NBA Free Agent Frenzy: Winners and Losers

Seems like the easiest way to do this: Wait for most of the action in the swapping to die down, then go back and look to see who won and who lost out in free agency. I'm only going to cover the big winners and losers though due to space. It also allows me a breather from the NCAA Pipe Dream Playoffs... results pending.

Winners

Los Angeles Clippers (and Chris Paul)
How could they not be the big winners of the hurried offseason? They landed arguably the most sought-after player on the trading block in Paul, and people in LA will have to have cameras ready for the inevitable 17 alley-oops per game Paul will toss up, and with Blake and Jordan slamming those passes home... oh my.

Does this make them a championship contender? No way, not yet. Give this core time to grow together, and they'll be in line for maybe a second round berth and a tough out in the playoffs.

Orlando Magic
The other big winners because they get to keep Dwight Howard. They said they've taken him off the trading block, but I'm sure they're keeping in touch with teams like the Lakers and Nets, two strong suitors. And even if it comes down to the trade deadline, the Magic would probably still get a couple players, plus a pick, plus cap space courtesy of shipping Hedo Turkoglu. Orlando is probably still a playoff team, but another likely first or second round out, likely first if they do end up dealing Howard depending on what they get back.

Chicago Bulls
Biased? Maybe. But the Bulls addressed their biggest need in a 2 guard without giving up their 2nd biggest strength: depth. If Hamilton can score even double figures per game, he's an upgrade over the waived Keith Bogans. Odds are as a starter he'll average in the mid to upper teens in points, and allow for some spacing on the floor. Key, given that this guy will only get better this year. The Bulls still have to prove that they can get through Miami in a seven game series, but Hamilton will help.




Losers

Los Angeles Lakers
Oh boy. They almost land Chris Paul before David Stern nixed the deal... and it wasn't even a bad deal for all the teams involved. Enough has been said about that trade that I don't need to go any further, but it messed up chemistry so bad that it forced the Lakers to ship off an upset Lamar Odom. And I can't imagine Khloe being too happy about Dallas compared to LA.

(Side note: I hope to God that's the only time I ever mention one of the Kardashians in this blog. I'm ashamed I even brought it up in the first place. Rage.)

Boston Celtics
I know Bill Simmons is already in panic mode about their season, and understandably. Didn't have a lot of room to make improvements, but this team looks to be in trouble between the shortened season and a possibly pissed off Rajon Rondo. I'm not sure if he'll be motivated by the mention of his name in trade rumors for Paul or if it will damage his psyche. The other problem is that the Celtics have no depth, especially behind Allen and Pierce, and their starting center is Jermaine O'Neal. Have fun with that, Bill.

David Stern
For obvious reasons. Between the nixed Lakers deal and the high price for the initial Clippers-Hornets deal, Stern showed that he's either trying too hard or not hard enough. I think more so he's in over his head now and just needs to step down. We can still have a good season, but he doesn't have the same magic anymore. No need to overstate anything more.




In the meantime, the NBA season starts a week from tomorrow. For things Bulls, you can keep tabs on work from my good friend Geoffrey Clark here. He's a big Bulls fan and knows his stuff. A good follow. In the meantime, go Bulls!

NCAA Pipe Dream Playoffs: First Round

I'm ignoring some of the bigger stories in sports for right now, just because there's so much uncertainty, and I want to wait on an NBA/NFL playoff preview for now... though those will come. For now, since a feature I've been waiting on finally opened up, I can get to this.

A week ago I posted my bracket for the 2011 NCAA FBS Championship. Obviously this is just a pipe dream, but I wanted to know how things would go instead of the crappy bowl system we have in place. So, one week at a time, I'm going to run a simulation of how the games would hypothetically end up going. (The higher seed hosts, by the way, with weather taken from December 10th.)

Obviously, there's no way of saying this is exactly what's going to happen, but I'm going to run 3 simulations of each game (to get a better feel) and average out the scores of the 3 contests, just to get a better sample size of each game. All simulations provided by WhatIfSports.com.

