie of the Year races were spotlighted in the AL and NL. Also, Jets camp is a soap opera perfect for Hard Knocks. And, we kicked off our 2010 StatMan NFL Preview with a look at the NFC West and AFC West.
This is a new way of putting together the notes for our show. Instead of summarizing the show, I will try to break the show down into smaller pieces so you can listen to the segments of the show that interest you.
Here is the list of topics we talked about:
Here is the list of topics we talked about:
- 00:00-00:30 - Show Intro
- 00:30-12:00 – Two rivalry series over the weekend
- 00:30 – Phillies take two of three from the Mets at Citi Field
- 04:30 – Red Sox split at Yankee Stadium
- 10:00 – Terry Francona has kept the Red Sox in the race
- 12:00-14:00 – On Tap: Around the League
- 14:00-18:00 – On Tap: Jets talk and 2010 StatMan NFL Preview begins
- 18:00-24:30 – On Tap: Kovalchuk is a free agent again; possible ramifications for the Devils
- 24:30-29:00 – Show Information: upcoming episodes, how to find the show, recent blog posts
- 29:00-31:30 – Red Sox upcoming series and pitching probables
- 31:30-35:45 – Yankees upcoming series and pitching probables
- 35:45-42:30 – More Phillies-Mets talk: Mets bullpen issues
- 42:30-44:30, 46:00-46:30 – Mets upcoming series and pitching probables
- 44:30-46:00 – Phillies upcoming series and pitching probables
- 46:00-57:00 – MLB: Around the League
- 46:30 – Big Series in the next week
- 48:15 – Cardinals-Reds brawling at the top of the NL Central
- 50:15 – AL Central foes Twins-White Sox are very similar teams
- 51:00 – Strasburg returns and gets pounded by the Marlins
- 52:15 – Rookie of the Year races in AL/NL
- 57:00-1:00:45 – Show Recap and Information: how to get in touch with the show
- 1:00:45-1:35:15 – 2010 StatMan NFL Preview (2009 actual record/2010 predicted record)
- 1:00:45 – NFC West: Arizona (10-6/7-9) – Is it finally time for Matt Leinart?
- 1:05:00 – NFC West: St. Louis (1-15/5-11) – How good a pro will Sam Bradford be?
- 1:08:15 – NFC West: San Francisco (8-8/8-8) – How will Michael Crabtree fare in his first full season?
- 1:10:30 – NFC West: Seattle (5-11/6-10) – Will Pete Carroll bring his USC success to the Pacific Northwest?
- 1:14:00 – NFC West recap
- 1:14:30 – AFC West: Denver (8-8/8-8) – How will Elvis Dumervil’s injury impact Denver’s defense?
- 1:20:00 – AFC West: Kansas City (4-12/6-10) – Will the running back by committee work in Kansas City?
- 1:23:45 – AFC West: Oakland (5-11/5-11) – What will Al Davis do next?
- 1:28:15 – AFC West: San Diego (13-3/12-4) – Can Phillip Rivers finally get it done?
- 1:33:45 – Big Questions recap, predicted standings, next week’s preview
- 1:35:15-1:36:00 – Show Information
- 1:36:00-1:43:45 – MLB: Fantasy Update – Last 7 days (Carlos Gonzalez/Brandon Morrow), Season-to-date (Albert Pujols/Adam Wainwright)
- 1:43:45-1:46:15 – Show Close: Recap and Next Week’s Preview
- Show page: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/The-StatMan
- iTunes: type in "Sports With The StatMan" in the search
Also, follow the show on Twitter (http://twitter.com/gstatman) and read the Random Musings blog (http://gstatman.blogspot.com).
Friday, August 13, 2010
Have Injuries Taken Their Toll?
There has been a lot of talk about the devastating injuries that have befallen the Red Sox and Phillies. Despite it all, both teams are not only alive, they are well in the chase for their respective Wild Card and division leads. But, how many injuries have they really had through the first four months?
MLB.com compiled a list of man-games lost from injury by each major league team and the results might surprise you. In games through Sunday, August 8th, the Red Sox are not first, second, or third in man-games lost, but their players have lost more time than any of the other local teams. The Red Sox place fourth behind Oakland (909 man-games), Washington (885), and the Los Angeles Angels (686) with 672 man-games lost this year from 18 players. The 18 players that have missed time are second in baseball behind Oakland (20). The amount of players is more concerning because of how pervasive the injury big has bitten the Red Sox this season. Three of their starting staff has spent time on the DL, as only Jon Lester and John Lackey have avoided injured status. The right side of the infield has missed significant time and Kevin Youkilis will make sure the amount of man-games lost will be at least one per game, as he is out for the rest of the season. The one healthy starting outfielder in the early part of the season was the perennially fragile J.D. Drew.
