TDL’s Sports, Wrestling, & Otherwise

Fortunately I was able to find a nice, five square-foot space on the Patriots bandwagon. I got a sublet from a guy who just couldn’t handle the cheating issue. It’s nice… street views and everything.

Dolphins +3 at Jets: Both teams are 0-2. Both teams are legitimately facing must-win games if they hope to salvage the season. I think the Jets are the better team. Jets cover.

Cardinals +7 at Ravens: I’m pretty sure I don’t buy the Cardinals based on close home win against the Seahawks. I also hate Raven games with large spreads since they’re always a threat for the epic 3-0 victory. Fun fact: This game features the 15th and 16th ranked offenses vs the 18th and 19th ranked defense. Mediocre Bowl 2k7. Cardinals +7.

Chargers -4 at Packers: This is another spread that makes me run screaming. The Chargers got crushed last week by a team they were supposed to be contending for the AFC with. The Packers crushed the pitiful Giant defense. This just goes to show that a healthy Brett Favre still gives people gambling douchechills…. for good reason. That said, we’re still talking about the motherhumpin Chargers. They got crushed by the best team in the league while the Packers have beaten two sub-standard (*sigh*) NFC East teams. Chargers cover.

Bills +15 at Patriots: The Patriots have won 2 games now by 24 points. Both of these teams are better than the Bills AND the Patriots are at home. This has a chance to be really ugly. Patriots cover.

Colts -5 at Texans: Just pointing this out… the Texans are now only getting five points against the Colts. You know the end of Season 6 of Buffy when Willow’s destroying civilization and Giles makes his heroic return and Evil Willow says “uh-oh, Daddy’s home” in that disturbingly sexable way? That’s all I can think of for this game: Running roughshod, but now daddy’s home. Colts cover.

Vikings +2.5 at Chiefs: I’m not saying I believe in the Vikings, but apparently not being able to name a single soul on the team is a good sign. I think the Vikes are the definition of “under the radar.” I also thinks they can beat the Chiefs. Vikings outright.

49ers +8.5 at Steelers: At some point the Steelers have to stop just crushing people, right? The Niners have kept both their games close so far… I think they can do it again. 49ers +8.5.

Rams +3.5 at Bucs: I’m riding this Jeff Garcia bandwagon until it crashes and burns. Fun fact, Garcia’s 7-4 in his last 11 starts, including a 3 point loss to the Saints in the playoff. Bucs cover.

Lions +7 at Eagles: You know, it’s an interesting question how much of the TO/McNabb drama really was TO. I mean, when you think about it, TO did gut out the Super Bowl on a bum leg while McNabb had a few too many Big Bacon Classics before the game. Now that they’re separated, TO has turned down the volume and McNabb is running through his standard play book of generated drama to deflect attention from his team being horrifically over-rated with an expiring quarter back and a receiving core full of college players. Lions +7? That’s a lock. Lions outright is a little suspect. They are in Philly but apparently Jesus loves Jon Kitna. This uncharted territory of thinking the Lions might WIN a game is wearing on me. I’m picking this game as the Upset Of The Week. Lions outright.

Browns +3 at Raiders: Any team getting points against the Raiders? Ever? Sold. Browns outright.

Bengals +3 at Seahawks: Hey, it’s Week 3’s What The F*ck Happened Bowl. The only question is whether the Bengals can get over an embarassment of a game in time to go into the hardest road stadium in the league. I say they don’t. Seahawks Cover.

Jaguars +3 at Broncos: I still couldn’t pick Jay Cutler out of a line-up with a gun to my head. However, the Jaguars offense seems anything but prolific. At Mile-High, I say the Broncos take this. Broncos cover.

Panthers -4 at Falcons: The Falcons have returned to “have to give me a reason to pick you” status. Panthers cover.

Giants -3.5 at Redskins: Did you know that Giants have the #32 ranked defense in the league? Did you know they’re giving up an average of 10.2 yards per passing play? Did you know that I’m a Pats fan now? Enjoy another week of over the middle passes to a tight end while the linebackers decide that dropping back in coverage is for amateurs. Redskins cover.

Cowboys +3 at Bears: My hatred of the Cowboys tells me that the Romo-wagon hits it’s first bump this week. They’re not going to hang 40 points on the Bears, so the question becomes “can they win a close game.” Grain of salt since I can’t think straight when it comes to the Cowboys. Bears cover.

Titans +5 at Saints: This is the Saints first home game. I don’t think there’s any way in the universe that the Saints don’t win this game by at least a touchdown. Caveat: if they don’t their season’s over. Saints cover. Total points: 48.

Tons of favorites this week.

