FJM: Mike Lombardi On The B.S. Report

Mike Lombardi is an analyst for NFL.com and a friend of Bill Simmons and thus a frequent guest on The B.S. Report. I don't understand how Bill Simmons can be friends with both the founder and creator of Football Outsiders (the leading pioneer in advanced NFL statistics) Aaron Schatz and truly believe what FO says and also listen to the advice of Lombardi. Mike Lomardi is the most vanilla, cliche analysis out there and is just one step above Trent Dilfer who doesn't even believe in statistics. Sidenote: why is it the worst QB ever to win a Superbowl is the guy who doesn't believe in stats?

Anyways, I'm like a week or two behind on my B.S. Report's and I was recently listening to a podcast where Simmons and Lombardi were talking about the Bears/Jets game. Now since this game already happened before I started listening to the podcast, I was very upset at what I was listening to. Let me share some excerpts from the podcast with you.

Mind you, the Bears won this game 38-34

Mike Lombardi: I don't see how the Jets lose this game.

Are you now blind Mike Lombardi? Seriously though, the Bears are a good team, they were fighting for home field advantage throughout the playoffs and this game was being played IN Chicago, yet there was NO WAY you could see the Bears lose!? What!

This is a bad match up for the Bears because the Bears can't really block all this pressure stuff

What is "pressure stuff"? What are you, the new marketing director for Oreos? Kids, come out and try our new Pressure Stuffed Oreos!

and the more pressure stuff the more Jay Cutler will turn the ball over

He ain't the best analyst in the biz for nothing folks. Bringing you top quality analysis like, "the more pressure a defense gets on a quarterback, the harder it is for the quarterback to be effective". Thank you Mike Lombardi for graduating from elementary school and watching the NFL for at least one full season. By the way, way to not actually watch Jay Cutler since Chicago's bye and realize he's not the turnover machine he was last year. Cutler only had one turnover this game.

not that I think the Bears can't play good defense

What!? The team that has the 3rd best scoring defense coming into this game has the possibility of playing good defense? Again, top notch stuff Lombardi, top notch. And just to pile more shit on Lombardi, the Bears played horrific defense this game.

I mean the Bears have to try and win this game in the teens, 16-13, but I think the Bears offense will make a mistake.

Yep, a real low scoring game. A real doozy of a tilt we had goin' on up in herrr. Also, more nonsense, cliche dribble like the Bears are automatically going to turn it over.

The Bears don't have anything they can hang their hat on, they don't have a great running game

"Honey I'm home"
"Lovely Matt, what did you do today?"
"Well, I just ran for 113 yards on 19 carries which is good for a 5.9 yards per carry. Plus, I had a great rushing touchdown run"
"Oh, that's just lovely dear, can I take your hat? I think we just found a new resting place for it"

and the more they throw the less, more opportunity they have to pass.

ENGLISH MOTHAFUCKA! Do you speak it?

I think the Jets can go in there, they're good on the road, they kind of have a mutter type mentality

What does "mutter" mean? I can make up words and intangibles too! "The Bears have a strongforce, grittering type of style that is the reason they win games."

and I think they can play enough defense against a bad offense. They usually shut down bad offenses and I'm not sure the Bears have a great offense.

Yeah, keep shitting on this offense some more and they'll go laugh when the scoreboard reads that they have more points than their opponent.

Bill Simmons: The Bears are not a team that is equipped to drop 35 points

With the exception of this game where the Bears put up 38 points. Oh and the game before where they put up 40.

M.L.: And they're not going to be able to handle all the pressure stuff, the overloads.

Quick! Somebody call the Manning brothers and get this man a cookie stat! He's hungry!

Not that Mike Martz won't know how to block it but Mike Martz will have a hard time getting it done because they can't block, the right tackle's a liability, the left guard's a liability, those are problems.

Because it's not like Mike Martz isn't an above average offensive coordinator or anything and it's not like he (a) doesn't make adjustments during games and (b) hasn't been making adjustments during games all season long.

You commonplace dumb piece of shit Mike Lombardi. You can't keep spitting out platitudes and then wonder why you keep wiping egg off of your face every week. But I thank your stupidity for giving me a chance to laugh at you. And you were SOOOOOO confident the Jets were going to win this game too.

Joe Morgan DFAed, What Now FJM?

Now that ESPN has designated Joe Morgan for assignment (well, they really just outright released him), do you think Kenny Williams or Bruce Bochy will sign him? They love their crafty veterans and that "veteran presence," right?

But on a serious note, does anyone remember that ingenuous blog (whose untimely demise sparked the birth of this blog), Fire Joe Morgan? Just a few days over two years ago, Ken Tremendous and crew said their final goodbyes, but left us FJM enthusiasts with a glimmer of hope in the comments to that final post:

Many of you guys have written in to ask us to reconsider -- even if we just post something once in a long while. You guys are nice and awesome.

And, well, we might. We might come back here once in a while and post something particularly infuriating or noteworthy. We like this place too.

I realize that FJM has reunited for one day of glory over on Deadspin.com for two-years running now, but FireJoeMorgan.com is yearning for new material. If this news is not something particularly noteworthy (though it is worth noting that the guys at FJM did not actual proclaim a desire for Joe Morgan to get fired, only that people disregard that "old baseball" knowledge that science and math has disproved), then what in the world is?

Please Ken, we miss you!

