Time to Point and Laugh: Another Bad Preview of the 2009 Season
by ChiFan13 on Jul 11, 2009 8:53 PM CDT
Email
Print
That's right kids, another really bad preview of the 2009 season. This one is comical, which is its only redeeming quality.
Mike Tanier of the Fifth Down Blog starts out by giving himself a big ol' pat on the back for the past two years and then proceeds to give us the two surprise playoff picks of this year's season: The St. Louis Rams and the San Diego Chargers.
Yeesh. Come on inside for some analysis.
Where to start....
First, this guy really cherry-picks his statistics.
It turns out that Spagnuolo isn’t the only reason for optimism in St. Louis. Many statistical indicators suggest that the Rams are close to rising again. One is their fumble recovery percentage: the Rams forced 17 fumbles last year but recovered just 5, a sign that with better luck and a dose of Spagnuolo’s coaching, their defense will create a few more turnovers.
The Rams were one of the worst teams in the league in red zone running, and it takes only a slight improvement in that area to make a big difference on the scoreboard. The Rams lost many of their starters to injuries in 2008 and can get better just by getting healthier.
That's very true. However, Orlando Pace and Pisa Tinoisamoa aren't on the Rams anymore and they're still one solid draft away from being good. If the Rams go to the playoffs, I'll issue an apology to Tanier, both on the blog and through email. I feel confident making that assertion because I know I won't have to.
Second, how are the Chargers a surprise to make the playoffs? Didn't they make the playoffs last year?
Am I the only one who thinks this is a little off?
51 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I would be quite shocked if the Rams
somehow won more games than they lost. Way more shocked than say, JA trading for a franchise QB. They have what, 5 good name-recognizable players on their roster now? They got their asses handed to them in most of their losses last year too. I think only at the end of the year they were at least competitive. Everything about them this year screams rebuilding = 6 wins. Although, I would love to see that Oshiomoboo-boo guy at FS for the Bears this year. Some of the responses to that lame article are pretty in-depth in rejecting that tripe.
Picking Chargers is lazy and weak. Whoever wrote this is boring.
shocked?
They have an ok team that could go .500. This year their offense is going to be more running this year and it will lead to more wins
I Have Spoken.
OK team
IF Bulger and Jackson can actually finish a season. Big IF IMO.
"The phone's for you, I think it's the Devil."
Which they haven't in quite awhile
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." -Sir Winston Churchill
The Rams have a better chance of finishing last in that division and the Chargers could be one of the better teams in the AFC
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Jul 11, 2009 10:32 PM CDT reply actions
True
but the chargers shouldn’t be a “surprise” to anyone. over the last two years they’re a road playoff win away from the super bowl (lost to pats and then lost to steelers).
the rams could be better… that division isn’t exactly overwhelming. seattle’s rebuilding. hangover effect for arizona. and i don’t have any idea what to make of san fran.
Nobody who ever gave his best regretted it. -George Halas
Sheesh...
Lots of things wrong…with this post.
1.) First off, this guy isn’t just some guy—he’s one of the main guys from Football Outsiders, a leading football statistical analysis site. Think Baseball Prospectus, but for the NFL. Now, just like BP, that doesn’t mean what they say is law, but this is not just some dude coming up with crazy numbers for no reason. These guys are really smart and think about what they say.
2.) The stats aren’t random. The significance may not be clear to people who don’t read stuff produced by FO a lot, but he had a good reason for citing what he did. Specifically, turnovers correlate strongly with wins, and obviously recovering fumbles is a big part of that. But the numbers show that recovering (note: not causing, recovering) fumbles is more or less random, and no team is consistently better than it year after year throughout NFL history. And so, the Rams had a bad season, but part of that was that they were really unlucky in a big part of the game. If they have normal luck next year, their turnovers will rise and they will likely win a few more games just from not being unlucky.
3.) Similarly, injuries are mostly luck and for the most part aren’t something that teams are better at than any other. So when a team has more injuries than average, they do worse than the team is really capable of. A normal year injury-wise will benefit the Rams a fair amount.