John Lock(e)s of the Week: Saints -5. Colts -5
Upset of the Week: Lions outright.

W/W - Bills +8.5 at Steelers: Steelers cover. Oh yeah, remember that team that had a Super Bowl hangover last season?

W/L - Colts -7 at Titans: Colts Cover. The Colts only won by 2. In Simmons’s picks column, he took my joke to the next level by pointing out that the end of the world occurs when Peyton Manning is actually in a Chevy commercial. I hope in the commercial he kareoke’s This Is Our Country.

L/L - Bengals -6.5 at Browns: Bengals cover. F*ck the Browns. I’d like to thank the NFL for going bat-sh*t crazy in my annual bookie dry-run for the fourth year running. Each year, before I actually get in touch with someone that’ll take NFL picks I do a week where I pick everything I would pick with the dollar amounts I’d pick them. I’d like to thank the NFL for knocking 75% of my gambling budget out in the dry-run week. Money that won’t be spent again this year.

L/L - Packers at Giants: Giants. As I already mentioned… I’m pretty sure I’m already punching out for the season. I’m looking to rent a few square feet on the Patriots bandwagon. If anyone has some available, let me know. What can I say? I used to root for the bad guy in wrestling, too.

L/L - Texans +6.5 at Panthers: Panthers cover. Note to self, never gamble on the Texans. You have no idea what they’re going to do but it apparently is going to involve lots of points.

L/L - Saints -3 at Bucs: Saints cover. Who gets to be America’s Team after everyone starts evacuating the Saints’ bandwagon? I vote for Houston.

W/W - Falcons +10 at Jaguars: Falcons +10. Yeah, that whole “sleeper team” thing? Not happening.

W/W - 49ers +3 at Rams: 49ers outright. Actually, I’d rent space on the Niners bandwagon if I wasn’t afraid at who I’d run in to from high school.

W/P - Vikings +3 at Lions: Lions cover. God healed John Kitna and wants the Lions to win 10. Seriously. Watch out NFC North!

W/W - Cowboys -3.5 at Dolphins: Cowboys cover. Filthy Cowboys.

L/L - Seahawks -3 at Cardinals: Seahawks cover. The Seahawks were getting 3 points and lost 23-20. I guess there is something to this “spread” thing. By the way, this was another game on my dry run.

W/W - Jets +8 at Ravens: Jets +8. So, apparently, the coaching staff of the Ravens has accused Eric Mangini and the Jets of cheating during the game. Anyone other than me wondering if Mangini broke some kind of unwritten coaches’ code?

W/L - Raiders +9 at Broncos: Broncos cover. This is still not reason for me to believe I should start picking the Raiders under any circumstances.

W/W - Chiefs -12 at Bears: Chiefs +12. Nothing fancy to say here, just that I shockingly got one right. This was the one game this week I won in my dry run.

W/W - Chargers +4 at Patriots: Patriots cover. Lost in the whole Patriots’ cheating scandal was the fact the Patriots just crushed one of the two teams that were supposed to be their competition this year. If ever a team could go 19-0, it’s this one.

W/W - Redskins +7 at Eagles: Redskins outright. Tiebreak points: 51. Take the over. OK, so this was right… I managed to get my friend Hulse into a 3-2 straight up bet (we were going to do 5-2, but I balked… not because I thought I was wrong, but because I feel somewhat bad about taking that much money from people I like). While the game wasn’t the score-fest I expected (20-12), I feel much more justified in my prediction of the Redskins being better than everyone thought and the Eagles being worse than everyone thought.

I also got bounced out of BOTH of my Knockout Pools this week. Pool one, as I mentioned, was Bengals over Browns. I also was talked into another one at the last minute and went with the Saints. Quickest $20 ever.

This Week
- Straight up: 11-5
- Spread: 8-7-1

Overall
- Straight up: 22-10
- Spread: 17-12-3

Locks of the week: 1-1

Or, by the full name Three Nights in August: Strategy, Heartbreak, and Joy Inside the Mind of a Manager by Buzz Bissinger.

When the Fire Joe Morgan guys talked about this book they gave it one paragraph:

If you haven’t already, I invite you to read Buzz Bissinger’s book 3 Nights in August, about La Russa. The purported aim of the book is to show how brilliant La Russa is as a strategist. The actual accomplishment is to make one feel like one wouldn’t trust La Russa to take care of one’s cats, much less one’s baseball team. It starts with an anecdote about how Albert Pujols has a severe arm injury — one that allows him to swing a bat but not throw. La Russa wants to play him anyway, to like intimidate the other team (which doesn’t know about the injury), so he puts him in left field and tells him to casually underhand the ball to the SS if it gets hit to him. A doctor has told La Russa that Pujols, the most important player on the team by a factor of fifty, is risking severe like career-threatening shit if he throws a baseball. This is a not-super-important game. I mean, what the hell?