FJM: John Clayton's QB Rankings

Recently, ESPN's John Clayton ranked 33 quarterbacks in terms of talent. This list could not have made me more upset. Like a cliche sports blogger, I have to add my two cents and tell the author why he's a dumb mo fo and should never talk about sports ever again because he's the dumbest man alive. Plus it's a Saturday night so naturally this is the best thing on my list to do.

Here's Clayton's list

THE ELITE
1. Peyton Manning
2. Tom Brady
3. Drew Brees
4. Ben Roethlisberger
5. Brett Favre
6. Aaron Rodgers
7. Philip Rivers
8. Tony Romo
9. Donovan McNabb
10. Carson Palmer
11. Eli Manning
12. Joe Flacco
13. Matt Ryan
14. Matt Schaub

CHAD PENNINGTON DIVISION
15. Jay Cutler
16. Kyle Orton
17. Matt Hasselbeck
18. Vince Young
19. Jason Campbell
20. David Garrard
21. Alex Smith
22. Matt Cassel

HIT-OR-MISS DIVISION
23. Mark Sanchez
24. Kevin Kolb
25. Chad Henne
26. Matthew Stafford
27. Byron Leftwich
28. Matt Leinart/ Derek Anderson
29. Josh Freeman
30. Sam Bradford
31. Trent Edwards
32. Matt Moore
33. Jake Delhomme

SIDENOTE: This list was created before Leftwich got hurt and Leinart got cut

Now with most rankings you're never going to have someone agree with you on 100% of your picks. Everyone is always going to think that Person X should be above Person Y. So when I look at rankings I look at groupings. Sure, maybe I think Person X should be better than Person Y, but both people are top 10 and I think that's right. But even still, John Clayton, what are you thinking!?

- My hatred of Big Ben is well documented. While I hate rapists and liars (especially those that get away with it), I especially don't like Big Ben because he isn't asked to throw a whole lot so a decreased sample size shows up as good statistical numbers. And admittedly Roethlisberger proved me wrong last year by having a lot of attempts, a still good completion percentage all while leading the league in sacks. So he gets a bump up in my book. BUT NUMBER FOUR!? COME ON JC! I thought we were past the fact that Superbowl rings does not equal good quarterback play. Was your colleague Trent Dilfer looking over your shoulder when you wrote this?

- Aaron Rodgers is AT LEAST a top 5 quarterback. Part of what makes the greats put up big numbers is because of their offensive line. You put Joe Montana or Dan Marino in front of the most recent Detroit Lions offensive lines and they put Jay Cutler-esque numbers. But Aaron Rodgers put up Dan Marino-eqsue numbers with an awful O-line last year. (tied for first last year in sacks with 50 and had the third worst passing offensive line last year). In my heart (especially as a Bears fan) I can't put him ahead of Manning, Brady, and Brees, but I think my head and logic says Rodgers needs to be top 3.

-Matt Schaub is only 14! WHAT!? The only flaw throughout Schaub's entire career (besides the fact that I've heard many people call him 'Schwaub') is that he's injury prone. But this list is not about fantasy football (and seeing how McNabb is at #9, this list is clearly about talent) it's about how well does a QB perform on the field. Schaub was an elite prospect/back up in Atlanta and always performed well on the field with a Detroit Lions-esque offensive line. Top 10 talent.

-The absolute worst ranking on this list is Matt Ryan. No amount of capital letters can begin to describe how much Matt Ryan sucks. I know this isn't fantasy but when you're healthy and Carson Palmer and Jason Campbell outscore you- you suck.

-Speaking of Carson Palmer- he's 2009 L.T. done. He's I-just-finished-an-easy-final-and-now-I'm-turning-it-in done. This is a shame because he was so good early in his career and looked like the best quarterback to come out of USC in the past decade (although he's still looking like that with the week Matt Leinart is having). But he's looked really bad since his knee injury in the playoffs a few years back and has done nothing since to deserve the "elite" tag

-I understand the frustration and hatred with Jay Cutler, as a Bears fan I do. But Jesus Christ the hatred has gone way too far. Yes, leading the league in interceptions and having it not be close is a HUGE knock on you. But he still completed 60+ percent of his passes and threw more touchdowns than interceptions. And Cutler's INT% was such a statistical anomaly that I refuse to believe he repeats his 2009 campaign. But you wanna talk about guys with bad numbers, just look at Carson Palmer and Matt Ryan.

-I'm glad Drew Brees is getting love. He's always been good where ever he's gone and he makes no name wide outs and 7th round draft picks stars. Plus, his kid is cute AS HELL.

- I love the talent of Philip Rivers. I heard he's the biggest douchebag and trash talker on the field but I think he's also a top 5 talent.

- Fuck Brett Favre. Oh, and Clayton's ranking of him sucks as well. At this stage in his career, Favre is barely a top 10 QB. But still light years better than Tavaris Jackson.

-As a real life player (because god forbid we talk about a player's real life value as opposed to his fantasy value), I like Vince Young. He loves to cough more than a man with lung cancer and emphysema, but the man just wins games. Normally, I'd say that how many wins a team has when a particular quarterback starts is just pure luck. But not with Vince Young. When his team is down by 5 in the fourth quarter (granted they are probably down because Young had 2 interceptions and a fumble in the game) Young just puts game winning drives together. It's just what he does. Plus, there's no stat for rushing for three yards on 3rd and 2- which is what Vince Young does. During a debate last week with my buddy, if I had to start a team today (real not fantasy) and get a QB for the next three years, which QB would I take: Young or Ryan? I took Young.

