Vegas Watch

This Week's Links (11/16-11/20)

2009-11-19T23:25:00.002-05:00

Zack Greinke "tries to keep [his] FIP as low as possible." Well, that worked.

Belichick is insane!

CHONE projections for the free agent hitters, and also some UZR projections.

Nate Silver unveiled his Soccer Power Index over at ESPN.

2010 College Hoops Contest: Guessing the Seeds

2009-11-18T11:42:00.004-05:00

The format of this one is going to be slightly different than our previous over/under contests, since I figured that in the end nobody really cares how many games a team wins in the regular season, or even in their conference.

What does matter is what seed you end up getting in the tournament, which will be the focus of the contest. The rules are very simple -- each entry will have to guess which four teams will earn #1 seeds, which teams will receive #2 seeds, on and on down to the fourth line. So your entry should look something like this, although possibly with different teams:

Entry Name: JWS

1. Emory
1. Rutgers
1. VCU
1. Richmond

2. Harvard
2. Iowa St.
2. Cleveland St.
2. NJIT

3. Ohio St.
3. Indiana
3. Texas Tech
3. Georgia Tech

4. Florida A&M
4. Georgia St.
4. Kansas
4. North Carolina

There is no tiebreaker. If two people tie, they'll both have to submit tournament brackets to determine the winner. This is a great idea, and will save me a ton of time.

The scoring will be six points for each #1 seed you get right, five for each #2, four for #3, and three for #4, for a grand total of 72 possible points. Please e-mail your entries to vegaswatch@gmail.com by midnight on Friday, December 4; this gives everyone a full week after Thanksgiving to get their picks together.

We'll start the prize pool at $200, although this sort of things tends to increase over time because I just love giving away money. Ask any questions you may have in the comments.

2009 NFL Survivor: Week 11

2009-11-17T14:35:00.008-05:00

Last week:
MIN: W, 27-10
MIA: W, 25-23
NO: W, 28-23
DEN: L, 27-17
BAL: W, 16-0

OFP had 4.6% of entries knocked out last week, and Yahoo lost 14.9%; the Broncos were a lot more popular in Yahoo!. There are 41,157 entries left in the Yahoo! pool.

Teams used (Weighted DVOA rank): New England (1st), Philadelphia (3rd), New Orleans (4th), Minnesota (6th), Dallas (8th), Green Bay (10th), Houston (14th), San Diego (16th), Washington (22nd), Seattle (23rd).

This week's consensus numbers from OFP and Yahoo!:

The new column is % of the OFP population that has already used each team in a game that they won.

Cincinnati (at Oakland)

The Bengals are an even 80.0% to win according to the line at Pinnacle, which is solid but really doesn't stand out in a week that contains a ridiculous eight legitimate options. They are also pretty popular in both pools, and the handy Survivor Grid tells us they still host the Browns, Lions, and Chiefs. With all that future value, there's no real reason to use Cincinnati this week.

Dallas (vs Washington)

I've already used the Cowboys, which is unfortunate because they're the most likely team to win this week at 83.3%. They're also very popular according to the most accurate consensus numbers we have though (OFP), and are an even better option next week when they host the Raiders.

Arizona (at St. Louis)

The Cardinals are a very average option this week. Their implied win probability of 78.3% is good, but not great -- it's actually only the seventh highest this week, although I've already used four of the teams ahead of them. They aren't ridiculously popular, but Arizona is the third most common pick in both OFP and Yahoo! And they don't have that much future value, although hosting the Rams in Week 16 is clearly a better option than this game. The Cardinals are slightly better than Cincy this week, but hopefully there's something else out there.

Pittsburgh (at Kansas City)

The Steelers are more likely to win than both Cincy and Arizona, and also less popular than those two teams, so that's certainly a good start. Pittsburgh is an extremely popular pick ATS this week, but that's the case for nearly all of these big road faves, so that's not going to be much of a differentiator. Future value could be though -- they have two games that are potential options, hosting Oakland in W13 and playing in Cleveland the next week.

Is that enough of a reason not to take them? The Browns game isn't, since Baltimore hosts the Lions that week. The Ravens are going to be a great option there, as 78% of the OFP survivors have already picked them. In W13, you could take the Bengals (vs DET) instead of Pittsburgh -- those two spreads should be about the same. The only problem with that is it means in W12, Cincy won't be available. The Cowboys and Chargers will be big favorites that week, but I've already used both of them. It looks like I'm going to need Cincy in W12, and Pittsburgh the following week, which really narrows down my current options.

Jacksonville (vs Buffalo)

After coming to that realization, it basically comes down to the Cardinals and Jaguars for me. Arizona is a bit more likely to win, but also slightly more popular. That's a slight edge to the Cards, but pretty much a wash, especially after you consider my preference for home teams. And if it comes down to future value, Arizona clearly has more, with a W15 visit to Detroit and a home game against St. Louis in W16. The Jaguars do play in Cleveland in the always unpredictable Week 17, but that's not a great option, and they're not going to be close to playable any other week.

New Orleans (at Tampa Bay)
New England (vs NY Jets)
Minnesota (vs Seattle)

I've already used each of these teams, so my pick this week is the team with the eighth highest win probability: Jacksonville.

This Week's Links (11/9-11/13)

2009-11-12T20:15:00.002-05:00

Congratulations to Craig Calcaterra, who's going to be blogging full-time now.

A cool new site that shows how much future value each team has in Survivor.

Those who signed up for the ESPN Full Court package will be seeing a lot of Craig Brackins.

Ken Pomeroy doesn't understand Alabama's national championship odds.

2010 College Hoops Previews: The Odds

2009-11-11T14:40:00.014-05:00

Now that we're finally done discussing and rating the 73 power conference teams plus 12 others, it's time to recap the results. Today I'm going to compare our assessments to the conference odds posted at various books in an attempt to find some opportunities; I'm rather confident I discovered at least one good spot. Odds taken from BetUS (BU), VIP, SportsBetting (SB), and The Greek (TG).

Not much disagreement here. Duke at +250 could be a possibility, but I can't see there being a big enough edge there to wait it out until March; there's not much difference between them and Carolina, and there are enough teams hanging around in the upper .800s that could surprise that I don't think it's worth it.

The other odds that jump out, although not necessarily in a good way, are Georgia Tech's. Their short odds are clearly caused, legitimately or not, by Derrick Favors. We also may have underestimated GT, as I think when we did our ACC ratings we were putting too much stock in the automated projections. It will be interesting to see how much of a difference the freshman class can make on a team that was 2-14 in the ACC with a .725 Pomeroy rating (11th in the conference) last season.

There are some interesting prices here, but first I have to talk about the absurdity at SportsBetting, which is not reflected in the table above. Their odds fail to list either Connecticut or Cincinnati, and the Field is listed at 20:1. Considering the Huskies are no higher than +350 elsewhere, and you throw in Cincy for free when they're 30:1 most places, that's a pretty incredible price. Neither of those teams are the favorite, but we have UConn third, which could be higher if Ater Majok is eligible and effective during the conference season. Throwing Cincy in there is also worth something, as they return more from last year than any Big East team other than St. John's and West Virginia, and also add Lance Stephenson.

As far as normal odds go, I think UConn and Louisville are pretty overrated here because of their success last year, while the teams they return really aren't that comparable to their '09 squads. Apparently this doesn't happen if you lose over 70% of your scoring, as Pitt's odds are more reasonable. I think the value lies with West Virginia, which isn't surprising since their record (10-8) was held down last year by a bunch of close losses; they were only seventh in the Big East standings, but fourth among BE teams in Pomeroy.

Also: the Notre Dame odds are really funny.

The odds seem to indicate that we've underestimated Texas. I actually didn't think there was a huge difference between the Big 12's top two teams, with KU at .970 and UT at .935. Anyway, there doesn't look to be value in either of those two, and I'd be very surprised if the conference champ came from one of the other 10 squads.

With the two favorites clearly established, Minnesota is the interesting option here. It doesn't really make sense for their odds to be as high as they are; the Gophers are directly comparable to a team like Michigan, with the same Pomeroy rating and conference record last year, similar recruiting classes, and Minnesota losing less talent from '09 to '10. Unfortunately, all that really proves is that Michigan's odds suck. Maybe there's some value with Minnesota, but since they're significantly behind Purdue and MSU, and very similar to Ohio St. and Michigan, I'm not too confident.

I don't really understand how UCLA is the favorite here. They lost so much, and the offense is going to have to have a completely new look. That'd be okay if they had a huge recruiting class coming in, but they don't; their newcomers are just the 8th best group in the nation according to Scout, and 13th if you believe ESPN.

With Washington having lost nearly 40% of their scoring themselves, the door is clearly open for Cal. I do have my concerns about the Bears keeping up last year's incredible 3P shooting, but I definitely think they're the best team out west, and have greater than a 22% chance of winning the conference.

The Arizona State odds look good at first, since we do have them finishing fourth, but I have a hard time seeing much upside there. Harden and Pendergraph were such a huge part of their offense, which was the reason they were good last year. Losing them is going to kill their inside scoring, and there are going to be a lot more contested threes now that that's all opposing defenses really have to worry about.

I was quite surprised when I saw these odds. Even if you go by public perception, the Vols are only about six spots behind UK (#10-11 vs. #4-5). We have them about even; when you consider the inherent variability that comes with a team dominated by freshmen, how insane would you have to be to lay -800 with Kentucky? The Wildcats will probably end up winning the conference, but the value here clearly lies with Tennessee.

Even without Sidney, I'm surprised MSU isn't getting more credit here. Some of these other odds don't make much sense; is there any reason to think Mississippi is actually going to be good? Maybe if Huertas and Malcolm White were coming back, but they're not; the defense was 184th in the country even with White's impressive block percentage. Arkansas was also absolutely terrible last year (2-14 in conference, .596 KenPom), and they currently have all sorts of issues. Alabama was well below average last season themselves, and Auburn and LSU both lost a lot, which just leaves MSU, returning 97% of their '09 scoring. Despite the lack of hype, they seem like a much clearer favorite to me than, say, Kentucky, and the odds certainly don't reflect that.

2009 NFL Survivor: Week 10

2009-11-11T08:52:00.004-05:00

Last week:
ATL: W, 31-17
SEA: W, 32-20
GB: L, 38-28
NO: W, 30-20
NE: W, 27-17

OFP had 11.6% of entries knocked out last week, and Yahoo lost 16.8%; the vast majority of this in both pools was because of Green Bay. There are 51,150 entries left in the Yahoo! pool.

Teams used (DAVE rank): New England (1st), New Orleans (2nd), Philadelphia (4th), Dallas (5th), Green Bay (9th), Houston (14th), San Diego (18th), Seattle (21st), Washington (23rd).

This week's consensus numbers from OFP and Yahoo!:

Minnesota (vs. Detroit)

The Vikings are favored by 16.5 and are 91.0% to win. That's a pretty convincing argument.