4.) Finally, I didn’t see anywhere in the article where it said that the Chargers were going to be a “surprise to make the playoffs”. It said they would “surprise” this season compared to last. Meaning, whereas they went 8-8 last year, they have a really good chance of going 11-5 or 12-4 this year, which would be a significant improvement. Now, of course, most observers would note that this isn’t really surprising, as they should get some people (Merriman) back this year and they seemed to underperform last year. But the article mentions that this is a surprise team by the statistical analysis’ view, not by human ones.
I haven’t read the FO projections yet (waiting for the print-on-demand+PDF package version that’s supposed to be coming in the next week or so), but I am very eager to find out. They know what they’re talking about. When I do, I’m planning on giving summaries of what they have to say about the Bears here. Seeing how their system loves strong QB play, I’m hoping it will be good.
by TCBullfrog on Jul 12, 2009 12:19 AM CDT reply actions 2 recs
FO projections are out
Just got mine in pdf format. Looks like they have the Bears as the best team in the NFC, with a 49% chance of being a super bowl contender. In comparison, they have the Giants at 42%. It seems they like the defense to be much improved, which are rated as easily the best fantasy defense per KUBIAK.
Bears as the best team in the NFC?
oh… Then these guys are spot on!
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Jul 12, 2009 10:03 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Beats as the best team in the NFC?
If the offensive line can jell, and the defense can play all season, the Bears will be there! Cutler, if he stays healthy, will make a group of average receivers look good. Forte is a very good running back and receiver, but the Bears need to find him help. Otherwise it will put them in the same situation as the Eagles, something happens to the running back, they become one dimensional, and you do not get to the big dance that way! Now, we come to the big question mark, COACHING? They should of never got rid of Ron Rivera, none of Lovie’s buddies could carry his tote bag, and it shows. Turner couldn’t cut it at the University of Illinois, and he hasn’t shown anything with the Bears, and he won’t! The Bears could pick up some help cheap, if their GM could recognize it, and McCaskey’s would let him. Cutler was the appeasement bone thrown to the fans, the press, and to the players, whose grumblings were getting loud.
The Bears could pick up some help cheap, if their GM could recognize it, and McCaskey’s would let him.
Where? And how do you know they don’t recognize it and that McCaskey won’t let him? Also if Cutler makes the WR look good as you say, wouldn’t that reflect positivly on Turner?
I'm teaching fools some basic rules.- MR.T
by Ditkavsworld on Jul 12, 2009 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions
exactly
You can’t say “but Orlando Pace and Pisa Tinoisamoa aren’t on the Rams anymore” and use that to point to this article as flawed; FO calculated their loss and still came to these numbers. Plus, both those guys were RELEASED, they weren’t out of their contracts. Think about the Rams last year: Bulger went down, Pace went down, Stephen Jackson was hurt all year. They do stand a good chance to at least bounce back to 8-8, and in their crappy division, anything is possible.
"If God had wanted man to play soccer, He wouldn't have given us arms" - Ditka
Umm
Plus, both those guys were RELEASED, they weren’t out of their contracts.
That’s an irrelevant point….doesn’t matter why they’re not on the Rams.
Anyways, best of luck to you all watching the Rams get to 8-8.
I'M A MAN! I'M 23!
how is it irrelevant?
Management got rid of those players on their own accord, the players didn’t leave because they wanted to. Management has a plan that didn’t include those 2 players, and FO still came to the conclusion they could turn it around this year. They obviously weren’t that important to the Rams getting to 8 wins.
What was an irrelevant pointing to their loss and saying these ratings are stupid. They obviously knew they were gone and still came up with these numbers.
"If God had wanted man to play soccer, He wouldn't have given us arms" - Ditka
I actually don’t take stats talks seriously anymore because everytime someone thinks that they have the entire thing figured out…something strange happens. No one expected the dolphins to make the impact that they did. All teams start in the same position, 0-0, and it’s up to them to fill in the numbers. I certainly didn’t see the falcons going to the playoffs. The past is the past and ever team should focus on the future. If you didn’t make the playoffs last year, it’s over so all we can do is learn from it and move on. When September gets here, go for it ! Somebody else will surprise the league and cause a stir. May Tom Brady and Peyton Manning once again put on World War 3, that is a great rivalry!
Needagoodtime!
The NFL is a league of parity...
…therefore it is quite difficult to predict what will happen season to season. Nobody would have predicted the rapid ascension of Miami, Atlanta or Arizona in 2008.