(1)LSU vs. (16)Georgia                                   (2)Alabama vs. (15)Clemson
Game 1: LSU 44, UGA 14                                  Game 1: ALA 45, CLE 6
Game 2: LSU 24, UGA 14                                  Game 2: ALA 48, CLE 9
Game 3: LSU 34, UGA 17                                  Game 3: ALA 62, CLE 3
Final: LSU 34, UGA 15                                     Final: ALA 52, CLE 6
  
(8)Kansas State vs. (9)So. Carolina               (7)Boise State vs. (10)Wisconsin
Game 1: KSU 26, SC 7                                      Game 1: WIS 28, BSU 27
Game 2: KSU 29, SC 7                                      Game 2: BSU 23, WIS 21
Game 3: SC 26, KSU 3                                      Game 3: BSU 27, WIS 24
Final: KSU 19, SC 13                                        Final: BSU 26, WIS 24

(4)Stanford vs (13)Michigan                           (3)Oklahoma State vs. (14)Oklahoma
Game 1: STAN 33, MICH 21                             Game 1: OSU 44, OU 16
Game 2: STAN 34, MICH 20                             Game 2: OSU 48, OU 27
Game 3: STAN 34, MICH 24                             Game 3: OSU 43, OU 12
Final: STAN 34, MICH 22                                 Final: OSU 45, OU 18

(5)Oregon vs (12)Baylor                                 (6)Arkansas vs. (11)Virginia Tech
Game 1: ORE 42, BAY 39                                 Game 1: ARK 34, VT 16
Game 2: ORE 41, BAY 16                                 Game 2: VT 41, ARK 38
Game 3: ORE 51, BAY 37                                 Game 3: ARK 31, VT 17
Final: ORE 44, BAY 31                                      Final: ARK 34, VT 25


Chalk ends up playing out in this first round. I'm not too surprised, but notice here that there are some great games (especially Boise State-Wisconsin). I'm hoping we get some closer games as the tournament moves on.

Remember, the losers go to a single-elimination tournament for the 9th place game (we'll say it's the Rose Bowl this year, but will change next year due to the rotation). The winners all are guaranteed 3 more games. Does the system work? Perhaps. Odds are TV revenue would have been good just because it's a tournament of the best teams thus far.

After I posted the original bracket, I talked to a friend of mine from WONC who said he liked the idea but would prefer the playoffs have only 8 teams. I'm certainly open to that, though it then means one of the BCS Bowl games doesn't get decided by the playoffs. Like I said in the original idea, the system isn't perfect. And if in a few weeks we end up with an LSU-Alabama rematch still for the national title, fine by me. We will just have arrived at it in a more fair fashion. Next week I'll have the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Game Notes: University of Dubuque @ North Central College (12/9/11)

Final Score
Dubuque 63, NCC 60 

Summary
This was probably the most bipolar game I've ever seen. As Mark Albanese said, "It was a tale of two halves." (Another line I debated about, but the bipolar thing seemed to work better.) North Central (5-4)was down 6-2 early from Dubuque (3-4) scoring down low, then the Cardinals went on a 20-3 run. They led by 23 with about a minute to go before halftime, seeing the lead dwindle down to 18, then 16 on a dumb foul with less than a second. The offense stopped working late, letting the Spartans back into the game, ultimately giving up the lead with just seconds left.

Key Stats

• NCC: 40% FG, 47% 3PT, 58% FT. Other than the free throw numbers, not bad. But let's break this down by halves.
• 1st Half: 14-26 FG (54%), 7-10 3PT (70%), 8-12 FT (67%)
• 2nd Half: 3-17 FG (18%), 0-5 3PT (0%), 11-21 FT (52%)
• Bipolar indeed. You can't go 3-17 in a half and miss almost half your free throws and expect to win... especially when your first field goal of the 2nd half comes with less than 6 minutes to go.
• Jenny Swanson (NCC): 5-11 FG (4-7 3PT), 14 pts, 2 reb. Taking the first half out of the equation, she was 5-8, including 4-5 from deep. She hit her first 4 treys, including an "Eff You" three in front of Dubuque's bench in the first half. It was beautiful. NCC got an odd man rush off a press break (5 on 4), the ball handler drove inside, then dished out to Jenny who was wide open and drained it. I thought for sure after she hit that one that it was going to be "that kind of day" for the Cardinals and we'd win easily. Alas.
• Lauren Gabler (UD): 4-10 FG (all 3PT), 1-2 FT, 13 pts, 2 reb. Led the team in scoring, and was lethal from deep in the 2nd half, including the game winning 3 with about 10 seconds left. Dubuque called a timeout with 18 ticks left, and I said to the others at the scorer's table, "Defensive strategy: no threes!" What happens? They give the ball to another girl, have her drive and dish back to Gabler. No one is on Gabler. Open three. Swish. Cardinals face their first deficit since the opening minutes.