In fairness, that’s not exactly true. The Pujols anecdote, I think, was supposed to show La Russa thinking “outside the box” to keep his team in a playoff hunt. It was the middle of August and the Cardinals were fighting out the division with the Cubs and the Astros. La Russa couldn’t really afford to have Pujols out of the line-up and didn’t have a DH slot to hide him in so he had Jim Edmonds shade over to left on deep balls and Edgar Renteria shade back on shallow balls. Pujols was ordered to not fire the ball to the infield under any circumstances but rather to flip the ball either to Edmonds or Renteria. This was after they attempted to play him at first for a bit until runners realized they could steal bags even on a pick-off throw. It wasn’t exactly a “not important game”. It was more “middle of a divisional race.” Pujols was in because he was the most important guy on the team.

As much as I expected this book to be a response to Moneyball (especially considering it promised in the opening that it would not be) it really didn’t turn out that way. It didn’t delve into stats or overvalued and undervalued players. It didn’t start by underlining the woe that is the St. Louis payroll, though it did get in it’s shots at the Yankees and Red Sox over-hyped rivalry. I quote:

The rivalry between the Cubs and the Cardinals is probably the oldest and perhaps the best in baseball, no matter how much the Red Sox and Yankees spit and spite at each other. That’s a tabloid-fueled soap opera about money and ego and sound bites. That’s a pair of bratty high-priced supermodels trying to trip each other in their stilettos on the runway.

This is before it gets in to the history of the Cubs/Cards rivalry which in itself was pretty interesting. What it did end up responding to was the Moneyball, or more precisely Billy Beane’s, view of a manager. Beane considers the manager of a baseball team to be a middle manager. A guy with (usually) very little education who is tasked with managing the most important asset of a major league baseball club: the team. Beane points out that no other industry in the world would consider doing business this way. Hence, in Oakland, the manager is a figurehead while the front office decides who bats where, what reliever comes in when, and who pitches when. The manager is just there for show.

Three Nights In August takes a different view of it. It picks up the Cardinals’ 2003 season in the midst of a three-game series against the Cubs in the midst of August. At the beginning of the series, which runs from August 26th to August 28th, the Cardinals’ record sits at 68-63. They are a half-game behind the Cubs (68-62) and one game behind the division leading Houston Astros (69-62).

The format of the book is pretty simple. Bissinger takes you through each game, step-by-step, starting with the pre-game meeting the team has before each series and culminating with the post-game celebration following a walk-off home run in game three. Along the way, you’re treated to a little backstory on some of the players as they come up. Much like Moneyball branches off into chapters about Scott Hatteburg and Jason Giambi, Three Nights branches off into chapters about even lesser known names, like Cal Eldred and Bo Hart and even delves in to Rick Ankiel and Darryl Kile.

It allows the reader insight into parts of baseball he’d never see: like a pre-game meeting between the Dave Duncan and Garrett Stephenson. Duncan sits each starter down before a start. He has spent hours watching DVDs of Cub batters and has a strategy for each batter. He tells Stephenson that Kenny Lofton kills him when he throws a sloppy breaking ball but that he tends to strike Lofton out with his change-up. He lets us know that Cub hitters are overly aggressive and tend to attack the first pitch. We find out that Moises Alou, in particular, has feasted off Cardinal starter’s first-pitches to the tune of four home runs. He tells Stephenson that another hitter, Randall Simon, has killed him whenever he gives him something up in the strike zone… so don’t do that.

Of course, it does then delve off-course into it’s (thankfully) few forays into the world of statistics. The reader finds out that Stephenson has been complaining at the lack of run-support on the season. We also discover that La Russa is angry about Stephenson being angry. After all, it proclaims, Stephenson should be pitching in his 2000 form if he wants to go 16-9 again. It then uses Stephenson’s statistics to make the point:

2000: 31 starts, 16-9, 4.49 ERA 209H 31HR 63BB 123K in 200.3 IP
2003: 25 starts, 7-12, 4.41 ERA 148H 26HR 57BB 83K in 159.3 IP (it’s only August).

Meanwhile, if I couldn’t outline the absurdity of the “Win” before, allow those two lines above to do so. Stephenson has been essentially the same pitcher in 2003 as he was in 2000, except in 2000 he got 16 wins because the team scored more runs.

It took a lot of effort to muscle through that chapter.