My very early predictions for the playoffs…
NFC North…Vikings
NFC East… Eagles
NFC South…Panthers
NFC West…Cardinals
NFC Wildcard…Bears, Giants
AFC North…Steelers
AFC East…Patriots
AFC South…Colts
AFC West…Chargers
AFC Wildcard…Texans, Raiders
$136 million payroll for a .500 style ballclub. Good work Jim.
Finally it all makes sense!
You are raiders fan.
You. Are. Confusing. Me.
Camp ifuwanna, we hold you in our heart...
by ifuwannacrownem on Jul 12, 2009 10:57 PM CDT up reply actions
The Rams have a chance to be somewhat better...
but they still have too many holes to be successful consistently.
1. Their interior line is horrible
2. The D-line is small and slow.
3. The best WR is second year guy Avery.
4. Bulger has not had even an average season in 3 years and no one is sure he can stay healthy for a season, hence they signed Boeller.
5. Their DBs are pedestrian at best.
This adds up to a poor offense and an OK run defense. They will not beat out Seattle or Arizona for the division and they play a few too many good passing teams to be able to level a few close grind out victories to get close to 8-8. They would have to beat Houston, Indy, NO, and Chicago and or sweep their division games to be a playoff team.
Their line isn't just horrible
its downright horrible. They have no line like you said. Their only bright spot is Steven Jackson
I Have Spoken.
FO Almanac
Brad Biggs has some insightful comments on the Almanac’s Bears coverage at http://blogs.suntimes.com/bears/
Chargers a surprise.
If San Diego is a surprise pick. I’ll go with the Patriots as a sleeper with a 100% Brady.
by Big Ike on Jul 12, 2009 8:03 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I wonder if this guy worked for Miss Cleo?
The Rams? Are you serious, Bulger has shown that he can not stay healthy, and who is his back-up? Steven Jackson seems to have the same issue. They’re learning a new system so no way are they making the playoffs, even if both Bulger and Jackson stay healthy for most of the season the best I see with them is 7-9, that team has no heart, and you can’t teach that. As far as the Dolphins being a surprise last year, I wasn’t surprised sure they were 1-15 the year before, but they were in most of those games, they had most of the pieces, they just needed a better QB, and their RB to stay healthy, and a coach who didn’t quit on them. The Chargers making the playoffs isn’t really going out on a limb though, they have one of the better QB’s in the league, a good running game, and a good defense, and they play in a very weak division.
by touchdown bears on Jul 13, 2009 6:38 PM CDT reply actions
2 points
1.) One hit to Kurt Warner and 7-9 could make the playoffs in the NFC West.
2.) You weren’t surprised that the Dolphins improved by 10 games?!?!?! I mean, some improvement is one thing, but…10 games?
i'm kind of amazed
by your lack of awareness of football outsiders…. as someone who runs a football blog, its pretty surprising your level of unfamiliarity with their work
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 13, 2009 8:52 PM CDT reply actions
Wait a minute
Two things: First, I’ve read their stuff before, so I’m kind of confused on your first point. Second, I’m really supposed to care about a preseason ranking?
Glad to see you popped in for that one.
I'M A MAN! I'M 23!
based on your interpretation
of the data, it suggests you really don’t read them very often
As another poster points out above
Laughing and Mocking a system that has shown pretty decent predictive power and mocking it for the exact things in the model that help it be more accurate, shows a complete lack of understanding or just pure ignorance regarding the model
Obviously you care about the preseason ranking, otherwise you wouldn’t have posted it just to mock it
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 14, 2009 9:39 AM CDT up reply actions
lol
Wow.
So, I have to care to post something?
“a system that has shown pretty decent predictive power,” eh? Take a look at some of the comments underneath that story and you show me the predictive power.
I'M A MAN! I'M 23!
Wait, so we're supposed to take comments on a blog as an indicator of the site's intelligence?
Talk about cherry-picking.
The Chicago Bulls.....the more profitable Los Angeles Clippers.
by Ozzie Montana on Jul 14, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I wouldn't allow me to post if that was the case and I ran this blog.
Wrecked. Totally.
If you can't laugh at yourself you must not be very funny.
Wait
So you’re not allowing the times where they were blatantly wrong? Sounds good, bro.