The immediately obvious reason to look elsewhere is Minnesota's popularity, but the gap between their win probability and that of my next best option (Baltimore, 82.4%) means the Vikings are still easily the most attractive option this week.

Minnesota also has surprisingly little future value. They do host the Seahawks next week (currently -10.5 at SportsBetting), but there are so many other comparable lines (PIT@KC, ARI@STL, CIN@OAK, plus a bunch of teams I've already used) that not having the Vikings available next week wouldn't be a huge loss. And their highest spread after that game is just seven, so there's not much to worry about there.

Miami (vs. Tampa Bay)

If not for Minnesota, the Dolphins would be an interesting option. They're a bit too popular since they're only the fourth most likely team to win, but Miami makes up for it with their complete lack of future value: they're not favored by more than a field goal in any game the rest of the year at SBET.

New Orleans (at St. Louis)

The Saints may at first seem like an interesting option if you have them available, since they are very good and the Rams are quite poor. But there's no way you can take them over the Vikings this week, and I'd take Miami over New Orleans as well. That's because the Saints are "only" 84.5% to win (favored by 13.5, and an extremely popular selection ATS) and have an immense amount of future value.

They play at Tampa next week, and visit Washington in Week 13, but the most ridiculous line will come in Week 16, when they host the Bucs. Hopefully the Saints still have something to play for at that point, since not only will the spread be huge (-17.5 at SBET) but after this week only 32% of the OFP population will still have New Orleans as an option, so by Week 16 they won't be a popular selection at all.

Denver (at Washington)

The Broncos are favored by 3.5 points. Go Redskins.

Baltimore (at Cleveland)

The Ravens are the third most likely team to win this week (-10.5, 82.4%), but the case for them falls apart when you look at future value. They're going to be a great option when they host the Lions in Week 14, especially since over 70% of the OFP population has already used Baltimore. The other thing about W14 is that there aren't many other great options, with only two prospective lines above 10 at SBET. And even with those, I've already used New England and I doubt the Steelers-Browns line will be as high as the -15 it's currently listed at (and I'll probably use Pittsburgh before then anyway).

None of the other games are particularly compelling, so the Vikings are the obvious pick this week.

2010 College Hoops Previews: The Big East

2009-11-08T20:13:00.004-05:00

Here's the final conference installment of the mammoth 2010 College Hoops Previews series. This time I'm joined by JP, ML, and RTC. For more details on what's going on with the ratings, go here and here; the new regression ratings for the Big East are here. All team ratings from kenpom.com, recruiting info was taken from Scout.

1. West Virginia
2009 rating: .951
Returning 80% of minutes, 78% of points
Lost Alex Ruoff (senior), Dee Proby (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Dalton Pepper (6'5, 215; 4*), Dan Jennings (6'9, 240; 4*), Deniz Kilicli (6'9, 245; 3*), Casey Mitchell (6'4, 220; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .955, VW .942, JP .949, RM .935

VW: Losing Ruoff hurts, but they were actually only 227th in the nation in 3P% last year, so they'll be fine if Butler and Bryant improve a little bit in that area. Despite a 48.5% eFG%, which was good for just 193rd in the nation, the offense was 18th in the country thanks to outstanding rebounding and few turnovers. It's sort of strange to project them since I don't think many people ever saw them as the #9 team in the country last season, but there's just not a whole lot pointing toward the Neers getting worse.

RM: This is my pick for the BE title. Huggins is a great regular season coach, and he returns almost everyone. Ebanks has only scratched the surface of his potential and will anchor the defense from the middle with prototypical Huggins guards like Truck Bryant and Joe Mazzulla hawking the perimeter.
Final rating: .951

2. Villanova
2009 rating: .946
Returning 63% of minutes, 62% of points
Lost Dwayne Anderson, Shane Clark (seniors), Dante Cunningham (draft)
Incoming freshmen: Dominic Cheek (6'5, 175; 5*), Mouphtauo Yarou (6'9, 235; 5*), Isaiah Armwood (6'7, 185; 4*), Maalik Wayns (6'1, 175; 4*)
Initial ratings: ML .950, VW .948, JP .938, RM .920
RM: It feels like people are slightly overrating Villanova based on their F4 run and the incoming class (which, granted, is nasty). The returning guard play is excellent with Reynolds, Fisher and Stokes, but the loss of Dante Cunningham inside shouldn't be overlooked. He did everything for Nova inside, and to expect a talented freshman like Yarou to walk in and fill his shoes immediately may be too much to ask.

VW: The Cats may be historically tough in the coming season. Their RetMin% isn't all that impressive, but if they replace Cunningham, Anderson and Clark with 18 stars of recruits I can't see it being a huge drop off.
Final rating: .948

3. Connecticut
2009 rating: .975
Returning 39% of minutes, 37% of points
Lost Jeff Adrien & Craig Austrie (seniors), Hasheem Thabeet & A.J. Price (draft)
Incoming freshmen: Alex Oriakhi (6'9, 225; 5*), Jamal Coombs-McDaniel (6'7, 185; 4*), Darius Smith (6'2, 180; 4*)
Initial ratings: ML .910, VW .915, JP .905, RM .885
VW: They lost a ton obviously, but UConn should still be pretty strong. Robinson's rebounding numbers aren't as good as I would've guessed, but that's probably inevitable when you're playing alongside Adrien and Thabeet. Walker famously came on strong at the end of last year, and Dyson is a serviceable two guard, although his 3P shooting has been pretty weak throughout his tenure in Storrs. If the freshman class lives up to the hype they might have something here.
Final rating: .912

4. Georgetown
2009 rating: .908
Returning 69% of minutes, 68% of points
Lost Jessie Sapp (senior), DaJuan Summers (draft), Omar Wattad (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Hollis Thompson (6'6, 180; 4*), Vee Sanford (6'3, 175; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .920, VW .905, JP .908, RM .895
VW: A lot of their struggles offensively last year could be attributed to terrible 3P shooting: 33.2%, just 206th in the country. If Wright and Freeman get their acts together in that department -- and the latter did shoot 40% two years ago -- then the offense will be excellent, with those two on the perimeter and Monroe inside. They'll miss Summers, but the defense was 22nd in the nation last year, led by Monroe's impressive numbers across the board. I think it's reasonable to stray from the projection here as I can't see how they regress from last season's disappointing showing.
Final rating: .911

5. Louisville
2009 rating: .968
Returning 55% of minutes, 55% of points
Lost Andre McGee (senior), Terrence Williams & Earl Clark (draft)
Incoming freshmen: Peyton Silva (5'11, 160; 4*), Rakeem Buckles (6'8, 200; 4*), Stephan Van Treese (6'9, 220; 3*), Mike Marra (6'4, 190; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .915, VW .900, JP .921, RM .870
VW: I don't doubt their defense -- the rebounding is somewhat worrisome, with Clark and Williams gone, but they have enough size that they should be alright. How are they going to score though? They weren't great in that department last year (31st in the nation), and things revolved around T-Will a good deal. They're going to be dependent on Samuels inside and the excellent shooting of Knowles and Smith again, which doesn't seem like the greatest of plans.
Final rating: .910
6. Cincinnati
2009 rating: .748
Returning 78% of minutes, 78% of points
Lost Mike Williams (senior), Alvin Mitchell (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Lance Stephenson (6'5, 202; 5*), Sean Kilpatrick (6'3, 185; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .860, VW .830, JP .855, RM .860
RM: The Bearcats should be the upwardly mobile BE team of 2009-10. They return the core of a team that surprised in the league last year, plus they add five star recruit Lance Stephenson, and Cashmere Wright returns from an injury. If Stephenson can stay away from 17-year old girls and doesn't piss off the rest of his team with the Born Ready stuff, the Bearcats should be NCAA-bound.

VW: I'm fully prepared for five months of being a Lance Stephenson fanboy, and I'm actually a fan of their core on offense if Vaughn goes back to nailing 40% of his threes and Gates progresses in his sophomore season. Unfortunately, I'm not sure where the D, which was 104th in the country last year, is going to come from.
Final rating: .855
7. Pittsburgh
2009 rating: .963
Returning 34% of minutes, 27% of points
Lost Levance Fields & Tyrell Biggs (seniors), Sam Young & DeJuan Blair (draft)
Incoming freshmen: Dante Taylor (6'8, 215; 5*), Talib Zanna (6'8, 215; 4*), Lamar Patterson (6'5, 220; 3*), J.J. Richardson (6'7, 230; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .840, VW .870, JP .840, RM .870
RM: Wow, talk about personnel losses. Not only the four listed above, but also Dixon starting the season injured. There's some solid young talent here in Chase Adams (Centenary transfer eligible immediately), Ashton Gibbs and Gilbert Brown, along with some interesting recruits, and if anyone believes that a Jamie Dixon team will collapse, they're crazy - he's only had one sub-25 win season in six years of coaching.

VW: They bring back a bunch of solid ORtgs -- their offense was ridiculously efficient last year -- but how much of that will carry over with so much talent gone? Maybe this Taylor guy ends up being pretty good, it definitely looks to be a down year for Pitt though.
Final rating: .854
8. Marquette
2009 rating: .929
Returning 40% of minutes, 34% of points
Lost Jerel McNeal, Wesley Matthews, Dominic James, Dwight Burke (seniors), Pat Hazel (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Junior Cadougan (6'1, 190; 4*), Erik Williams (6'7, 190; 4*), Jeronne Maymon (6'7, 185; 4*), Youssoupha Mbao (7'2, 215; 3*), Darius Johnson-Odom (3*), Dwight Buycks (6'1, 165; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .835, VW .850, JP .827, RM .825
RM: Jimmy Butler is interesting given how he came on at the end of last season (four double-figure scoring and two double-figure rebounding games in his last eight). The recruiting class is solid, but Marquette will have to figure out where points are coming from after losing so much offensive firepower.

VW: Who knows, with the trio of guards finally having graduated. Hayward had a great year all around last season, and Butler was outrageously efficient in limited time, but their success will probably come down to how effective the enormous freshman class is.
Final rating: .841

9. Seton Hall
2009 rating: .796
Returning 76% of minutes, 85% of points
Lost Paul Gause (senior), Mike Davis & Brandon Walters (transfers)
Incoming freshmen: Ferrakohn Hall (6'7, 200; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .835, VW .825, JP .850, RM .845
RM: If Cincy isn't the surprise team this year, Seton Hall will be. The additions of Keon Lawrence and Herb Pope as transfers makes this a very interesting squad when added to gunner Jeremy Hazell and several other returning contributors. The additional athleticism alone should help the defense improve from third-to-last in the BE last year.