Fortunately, it got better. After the team meetings, the book takes you in to the dugout. It gives you a chance to actually be in the manager’s head and see what he’s thinking and why he makes the calls he does. You see why the manager pulls a hit-and-run when he does and when he decides to send the runner. It gives you the reason why managers view certain guys as bench players and some guys as full time players even giving the story of one of the Cardinal’s bench players who makes a trip from the doghouse to superhero in the course of the series.

It even manages to be oddly psychic. The Cubs started Mark Prior in Game 1 and Kerry Wood in Game 2. Mark Prior was framed as the entitled, cocky young pitcher who didn’t have a care in the world. The book uses that chapter to give some history on another cocky, young pitcher who didn’t have a care in the world; Rick Ankiel. It mentions that Prior, who at the time was on top of the world, should be careful that he doesn’t take his arm for granted. The Game 2 starter is Kerry Wood. While it doesn’t make specific notes about Wood’s personality, it does mention that Dusty Baker had a tendency to overuse him a bit.

What it does particularly well is convey the million things that are going on during any given ballgame that the casual (or even the hardcore viewer) doesn’t realize. One particular anecdote, in the part of the book that delves a little bit into sign-stealing and ways to avoid it, tells about Roger Clemens warning a proficient sign-stealer that if he didn’t stop, “somebody was going to get killed.” Also, in this same section, it mentions that Shawn Green, currently of the New York Mets, has an almost uncanny ability to steal a catcher’s signs. It gives you a sense of how manager’s go about responding to one of their player’s getting hit (On the Cardinals, the order always comes from La Russa). The manager’s inner struggle over whether to hit-and-run or steal. While it doesn’t go so far to say that certain batters “clog up the basepaths” when they work walks, it does make the rather obvious assertion that a walk isn’t always the best thing to get… especially as an 8-hitter in the National League.

Now, the stat-head in me can easily say that any person can make that decision. Any person could look at a hitter’s trends and know where to position a defensive player. Really that the manager could be replaced with a particularly well-programmed super-computer that analyzes match-ups and trends and positions the player’s accordingly. But other stuff that managers have gut instincts for, like managing 25 egos ranging from fragile to over-entitled, is a talent. JD Drew, for instance, is the guy in the book set forth as the one person that La Russa has no idea how to motivate. He said, frankly, that there is nothing he can do to get Drew “fired up” to play. On the drastic other end he gives you Matt Morris. Morris, days before his start in game 3, twisted his ankle badly. Instead of going on the DL, he made his start. Most of Game 3 is written with Morris in mind, as he manages to hit 2 slow rollers that force him to bust down the line on a gimpy ankle. He does it both times.

The Morris part is springboard into the death of Darryl Kile. While “play the game right” is a line that stat-heads like to tear apart and goof on, Kile is the guy who taught Morris to play the game right. By that, they mean be there when the team needs you. As much as I respect most of the Jamesean theories and statistics, I think the tendency to ignore player’s personality is the biggest. The issue, outlined particularly well with JD Drew, is that no matter how good a guy’s numbers are: he doesn’t help you when he isn’t playing. Bissinger makes it a point to mention all the situations where La Russa could have used JD Drew during the series. Since Drew is on the DL, it does him absolutely no good.

What you walk away with at the end is the sense that the manager has a million things going on in his head during the game. Whether to hit-or-run, steal, defensive positioning, pitch-outs, trickery, sign-stealing, and the like.

One final thing to mention is the Epilogue. It jumps to the 2004 post-season. It mentions how the entire city of Boston conspired to beat the Cardinals in Game One and Two. The Red Sox, sportsmen that they are, booked the Cardinals in a hotel 40 miles outside the city. A security guard at Fenway Park left his car parked in front of a team bus, stranding them at the stadium until the wee hours of the morning. By the time they got back to their hotel, the kitchen had no real food left to serve them. To the book’s credit, it also mentions La Russa’s tendency to get swept in the World Series.

The Yard Sez: Fantastic read if you’re even remotely interested in the game of baseball. Otherwise: interesting read but much of it will be lost on you.

Is it too soon to declare the football season over? I don’t think it is

Bills +8.5 at Steelers: The Steelers crushed a bad team last week on the road. I can’t see them not crushing a bad team at home. I don’t believe in the “Do it for the paralyzed guy” effect. Steelers cover.

Colts -7 at Titans: If the Colts defense is as good as it looked last week, I don’t know if anything less than Colts -10 is a bad pick. Also: can anyone tell me which product is more over-saturated: Peyton Manning or Chevy Silverado. Discuss. Colts Cover.

Bengals -6.5 at Browns: It’s that wonderful time each year when you sit back and say: “Damn, Ohio has TWO football teams.” The Bengals pounded Ray Lewis’s defense last week while the Browns proved that good teams are still going to spank them. Bengals cover.