Look, no one can accurately predict how each team will do and Football Outsiders is no exception. I don’t put much stock into it, which is why I mocked them for their “surprise” pick of the Rams. If you want to believe their stuff, it’s your right. But I’ll sure as hell hold my right to mock them if I choose.
I'M A MAN! I'M 23!
Still
It would be nice if you engaged his arguments, instead of deriding his points and mentioning something else entirely.
Admittedly, maybe hard to do because the Tanier piece is pretty lightweight (you pay for the heavy analysis). But still, it’s annoying to hear people just say “you’re wrong it can’t happen that way” when someone else has constructed an argument. It doesn’t make it seem like you’re taking things seriously.
Which is your right, I guess. But I suppose some of us would like more from our Bears commentary.
I apologize
For that last line. I was tired when I was writing (must go to sleep instead of obsessively reading sports blogs) and mad and kind of dashed it off, and regretted it soon after. I appreciate the content you guys put up here, I don’t want to insult you in any way.
I stand by my more general criticism of this post, however.
i think by definition
posting on a blog about a topic is an indication of interest in the topic and thus “caring”
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 14, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Here's my take.
All of the things that we post here are for discussion, sometimes we endorse the opinions of the writers that we link to, and sometimes we don’t.
That being said, Football Outsiders is an awesome site, and have some incredibly intelligent folks doing the work over their. They have authored entire theories that are statistically based, and their work is usually spot on, including the DVOA.
In this situation, picking the Rams to make the playoffs seems completely outlandish, whether from a statistical point of view or a rational point of view. Could they be correct? Of course, but even when the science kicks in, it doesn’t seem probable.
LSU Tigers Baseball... NCAA National Champions- 2009.
isn't that the whole point
of teams that will “surprise”
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 14, 2009 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions
huh?
so you were “expecting” the Rams to be great next year? I’m confused…
if it would be a shock to you that they would be good, then wouldn’t they be a “surprise”
and thus…. wouldn’t ridiculing someone going out on a limb, be kind of a childish thing to do when they clearly state the purpose of their article was to go out on a limb?
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 14, 2009 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions
*Why* does it seem outlandish?
I mean, really? I live in St. Louis, you don’t have to tell me how bad the Rams were last year. But why is it so laughable to have them in the playoffs? Why is it impossible for them to do what the Falcons and Dolphins did?
Laughing and saying “can’t happen” doesn’t seem useful.
I didn't say that it was laughable.
And I didn’t say it was impossible. And I didn’t say that it can’t happen.
LSU Tigers Baseball... NCAA National Champions- 2009.
lol
Not necessarily.
Hey, since you obviously know everything about doing this job, do you want to come aboard and write for us?
I'M A MAN! I'M 23!
Given my day job
and writing responsibilities on the side for another website, i wouldn’t have the time nor the necessary passion for putting out as much content as the three of you do
I’m not criticizing the job you guys do running the site. I’m ridiculing the post that appears to be mocking something they don’t understand and then claiming not to care at all about it (yet “cared” enough to publicly mock them)
It seems like a rather childish take on an article that was intended to “surprise” people
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 14, 2009 5:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Two things
1) There are four of us, not three.
2) I’m just gonna spell this out for you and you can go do whatever you want with it.
I think the article is extremely flawed. The Chargers cannot be considered a surprise and the Rams haven’t added that much talent to warrant a “surprise” label. So no, I really don’t care. I don’t have a vested interest in it. Now though, I’m excited for the conclusion of the season so you can realize how stupid those projections are.
I'M A MAN! I'M 23!
so hypocritical
on one point you say the Chargers can’t be considered a real surprise because of all the talent they have
on the other hand you say the Rams haven’t added enough talent to be considered a surprise
so you’re saying a team needs to upgrade a bunch to “surprise” you
isn’t the nature of the surprise something you wouldn’t expect? Isn’t that the exact thing you’re ridiculing with the Chargers????
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 14, 2009 7:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Boston (in) Common: Kevin Youkilis set to marry Tom Brady’s sister
- Giants to be honored with commemorative NY license plate; some would rather see a 9/11 plate
- The hidden play of Super Bowl XLVI: Justin Tuck’s third-quarter sack
- Report: Chad Ochocinco will become Chad Johnson once again
- Video: Bill Belichick implores his defense to make the Giants throw to Mario Manningham
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