VW: The Pirates return almost everybody after a respectable year in a tough conference. They have really struggled from beyond the arc and on the defensive glass each of the last two years; if they could just manage to be average in one of those areas for a couple months an above .500 finish in the BE isn't out of the question.
Final rating: .840

10. Notre Dame
2009 rating: .877
Returning 47% of minutes, 53% of points
Lost Kyle McAlarney, Luke Zeller, Ryan Ayers, Zach Hillesland (seniors)
Incoming freshmen: Tom Knight (6'9, 245; 3*), Mike Broghammer (6'9, 220; 3*), Jack Cooley (6'8, 210; 3*), Joey Brooks (6'5, 200; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .815, VW .835, JP .810, RM .850
VW: Transfer Scott Martin tearing his ACL hurts; he would've been a nice complement to Harangody inside. They do bring in The Other Hansbrough, but appear to have very little depth beyond him, Jackson, and the big guy down low. Not exactly promising for a team that has developed a reputation for not being able to stop anyone.
Final rating: .822

11. Syracuse
2009 rating: .945
Returning 45% of minutes, 41% of points
Lost Kristof Ongenaet (senior), Johnny Flynn (draft), Sean Williams (transfer), Eric Devendorf & Paul Harris (tried to get drafted)
Incoming freshmen: DaShonte Riley (6'11, 220: 4*), Brandon Triche (6'3, 195; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .815, VW .830, JP .820, RM .840
RM: Major losses for the Orange, who will clearly struggle to find cohesion while implementing transfer Wes Johnson as the new best player in their lineup. Arinze Onuaku appears underutilized - even though he shot a ridiculous 67% from inside last year, he only received 18% of the shots available while on the floor. The expectation is that will go up significantly this year.

VW: They would've been excellent if Devendorf and Harris had decided to return rather than go undrafted, but that didn't happen. The Cuse could be tough down low with Onuaku and the 6'11" freshman Riley, but I'm not sure what the plan is in the backcourt.
Final rating: .820

12. St. John's
2009 rating: .626
Returning 94% of minutes, 97% of points
Lost Phil Wait & TyShawn Edmondson (transfers), Tomas Jasiulionis (overseas)
Incoming freshmen: Omari Lawrence (6'4, 170; 3*), Dwight Hardy (6'2, 175; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .780, VW .735, JP .795, RM .750
VW: The regression projection (.827) is absurd -- that'd put them 59th in the country, and they haven't even been in the top 100 since '05 -- but the Red Storm were dominated by sophomores last season, so they should be markedly better. They also theoretically return Anthony Mason Jr., who missed all but three games last season, but he's out for at least a few more weeks with an aggravated hamstring.
Final rating: .760

13. Providence
2009 rating: .773
Returning 36% of minutes, 34% of points
Lost Weyinmi Efejuku, Geoff McDermott, Jeff Xavier, Jonathan Kale, Randall Hanke (seniors), Alex Kellogg (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Johnnie Lacy (5'10, 160; 3*), James Still (6'9, 210; 3*), Kadeem Batts (6'7, 215; 3*), Vincent Council (6'1, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .735, VW .705, JP .725, RM .725
RM: The Friars need to improve defensively, which will be very tough to do after losing five seniors from an NIT team. It's Sharaud Curry and Marshon Brooks' team now, but neither player gets me very excited about this team.

VW: Curry, Brooks, and Hanke form a decent enough top three, but it seems like they're going to be giving way too many minutes to 3* recruits to be particularly competitive.
Final rating: .720

14. South Florida
2009 rating: .572
Returning 65% of minutes, 70% of points
Lost Jesus Verdejo, Mobolaji Ajayi, Aris Williams (seniors), Gaby Belardo & Eladio Espinosa (transfers)
Incoming freshmen: Jarrid Famous (6'11, 235; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .680, VW .700, JP .685, RM .700
ML: Dominique Jones is good. His 2009 rate stats aren't that impressive until you account for the fact that he accomplished them with no supporting cast while playing 93.3% of the minutes. USF basketball tends to become pretty popular in Contrarianville from January to March, but if something were to happen to Jones, I'm not sure I could support them in the way that I have in the past.
Final rating: .692

15. DePaul
2009 rating: .406
Returning 68% of minutes, 61% of points
Lost Jabari Currie & Matija Poscic (seniors), Dar Tucker (tried to get drafted)
Incoming freshmen: Tony Freeland (6'7, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .610, VW .702, JP .605, RM .600
VW: Tucker was ridiculously high usage, but also horribly inefficient, with a 45% eFG%. Walker and Koshwal were better, and will be the focus of the offense this season. The defense will probably continue to be awful, as they were bad last season in just about every category except preventing their opponents from getting to the line. Last year was really a huge outlier for them overall though, so I'm projecting a return to respectability.
Final rating: .658

16. Rutgers
2009 rating: .558
Returning 53% of minutes, 55% of points
Lost Anthony Farmer, J.R. Inman, Jaron Griffin (seniors), Earl Pettis (transfer), Corey Chandler (dismissed)
Incoming freshmen: Dane Miller (6'6, 200; 3*), Austin Johnson (6'7, 200; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .640, VW .590, JP .660, RM .675
VW: I know we're constantly saying that 3P shooting will regress to the mean, but when you're under 32% as a team for three consecutive years, I'm pretty sure it's not just bad luck.

RM: Mike Rosario shoots poorly because he takes way too many threes (252 attempts, converting 30%), but he'll get the shots, and along with Greg Echinique inside, the horrific offense should improve. It won't be enough to move into the top half of the league, and their relative position in the standings might not change, but they should be marginally better.

Final rating: .620

Final Big East ratings:

Pretty weird hierarchy, with a clear top two and then three more teams before another big gap. In the next couple days I'll be looking at how the 85 teams we rated stack up against each other, how that order compares to the polls, where I disagree with the conference odds, and who knows what else.

2010 College Hoops Previews: The Other Guys

2009-11-08T15:22:00.006-05:00

Below is our attempt to catch the non-power conference teams that appear headed toward relevance in March. The standard numbers we look at can be found here; I only got RM on board for this one, so all the discussion and ratings are from the two of us. Also note that the order below is completely meaningless. The Big East preview will be posted Monday morning, and look for various other preview content later in the week.

Memphis

RM: The addition of Elliot Williams from Duke may have saved this team from a complete meltdown. He only averaged four points in 16 minutes for the Devils, but his late addition to the starting lineup last year made Duke much more athletic and effective defensively. If he can handle that role for Memphis, and I think he can, we'll get to see just how deep John Calipari's last couple of teams actually were (Witherspoon, Mack, Sallie, Kemp).

VW: I think the Tigers may have a down year at some point because of Calipari's departure, but I'd guess that will be next year, when Mack, Kemp, and Henderson-Niles graduate. For now they still have all the talent he brought in, so they should be okay, although it'll obviously be quite a drop from the last two years.

Final rating: .855

Gonzaga

RM: Can you believe that last year's Zags were the nation's #1 defensive team against twos? Seems impossible. Though not as hyped as some of his teammates, Bouldin was actually the second most efficient player they had last year, with a 54%/42% split from 2/3. There will have to be a dropoff at a national level, but they'll still probably win the WCC.

VW: It's kind of surprising that they don't have a stronger recruiting class to balance out the graduations of Pargo, Heytvelt, and Downs, but both Bouldin and Gray (58% from two) were extremely efficient last year, so they should be able to pick up some of the slack of last year's seniors and Mr. Tough.

Final rating: .855

Xavier

RM: Another team with some big losses, including head coach Sean Miller. Lebron-dunker Jordan Crawford will help things, but the sophomore class of Terrell Holloway, Kenny Frease and Brad Redford will have to seriously step up if XU expects to win 25+ games and the A-10 again.

VW: Jason Love and Frease could be an excellent combo on the boards in increased minutes for both of them. Redford shot 47% from three last year; his outside shooting could be huge in replacing the offensive production of Raymond and Brown.

Final rating: .865

BYU

RM: Despite the loss of Lee Cummard this should be a really good team, with Jonathan Tavernari and Jimmer Fredette returning. If the Cougars can get improved boardwork from Chris Miles (6'11) and James Anderson (6'10), this team could finally win a first round NCAA game (last time: 1993).

VW: I'm not quite as high on these guys as RM; I don't think they were as good as their final KenPom rating last year (.919), and replacing Cummard's production (122.3 ORtg) will be tough. Fredette and Emery were both very good as sophomores last year though, so they're probably the MWC favorites.

Final rating: .880

Butler

RM: The Bulldogs are media darlings this year, but deservedly so. The multi-dimensional Gordon Hayward would star for anyone in the country, and Matt Howard and Shelvin Mack are no joke either. Everyone else returns, as this was basically a team of freshmen/sophomores last year. Butler is a Sweet 16 team without question based on their talent level.

VW: This is the best team outside the big six conferences, and it doesn't appear to be particularly close. It's hard to project them both because they literally return everybody, and they were surprisingly good last year despite losing a ton from their strong '08 team. Hayward was ridiculously good as a freshman (52% from two, 45% from three), and should be an even bigger part of the offense this season.

Final rating: .922

Dayton

RM: I'm not sold on media selection of UD as the best team in the A10, even though they return nearly everyone including super-dunker Chris Wright. The Flyers really need to really improve their offensive execution (#250 from two; #231 from three) to realize their talent level, and 65% from the line (#298) won't help much either. Their defense saves them most of the time, but that offense must improve.

VW: I'm not huge on the Flyers myself; they were fifth in the country in "Luck" last year, and thus pretty overrated. They only lost Little and Thomas though, who weren't particularly good; they should improve, especially if Wright can return his ORtg to his '08 level (110).

Final rating: .840

Siena

RM: Hasbrouck is a key loss, but he didn't shoot it as well as Ubiles, Rossiter and Franklin, who all return. They're undersized as a group, but make up for it on defense by forcing turnovers (#48 in the nation last season) and not fouling much (#5).

VW: Even moreso than Hasbrouck, Rossiter was the key last year, shooting 63% from the field. It actually looks like Hasbrouck, their biggest name and (not coincidentally) highest usage guy, was quite overrated, with an ORtg of just 97.8. They could be pretty good on offense if Rossiter starts getting more touches.

Final rating: .835

Tulsa

RM: Jerome Jordan will be an NBA center, and Ben Uzoh is a good enough to set up the offense and keep defenses honest. If Memphis falters like many expect in CUSA, Tulsa will be there to pick up the crown.

VW: Jordan is really, really good, which makes it funny that the strength of their defense last year was actually guarding the three (27.8% 3P% against, lowest in the nation). That will inevitably regress, but the offense should be better with Jordan and Ben Uzoh back for their senior years. We actually have them tied with mighty Memphis, so that should be an interesting race in C-USA.

Final rating: .855

Northern Iowa

RM: UNI returns all five starters from a balanced team. 7'1 Jordan Eglseder only played 19 minutes/game last year and still put up 10/6; if he can stay on the floor another 5-10 mpg, he could average a double-double. Nobody else in the Valley has anyone quite like that.