Packers at Giants: Giants may or may not be starting a back-up quarterback. I still think they can outscore the Packers. Giants

Texans +6.5 at Panthers: I have no idea what to do with the Texans yet. So far they’ve beaten a “meh” Chiefs team. Now they’re playing a “meh” Panthers team. Last week they contained a Herm Edwards ground attack. This week, they have the Panthers who just signed Christian Fauria as a legitimate second option for Jake Delhomme. The only question is do they cover. I think they do. Panthers cover.

Saints -3 at Bucs: The Bucs aren’t the Colts and they only managed to put up 6 against the Seahawks. I don’t understand this spread. The Bucs home field isn’t that intimidating. Saints cover.

Falcons +10 at Jaguars: Well, that bandwagon didn’t take long to fall apart, did it. Things like this is what makes me excited that Bill Simmons continually says how awful the Giants are. Regardless, I don’t get the spread here. It seems like it’s way too many points to be giving a team against another team that lost by three to the Titans a week ago. Falcons +10.

49ers +3 at Rams: I’m not sure how many wins it takes for a team to be becomes “spunky and unpredictable”… but I think the niners are that. I also think if the Rams can’t beat the Panthers, they’re in trouble. 49ers outright.

Vikings +3 at Lions: This is going to be a really tough game for the Vikings to go into Ford Field and win. Considering between Jon Kitna’s 10-game guarantee and the fact they didn’t fall on their face the first week. The crowd’s going to be into it and the team’s going to be into it. Lions cover.

Cowboys -3.5 at Dolphins: Speaking of bandwagons that fell apart rapidly, who’d the Dolphins tick off to get such a crappy schedule so early in the season. The Dolphins’ defense is better than the Giants’, but I think the Cowboys can do better than 3. Unless of course the Dolphins take a look at one piece of film and actually cover Jason Witten over the middle on 3rd. Cowboys cover.

Seahawks -3 at Cardinals: Seahawks -3 at Cards? Ha! Seahawks cover.

Jets +8 at Ravens: The Jets are starting a back-up quarterback, so they probably aren’t going to score a ton of points. Of course, neither or the Ravens. This smells like a 17-10 or 13-10 kind of game. This game also represents the Jets’ karmic backlash for last week. Never cheer an injury, you idiots. Jets +8.

Raiders +9 at Broncos: The Raiders still have not given me a reason to ever pick them with less than 2 touchdowns. Broncos cover.

Chiefs -12 at Bears: My gut is telling me asking the Bears to outscore anyone by 12 is nonsense. I’m going with that. Chiefs +12.

Chargers +4 at Patriots: I have never hated a team that I have absolutely no connection to than the Chargers. I want LDT to rush for like -35 yards. I just want this team to die. Oh, and they will because the Patriots are a better friggin team you whiny, “classy”, douchebag. Patriots cover.

Redskins +7 at Eagles: Well, this is the first true test of my theory. I think the Redskins are tremendously under-rated. I think the fact they just barely beat the Dolphins is more a function of a team getting its feet wet than a team who isn’t that good. I think the Eagles have been tremendously over-rated all pre-season. I think an Eagles’ team as good as everyone else thinks they are would have crushed the Packers, not left them in the game to win the way they did. I’m calling this the upset of the week. Redskins outright. Tiebreak points: 51. Take the over.

For the knockout pool: I try not to be crazy in the first week. I let other people do that and get knocked out because they think they’re going to put something over on someone. That said, if the Browns can’t beat the the Steelers at home, they’re not beating the Bengals on the road. Knockout Pool Pick of the week: Bengals over Browns.

W/W - Saints +6.5 at Colts: Colts cover. Why anyone thought this was going the other way fascinates me. Do the Colts still have to win more than 3 Super Bowls before they mystically morph into the bad guys?

L/L - Falcons +3 at Vikings: Falcons outright. Maybe Harrington is as bad as everyone thought.

W/W - Panthers -1 at Rams: Panthers.

W/L - Broncos -3.5 at Bills: Broncos win and cover. Heartbreaker for Buffalo. Why is no one pointing out that, had Everett connected with that tackle and not gotten paralyzed, the league probably would have fined him and suspended him for two games? Leading with your helmet is illegal for two reasons. One, you get hurt… two, you can kill the other guy. Am I the only one thinking this?

L/L - Chiefs +3 at Texans: Chiefs outright. I guess the Texans DID do something in the offseason I didn’t know about.