-Chad Henne is too low at 25 and Kevin Kolb is WAY too low at 24

-I think McNabb, E. Manning, and Orton are correctly placed/ right in the area they should be

Here's my list:

1. Tom Brady
2. Peyton Manning
3. Aaron Rodgers
4. Drew Brees
5. Philip Rivers
6. Matt Schaub
7. Tony Romo
8. Brett Favre
9. Ben Roethlisberger
10. Donovan McNabb
11. Jay Cutler
12. Eli Manning
13. Joe Flacco
14. Kevin Kolb
15. Vince Young
16. Kyle Orton
17. Jason Campbell
18. Matt Ryan
19. Chad Henne
20. Carson Palmer
21. David Garrard
22. Matt Cassel
23. Alex Smith
24. Sam Bradford
25. Matt Hasselbeck
26. Byron Leftwich
27. Matthew Stafford
28. Mark Sanchez
29. Matt Moore
30. Jake Delhomme
31. Trent Edwards
32. Josh Freeman
33. Derek Anderson

FJM: Tiger Woods Time Magazine

In 2009, Time Magazine released an issue of the Top 100 most influential people in the world. Each selection had a short editorial written about him or her by a person who knows them best. Woods' editorial was written by his good Gillette buddy Roger Federer and it could not be more perfect in retrospect.

We are fortunate to live in the Tiger Woods era. Tiger, 33, is a model for how athletes should conduct themselves.

Yes, we are fortunate. What other athlete could possible screw up his life so royally in front of the entire world? Finally, we have a model of how athletes DO conduct themselves, and it is awesome.

He handles himself with class, and he's articulate. There's no silly talk in public from Tiger. When he speaks, people listen.

Uh, yeah. I set not one, but two alarm clocks to make sure and not miss Tiger's infamous "apology" for getting caught..errrrr..losing his sponsors..errrrr..destroying his family. And he's so articulate, perfect spelling and so visual in his texts.

That is an important part of why he's an idol for so many young athletes and why adults get giddy when they see him. They're not just awed by his great wins; they admire him as a person.

If by giddy, he means horny, then yes adults get super giddy when they see the great Tiger. Whats not to admire. He's perfected putting it in the hole on and off the course.

I looked to Tiger for lessons on how philanthropy should be done. His philanthropic efforts are really unbelievable, and I plan to follow his example.

Tiger never hesitates to get out his credit card when he sees someone in need of a plane ticket, hotel room, or even a diamond necklace. Those poor, tattooed little kiddies.

Tiger has become a close friend, and people would be surprised that under that serious game face is a big kid who loves to play jokes and have a good time.

Just like Borat, beneath that serious face he love to make sexy time too

FJM: Sebastian Janikowski

I could probably just leave the title at that. This commentary is not meant to attack the writer of the article as it is meant to attack the stupidity that is Al Davis- the owner of the Oakland Raiders. The LA Clippers look like the New York Yankees compared to how the Raiders are being run. Can we just put Al Davis as the worst GM- it's close enough...

The Oakland Raiders and Sebastian Janikowski reached agreement Tuesday on the richest kicking contract in NFL history.

You know how you can tell it's a Quentin Taratino movie just watching a scene? Well, that's the same thing as Al Davis, you can tell something's an Al Davis dealing when the term "richest kicking contract" is in the sentence.

It also removes arguably the top kicker from the free-agent market. Other notable free-agent kickers are expected to include Cincinnati's Shayne Graham and the New York Jets' Jay Feely.

Shit. Now what are teams going to do about their open kicker situation? it's not like they can't pull guys off the street or take the 10 open guys who won't get drafted this year because it's dumb to draft a kicker (same in fantasy football too!)

In 10 seasons, all with the Raiders, Janikowski has scored 1,000 points, converting 78.4 percent of his field-goal attempts (229 of 292) and 313 of 316 extra-point attempts. He scored 95 points in 2009.

Also, among active kickers he's: 13th in Extra Point Percentage, 27th in Field Goal Percentage, and 14th in total Field Goals made. Those numbers just SCREAM amazing contract don't they?

Janikowski is coming off the best season of his 10-year career. He made 26 of 29 field goals, with his only misses coming from 45, 57 and 66 yards. He made six kicks of at least 50 yards, including a 61-yarder that was the fourth longest in NFL history.

OK, I won't be a complete hate-ah, those are pretty good numbers. But this article won't go downhill will it?

Janikowski also had 17 touchbacks on 58 kickoffs for the sixth-best mark in the league last season.

Hmmm, how do you say "slippery slope" in Al Davis' world? "6th best" doesn't really go hand in hand with a blockbuster deal, does it?

The Raiders used a first-round pick to draft Janikowski in 2000, making him the first specialist in 21 years to go in the first round. Janikowski did not emerge as the game-changing kicker owner Al Davis hoped for at the time.

Oh right, I forgot, Al Davis doesn't know how to properly value kickers at all. Because even though no team would ever draft a kicker before the 6th round, Al David decided to waste a first round pick on Janikowski. Of course this new Janikowski deal makes sense. Dude was a first rounder! WOAH!

He missed 10 field goals as a rookie, and connected on only 76 percent for his first three seasons. But he has been very consistent the past two seasons, making 41 of 44 kicks inside of 50 yards. He became the all-time leading scorer in team history in 2008.

This article doesn't really point out the other seven years where Janikowski was also crap between his rookie season and these past two seasons.

The Raiders have traditionally done a good job keeping their own free agents.

They also do a good job of losing games, poorly evaluating talent, having a head coach more times that a crack head smokes up, and running a beloved franchise into the ground.