VW: Both Eglseder and Lucas O'Rear (65% from two) were excellent inside last year; both also played less than half the time, so there is some room for improvement there if those two can stay on the court. If sophomore Johnny Moran can improve on last year's 33% from three, they could have quite an offense.

Final rating: .825

Creighton

RM: There's a lot returning here even though star Booker Woodfox is gone. Stat of the year: Kaleb Korver shot NINE times as many threes than twos last season (87 vs. 9). How do you only shoot nine twos in over 500 minutes of court time?

VW: Woodfox was really good (123.4 ORtg), and also high usage, so that production will be extremely difficult to replace. They are going to need Korver to keep up his efficient shooting (45% from three) though, as treys from him and Woodfox were the strength of their offense last year.

Final rating: .805

Utah St.

RM: Gary Wilkinson was really good, but he wasn't the whole team here. Tai Wesley and Jared Quayle are also very efficient players, and if this team could just get its defense marginally better, then they would be the prohibitive favorite (as it stands, they barely edged out Nevada in both the coaches and media polls).

VW: I'm not too worried about them being better than Nevada, since the Pack finished last year with a KenPom rating of just .685 and are only returning 67% of last season's minutes. As RM mentioned, they should be able to survive the loss of Wilkinson, since they have a variety of weapons on offense. Wilkinson also doesn't appear to have been a big factor on D (beyond rebounding), which is the area that they really need to improve.

Final rating: .830

VCU

RM: Eric Maynor is gone, but the rebounding/shot-blocking machine known as Larry Sanders returns to become the focal point for new coach Shaka Smart. Wake Forest transfer Jamie Skeen could also add athletic depth not typically seen at the CAA level in the frontcourt, but I'm worried about their backcourt with Maynor leaving.

VW: Finally, we arrive at my hometown team (tickets to the 11/21 game vs. OU still available!). Losing Maynor obviously hurts, but they do return every other significant contributor from a team that almost took down UCLA in the first round last year. This is the year that Sanders needs to show some polish on the offensive end; he should really be able to hit more than 51% of his twos. Bradford Burgess had an impressive 58% eFG% as a freshman, so he should be able to fill some of the scoring void left by Maynor, but I can't see anyone duplicating the departed guard's ridiculous Assist Rate of 41%.

Final rating: .835

2009 NFL Survivor: Week 9

2009-11-03T12:44:00.011-05:00

Last week:
SD: W, 24-16
CHI: W, 30-6
ARI: L, 34-21
DAL: W, 38-17
IND: W, 18-14
DET: L, 17-10
NO: W, 35-27

OFP had 10.4% of entries knocked out last week; the Yahoo! entrants were a bit more bullish on Arizona, which caused 13.9% of them to go down. There are 60,648 entries left in the Yahoo! pool.

Teams used (DAVE rank): New England (1st), Philadelphia (2nd), New Orleans (3rd), Green Bay (6th), Dallas (9th), Houston (17th), San Diego (19th), Washington (21st).

This week's consensus numbers from OFP and Yahoo!:

Atlanta (vs. Washington)

For most of this season, there's been a choice: either take the most popular team, or sacrifice some win probability. Not this week though, as there are three other teams favored at least as much as the Falcons (-10, 81.3%). Throw in the fact that they still face the Bucs twice, and there's really no reason to waste Atlanta this week.

Seattle (vs. Detroit)

The Seahawks are favored by the exact same amount as the Falcons, but are dramatically less popular; this probably has something to do with Seattle only having won one more game this season than Detroit. They do travel to St. Louis and host Tampa Bay later in the season, but it doesn't get any better than the Lions -- who have been noticeably worse than those other two teams -- at home. Those lines will probably be in single digits, and I don't think there are going to be many weeks the rest of the year where taking a team favored by less than 10 points is necessary.

Green Bay (at Tampa Bay)

I have already used the Packers, but I don't think I'd take them over Seattle even if I hadn't, since they're extremely public at -9.5 (79.6%) on the road, and still face the 49ers, Lions, and, well, Seahawks down the stretch.

New Orleans (vs. Carolina)

You know, when I took the Saints in Week 1 against the Lions, I really had no idea I'd be using the third best team in the league right off the bat. That's how it worked out though, so I obviously can't take New Orleans this week.

If you do still have the Saints available, it's an interesting debate between them and the Seahawks:

Win probability: NO 85.4%, SEA 81.3%
Popularity: SEA 18.1%, NO 11.7%
Future value: The Saints will be large road favorites against the Rams (-14.5 at SBET), Bucs (-17.5), and Redskins (-14), and will be laying a huge number against the Bucs in Week 16 at home (-17.5 right now; I realize this makes no sense). The Seahawks are favored by nine against TB in Week 15, but there are plenty of options that week; Seattle has essentially zero future value.
Future popularity: If they win, the Saints will have been used by 53% of OFP survivors after this week; the Seahawks will be at 30%.

New Orleans comes out on top in three of the four categories, but they have such a ridiculous amount of future value that I think I'd probably still go with Seattle.

New England (vs. Miami)

The Pats are actually the second biggest favorite of the week at -10.5 (82.8%). They have more value going forward (-10.5 vs NYJ, -13 vs CAR, -16 vs JAX) than the Seahawks, but are less popular this week; I'd probably stick with Seattle and save New England for later if I hadn't used either team.

The lack of available options made my choice unusually simple this week: the Seahawks are the pick.

Evaluating April MLB Predictions (2005-2009)

2009-11-03T08:27:00.001-05:00

First off, here are the final 2009 standings:

Not much has changed since we last checked in. Most of these got a bit lower, as you'd expect with the slightly larger sample size; CAIRO ended up gaining a decent amount of separation from the pack.

Of course, there's all sorts of noise when we're just looking at one season of projections. Below are the systems I have win totals from for each year since 2005, plus CHONE, which I have for '06-'09:

It's essentially a dead heat between CHONE and MGL over the last four years, with MGL holding the five-year crown on the strength of his '05 performance. PECOTA was the clear leader before 2009, but because of both its terrible showing this season and questions about the system's current methodology, I'd have a hard time relying on its 2010 projections too heavily. Considering that MGL doesn't make his win projections public prior to the season, that means we should probably be focusing on CHONE when analyzing the preseason divisional odds next March.

2010 College Hoops Previews: The Pac-10

2009-10-31T17:33:00.008-04:00

Here's the fifth installment of the mammoth 2010 College Hoops Previews series. This time I'm joined by JP, ML, and RTC. For more details on what's going on with the ratings, go here and here; the new regression ratings for the Pac-10 are here. All team ratings from kenpom.com, recruiting info was taken from Scout.

1. California
2009 rating: .886
Returning 91% of minutes, 93% of points
Lost Jordan Wilkes ("pursuing academic opportunities")
Incoming freshmen: Brandon Smith (5'11, 170; 3*), Markuri Sanders-Frison (6'8, 265; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .945, VW .930, JP .935, RM .935

VW: Pretty incredible that the Bears are the favorite in this conference, but they're legitimately good in a down year out west. My main concern is that, while you'd expect a team with all five starts coming back to progress, it'd tough to improve on 42.7% from three (first in the nation). That's bound to go down; Randle and Robertson shot 46% and 49% last year after hitting at 40% and 37% clips in their prior years, respectively.

Their hope for improvement is on the defensive end, where they were ranked just 101st a year ago. Cal had particular issues forcing turnovers; maybe they'll be more adept in that department this season with Seeley and Gutierrez getting a bit more time as sophomores.

ML: I went a bit overboard here. My rating suggests that I think they are only a smidgen worse than Purdue/UK, and I highly doubt that is the case. Cal's struggles forcing turnovers are not exactly a new development either. They were bad in this department long before Mike Montgomery arrived on campus. I do agree that they should be considered favorites to win the league, but that says more about the Pac 10 then it does about them.

Final rating: .928

2. Washington
2009 rating: .940
Returning 69% of minutes, 61% of points
Lost Justin Dentmon (senior), Jon Brockman (draft), Joe Wolfinger (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Abdul Gaddy (6'3, 170; 5*), Clarence Trent (6'7, 230; 3*), Charles Garcia (6'10, 220; 3*), C.J. Wilcox (6'5, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .900, VW .915, JP .910, RM .920

RM: The quartet of Isaiah Thomas, Abdul Gaddy, Quincy Pondexter and Venoy Overton could be the best backcourt in America. Unfortunately, the frontcourt could be the worst (ok, not really). But it's pretty bad. The loss of Jon Brockman will be felt if UW gets into games where they're walking the ball upcourt. The good news is that there's very little skilled size in the Pac-10 this year, so that weakness may not be exploited too frequently.

ML: The one area where they won't miss Jon Brockman is shot blocking. He was about as deficient as the 5 foot 8 Thomas in this regard last year, which is pretty amazing.

VW: They were third in the nation in OR% last year, and a lot of that was attributed to Brockman. They were only 84th on the defensive glass, and if you take the 6'11 senior out of the equation they really weren't very impressive at all. It's going to be key for Pondexter, Bryan-Amaning, and one or two of the freshman to fill that void; they'll still fall off in those two categories, but progression in other areas (particularly from Thomas in his sophomore season) will minimize the damage.

Final rating: .908

3. UCLA
2009 rating: .949
Returning 38% of minutes, 43% of points
Lost Josh Shipp, Alfred Aboya (seniors), Jrue Holliday, Darren Collison (draft)
Incoming freshmen: Tyler Honeycutt (6'8, 190; 5*), Mike Moser (6'7, 185; 4*), Anthony Stover (6'10, 207; 4*), Brendan Lane (6'9, 200; 4*), Reeves Nelson (6'7, 215; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .905, VW .910, JP .905, RM .875

RM: It's really hard to project this UCLA team because the majority of its players haven't seen much action, yet we know from their recruiting rankings that they're all blue chippers. How will Jerime Anderson, Malcolm Lee, Drew Gordon and J'Mison Morgan adjust to playing heavy minutes in their sophomore seasons? Howland won't let this team fall too far, but they're going to take some licks this year.

VW: Yeah, this is a situation where last year's rating is nearly irrelevant. The defense will likely be alright, since they have plenty of athletes and their coach didn't change, but the thing about UCLA last year was that it wasn't the defense that carried them, it was their offense, which was the third most efficient unit in the nation. Dragovic is back, and he was quite good on offense last year, but who knows how much of that was because of all the talent around him. With all the sophomores and freshmen, UCLA has the chance to be pretty strong, especially once conference season rolls around, but there's really no way of knowing at this point.

Final rating: .907

4. Arizona St.
2009 rating: .941
Returning 66% of minutes, 50% of points
Lost James Harden, Jeff Pendergraph (draft), Kraidon Woods (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Trent Lockett (6'5, 185; 4*), Demetrius Walker (6'4, 185; 3*), Victor Rudd (6'8, 200; 3*), Ruslan Pateev (6'11, 235; 3*), Brandon Thompson (6'2, 185; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .850, VW .872, JP .886, RM .840

JP: They were 2nd in the country last year in eFG% (56.4), but losing Pendergraph's 66% is going to bring that back down to earth a little bit, and I heard that Harden guy could score occasionally as well. I also don't see a single player on this team getting a rebound next year beyond Boateng, which could be an issue.