W/W - Patriots -6.5 at Jets: Patriots cover. I actually read somewhere that people think the league should take some number of wins away from the Jets for this using the NCAA’s banning of teams from Bowl Games as an example. These people obviously think college football’s a real sport. Anyway, the league is not going to start with taking wins away. That’s something that pretty much needs to be outlined before hand. You don’t just do it. That said, it’s very unlikely they’d do it because 1) It’s one of the most popular teams in the league and 2) what team would want to take the win that way and 3) if I was the Pats, I’d not show up to the games we were forced to forfeit.

L/P - Eagles -3 at Packers: Eagles cover. He’s still done, the Eagles are tremendously over-rated. I’ve been saying this since July.

W/W - Steelers -4.5 at Browns: Steelers cover. This would have been my Last Man Standing pool pick. So, even though we didn’t pick week one, I’m still alive.

L/W - Jaguars -6.5 at Titans: Titans +6.5. In my notation, I thought the Jags would win but not cover. Oops.

W/W - Bears +5.5 at Chargers: Chargers cover. I used to make from of Cam for his inexplicable hatred for Tiki Barber. Not only do I understand that hatred of Barber now but I also feel what it’s like to have a hatred for a player that no one else really shares. LDT, lookin at you.

W/W - Lions +1.5 at Raiders: Lions outright. Welcome to your future Jamarcus. Welcome back to the starting gig Daunte.

W/W - Bucs +6 at Seahawks: Seahawks cover.

W/P - Dolphins +3 at Redskins: Redskins cover. Stupid Spread.

L/L - Giants +5.5 at Cowboys: Giants +5.5. I’m as happy as I could be following a loss. The offense looked good so maybe we can at least outscore some teams. Strahan looked all of his age and Osi was gone by the second quarter. If Derrick Ward is as good as he looked and The Hefty Lefty is at least competent, I’m still on the bandwagon for nine wins. It also goes back to what I said in my Giants Preview: Eli’s QB Rating was 30 points higher before Luke Petitgout got hurt last season. When the left side of right handed quarterback’s offensive line can be described as “patchwork”, that quarterback is in for a bad season. When Eli isn’t worried about looming death from behind, he’s a good quarterback. Besides, I called 4-2 in the division with two road losses, so I’m still on schedule.

W/W - Ravens +2.5 at Bengals: Bengals cover. Go gut!

W/L - Cardinals +3.5 at 49ers: Niners cover.

Record Straight up: 11-5
Record Against the spread: 9-5-2

I try to do this each season and I always bail by the fourth week. Let’s see how it goes this year. I’d like to try, at least one season, to make it all the way through. Especially considering I usually do better when I write about the picks before actually doing them… maybe it’s because I don’t just pick at random.

Saints +6.5 at Colts: Indy’s raising their championship banner and the Saints reek of “back to Earth this year.” Colts cover.

Falcons +3 at Vikings: Joey Harrington isn’t as bad as everyone thinks and the Vikings probably are. Falcons outright.

Panthers -1 at Rams: No clue here. Panthers.

Broncos -3.5 at Bills: The Bills seemed to spend the season jettisoning anyone with talent. Broncos win and cover.

Chiefs +3 at Texans: Did the Texans do something in the offseason that I don’t know about? Early in the season for LJ… I can’t imagine that the Chiefs lose this, but I’d never lay real money on this. Chiefs outright.

Patriots -6.5 at Jets: Until I see otherwise, I’m not picking against the Patriots ever. Patriots cover.

Eagles -3 at Packers: Dear everyone, Brett Favre is done. He has been for two years. Eagles cover.

Steelers -4.5 at Browns: I see no world in which the Steelers lose this game. Steelers cover.

Jaguars -6.5 at Titans: This spread makes me nervous, since I don’t think the Jaguars are that good. That many points for Vince Young is enticing. Titans +6.5.

Bears +5.5 at Chargers: Stay classy San Diego. The Bears are another team that reek of “back to earth.” Chargers cover.

Lions +1.5 at Raiders: Someone getting points against the Raiders? Again, I’m not picking the Raiders until they show me otherwise. Lions outright.

Bucs +6 at Seahawks: Another game I would never lay money on. I also feel like taking the Seahawks at home against a shaky team getting less than 8 is a good pick. Seahawks cover.

Dolphins +3 at Redskins: I’m not picking the Dolphins until they show me otherwise. Redskins cover.

Giants +5.5 at Cowboys: NFC East teams against each other at more than 3 points is usually a good pick. I don’t think the Giants lose this game, but I certainly think they keep it within five. Giants +5.5.

Ravens +2.5 at Bengals: I’m sitting here trying to talk myself into taking the Bengals. That’s not a good sign. My gut still says Bengals though and, since it’s so ample, I’ll go with it. Bengals cover.

Cardinals +3.5 at 49ers: How many years will the Cardinals be the sexy dark horse until people give up on them? Niners cover. Total tie break points 45.