They gave record deals last February to keep Pro Bowl punter Shane Lechler and star cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha and also gave a big deal to keep defensive tackle Tommy Kelly in 2008.

Like we needed any more proof that Al Davis probably has had Alzheimer's for the past few years

The focus now turns to defensive lineman Richard Seymour. Oakland traded a 2011 first-round pick to New England for Seymour before last season. He had four sacks, but two of the them came in the season opener. If Oakland cannot sign Seymour to a long-term deal by Feb. 25, the team is expected to use the franchise tag to keep him for next season. Seymour, a five-time Pro Bowler, would be guaranteed $12,398,000 with a franchise tag.

What's with this crazy hypothetical that they might not throw a lot of money at a washed up player who won't perform well for their team? Did this guy just read his own post?

This article is from ESPN.com. Also, sincerest apologies if I offended anyone with my Alzheimer's comment.

Is being a moron a prerequisite for getting paid to write for MLB.com?

Where is FireJoeMorgan when you need them? Today's idiocy comes courtesy of Chris Haft.

Jacobs isn't a premier free agent like Matt Holliday or Jason Bay. He isn't even considered a second-tier free agent. But he did hit 51 home runs in the previous two seasons. Jacobs would have an AT&T Park concession-stand menu item named after him, kind of like the "Cha Cha Bowl" saluting Orlando Cepeda, if he homered at that pace for the Giants.

These are the same Giants who ranked last in the Major Leagues with 94 home runs in 2008 and next-to-last in the National League with 122 homers last season. Granted, power isn't the cure-all to the Giants' offensive woes. But you have to wonder whether Jacobs might be worth signing to a one-year contract for a low base salary and enough performance bonuses to reward him for a job well done.

The Giants, who continue to seek offensive help, have contacted Jacobs' agent, John Boggs. Their interest in Jacobs appears minimal, however. "They haven't given any indication that he's a player they've targeted," Boggs said Monday. "But he could be the answer to completing their lineup."

Maybe Jacobs, 29, can be this year's Russell Branyan, who amassed 31 homers for Seattle last year after averaging 12 in the previous six seasons.

Let's look at the numbers; you know, Chris Haft's job.

It is true that the Giants ranked second-to-last in ISO last season, with a team mark of .132, but they also ranked dead last in both OBP, BB% and wOBA last season.

Whereas Russell Branyan hit for a .368 wOBA/.867 OPS with an 11.9% walk rate, .347 OBP and .269 ISO last season, Mike Jacobs posted a .305 wOBA/.698 OPS with a .297 OBP (8.6% walk rate) and .173 ISO. Branyan is a career .257 ISO hitter with an elite career walk rate of 12.2%. Jacobs, by contrast, has a career OBP of .313 (7.9% walk rate) and .222 ISO. Jacobs has a -9.0 career UZR/150 at 1B. Branyan has a career +1.6 UZR/150 rate at 1B.

Whereas Branyan's 31 bombs (in an injury shortened season) last year ranked top 15 in the AL and whereas Branyan's .269 ISO was top 5 in the league, Mike Jacobs' .297 OBP was the fifth worst of any AL player given 450+ PA's and his .173 ISO fell well below the MLB average for first basemen last season (.206).

So please, Mr. Haft, explain to me in what way one of the league's worst OBP guys with below average pop for a first basemen (and poor defense) can not only benefit the worst team in OBP and second worst team in ISO from 2009, but can also be this year's Russell Branyan. Show your work.

Oh, and for the record, Russell Branyan only averaged 12 home runs from 2003-2008 because he also averaged 175 PAs per season over that same time frame. If you extrapolate the 12 HR/175 PA sample size to just Branyan's 2009 PA amount, you get six seasons where Branyan, in theory, averaged 34.7 home runs. Mike Jacobs career high mark in HRs? 32 in 2008. That was the only time Jacobs ever hit more than 20.

FJM: Gilbert Arenas Edition

ESPN.com has the hilarious details of Gilbert Arenas and Javaris Crittenton western style stand-off

An argument commenced during a card game on the team's overnight flight back to Washington from Phoenix on Dec. 19 and escalated into a heated exchange between Arenas and Crittenton.

A "heated exchange" is defined as a couple swears and maybe a chest bump. Once someone takes out a pistol, it officially escalates to the "mo fo's got a gun" category.

Arenas placed three guns he owns on a chair near Crittenton's locker stall and invited him to pick one before practice on Dec. 21. Sources said that Crittenton subsequently let Arenas know that he had his own gun.

He really is Agent Zero! Got guns and everything. Only in the NBA are all disputes solved through the exchange of weaponry. "Dude, so sorry for sleeping with your wife. Let me make it up for you. Here's a bazooka."

Arenas and Crittenton pulled guns on each other over a gambling debt during the pre-practice confrontation at the Verizon Center.

Jordan was a notorious gambler. I wonder how many times he needed to pull out the semi-automatic to "resolve" his gambling debts. Rumor is that MJ left basketball for 2 years because David Stern suspended him for gambling related activities. Clearly Stern packs more heat than his airness.