Final Thoughts
Par for the course in this one. Great first half ruined by the Clogged Toilet Offense in the 2nd. Bad passes, careless dribbling, though not a lot of travels called either way. Nonetheless, NCC turned it over 25 times.

I want to recap North Central's play after the go-ahead 3 by Gabler. Inbounded, Sophie Newson dribbled up the court, fed inside to Callie Rezin, who dribbled in... and kept dribbling... and kept dribbling... then double-dribbled with about a second to go before she could get off a shot. Poor execution cost the Cardinals a win tonight. Honestly, I couldn't get out of that gym fast enough.

The Cardinals hit the road for a couple weeks, with their next home game (and my next report) coming near the end of 2011. I just hope it's a better result and a more complete game.

Out of the Hot Stove, Into the Fire

Once the MLB season ended I started paying attention to the movement of players, with a lot of talk around some huge names moving around. Today was probably the biggest free agent day that I can remember in a long time.

I have to say, it's nice to have an offseason where the Red Sox and Yankees aren't heavily involved to drive up the price/end up signing every single major free agent, so the quiet on that front is great, but we've seen a couple other teams drop major money the past week or so in Miami and Los Angeles/Anaheim.

I'll be honest from the get-go: I hate the Marlins. I'm still bitter about 2003. But they've made some good moves this week in getting Jose Reyes and yesterday, Mark Buehrle. You now have a legit leadoff hitter (when he's healthy and gives a crap) and a workhorse who will give you 200 innings and at least 10 wins. I'm a Cubs fan, but I've always respected Mark Buehrle, and it'll be weird seeing him in different colors next season. Is Miami now the favorite in the NL East? Not by a long shot. The Phillies are still the team to beat (assuming Ryan Howard's Achilles is okay), and the Braves are right behind them. While we're at it, don't forget about Washington with a healthy Steven Strasburg for all of 2012.

Meanwhile, the Angels came out of nowhere to get the biggest name in free agency in one Albert Pujols. I'll have more on him in a minute. But the Angels also shored up their rotation with C.J. Wilson from the Rangers. Wilson finished in the top 10 in several major categories in the AL last year (wins, IP, ERA, K's), and any team would have been lucky to get him. Pairing him with Jered Weaver and Dan Haren gives you a great 1-2-3 in your rotation. The balance of power has definitely shifted a bit in the AL West, though with Texas talking about moving closer Neftali Feliz to the rotation lessens the blow the Rangers took.

Now let's talk Pujols. As a Cubs fan, it was a possibility that would have been kinda fun to see: the best player on your archrival team changing sides and coming over. That being said, I didn't want Pujols. Best hitter in baseball or not, at age 31 going on 32, you don't want to sign him to a 10 year deal, especially one paying $250 million (unless you obscenely front-load the deal, screwing yourself over for those first couple years in the process). And the Cardinals should be glad that they get to save the money from Pujols and maybe get a couple other good players for him.

This would be where Cardinal fans start talking about the value of Pujols, and not in dollars. I've already seen comparisons to The Decision from last year, with some fans already burning Pujols jerseys. The difference here is that I picture Pujols as a classier guy than 2010 LeBron. There was no heart-wrenching televised special of his decision, and I would hope he called the Cardinals' brass before signing. But what we need to remember is that professional sports are a business, and favorite players will come and go.

That doesn't mean fans can't be sad about it, but they need to understand both sides. Albert won 2 World Series in St. Louis, and it's not like he's going to a team with no shot of winning. And if more money was his priority, fair enough. Though the ESPN experts may have been onto something: they cited the Matt Holliday signing as a problem, since Albert wasn't the main focus that year. Did he feel a bit betrayed? Maybe. But he left St. Louis with a perfect on-field memory: winning a title.

I've seen Pujols play in person 5 times, and it's been an honor to see him play. His numbers in those 5 games:

.400/.550/1.133, 3 HR, 5 RBI


Take into account 2 of those homers came in one game back in 2009, but those seem about par for one of the best hitters in the game over a 5 game sample. My dad and my brother saw him get his 2000th career hit this year and I'm pretty sure were giving Pujols the ovation along with every other fan in attendance.