VW: They shot a ton of threes last year, and without Pendergraph that tendency may become even more dramatic. That's fine if you're hitting them, but Glasser and Kuksiks both saw huge rises in their 3P% last year, so some regression there is almost inevitable. Fortunately Abbott's 29% from deep has nowhere to go but up. I'm guessing they'll score enough, but the defense and rebounding could get ugly.

ML: Without Harden the quality of those 3PAs figures to go down as well. He created a lot of open looks for the likes of Glasser and Kuksiks with his ability to get into the lane. They won't be as bad on the whole, but I won't be shocked if the Sun Devils resemble their borderline unwatchable 2007 outfit at times offensively.

Final rating: .868

5. Arizona
2009 rating: .871
Returning 52% of minutes, 43% of points
Lost Fendi Onobun (senior), Jordan Hill, Chase Budinger (draft), Zane Johnson (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Kyryl Natyazhko (6'10, 240; 4*), Solomon Hill (6'6, 215; 4*), Kevin Parrom (6'5, 185; 4*), Derrick Williams (6'7, 195; 4*), Lamont Jones (6'0, 175; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .855, VW .850, JP .865, RM .860

RM: Arizona's defense was appallingly bad for a team in the NCAA Tourney last year, but Sean Miller won't stand for that level of effort on his team -- his last two Xavier squads were top 35 defensive teams. On the other hand, who other than Nic Wise will score? When he's not handing games away, Jamelle Horne shows promise -- as does Kyle Fogg - but Miller is going to have to lean heavily on his recruits, most notably Solomon Hill, for production. The NCAA streak stands at 25, but an awful lot of things need to go well to get to 26.

VW: The defense should actually get better, with the loss of Budinger, the new coach, the recruits, and some regression balancing out Hill's departure. The offense will take a big step back from #7 in the country though, since Budinger was actually effective at that end of the floor. Overall, a small step back seems about right; I bet they still stumble into the tournament, deservedly or not.

Final rating: .858

6. Oregon St.
2009 rating: .677
Returning 83% of minutes, 88% of points
Lost Rickey Claitt (senior)
Incoming freshmen: Angus Brandt (6'9, 220; 4*), Roberto Nelson (6'3, 180; 4*), Joe Burton (6'7, 270; 3*), Jared Cunningham (6'3, 165; 3*), Rhys Murphy (6'7, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .820, VW .805, JP .812, RM .830

RM: Craig Robinson has done a nice job here, taking one of the worst teams I've ever seen two years ago and turning it into a competitive program overnight using his methodical (read: slow) style of play. Most everyone returns and they add a good recruiting class; I think they actually have a shot at the tournament this year.

VW: They should improve once again, but I'm not completely sold -- while they have a lot of volume coming back, it's not like we're they're returning a bunch of four- and five-star recruits. Claitt was also their most efficient player on offense, although he was very low-usage. Brandt and Burton are going to have to improve the interior defense, which was horrible last year.

Final rating: .802

7. Stanford
2009 rating: .860
Returning 45% of minutes, 41% of points
Lost Anthony Goods, Lawrence Hill, Kenny Brown, Mitch Johnson (seniors), Will Paul (suspended)
Incoming freshmen: Andy Brown (6'8, 200; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .800, VW .785, JP .782, RM .770

JP: Owens and Fields, already very efficient offensive players, are going to need someone else to step up. Hopefully Jeremy Green, who shot 46% from three last year, can take this role and fill the shoes of Goods and Johnson, or else this team may be in trouble.

VW: What is going on with the recruiting in Palo Alto? They've lost a ton of talent (and Mitch Johnson) over the last couple years, and have replaced it with neither quantity nor quality. Aside from the Lopez brothers, there hasn't been much of interest in this program in the last five years, and it looks like that's going to continue for at least the near future.

Final rating: .786

8. Southern Cal
2009 rating: .908
Returning 40% of minutes, 37% of points
Lost Keith Wilkinson (senior), DeMar DeRozan, Taj Gibson (draft), Donte Smith (transfer), Daniel Hackett (Italy)
Incoming freshmen: None of note.
Initial ratings: ML .800, VW .775, JP .765, RM .800

JP: This team loses A LOT, including three of their top four scorers from last year. Lewis is going to have to be more efficient offensively in order for them to compete. They also lose their beast in the middle, Taj Gibson, so I expect their defense to suffer. One of the reasons they were so efficient defensively was their ability to block shots on the interior and contest shots, but that could be a problem this year as their only players above 6'7 are transfer Alex Stephenson, a rarely used forward (Vucecic) and a 215-pound seven footer from Europe who wasn't even rated by Scout (Davis Rozitis).

Final rating: .780

9. Washington St.
2009 rating: .882
Returning 46% of minutes, 39% of points
Lost Taylor Rochestie, Aron Baynes, Caleb Forrest, Daven Harmeling (seniors)
Incoming freshmen: Xavier Thames (6'3, 177; 3*), Steven Bjornstad (6'10, 215; 3*), Brock Motum (6'9, 215; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .760, VW .750, JP .762, RM .765

RM: Ken Bone takes over at Wazzu. His Portland St. teams were more offensive-minded and uptempo than Tony Bennett's were, so it'll take some adjustment before the players get used to it. Klay Thompson is really the only significant piece remaining, so this looks to be a transition year in Pullman.

Final rating: .757

10. Oregon
2009 rating: .522
Returning 85% of minutes, 89% of points
Lost Churchill Odia (senior), Kamyron Brown (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Jamil Wilson (6'6, 200; 4*), E.J. Singler (6'6, 200; 3*), Jeremy Jacob (6'7, 210; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .770, VW .695, JP .682, RM .625

RM: Someone remind me how Ernie Kent still has a job? UO gave up buckets to anybody who wanted one last year, ranking in the bottom 15 in both 2-pt and 3-pt defense (Brown and Longwood should be proud). I think the four of us could team up with a blind cripple and still get 2 against this team. Bad coaching is still bad coaching and I don't expect much improvement in Eugene.

ML: This is a situation where I went WAY too far with my whole "unlucky on defense" theory . As pointed out above, the Ducks were beyond bad defensively last season, and if their history under Kent is any indication, they probably won't improve all that much even with some regression in their defensive 3P% and FT%.

Final rating: .690

I'll have a full recap next Monday when we're done with the Big East and our list of assorted teams*, but if it seems like the Pac-10 lost a ton of talent:

It's because they did. It's particularly ugly when you look at points, with the conference returning just seven of its top 20 scorers.

*- We have Memphis, Gonzaga, Xavier, BYU, Utah, Butler, Dayton, Siena, and Tulsa thus far, and are taking suggestions on other deserving programs.

This Week's Links (10/26-10/30)

2009-10-31T17:13:00.002-04:00

I don't want to look at them before we finish our previews, but the preseason college hoops rankings were released.

Heck, I'm nervous writing this links post.

Basketball Prospectus projects the 2009-10 NBA season.

"Is Ryan Howard really that bad versus LHP?"

2009 NFL Survivor: Week 8

2009-10-28T17:50:00.007-04:00

Apologies for the delay, (hopefully) won't happen again.

Last week:
IND: W, 42-6
NE: 35-7

OFP had 5.8% of entries knocked out last week, while that figure was slightly lower in the Yahoo! pool, at 3.9%. There are 71,270 entries left in the Yahoo! pool.

Teams used (DAVE rank): New England (2nd), New Orleans (3rd), Green Bay (4th), Philadelphia (5th), Dallas (10th), Houston (20th), Washington (22nd)

This week's consensus numbers from OFP and Yahoo!:

San Diego (vs. Oakland)

Yet another big favorite (-16.5, 91.4% to win) that is ridiculously popular in both pools. Even with the huge consensus figures, after considering those two factors I have the Chargers as the most attractive option when considering value this week alone.

Looking ahead to their upcoming schedule, San Diego plays the Chiefs and Redskins at home and travels to Cleveland; all three of those games have prospective lines at SportsBetting between 10 and 14, so it'd be nice to keep them around, particularly since I'm running pretty low on elite teams. However, there are multiple better options available to me in each of those weeks, so future value shouldn't be a huge deterrent here.

Chicago (vs. Cleveland)

The second biggest spread of the week is also the second most popular pick, quite a coincidence there. The problem in comparison to SD is that you're given up a ton of value by dropping down to -13.5 (84.9%), and not gaining a whole lot by getting the consensus down 17% (obviously gaining one percent of win probability is worth more than losing one percent of consensus).

The Bears will be huge favorites in Week 13 when they host the Rams, and SBET has them at -10 in their W17 matchup at Detroit, so while they don't have as much future value as the Chargers I'm not anxious to get rid of them either.

Arizona (vs. Carolina)

The Cardinals are -10 (81.3%) this week, and are comparable to the Bears in the main two criteria, giving up some win probability but trading a good amount of consensus. They have a pretty ridiculous second half schedule, with games in various locations against the Seahawks, Rams (twice), Titans, and Lions, so I think I'd rather save Arizona than Chicago.

Dallas (vs. Seattle)

I've already used the Cowboys; if you have not we can discuss that in the comments.

Indianapolis (vs. San Francisco)

At under 6% in Yahoo! and OFP, the Colts (-11.5, 83.0%) are trumped only by San Diego in attractiveness for this week alone against the mighty 49ers. Since they are #1 in DAVE though, and are favored by at least 8.5 at SBET in six of their final nine games, Indy would definitely be missed in the future if I used them this week.

One other thing that is worth thinking about is that coming into this week, 58.6% of OFP survivors had used the Colts. After this SF game they will be around 64%. That means even if every single person that still has them available takes Indianapolis next week, they still won't be as popular as the Chargers are right now. This has to be considered a positive attribute, since it means even in games where they are favored by a ton of points (W13 vs. TEN is at -17 at SBET right now), their consensus numbers won't be that much of a drawback.

The list of how many users have used each team in OFP through the first seven weeks of the season can be found here; I excluded the percentages for weeks teams lost, since we don't care which teams those eliminated users still have available. So a team being really popular one week makes them both less attractive in that week and more useful in the future.

Detroit (vs. St. Louis)

This line has (finally) been released at DET -4.5. The Lions are 32nd in DAVE. Out of 32. Go Rams.

New Orleans (vs. Atlanta)

See: Dallas.

Always good to throw an additional variable in the mix mid-post to complicate things as much as possible. To recap:

SD: Extremely popular this week. Similarly likely to win. Favored by 10-14 in three future games, but never even the second best available option according to SBET. Will have been taken by 61.1% of OFP survivors after this week if they win.

CHI: Second most likely to win but also second most popular. Possible pick in two future weeks. Will have been taken by 51.5% of OFP survivors after this week if they win.