Quoted Arenas as saying, "That's not the real story." The newspaper also reported that the argument between Arenas and Crittenton was over "who had the bigger gun"

I'm pretty sure that argument happened in the shower after practice, so not technically a lie

Arenas may not play Saturday against the San Antonio Spurs because of soreness in his left knee

Errrrr, because he's being investigated by the FBI and NBA security for threatening to kill a guy. If charged with a fellony, the Wizards may be able to void Arena's untradeable $111 million dollar contract. The Wiz should really go back to being called the Bullets. It's more politically correct

Arenas was right after all, "Impossible is nothing...if you got guns to back you up". I wonder if Arenas was packing heat when I saw him at the airport in Washington this past summer

Pointing out the stupidity of the phrase "clogging the bases" just isn't funny any more

It's been well accounted in the past, via FJM, this blog, and many other numerous sources that clogging the bases is a stupid phrase made by stupid people. Jed Hoyer, the new GM of the Padres, may be one such stupid person. From MLB.com:

What kind of player does new Padres general manager Jed Hoyer want/value as he moves into his first season?

There's not one type of player Hoyer likes or covets, though he has talked about finding players who fit this ballpark, PETCO Park. After all, the Padres do play 81 games here. That player is an athletic one, has doubles-power, someone who can run ... if it's an outfielder, someone who can go get a ball, someone who won't clog the bases. Granted, you need thumpers in the lineup, but ones who are undeterred by the spacious dimensions of the ballpark.

FJM: Lance Briggs

Here's an article based upon what Briggs said a few weeks ago about the horrible season the Chicago Bears are having. His comments don't look quite as dumb with a MNF win over the Vikings, but they're still pretty dumb

Lance Briggs stepped to the podium in the media room at Halas Hall this afternoon and said he was ready to deliver some controversy.

I don't mean to be a dick towards Briggs, but... here we go

The Pro Bowl linebacker was joking, playing off an interesting Wednesday when wide receiver Devin Hester expressed his frustration with his role and the team's struggles.

Which then, with the front office having the self-esteem of a 14 year girl, forced Hester to recant his statements

"There is going to be a shakeup. There is going to be what I call a shake at the lake,'' Briggs joked.

If by shake up, you mean giving Ron Turner a swirlie, then yes, there will be a shake up. I wish he were talking about personnel moves, but alas, he is only a linebacker so I'm not really going to believe that a linebacker is really the best person to tell me about these sort of things.

Then, the team's leading tackler got serious and admitted that, yeah, things could be different starting in January.

Oh phew, he was just kidding about a shake up and being frustrated. And I'm also relieved that things will be better in January- where the Bears only have one game left and it's against the Lions. But before then, things will be the same.

"Obviously, with years like this, I'm sure something is going to happen," Briggs said. "Next year, I don't know what. But for me and the rest of the guys in the locker room, this year and this day will never come again.

I hate to break this to you Briggs but you play for a team with a coach that can't coach and will be your coach for at least two more years because he's owed a crap ton of money, a GM who can't draft, and an owner who's too cheap and/or dumb to do anything about making this team better. Yeah, you will be feeling this shitty for at least two more years.

"It's frustrating to go through years like this. The only thing, at this point that you can really do, or I feel I can do is for one, finish strong, two, not let this happen again.

Nothing like setting your goals so you can finish a season 7-9. I wonder what the Detroit Lions' goals are?

"I could say a bunch of different things about it. We're definitely not the team of the past, of those successful years (2005 and 2006). We don't play that way. It doesn't feel that way on the field and the results are not the same. So, any hope of that, people need to put that stuff to rest, really, and we need to start moving forward and continue to move forward and eliminate the questions of, 'Are you guys going to get back to this form?'

True you are not the team of 2005 and 2006. Yes, you technically have different players and thus are technically a different team. And yes, the results are not the same. In those years, you made it to the playoffs. Very astute observation.

"We need to move forward and develop the guys that are here, get better communication, play better football and work on success for next year.''

Very true. You do need to play better football to have success in future years. I also need to play better football next year so I can have a chance to play on the Bears as well. John Madden told you to say that didn't he?

Then, Briggs started talking about some of the players and coaches who are no longer here, mentioning ex-defensive coordinator Ron Rivera and secondary coach Perry Fewell, and players Thomas Jones, John Tait, Mike Brown, Ruben Brown, Chris Harris and even Ian Scott.

WHAT!? Did I read that correctly!? Did he just admit that Ian Scott should still be on the team!? Really!? That's worse than Chris Rongey preaching the importance of batting average! I mean, yes, everyone else you mentioned played very well for the team or seemingly contributed great things for the team. But Ian Scott!? Really!?

Also, you do realize that Mike Brown played a total of 9 games during the 2004, 06, and 07 seasons right? And only 12 in 2005. He did play 15 last year but was awful in coverage so it was easier for teams to throw on your defense. And as for Reuben Brown, he's old. He still would probably be better than Orlando Pace, but still probably really bad. Plus, he retired. On his own. What did you expect this organization to do?

"There are guys that are gone that we don't have," Briggs said. "I think sometimes when you believe in what we're doing so much, you think sometimes, 'Hey, we can let this guy go,' or 'We don't need this guy,' and we'll be just fine. I think in most cases that would be the case, but you miss some of those guys when you don't have them and sometimes you realize what you could have had when it's not there anymore. There are things that I do miss about some of those players.

"The thing is, in football nothing lasts forever. Who is to say if those guys are with us today we would be successful."

Listen Briggs, I love you as a player, but I hate to break this to you: Just because you went out and had a beer with some former players, does not mean that this organization would be a better team. In some instances, sure, having Thomas Jones and Chris Harris probably would make this team better. But the problem is a lot deeper than some players you like being released or traded.

I'm just glad he didn't pine for Adam Archuleta to be back on this team.