My last man standing pool does not start until next week, but, if I was picking, it would have been the Steelers.

One of the very few reason I still go to the “we’re not the big media we promise” site that is Fark.com is because about six or eight months ago they put up a sports tab. Fortunately, there’s a core of like 20 or 25 sports posters (amongst the thousands and thousands of registered users over there who all think they’re anti-establishment and unique…. just like everyone else that posts there) capable of reasonable conversation. One of these happened last Tuesday when Roger Clemens revealed an “injury” after getting shellacked by the Mariners. Within five posts someone brought up that the last team Nolan Ryan ever faced was the Seattle Mariners before retiring due to an injury. This then morphed the whole conversation into a Nolan Ryan vs. Roger Clemens thread. Every sports fan has had one of these bar discussions; one of those things where no one is really wrong, but each guy wants to make his point louder than the other guy.

So, a point-by-point comparison.

Strikeouts: Roger Clemens: 4668 (and presumably counting) strikeouts (K) in 4910 2/3 Innings pitched (IP) for a K/9 ratio of 8.5. Nolan Ryan: 5714 K in 5386 IP for a K/9 ratio of 9.5. This is one of those insane statistics like the batting streak. Clemens (and Randy Johnson) have had long, solid, strikeout-a-lot-of-guys careers and they’re both still 1100 behind Ryan. For the record, Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez beat both of these guys with K/9 ratio over 10. There is no question here. The king of strikeouts is king.

Point: Ryan

Walks: Clemens: 1577. Ryan: 2795. For every 2 guys Ryan struck out, he walked one (roughly). For every three guys Clemens struck out, he walked one. Ryan did play his career before Questec and when different leagues actually had different umpires; but he was still striking guys out during all those times. When Nolan was off, he was WAY off.

Point: Clemens

ERA: Clemens’s career ERA is 3.13. Ryan’s is 3.19. These guys played in different eras and most of the time in different leagues and different parks. If only there was some statistic to adjust for all of those differences….

ERA+: Oh wait. This statistic takes ERA and adjusts it against the average ERA at the time and for park factor. Ryan’s career 3.19 ERA is good for a 112 ERA+. Clemens’s 3.13 ERA is good for a 143 ERA+. Ryan compiled a 3.19 playing most of his career in time when there was less scoring. Clemens compiled his 3.13 in a time (mostly) when everyone was hitting balls out of the park.

Point: Clemens

Wins/Losses (W-pct): I am loathe to include wins on any discussion about a pitcher’s worth, I will include them here. If some of my non-sports people read this, here is why wins is a stupid statistic. To qualify for a win, a pitcher must either 1) start the game and last 5 innings, then leave with a lead which is not relinquished for the remainder of the game or 2) enter a game behind and be the pitcher of record when the go-ahead run is scored. This means a starting pitcher can give up 8 runs in 2 innings, but as long as his team scores 10 while he’s still in, he qualifies for a win. Conversely, he can also give up 1 run over 9 innings, but if his team does not score any runs, he does not qualify for a win and, in fact, gets a loss. Remember the column I wrote a while back about over-valued statistics in baseball? This tops the list.

There are two things that make these hard (and, frankly, stupid) to compare. Ryan pitched most of his career in the 70s and 80s… hence he was much more likely to finish games and get losses that would have gone to a reliever in the modern day. Clemens, on the other hand, pitched in the 80s and 90s. There’s really no way to tell how many of Clemens’s appearances would have ended in losses instead of No Decisions had he completed 222 games instead of 118. That’s significant.

Point: No

Cy Youngs: The Cy Young award is given each year to the best pitcher in each league. Roger Clemens has won this award seven times. He finished second in 1990, a season where he compiled a line of: 21-6, 1.93 ERA, 1.08 WHIP, 209 Ks in 228 IP to Bob Welch (27-6, 2.95 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 127K in 238 IP). As the voters’ blinding love of the Win usually wins out, he lost the award despite absurdly better, you know, pitching stats. Again in 2005, Clemens compiled 13-8, 1.87ERA, 1.01 WHIP, 185K in 211 IP and finished third in the Cy Young Voting behind the winner Chris Carpenter (21-5, 2.83ERA, 1.06 WHIP, 213K, 242IP) and Dontrelle Willis (22-10, 2.63ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 170K, 236IP). This shows us three things: 1) Gary Sheffield is right and Major League Baseball hates the black man, 2) baseball people give out pitching awards based on the pitcher having Albert Pujols on his team and 3) Clemens, in a 24-year career, has been the best pitcher in the American League nine times and has been recognized for seven of them because his offense performed well enough to get him wins. He was so good, in fact, he won the MVP and the Cy Young in the same year. Ryan never won either.