ARI: Least likely to win of four possible options, third most popular. Possible pick in five future weeks. Will have been taken by 9.8% of OFP survivors if they win.

IND: Third most likely to win, and not very popular at all. Possible pick in six future weeks, although to be fair only one of those lines (vs. TEN) is over -10. Will have been taken by 64.2% of OFP survivors if they win.

I think we can eliminate the Cardinals, since they are not doing too well in any of the four categories. The Bears are next, since their popularity greatly outweighs them being slightly more likely to win that IND. Beyond that, I think Indy's overall team strength and future value (obviously related factors) carry the day, so after all that I'm going with the most obvious option-- the Chargers are the pick this week.

This Week's Links (10/19-10/23)

2009-10-23T09:23:00.002-04:00

There will be a Basketball Prospectus 2010 Major-Conference Preview this year. Also, Gasaway talked to UMHoops.com.

Safe!

USS Mariner's DMZ put together a cool iPhone app.

An interview with Cardinals AGM John Abbamondi.

2009 NFL Survivor: Week 7

2009-10-19T16:27:00.006-04:00

Last week:
PIT: W, 27-14
PHI: L, 13-9
GB: W, 26-0
JAC: W, 23-20 (OT)
NYJ: L, 16-13 (OT)
NE: W, 59-0

We finally had some people knocked out in the late games on Sunday; 44.4% of the Yahoo! pool was eliminated, nearly as high a percentage as the first four weeks combined (47.1%). There are now 75,742 entries remaining in the Yahoo! pool, and 38 left in the VW ESPN group.

Teams used (DAVE rank): New Orleans (2nd), Philadelphia (4th), Green Bay (9th), Dallas (12th), Houston (20th), Washington (22nd)

This week's consensus numbers from OFP and Yahoo!:

The consensus this week is pretty astounding, if understandable. The Colts and Patriots are both very obvious huge favorites, and no other team is laying more than a touchdown. As much as I'd love to come up with something clever, it's not worth sacrificing that much likelihood of advancing just for the sake of being different, and I have already used two of the three seven point favorites (GB and PHI, with NYG being the third) anyway.

Indianapolis (at St. Louis)

Coming off a bye, the Colts are favored by 13 on the road against the Rams, and are -700/+570 (85.4%) to win at Pinnacle. I would certainly expect them to come away with the win in St. Louis, but it's hard to imagine that the line isn't at least slightly inflated. Indianapolis is on pace to be the most popular NFL side in the history of Wagerline this week, receiving an insane 87% of the action thus far. The numbers are pretty ridiculous at the other consensus sites as well; 96% at SIA, and 100% (!) at Sportsbook. So that is definitely something worth taking into consideration when thinking about how likely the Colts are to win.

The Colts are certainly a popular Survivor pick, but so is their only competition; I'd say that's pretty much a wash. In terms of future value, that Week 13 game against Tennessee jumps out after the Titans' showing last Sunday (which dropped them to 29th in DAVE); home games against the 49ers, Texans, and Jets are potential options as well. Indy has about as much future value as you'd expect from DAVE's #1 ranked team.

New England (vs. Tampa Bay in London)

The Patriots are favored by a bit more (14.5) than the Colts, with the odds giving them an 89.0% chance of emerging from London victorious. That figure should be take with a grain of salt as well, since the Pats are rather popular ATS themselves at the consensus sites (78%/94%/97% at WL/SIA/SB), but the action on NE isn't quite as lopsided as the action on IND. Either way, just from an advancing to Week 8 standpoint, the Patriots are a more attractive pick.

Since we have established that for our purposes the teams are equally popular in Survivor, that leaves only New England's future value to consider. The Pats don't have anything that stands out as much as Indy's game against the Titans, although they do face the Dolphins, Jets, and Panthers at home. It'd be nice to be able to save them, but since they are favored by more and not as popular ATS, and the Colts have a more favorable schedule down the stretch while appearing to be the stronger team, New England is the pick this week.

2010 College Hoops Previews: The SEC

2009-10-18T11:37:00.007-04:00

Here's the fourth installment of the mammoth 2010 College Hoops Previews series. This time I'm joined by JP, ML, and RTC; no commentary from JP but he did manage to submit ratings. For more details on what's going on with the ratings, go here and here; the new regression ratings for the SEC are here. All team ratings from kenpom.com, recruiting info was taken from Scout.

1. Kentucky
2009 rating: .857
Returning 62% of minutes, 57% of points
Lost Jodie Meeks (draft), Landon Slone, A.J. Stewart, Donald Williams (transfers)
Incoming freshmen: John Wall (6'4, 175; 5*), DeMarcus Cousins (6'10, 245; 5*), Daniel Orton (6'9, 260; 5*), Eric Bledsoe (6'0, 185; 4*), Jon Hood (6'6, 180; 4*), Darnell Dodson (6'8, 180, 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .949, VW .960, JP .950, RM .955

ML: I basically just took Purdue's rating and subtracted .001. Sophisticated I know, but I really had no clue here. If Meeks had come back I'd have had no problem labeling them as 1B to Kansas' 1A, but I think they are really going to struggle to score with him out of the mix.

VW: There's no way to know, really. Here's how the top recruiting classes, according to Scout.com, have fared each of the last four years:

UNC is the only team that completely lived up to the hype (that was the year they blew the lead to Georgetown in the E8), but all four teams ended up being pretty strong. I'd say UK has an average returning core compared to those four -- inferior to UCLA and UNC -- which is how I got to my rating of .960, just below the average of the teams above (.962). There's certainly an unusually large amount of uncertainty around whatever number you give them, especially considering how hyped they are coming into the season.

Final rating: .955

2. Tennessee
2009 rating: .889
Returning 99.8% of minutes, 99.7% of points
Lost Philip Jurick, Daniel West (transfers)
Incoming freshmen: Kenny Hall (6'9, 215; 4*)
Initial ratings: ML .960, VW .945, JP .967, RM .930

RM: Last year their defense was just 73rd in the country, and adding a year of experience to a terrible defensive team won't change bad habits. The point position also remains a serious problem, as Bobby Maze would make for a nice C-USA lead guard, but regularly gets outclassed in the SEC. What kind of team is Pearl trying to build in Knoxville -- every one of his players is a 6'7 athlete with questionable shot selection?

ML: This is Pearl's best team yet, and I do think there is a pretty good chance they'll win the league, but their upside clearly isn't as high as Kentucky's. I echo Randy's concerns about the defense. What exactly is the plan? There is one, right?

VW: I had about the same thought process when looking at the Vols. It's great that everybody is coming back, but they've had a top 50 defense just once in the last six years, and that '08 team was the beneficiary of some horrid 3P shooting by their opponents. You'd think they could get back to turning people over at a decent clip like they did a couple years ago, but we'll have to wait and see.

The other thing limiting their ceiling is that they just can't shoot from the outside -- 286th in the nation last season, at 31.5%. Smith should improve (he was decent in '08), but Chism really needs to focus on his post game. These guys are the anti-Kentucky: you know they're going to be very good, but it's hard to see them being great.

Final rating: .953

3. Mississippi St.
2009 rating: .818
Returning 96% of minutes, 97% of points
Lost Brian Johnson (senior), Jacquiese Holcombe (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Renardo Sidney (6'11, 255; 5*), John Riek (7'2, 240; 4*), Shaunessy Smith (6'5, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .910, VW .935, JP .929, RM .875

RM: If Sidney is available to play (and I'm assuming he will not be), MSU is the odds-on favorite to win the SEC West. Jarvis Varnado is the key to their defense, and I'm interested to see what the long-awaited 7'2 project John Riek can add to that frontline. If Sidney can miraculously become eligible, that frontline could be the best in CBB since 2006 UConn (R. Gay, J. Boone, H. Armstrong).

ML: Even without Sidney, or any of the recruits for that matter, they project as a Top 20 team, and yet I doubt you'll hear much about them before March. Varnado should hire a publicist.

VW I was assuming Sidney would play when I put these together, so I'm going to have to calm down a bit with that lofty rating. They'll be tough inside regardless of how that situation shakes out, but where will the production come from in the backcourt? They're going to need former four-star recruit Dee Bost to improve on his 37% shooting from two, and Barry Stewart to finally fulfill the promise he showed as a freshman.

Final rating: .905

4. Vanderbilt
2009 rating: .785
Returning 92% of minutes, 93% of points
Lost George Drake
Incoming freshmen: John Jenkins (6'4, 180; 4*)
Initial ratings: ML .905, VW .870, JP .890, RM .880

RM: Most everyone of consequence returns, and there are seeds of a solid defensive team here (#12 defensively in the paint). As always with Vandy, their best teams are bloody murder at Memorial Gymnasium, so it'll be key for the Commodores to set the tone early there in games against Missouri and Florida.

ML: Their interior defense made a pretty large leap last year, and from the looks of it this can be attributed to the addition of Ezeli & Goulbourne coupled with the continuing development of Ogilvy. The Commies look like a solid 5-7 seed in the tourney to me.

VW: Their perimeter D really held them back in '09; they've never been great in that area, but last year was an obvious outlier, so I'd except them to regress back to around the national average there. Other than that, they should have some pretty natural progression for a team that was only average last year but has all of their key cogs coming back.

Final rating: .890

5. Florida
2009 rating: .867
Returning of 66% minutes, 63% of points
Lost Walter Hodge (senior), Nick Calathes (draft), Allan Chaney (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Kenny Boynton (6'2, 185; 5*), Erik Murphy (6'9, 210; 4*)
Initial ratings: ML .875, VW .860, JP .867, RM .870

ML: I've got them 4th; not in the conference, but in the Eastern division. UF is a football school once more.

VW: The offense will be decent enough; I was surprised to see that Erving Walker shot 42% from three last year, and Tyus should continue to improve inside. Throw Werner and Parsons in there, and add Boynton to the mix, and they may not even miss Calathes too much on that end.

Defensively though...yikes. Hodge and Calathes forced a decent number of turnovers last year, but they're gone, and they were pretty bad at just about everything else. Actually, they were strong in one area: UF's opponents shot 62.5% from the line, the lowest mark in the country. Tyus and Kenny Kadji are going to have to block a ton of shots to make up for the inevitable regression in those two areas.

Final rating: .868

6. South Carolina
2009 rating: .805
Returning 78% of minutes, 78% of points
Lost Zam Fredrick, Branden Conrad (seniors), Mitchell Carter (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Lakeem Jackson (6'5, 200; 4*), Ramon Galloway (6'2, 170; 3*), Steve Spinella (6'5, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .860, VW .855, JP .860, RM .865

RM: Darrin Horn has a really nice team returning, led by the mercurial Devan Downey. At first glance, losing Zam Fredrick might appear troublesome, but all he really did was take a lot of bad shots and gum up the offense (41% on twos).