FJM: Tyler Hansbrough

Bob Ryan, the old dude from Boston who periodically appears on Around the Horn and PTI wrote a column about the how Tyler Hansbrough is progressing in the NBA. Most people, including everyone on this blog minus Cubsfan, didn't project Hansbrough's college game to transfer to the NBA, but lets allow Bob Ryan to tell all of us why we are wrong wrong wrong.

A full-blown, four-year college star, and not just any star but the player logically anointed College Player of the Decade by the Sporting News.

Yep, he was arguably the best college player of the decade(Jay Williams, JJ Reddick, Shane Battier) who was not good enough to go to the NBA before graduation. No good player stays in college 4 years. If Lebron, Dwight, or Amare spent even 1 year in college, people wouldnt even know who Hansbrough was. I'm willing to bet the 1 season Carmelo, Durant, and Beasley spent in college will be glorified in history more than Tyler's 4.

Was there another choice, really? What college player’s résumé in the 2000s came even remotely close to the dazzling portfolio submitted by North Carolina’s Tyler Hansbrough, by far the most decorated collegian of the decade, and one of the most award-laden players of all-time?

The title of this column is Hansbrough elbowing into role in NBA and so far no mention of the NBA. Better title so far would have been Hansbrough was good in college and won many awards. But i'm no professional so what do I know about newspaper business. BTW, Joakim Noah won more championships than Hansbrough. Just sayin'

The numbers tell us he can play in the NBA. He has been coming off Jim O’Brien’s bench for an average of 18 minutes a game, collecting 9.1 points and 4.6 rebounds a game. You easily could project that into double-double territory with sufficient playing time.

I broke this paragraph into 2 specifically to show the dichotomy. The paragraph starts telling us that Hansbrough can play in the NBA. The second part of the paragraphs has stats that completely contradict this assertion. Oh, and you cant simply extrapolate NBA stats. If Tyler could average 20-10 playing 40 minutes, he would be playing 40 minutes. There is a reason he's only getting 18 minutes.

But critics have something to hang their hat on, too, citing his field goal percentage (.380) and the inordinate amount of his shots that get blocked. He has not yet demonstrated he can hit the mid-range jumper that was a major part of his repertoire as a Carolina senior. There are predictable defensive nit-picks.

So basically he's a worse shooter than John Salmons. Can't make more than a layup. And can't play defense, which somehow is expected. Also, i've never heard anyone get "his shot blocked" too often. That has never been said about an NBA player. Guess there's a first for everything.

“For a guy who missed training camp and then wasn’t able to practice much he’s doing fine,’’ declares his ultimate boss, Indiana team president Larry Bird (remember him?). “I think he can be a very good player. He’ll be in the league for a long time.’’

So him missing training camp is the reason he can't shoot and gets his shot block an "inordinate amount"? What about all those other basketball stats. Like him averaging less than 1 assist, block, and steal per game. Derrick Rose averages more blocks per game, and he's 8 inches shorter.

List of guys who have been in the league a long time: Lindsey Hunter, Eric Dampier, Jannero Pargo, Eddie Curry, Tyson Chandler, Kevin Ollie, Bobby Simmons, Tim Thomas, Kareem Rush, Malik Allen. Yeah, I dont know who any of them are either

Said Jackson, “Wrong sport . . . his skill level is not there for basketball. He’s a bruiser. He needs to be playing rugby, or something.’’

Agreed. Elbowing people in the face does not make you good at basketball. If he goes to play rugby, nobody will notice. Would you have noticed or cared that Rashad McCants, Gerald Green, and Salim Staudemire were no longer on an NBA roster if I didn't just state it? I didn't think so.

“They don’t like to get hit with elbows, they don’t like to box out - none of that stuff. When a guy is going all-out on every play, things are going to happen. [Hansbrough’s] not going to back down. He brings it every day.’’

Yeah, they don't like it because it's against the rules. Shaq has been called for a thousand offensive fouls for elbowing. Yeah, when a guy goes all out things are going to happen. He's gonna get ejected for excessive elbowing. Every day.

“Oh, yeah,’’ Bird offers, “he can hit that 15- to 17-footer. We see it in practice, when he gets his rhythm going.’’

I've heard rumors for 20 years that Shaq is actually an 80% free throw shooter in practice, but has been a carer 50% shooter his entire life in real games. I should never be correcting Larry Bird, but the point of defenses is to disrupt rhythm, hence Hansbrough will never get into rhythm in a real game

“He’s just tough,’’ Bird says. “He gets his hands on a lot of loose balls.’’

That's why they wear jock straps.

And, of course, you knew the critics would zero in on his defense. There are better athletes in the NBA; no one will argue with that... there’s a lot worse guys out there trying to do that than Tyler.

Wait, you're telling me a white guy with no hops or lateral movement can't guard Carmelo and Durant? But there are worse players out there than Tyler Hansbrough. Just like there are worse pitchers out there than Jason Marquis.

“Hustle is part of ability.’’

Shooting, passing, rebounding, and defending are also a part of ability. They tend to be important in the NBA.

FJM: ESPN/ Tim Lincecum Edition

Here's excerpts from the ESPN article written about Tim Lincecum winning the NL Cy Young this year. You can read the full article here, but if you're smart enough to be on this blog, I wouldn't recommend it.

ESPN seem like that kid in your high school class who's a nice kid but just a little bit slow getting things. Kind of like Forrest Gump. He's trying so hard to learn the material, but you can't help but laugh at him anyway.

I'm going to hell.

Anyway, here's some of ESPN's hard hitting analysis and it's attempts to bring sabermetrics and advanced statistics into the mainstream

Lincecum, nicknamed "The Freak" for his giant stride, led the NL with 261 strikeouts and tied for the league lead with four complete games and two shutouts.