When it's all said and done, Pujols will end up coming back to St. Louis at least once (barring injury, thanks to interleague play). It's hard to project the exact reaction when he bats for the first time, but I would hope he gets an ovation as a thank you for all the memories in his 11 seasons as a Cardinal. And when he retires, I'm sure the team and city will welcome him back with open arms, retire #5, and see him wearing Cardinal red when he goes to Cooperstown.

Albert, from this Cubs fan, while I hated seeing you destroy Cubs pitching year after year, I do thank you for playing a part in a historic rivalry, wish you luck on the West Coast, and pray that the NL Central's balance of power continues to shift with Prince Fielder coming to the North Side to hit 45 home runs a year for a few years.

Game Notes: Lake Forest College @ North Central College (12/6/11)

Final Score
NCC 66, LFC 55

Summary
Probably their best game of the season that I've been to so far. The Cardinals (5-3) jumped out to an early 18-7 lead and never really looked back. The Foresters (4-3) did get within 2 early in the 2nd half, but the Cards were able to pull away late, leading by as much as 15. The defense was fantastic tonight; players switched extremely well on screens, and there weren't a whole lot of easy shots taken by Lake Forest. Rebounding was about even, and the Cardinals shot well enough other than at the line (18-30 for the game after starting 3-8).

Key Stats

• Jenny Swanson (NCC): 4-10 FG (all 3PT), 14 pts, 2 ast. She hit her first two 3's of the game then cooled off, but she was open most of the time when she shot. Would help to see her drive and dish a little more, but she made the most of her opportunities, especially on passes from Helen Muleya. 
• Emily Murphy (NCC): 6-12 FG, 1-3 FT, 13 pts, 4 reb (2 off). She's turning into the biggest low-post threat for the Cardinals, though she hasn't had many opportunities to receive entry passes. If she works on posting up, she can turn into the sort of player who can score 15 a night. To her credit though, she was in perfect position for a couple of easy shots off baseline drives on back to back plays.
• Sam Schuring (LFC): 3-11 FG 1-2 3PT, 1-2 FT, 8 pts, 2 reb, 3 ast, 2 stl. Coming into tonight's game, Schuring was averaging 14.5 points, 4 boards, almost 4 assists and 3 steals per game. All those averages went down after tonight. She was kept in check by fantastic defense by the Cardinals.

Finals Thoughts
I looked up stats for Lake Forest earlier this afternoon to see how good they were, and I saw they forced an average of 22 or 23 turnovers per game. They employed a full-court press that answered all the questions. North Central did a great job breaking the press and only turned it over 16 times tonight (several of them traveling calls). The offense was about 50/50 between good ball movement and open looks and the Clogged Toilet offense. They're looking better as the season goes on, and should be in decent shape come conference play. They take the court again Friday against Dubuque.

NCAA FBS Championships Sponsored by Pipe Dream

I already said yesterday what I think about the piece of crap that is the Bowl Championship Series. And to no surprise, we get a rematch for the "national" title. Obviously I think it's terrible that all these other one-loss teams don't get a chance to play for a title. But for the heck of it, let's look at what a playoff would look like based on my system and the BCS standings.

I'm going to be honest, there are flaws here. We have 2 rematches (LSU-UGA and (OSU-OU), but some fascinating matchups. I like the look of Wisconsin-Boise State, and even games like Baylor-Oregon and Michigan-Stanford. Obviously the major bowl games would have different looks in the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange Bowls, but when you get great competitive football in the 3 weeks leading up to it, who cares? I would take a tournament like this over a terrible Illinois team against a had-to-petition UCLA in the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl.

BCS or BS-CS?

With the postseason of college football upon us, like many other sports fans, I will complain about the format of the postseason. The following was originally written on 10/21/11, with some editing done.

I don't want to call this a rant, but this thought process was inspired by reading a Rick Reilly column about how undefeated teams are going to get screwed over by the BCS this season (with 6 unbeatens as of October 21, 2011, and only 2 as of November 29th). I will also preface this by saying I agree with LSU being ranked #1, but I'm not really sold on #2.

For context, I grew up not caring about college football. I started paying a little more attention in high school, with me pretty much being required to pay attention in college working in radio. Like many people, I hate the current championship system. It's corporate greed and elitism at its worst in sports. Many fans are screaming for a playoff, and I'm one of them. How hard could it be? Here's a modest proposal for a system largely based on how the current system works.