VW: Yeah, Fredrick could shoot a bit from outside, but he should be replaceable -- he didn't exactly fill up the stat sheet on D or on the boards either. Baniulis has lit it up from three for a couple years now; I suppose he doesn't provide a whole lot beyond that, but it'd be nice to see him get a few more minutes on a team that had some trouble scoring last year.

Final rating: .858

7. Auburn
2009 rating: .844
Returning 60% of minutes, 62% of points
Lost Korvotney Barber, Rasheem Barrett, Quantez Robertson (seniors)
Incoming freshmen: Andre Malone (6'4, 200; 3*), Earnest Ross (6'4, 185; 3*), Ken Gabriel (6'7, 200; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .790, VW .815, JP .795, RM .800

ML: Rightly or wrongly, I've consistently rated teams whose defensive stats were likely aided by luck slightly lower than the regression numbers. I know everyone else is excited as I am to see how this actually turns out.

VW: Absolutely looking forward to it. In this case it was an opponents' FT% of 66.1%, almost 3% below the national average. That was a small part of a strong defense, which should continue to be respectable, although they're going to miss Barber's excellent work on the glass. They're going to struggle to score though -- they weren't very good on that end last year, and are losing two high usage guys in Barber and Barrett. The SEC conveniently splits itself up into two tiers this year, and with the Tigers we've descended into the lower one.

Final rating: .800

8. Arkansas
2009 rating: .596
Returning 81% of minutes, 85% of points
Lost Andre Clark and Brandon Moore (transfers), Jason Henry (suspended, no longer on team), Montrell McDonald (quit), Marcus Monk (ineligible)
Incoming freshmen:Marshawn Powell (6'8, 225; 4*), Anthony Borden (6'10, 205; 3*), Glenn Bryant (6'6, 190; 3*), Jemal Farmer (6'5, 215; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .790, VW .750, JP .782, RM .800

ML: The Hogs were legitimately terrible last year, which is only surprising because I don't recall wagering on them very often, and I was playing like 20 games a night. Even though it likely won't be in HD, I'm excited to see what Rotnei Clarke is all about. I hadn't even heard of him before this exercise, but his efficiency stats are rather impressive.

VW: Not sure why I came in so low here, beyond the fact that they were easily the second worst team in a weak conference last year. They lose a lot of bodies, but not much production. Clarke looks like he could be a good one, and Michael Washington shot 59% from two last year. I'm still not sure about their defense though.

Final rating: .782

9. Louisiana St.
2009 rating: .866
Returning 42% of minutes, 42% of points
Lost Chris Johnson, Terry Martin, Garrett Temple, Quintin Thornton (seniors), Marcus Thornton (draft), Delwan Graham (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Aaron Dotson (6'4, 194; 3*), Eddie Ludwig (6'7, 195; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .770, VW .790, JP .790, RM .810

RM: Even though they lose a ton of production, the returning duo of Tasmin Mitchell and Bo Spencer should keep LSU competitive. The key for the Tigers will be how well last year's corps of freshman can step into roles vacated by all the departures.

VW: Mitchell and Spencer are nice pieces, but that only gets you 40% of the way there. They still need to draw three more starters from a pool of guys who played less than 20% of the time (and weren't very effective when they were in), and a couple three-star recruits. Seems like a pretty tall task.

Final rating: .778

10. Alabama
2009 rating: .720
Returning 69% of minutes, 70% of points
Lost Alonzo Gee, Ronald Steele, Brandon Hollinger (seniors)
Incoming freshmen: Ben Eblen (6'0, 185; 3*), Shawn Kemp (6'8, 200; 3*), Chris Hines (6'7, 225; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .780, VW .760, JP .780, RM .820

RM: Ronald Steele wasn't healthy for the last 2+ years, so Alabama really only loses Alonzo Gee from a team that showed marked improvement at the end of last season. JaMychal Greene is poised to explode onto the national scene as a sophomore, with his rebounding, defense and soft scoring touch.

VW: I like Greene, and Torrance to an extent, but I don't know that there's a lot else to get excited about here. Hillman really brings very little to the table -- he can't shoot, doesn't rebound, and turns it over too much -- and I'd imagine he'll be handling the ball even more now that Steele is completely out of the picture.

Final rating: .777

11. Mississippi
2009 rating: .713
Returning 72% of minutes, 66% of points
Lost Malcolm White, David Huertas (Puerto Rico)
Incoming freshmen: Reggie Buckner (6'9, 205; 4*)
Initial ratings: ML .780, VW .775, JP .766, RM .800

RM: Before losing David Huertas to the pros in Puerto Rico, Ole Miss was another team that looked to make a significant leap in the SEC West this season. Still, a cast of youngsters led by senior Chris Warren and reigning FrOY Terrico White will make the Rebels formidable. The SEC West is insane with just how close these six teams match up against each other - can we have six 8-8 records this year?

Final rating: .774

12. Georgia
2009 rating: .403
Returning 61% of minutes, 62% of points
Lost Terrance Woodbury, Corey Butler (seniors), Troy Brewer, Zac Swansey (tranfers)
Incoming freshmen: None of note.
Initial ratings: ML .560, VW .630, JP .595, RM .650

RM: Georgia's offense was comically bad last season (275th in the country), by far the worst for a BCS team in D1, so I'm a little uncertain how much improvement can actually occur given that the Dawgs lost their most productive offensive player (Woodbury).

VW: There's some hope because they were so young last year (258th in the nation in experience), but that offense was pretty awful across the board. It's not like they're losing a ton with Woodbury though, who had an ORtg of just 93.6. If It looks like Thompkins could end up being a decent piece -- he was extremely high usage for a freshman.

Final rating: .592

Final SEC ratings:

That puts our current national top five at Kansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Purdue, and Duke. The season somehow tips off in three weeks, so hopefully we'll be able to finish these up and recap everything before November 9.

This Week's Links (10/12-10/16)

2009-10-16T20:23:00.004-04:00

Fire Shapiro?

Louisville's Terrence Jennings and Jerry Smith show excellent judgment.

CC Sabathia is a big Bert Blyleven fan.

You're sitting on a gold mine, Trebek.

Updated 2009 NFL Wins Over/Unders

2009-10-16T09:54:00.005-04:00

Bodog has posted revised win totals for a few notable teams. Here they are, compared to the numbers Bodog had for each team back in May, and the rates at which each team would have to win the rest of the season to hit their new total:

Even during their hot start, the Bengals' DVOA was only -2.6%, so .545 definitely seems optimistic for their true talent level. However, part of that is because of schedule: Cincinnati still has games against the Browns, Lions, and Chiefs at home, and Oakland on the road. Their revised total still seems a bit high, but FO has them finishing with 9.5 wins, so it's close.

Despite their record, DVOA actually has the Jets having played better than Cincy, with New York coming in at +8.4%. FO thinks they'll be a bit better than the Bengals the rest of the way, and puts their mean win total at 9.1, so everybody is in agreement there.

I'm not sold on Tennessee being a .500 team at this point after their -28.1% DVOA performance over the last five weeks. It's not like their remaining schedule is a walk in the park either. FO says 4.7 wins, and I'd have to agree with the under there, especially at only -105 at Bodog.

I hate to be the one to obsess with recent results, but: the Titans are better than the Broncos!? Denver's remaining schedule includes an interesting combination of very difficult games (@BAL, @IND, @PHI), and fairly straightforward ones (@KC, vsOAK, vsKC). FO strongly disagrees with this total, putting the Broncos at 11.2 wins, and I'd have to side with them here -- pegging Denver as a .409 team (give or take, based on SOS) after how they've played over the last five weeks seems unreasonable. The only problem with this is that the juice on the over is up to -125.

Carolina has been bad, certainly, but they do have a win under their belt, and home games remaining against the Bills and Bucs; 5.5 seems about right (FO says 5.0).

The last two are pretty funny. They definitely both seem low to me, but let's go through some line guesses for their future games to find out. Here are line estimates for the Rams based on DAVE, the LVSC, and SportsBetting's prospective lines, followed by my guess and how likely that'd make them to win each contest:

Some of those SBET lines are pretty ridiculous. It does look the over is the way to go with St. Louis, but not by all that much, and it's currently -130 at Bodog.

Now, for the Bucs:

That's quite ugly; at -130, there doesn't look to be value in the over two wins for the Bucs.

2009 NFL Survivor: Week 6

2009-10-13T21:20:00.016-04:00

Last week:
PIT: W, 28-20
NYG: W, 44-7
PHI: W, 33-14
DAL: W, 26-20
MIN: W, 38-10
BAL: L, 17-14

Third straight, and fourth of five, slow week for eliminations, with 5.3% of the Yahoo! pool going down.

Teams used (DAVE rank): Philadelphia (3rd), New Orleans (4th), Dallas (11th), Washington (20th), Houston (21st)

On the recommendations of Matt and Natan, I'm using both OFP and Yahoo! for the consensus numbers this week:

Pittsburgh (vs. Cleveland)

The Steelers are -940/+760 (88.6%) to win at Pinnacle, and are an extremely popular selection according to the OFP numbers. They don't have a crazy amount of future value, but they do play Cincy at home in Week 10, and host Oakland in Week 13. This is a reasonable enough pick, but it'd be nice to find something not quite as popular and with less future value that doesn't give up too much probability of advancing.

Philadelphia (at Oakland)

It's just unfortunate that this game is in Oakland, really, because this had the potential to be a pretty hilarious line. As it stands, the Eagles are "only" favored by 14, and are -840/+660 (87.2%) to win at Pinnacle. PHI -14 is also incredibly public: 81% at Wagerline, and 93% at SIA. It's interesting that they're so much less popular in OFP than Yahoo!; that might indicate that the OFP population is a bit more advanced, and possibly even understands the concept of home-field advantage.

I've already used the Eagles because of their lack of future value. Home games late in the year against Washington and San Francisco both have some potential, but aren't all that appealing.

Green Bay (vs. Detroit)

Despite being favored by 13.5 and -700/+570 (85.4%) to win, the Packers aren't nearly as popular as the Steelers in either pool. Looking at those two variables, Pittsburgh remains the slightly more attractive option. But this is by far Green Bay's easiest game the rest of the year; it's unlikely that any of their games from here on out end up being legitimate options. Considering how ridiculous the line on OAK @ PIT may end up being in Week 13, that makes Green Bay a better selection than Pittsburgh this week.

Jacksonville (vs. St. Louis)
NY Jets (vs. Buffalo)
New England (vs. Tennessee)

All three of these teams are favored by 9.5 points at home, and are about 80% to win. They're less popular selections than Green Bay, but not enough so to make up for the four-point difference in the line. Each also has some future value, with both the Jets and Pats hosting the Panthers down the road, and the Chiefs coming to Jacksonville in Week 9.

No other team is favored by more than a touchdown, so the Packers are the pick this week.