Well, at least they're getting off on the right foot. You know how us sabermetricians love to use complete games and shut outs as the basis for our Cy Young votes. That's why I've been advocating all year for Mark Buerhle to win the AL Cy Young.

The wiry right-hander attracts plenty of attention on the mound with his shoulder-length brown hair and twisting delivery. But it was his 15 victories -- the fewest for a Cy Young starter over a non-shortened season -- that were really noticeable for the award winner.

Yes, the fact that Lincecum plays a team with an offense worse than the Washington Nationals and on par with the Kansas City Royals. It wasn't the fact that this is Lincecum's second Cy Young in less than three years of being in MLB or the fact that he's fucking awesome that was the noticeable thing. Nope, it was 15 wins.

The 2009 honors for Lincecum and Kansas City Royals ace Zack Greinke reflect a recent shift in how pitchers are evaluated. The focus has changed to more developed statistics, including some that even take into account team defense.

What a novel concept! We use data that proves causal factors in determining how good a player as the basis for Cy Young awards and not wins!? These smart baseball writers are too confusing for my dumb little mind. My head can't comprehend this concept that once a pitch leaves the picthers hand, he really has no control whether that ball goes as a pop up or home run! How DARE ESPN take into team defense when evaluating a pitcher!

Also, I think Chris Rongey would disagree with you ESPN.

Greinke equaled the previous low of 16 wins for a non-shortened season when he won the AL award on Tuesday. Afterward, he talked all about FIP, a mathematician's dream that stands for Fielding Independent Pitching.

Oh, you mean a Kansas City Royals pitcher ALSO got a Cy Young. Well, too bad both guys are just shitty batters that they couldn't generate enough runs to help themselves win.

Also, when did FIP equal a mathematicians dream? That's like saying it's Steve Phillips dream to spend all of is free time going after ugly girls. Sure it SOUNDS like they go together, but do they really?

Plus, I thought FIP also was for loser bloggers who sit in their mother's basement? Why couldn't ESPN just say FIP = one of the best ways to measure how good a player is considering, um, it is?

Lincecum has his own favorite indicator.

"To say which one I look to the most, I would just say WHIP," he said, referring to walks plus hits allowed per inning, "just because you just limit the amount of baserunners that can hurt you."

Too bad Lincecum isn't as smart as Zach Greinke. Lincy's arm may be developed by NASA, but his head sure isn't.

...

Two voters, Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus and Keith Law of ESPN.com, did not include Carpenter on their ballots. Carroll had Wainwright in the top spot, Lincecum second and Arizona's Dan Haren third. Law voted for Lincecum, Atlanta's Javier Vazquez and Wainwright in third. Those were the only votes for Haren and Vazquez.

You mean two really smart analysts who are aware of the causal reasons why a pitcher is good actually used logic and reasoning as the basis for voting and not their "eye" or anything like that! What silly people are getting Cy Young votes these days!

FJM: Bill Simmons Edition, Part II

A line Simmons said with Matthew Berry on his podcast

This year's Angels are very similar to what the Brewers had last year, that they have a lot of Black players which really helps them with their swagger

And the Angels, like what the Brewers did last year, got ousted from the playoffs and did not make it to the World Series. Why are "sports experts" allowed to just make up all these intangibles! All these unquantifiable quantities Simmons has assigned all these teams are teams that ended up not going to the World Series. Notice how Simmons didn't assign any intangibles to the Phillies or Yankees? (Well, the Phillies are a NL team so Simmons doesn't even know they exist)

A line Simmons has repeatedly said on his podcast:

The Angels scare me, they have the "Nick Adenhart" factor, something all these players can rally around; they want to win it for him

Listen, I in no way want to make light of the tragic death of Adenhart, but look how how this "Adenhart factor" has helped the Angels. In a short luck-based series, LA defeated Boston, and in the longer series, they got beat by the Yankees. And did the Angels really ever feel like they were in this series? Did the "Adenhart factor" just help the Angels finally got out of the first round. Does Vlad Guerrero have to die in order for the Angels to the World Series? Or maybe some little kid can wish they win the pennant and that is the "intangible" the Angels will need.

SIDENOTE: How come in all these sports movies, the goal isn't to win the World Series? In "Angels in the Outfield", the Joseph-Gordon Levitt character only wanted the Angels to win the pennant. If you're gonna wish for the Angels to win and be good, why not ask for Angels to help the baseball team win it all, as opposed to just MAKING IT to the World Series. In Major League (I), their goal was just to make it to the playoffs. You know what would have stuck it to the new owner and gain a lot of fans, win a World Series.

FJM: Bill Simmons Edition

Here's some excepts from Simmons podcast on 10.13.09 between him and JackO talking about the 2009 Red Sox v Angels ALDS

BS: I wasn't sold on this Red Sox team from a "heart" standpoint

What about from a "lung" standpoint? How were the Red Sox kidneys this year? I think the need to cut back on the red meat, the Red Sox cholesterol was a bit high. Maybe, that's what was wrong with the Red Sox heart this year

BS: The Angels were hungrier

Maybe the Angels should have ate a Snickers before the game or something

BS: [The 2009 Red Sox team] was the kind of team you would put together in a laboratory with statistics

Stupid fucking Bill James using statistics to determine which players are good or not. How dare anyone put a team together based on statistics! I mean, who needs shit like OBP, SLG, and UZR to measure how your team does. Let's throw out the shit like 70% of the first round is due to pure luck.