2 Points: Clemens

No Hitters: Ryan has seven no-hitters and 61 career shut-outs. Clemens has 0 no-hitters and 46 shut-outs. I love no-hitters as much as the next guy: they’re fun, exciting, dramatic… they’re everything that makes for good sports. But, in the grand scheme of things Nolan Ryan won seven games with probably a lot of really good defense behind him. They’re fun, but they’re also a really stupid measuring stick to measure greatness. In fact, the guy who threw two consecutive no-hitters, Johnny Vander Meer, is so great I had to Google “consecutive no-hitters” to remember his name.

However, Met fan so grain of salt and all.

Half point: Ryan

Championships: Ryan won one title as a relief pitcher on the 1969 New York Mets… he got a 2-inning mop-up appearance in Game 3’s 5-0 Mets’ win. Clemens was brought in as a mercenary on a Yankee team that won two titles before he got there and certainly would have won in 1999 without him. In 1999, Clemens was the 4-starter on a playoff rotation that included Orlando Hernandez (12-6, 2.55 ERA post-season record), David Cone (12-3, 3.80), and Andy Pettitte (18-6, 4.08). He was the cranberry sauce in the Thanksgiving line-up… nice to have, probably won’t miss it if it’s not there. He was, however lights out against the Mets in 2000. Nolan Ryan gains points for being a Met while Roger Clemens loses points for beating the Mets.

Point: Push

Miscellaneous: For whatever reason, pitchers are immune to all the steroid controversey. I feel it necessary to point out that in 1996 (at 33), Clemens had more than 2000 innings on his odometer and showed signs of breaking down. He went 10-13 with a 3.63 ERA in 242 innings. After that season, he went to Toronto and “got in shape” and proceeded to have two Cy Young seasons in a row… then continue to strike out 200 batters a season for another 10 years… then threw two MORE Cy Young seasons at 41 and 42. Now, I’m certainly not suggesting that he did anything other than eat right and get in shape (nor do I really care), but I do know if he was approaching Ryan’s strike-out total or Cy Young’s win total there would be a lot more questions into this. Pitchers are fortunate that the two big pitching numbers (511 and the aforementioned 5714) are so far out of reach that they never really have to worry about it.

Ryan, on the other hand, is famous for beating up Robin Ventura when the 20-year-his-junior, uppity young punk charged the mound.

Point: Ryan

Cal Ripkin Jr. proved, if anything, that it’s better to be holysh*t good at one statistic than to be kind of good at a lot of them. This seems to be the case with Ryan. While I think that Ryan was probably the tougher guy, probably a better team-mate, less likely to develop phantom injuries after bad starts, and ranks very low on probably consumption of… erm…. supplements, it’s really hard to argue that he compiled a better career than Clemens. While I do think the people who put Clemens on the “OMG TOP FIVE EVAR!!1!” are out of their mind, comparing him to Ryan it’s really hard to argue for Ryan. People often use Ryan’s team as a crutch when describing why he didn’t have more wins, but Clemens played on some dogs, too and it didn’t stop him from winning 7 Cy Young’s.

The Verdict: Roger Clemens

In a happy coincidence, That Bootleg Guy reviewed the movie version of The Bronx Is Burning.

Is anyone else wondering what kind of tee-time Derek Jeter can get in early October?

We got our lease renewal form from our management company last week. The verdict: my rent is being “bumped up” to $2950/month. When we moved to that apartment two years ago, our 650 square feet of prime label-whoring was $2150.

Welcome to Manhattan… please bend over.

Over the last couple of years, we’ve watched the rent and apartment prices in our neighborhood soar. It isn’t really surprising; our neck of Manhattan is a planned neighborhood, full of doorman buildings and penthouses with prime location near the major subway lines. It’s quiet: no bars or restaurants open after 11pm. No clubs with drunken fools staggering home to scar precious little kids… and full of people who make way more money than me raising kids. Kids in your neighborhood in Manhattan is a pretty good sign you’re around people with lots more disposable income than you have. When we moved in, there was still a little touch of the 9/11 douchechills because of it’s proximity to the World Trade Hole. The rents were down and the rental-agent fees were non-existent. As we’ve watched 600 square foot apartments start to sell for $600k-$700k, the writing has pretty much been on the wall for eight months. I’m sure the management company was patiently waiting to soak us for the two-year lease that’s kept them honest.

So, with a little bit of sadness, we enter back into the awful world of hunting for an apartment in New York City. Of course, even though we know we’re moving it’s next to impossible to find a November availability apartment in September. We’ll really have to wait until early October before we’ll be able to find November availability. No pressure of course.

Let the Craig’s List mining begin.