• Much of the regular season will remain the same. Maybe shorten it a couple weeks to enable more time for a playoff.
• Any teams that win 6 games will still remain "Bowl eligible" and can play in the Texas Bowl or whatever bowl game wants them.
• The polls and BCS standings can remain intact, with maybe some tweaks if the committee decides they want some. This is important because...
• At the end of the regular season, the Top 16 teams according to the BCS qualify for the National Championship Tournament (sponsored by State Farm or whoever). If any unbeaten team were to fall outside the Top 16, they automatically get in, with the lowest ranked team according to the BCS formula dropping out. This tournament will function as something of a double-elimination tournament like the ones used in junior high or high school Christmas basketball tournaments with a Winner's Bracket and a Loser's Bracket.
• In the Loser's Bracket, it becomes a single-elimination tournament. Winners advance, losers are out (but could still qualify for lower Bowl games if they choose). In the Winner's Bracket, the 8 teams will all play 3 games; no need to win to stay alive.
• The four major Bowl games (Rose, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta) will maintain importance as they rotate between the 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 9th (Loser Bracket Champion) place games. This goes back to pre-BCS days when these major games could rotate to decide national titles. Obviously the 2 teams that win out go to the National Championship Game.

Seems like it makes sense, right? I know there are several arguments against a playoff, but I think a lot of them are ridiculous.

Anti-playoff people say that a playoff diminishes the regular season. Keeping the BCS formula around and giving unbeatens an automatic in means the regular season does still matter. You win every game, you get a shot at the national title. For teams like LSU this year, they still get their recognition for winning every game. It gives other teams that may have had off days a chance to redeem themselves. And the mid-majors (a la unbeaten Houston) get a chance to prove themselves. The polls and BCS formula still remain relevant. Who loses here?

Some might argue about the schedule of a playoff, and it taking away from class time or something along those lines. Two obvious problems here. First of all, look at how Division III does it. They do a 32 team, 5 game playoff. No one there complains about missing classes, because student-athletes actually commit to the student part first. It works. Secondly, since when do the football coaches care about their players going to class? Look at graduation rates as they are without a playoff. These football factories only care about money, and a lot of the players are looking NFL or bust.

Teams in the so-called Power Conferences will argue that they lose in this system. How? Because you don't have your elite place where you and only you dwell? We've seen in the past few years that the mid-majors can compete. Last year TCU won the Rose Bowl against Wisconsin. Boise State knocked off Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl just a few years ago, and seems to beat every major program it comes up against in the regular season. Say what you will about the Georgia's of the world, but a win against a power conference team is a win against a power conference team.

For fans of the major powers who argue "Our team is way better than yours, we play in the [insert big conference here], we play a better schedule, you wouldn't survive our schedule." First of all, that's crap. Look at Alabama's non-conference schedule (other than Penn State, weak) or Oklahoma State's non-conference slate (weak). It's hypocritical to criticize Boise State's schedule, yet schedule cupcakes early on. Besides, if you're so confident about your team, you should have no problem letting the non-power conference teams play for the national title. After all, they'll lose in the first round to your SEC/Big 12/Big 10/Pac-12 team apparently.

We can argue strength of schedule all you want, but that makes no difference. The real reason there's no playoff? Money. That's always the answer. The BCS is another greedy corporate entity only looking out for its bottom line. But do they (and the NCAA and its member schools) not realize that a playoff can still be profitable as well? Sponsor the playoff tournament of the Top 16. That's 20 more games you can get TV money for, more ad revenue, more ticket and concession sales... there's money to be made with a playoff too if you think about it a little bit.

Is this system perfect? Of course not, no system is. But I would argue that this system is more fair. You give more teams an opportunity to win a national title like in basketball. For March Madness, theoretically every team has a chance to win the title. You win your conference tournament, you go to the Big Dance. Then it's just 6 or 7 more wins to pay dirt. Yes, SWAC teams usually won't get past the first round, but as far as theory goes, they have a shot. In football, the only way you can make the national title game in the BCS era is to be in a power conference and go unbeaten. Why not share the chances? I'll repeat: if power conferences think they're so great, they should have no problem putting "upstarts" like TCU, Boise State, Utah State, etc. in their place and still win a national title to keep glorifying themselves by winning a national title via a playoff.