Still, even with all of these injuries, as of Wednesday, the Red Sox (66-49) were five games behind the Yankees (70-43) for not only the American League East lead, but also the best record in baseball. The Sox are 17 games over .500 with players like Dustin Pedroia, Jacoby Ellsbury, Josh Beckett, and Victor Martinez missing significant time. Of these four, everyone but Pedroia is back and the second baseman may return as soon as this Sunday. Yes, the Red Sox have some injuries, but Youkilis and Mike Cameron are the only current DLers that play pivotal roles on the team.
The Phillies have seemingly have had more injury issues than anyone, but look at MLB.com’s list and the Phillies are only tied for 17th in baseball in man-games lost with 402 games. They have the second-fewest amount of man-games lost per player (23.65), which means that the Phillies have had a lot of players with injuries to make up those 402 games. Philadelphia is tied for third with 17 players, one less than Boston’s 18 players. So, the injuries have been just about as pervasive, but they have not missed nearly as much time as the infirmed Red Sox players. The right side of the Philadelphia infield is currently down in Ryan Howard and Chase Utley. The rest of the infield has had stints on the DL, including Jimmy Rollins, who missed a month of time twice this year. While the top of the Phillies starting rotation has been safe, Jamie Moyer is out for the year and the bullpen has been in shambles with either Brad Lidge or Ryan Madson being out for the first half of the year. But, Chase Utley has been cleared to swing a bat, Ryan Howard is returning next week, and Shane Victorino will return to the lineup on Thursday. Moyer’s elbow injury is the only season-ending injury and the Phillies should be well by September.
The Phillies (63-50), despite these injuries, are only 2½ games out in the National League East and a single game behind San Francisco for the Wild Card. The bullpen is pitching better than they have all year. The team turned a negative with Moyer’s injury to a positive by acquiring Roy Oswalt at the deadline.
The comparison between the two teams shows that while the Phillies have had their share of injuries, the Red Sox have been hit harder by their bumps and bruises and have persevered better through it all. But, the Phillies will most likely be healthier in September and are more poised to make a postseason run because of the division in which they play.
MLB.com compiled a list of man-games lost from injury by each major league team and the results might surprise you. In games through Sunday, August 8th, the Red Sox are not first, second, or third in man-games lost, but their players have lost more time than any of the other local teams. The Red Sox place fourth behind Oakland (909 man-games), Washington (885), and the Los Angeles Angels (686) with 672 man-games lost this year from 18 players. The 18 players that have missed time are second in baseball behind Oakland (20). The amount of players is more concerning because of how pervasive the injury big has bitten the Red Sox this season. Three of their starting staff has spent time on the DL, as only Jon Lester and John Lackey have avoided injured status. The right side of the infield has missed significant time and Kevin Youkilis will make sure the amount of man-games lost will be at least one per game, as he is out for the rest of the season. The one healthy starting outfielder in the early part of the season was the perennially fragile J.D. Drew.
Still, even with all of these injuries, as of Wednesday, the Red Sox (66-49) were five games behind the Yankees (70-43) for not only the American League East lead, but also the best record in baseball. The Sox are 17 games over .500 with players like Dustin Pedroia, Jacoby Ellsbury, Josh Beckett, and Victor Martinez missing significant time. Of these four, everyone but Pedroia is back and the second baseman may return as soon as this Sunday. Yes, the Red Sox have some injuries, but Youkilis and Mike Cameron are the only current DLers that play pivotal roles on the team.
The Phillies have seemingly have had more injury issues than anyone, but look at MLB.com’s list and the Phillies are only tied for 17th in baseball in man-games lost with 402 games. They have the second-fewest amount of man-games lost per player (23.65), which means that the Phillies have had a lot of players with injuries to make up those 402 games. Philadelphia is tied for third with 17 players, one less than Boston’s 18 players. So, the injuries have been just about as pervasive, but they have not missed nearly as much time as the infirmed Red Sox players. The right side of the Philadelphia infield is currently down in Ryan Howard and Chase Utley. The rest of the infield has had stints on the DL, including Jimmy Rollins, who missed a month of time twice this year. While the top of the Phillies starting rotation has been safe, Jamie Moyer is out for the year and the bullpen has been in shambles with either Brad Lidge or Ryan Madson being out for the first half of the year. But, Chase Utley has been cleared to swing a bat, Ryan Howard is returning next week, and Shane Victorino will return to the lineup on Thursday. Moyer’s elbow injury is the only season-ending injury and the Phillies should be well by September.
The Phillies (63-50), despite these injuries, are only 2½ games out in the National League East and a single game behind San Francisco for the Wild Card. The bullpen is pitching better than they have all year. The team turned a negative with Moyer’s injury to a positive by acquiring Roy Oswalt at the deadline.
The comparison between the two teams shows that while the Phillies have had their share of injuries, the Red Sox have been hit harder by their bumps and bruises and have persevered better through it all. But, the Phillies will most likely be healthier in September and are more poised to make a postseason run because of the division in which they play.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)