Likelihood of MLB Playoff Sweeps (1999-2009)

2009-10-12T08:17:00.009-04:00

This is pretty random, but I was curious so I decided to look into it. It seemed like the Yankees' ALDS sweep was one of the more predictable sweeps in recent memory, while the Dodgers taking down the Cardinals in three came as a bit of a surprise. Covers has lines going back all the way to 1999, so using those I determined the odds of each of the 23 sweeps since then; 17 in the DS, and six in the CS/WS (let me know if I missed anything there). Here they are, from most to least likely:

The Yankees' sweep was indeed the least surprising series shutout since '99; it helps to have a 77% chance of winning Game 1. The #2 finisher was the 100-win Cardinals against the 82-win Padres in '05.

The '00 Cards actually had HFA in that series against the Braves, but they were still dogs against Maddux and Glavine in St. Louis, and then Millwood was a large favorite against Garrett Stephenson in the final game.

I promise I didn't intend for STL to dominate the extremes of this list, but beating both Johnson and Schilling on the road in '02 is even more impressive; that one only gets knocked down to second least likely because they were about 60% to win at home against Batista in G3.

It's not particularly surprising, since there are only six of them, but none of the four-game sweeps have been particularly unlikely; if each game is a coin flip, each team had a 6.25% chance of sweeping, which is what the White Sox come in at at the bottom of the list. Compare that to 12.5% for a three-game series, a mark which 10 of the 17 teams are below, which is rather incredible.

Series Win Probability Graphs: STL vs. LAD

2009-10-11T17:29:00.004-04:00

Trying something new here, so any feedback would be appreciated. I did two things to come up with the graph below. First, I adjusted the FanGraphs win probabilities for each game based on the line, so instead of starting G1 at 50-50, the Dodgers started at 44.4% (+122/-130).

I then incorporated both the actual game lines and my guesses for games that never happened to figure out the series odds based on the potential result of each game. If the Cardinals had won Game 1, they would've been at 75.4% to win the series; LAD's victory got the Dodgers up to 61.7%. So throughout the game, those two are weighted by the batter-to-batter single game win probability.

Do that for all three games, and you end up with this:

(click to enlarge)

I think the main thing this shows is just how little Holliday's error is to blame for St. Louis going home early.

Please leave any thoughts/potential additions in the comments.

This Week's Links (10/5-10/9)

2009-10-09T10:29:00.002-04:00

Pro Basketball Prospectus 2009-10 is out.

Interesting Advanced NFL Stats post on how distance to go on fourth down effects whether a team punts or kicks a FG, which it should be pretty much irrelevant. I like the theory by the third commenter, which Phil Birnbaum explains a bit further down, personally (H/T: Jonny).

David Appleman explores the "wild fluctuations" in year to year UZR.

Great timing, Brady Morningstar.

2009 NFL Survivor: Week 5

2009-10-08T00:48:00.004-04:00

Last week:
NYG: W, 27-16
SF: W, 35-0
CHI: W, 48-24
IND: W, 34-17
CIN: W, 23-20
HOU: W, 29-6

Another terrible week for eliminations, with just 1.8% of the Yahoo! field being eliminated.

Teams used (DAVE rank): New Orleans (2nd), Dallas (14th), Houston (18th), Washington (19th)

Here are this week's most popular selections in the Yahoo! pool:

Pittsburgh (at Detroit)

Do people just not understand the concept of home-field advantage? That is honestly the only reasoning I can come up with to explain how the Steelers are more popular than the two teams discussed below. Pittsburgh has not looked as good as the Giants or Eagles over the first four weeks of the season, and is the only one of the three playing on the road. Sure, Detroit isn't good, but they did win at home a couple weeks ago, and they may well end up being better than both the Raiders and Bucs when all is said and done.

Another reason not to take the Steelers this week, beyond the relative shortness of the line and their mystifying popularity in these Survivor pools, is their immense value in future weeks. Pittsburgh hosts the Browns, Bengals, and Raiders, and also travels to Kansas City in Week 11. It may eventually be difficult to figure out when to pull the trigger on the Steelers, but it seems pretty obvious that the answer is not "Week 5".

NY Giants (vs. Oakland)
Philadelphia (vs. Tampa Bay)

Might as well just go ahead and group these two together from the start, since at first glance they're the two best options of the week, and they're clearly similar.

Likelihood of winning: It's a tie, with both teams currently favored -950/+770 (88.7%) at Pinnacle.

Popularity: The Giants are slightly more popular in the Yahoo! contest (23% vs. 18%), and more than twice as popular (21% vs. 9%) in the ESPN contest. Clear advantage to the Eagles here, although not a huge one.

Future value: Considering the strength of these two teams, there are going to be surprisingly few opportunities to take them in the season's final 12 weeks. Both have one game in which they'll be favored by 9.5, according to the current SBET prospective lines: New York hosts Carolina in Week 16, and the Eagles play Washington in Philly in Week 12.

Beyond that, though, there's not much; I suspect that the Giants will be favored by more than the 6.5 SBET currently has them at in Week 7 against the Cardinals, but the chances of that rounding into a Survivor play are slim. This category is essentially a draw, although it does make both plays even more appealing.

Putting the two options up against each other in those three categories reveals that the Eagles are a slightly superior option. Now we just have to go through the other games and make sure that holds true overall.

Dallas (at Kansas City)

The Cowboys are favored by nine (although the juice heavily favors KC), and are about 76% to win at Pinnacle. They are less popular than the Eagles, but the difference isn't nearly big enough to make up for the gap in win probability. Dallas also has more future value than Philly, with a home game against Oakland in Week 12 that SBET currently has lined at -14. There is no way I'm taking the Cowboys over the Eagles (especially since I've already used Dallas in this pool).

Minnesota (at St. Louis)

Pretty much the same deal here. The Vikings are favored by 9.5, and are around 81% to win. They've been selected by fewer than one in 10 people in the Yahoo! pool, but even if literally nobody was picking them they wouldn't be a better option than Philly. They also have some legitimate Survivor value in their future, hosting the lowly Lions in Week 10.

Baltimore (vs. Cincinnati)

This one interested me at first because so few people are picking the Ravens; just 0.7% in the Yahoo! pool. They're 77% to win at Pinnacle, which is solid but doesn't exactly compare favorably with Philly, and they are definitely worth saving, with home games against Detroit (W14) and Oakland (W17).

It doesn't look like any of the other options are even all that close, so the Eagles are the pick this week.

DS Previews

2009-10-07T08:50:00.004-04:00

I'm going to keep this fairly quick, since I've had zero time all week; hopefully I'll be able to get something up on the Red Sox series tonight.

Rockies @ Phillies
Current Pinnacle series line: PHI -152/COL +142
Game 1 line: Jimenez +124 @ Lee -132
Identical regular season games (same pitchers and location): none

For awhile there, when the potential Game 2 matchup was Cook at Lee, we did have a relevant line -- those two matched up on August 6 in Philly, with the Phillies being -165/+157 favorites. It would make sense if the line for the current G2 matchup ended up being similar. Something like this:

G1: COL (Jimenez, +124) @ PHI (Lee, -132)
G2: COL (Cook, +154) @ PHI (Hamels, -162)
G3: PHI (Blanton, +111) @ COL (Hammel, -119)
G4: PHI (Happ, +109) @ COL (Marquis, -117)
G5: COL (Jimenez, +124) @ PHI (Lee, -132)

Obviously I'm guessing on who the Phillies will start in their two road games, but I don't think there's enough separation between those two and Pedro at this point for it to make a huge difference; the Rockies should be 53-54% to win those games regardless. On the other hand, de la Rosa looked to be a cut above Colorado's current G2-G4 starters, so losing him hurts.

The potential lines above put the overall series line at PHI -129/+129; the Rockies are currently available at Carib at +150. Clearly, I think there is value in that, especially considering how much public action Philadelphia's G1 line has been getting over the last few days, regardless of their probable starter.

Twins @ Yankees
Current Pinnacle series line: NYY -397/MIN +334
Game 1 line: Duensing +303 @ Sabathia -333
Identical regular season games (same pitchers and location): 7/7/09, Sabathia -128 @ Baker +120

The above figures are rather ridiculous; justified, maybe, but ridiculous nonetheless. It's the combination of the Twins playing 12 innings and using seven relievers on Tuesday night and the lopsided pitching matchup that creates the crazy G1 line (which keeps getting higher, by the way); I'm assuming the next four lines will be a bit shorter:

G1: MIN (Duensing, +290) @ NYY (Sabathia -320)
G2: MIN (Blackburn, +195) @ NYY (Burnett, -215)
G3: NYY (Pettitte, -143) @ MIN (Pavano, +135)
G4: NYY (Sabathia, -136) @ MIN (Baker, +128)
G5: MIN (Blackburn, +195) @ NYY (Burnett, -215)

These numbers put the Yankees at -319/+319 to win the series. That may seem like a pretty big difference compared to the Pinnacle line, but when you get that high it really isn't; my numbers put New York at 76.2% to win the series, while the Pinny line has them at 77.6%. There appears to be some value in the Twins to win the series, but only a marginal amount.

Cardinals @ Dodgers
Current Pinnacle series line: STL -140/LAD +130
Game 1 line: Carpenter -136 @ Wolf +128
Identical regular season games (same pitchers and location): 8/19, Wainwright +117 @ Kershaw -125

G1: STL (Carpenter, -136) @ LAD (Wolf, +128)
G2: STL (Wainwright, +110) @ LAD (Kershaw, -118)
G3: LAD (Padilla, +136) @ STL (Pineiro, -144)
G4: LAD (Billingsley, +121) @ STL (Lohse, -129)
G5: STL (Carpenter, -129) @ LAD (Wolf, +121)

My initial lean was to take LAD for the series, but Carpenter being that big of a road favorite in G1 gives STL a huge advantage, and the action on that game is pretty split. I'll admit that the huge difference between G1 and G2 lines looks a bit strange, but I don't see much reason to stray too far from that Wainwright/Kershaw line from about six weeks ago, especially considering how well CK has pitched since that game. These numbers put the series line at STL -141/+141; I don't see a very compelling reason to take either side there.

MLB Totals Contest Final Standings

2009-10-04T20:02:00.004-04:00

Here's the final top 10:

Congratulations to "cmac" who went 9-1, only missing (by half a win) on the Astros total. His nine successful picks were: ATL O, LAD O, NYM U, TBR U, PIT U, OAK U, CHC U, CIN U, STL O.

Sadly, Tocchet's quest for 0-10 failed, as he ended up hitting his seven- and six-pointers (CHW U, HOU U) by half a game each. He actually didn't even finish last; that honor goes to "Mazz", who finished with just four points, winning only his Astros under.

The full results can be found here. Thanks to everyone for participating, hopefully we'll do this again next year.

Edit: Here's the distribution of how many people finished with each possible point total:

The average was 26.2, while the expected average if you have a 50% chance on each total is 27.5. PECOTA doing so poorly probably has something to do with our collective sub-par performance.