JackO: Where they're just like this corporate, soulless, robotic team that just goes about it's business, but has no fire no life, no spirit, no defining characteristics really.

Because you need to have fire to win in the playoffs! That's why the cavemen always did well in the playoffs, all they had was fire! Who needs to plate discipline or a good rotation when you have fire or spirit or a defining characteristic!

JackO: I'm not in the locker room, who knows how much of a difference all of this really makes...

Wait, did JackO just admit that everything him and Simmons were talking about were bullshit?

...but as an outsider viewing it, like, you just would like to see your team with a little, a little, life a little fire...

Oh shit, never mind. Sure let's not use Bill James' "outsider perspective", let's use JackO's.

JackO: Even Victor Martinez with his 27 different handshakes couldn't bring it together

Yeah it wasn't the fact that V-Mart was 2nd among catchers in wOBA that he was good, it was his handshakes. Maybe I should play baseball, I can shake hands!

BS: Yeah, we had Victor Martinez and Pedroia are the two guys that you know seem like they would be pieces on a type of playoff roster that would do something. You look at Youkilis, like every at bat, he's, he looks like he's gonna take a bat to the third base coach and just beat him to death...

Stupid fucking Youk who had an OBP over .400 and 20+ HRs. Fuck that guy. I want Pedroia who can barely hit a 365 foot home run. I want his "intangibles"

We don't have, like, that wacky Orlando Cabrera type, we don't have like Torii Hunter type, you know really passionate fist pump type, we don't have 38 year old veteran like, the Todd Helton type, that guys that's always wanted to make it to the World Series and he's dying, you know, although Todd Helton's made but you know.. the guy that would do anything to make it one time, where are those guys on this Red Sox team?

Did Simmons realize that two of the three players he mentioned have been eliminated? Did Orlando Cabrera's "wackiness" help the Twins gets swept by the Yankees? The Rockies beat the Phillies in the NLCS because of Todd Helton, right?

Jim Thome and Ken Griffey Jr, guys like Helton who "always wanted to make it to a World Series" really helped the White Sox win a World Series last year, right?

JackO: They needed Kevin Millar again, you know, somebody to stir things up...

Yes, the Red Sox needed Kevin Millar with his .311 OBP, .674 OPS, .302 wOBA, and negative UZR is exactly what the Red Sox needed to beat the Angels!

...Like the Yankees have Nick Swisher... a guy to have a little camaraderie, a little chemistry

Wasn't one of the main reason the Sox traded Swisher was because he was pissing people off in the clubhouse? This is the guy who is supposed to build camaraderie?

Oh, and this also helped the 2008 White Sox, right? Because not only did they have the "Todd Helton" guy that Simmons talked about, but they also had Swisher. Do these two guys even check their facts or think before they talk? They're like the Michael Scott of sports podcasts.

Now we realize why the Red Sox lost in the first round of a best of five series. No, it it's not because the Red OSx got unlucky and their best pitchers had so-so games or because of Jonathan Paperlbon, it's because the Red Sox didn't have heart or passion!

FJM: Jason Marquis

Tim Kurkjian of ESPN, most notable for collecting box score and scanning baseball history to make sure no one has ever been hit in the head twice in the same game, when played at night, on turf, and a lefty on the mound, recently wrote a piece proclaiming Jason Marquis baseball's grindiest winner since Derek Jeter.

The remarkable Colorado Rockies are making their push to the playoffs, which should come as no surprise because, after all, Jason Marquis is on the team.

Yes, of course, whenever I think of a team fighting for a playoff spot, Jason Marquis is always at the for-front

If the Rockies pull off this extraordinary comeback to make the postseason, Marquis will become the first player in major league history whose teams have made the playoffs in each of his first 10 seasons, playing for at least three teams.

Kurkjian went through his box score collection and found Marquis to possibly be the first to make the playoffs every year, since year one, for at least 3 teams. He forgot mention being the first Jew. I wonder if Ernie Banks was the first player to never make the playoffs, from year one, while playing for the same team. And not being Jewish. Obviously, they should replace the Banks statue outside Wrigley with Jason Marquis' jew-fro

So, is it skill or luck?

I can't wait to find out. Does the below average pitcher, who has been left off the playoff roster multiple times for multiple teams, has an uncanny skill of putting his team in the playoffs

"I firmly believe that pitching is all about winning. I've averaged 14 wins a year for six years, so I was contributing...It's nice to have a 2.00 ERA, win Cy Young Awards, strike out a lot of hitters and make All-Star teams, but the idea is to win games. And it doesn't matter how you do it. I am a baseball player who can pitch.''

Pitching is actually about getting hitters out. That is all. You can do it with strikeouts, groundballs, or an Andy Pettitte pick-off move, but it's all about outs. He has averaged 14 wins a year, since 2004, lets disregard those 4 years you spent in Atlanta. Let's also disregard the 4.6 ERA you contributed to the team.

He has a chance to set the Rockies' club record for wins in a season with 17, held by Kevin Ritz, Pedro Astacio and Jeff Francis, and he has a shot to set the club record for the lowest ERA in a season, held by Joe Kennedy (3.66) in 2004.

Who, who, is he still alive, and who? Does Kurkjian know about the humidor? You see how Helton is no longer hitting 110 XBH per season and every game isn't 12-11

"I have been more consistent...My stuff has always been good, but I'd have three good starts, then two bad starts. I just go about my business"

Great stuff? According to fangraphs, the fastball, curveball, and change have all been raped over the course of Mrquis' career. His most successful pitch, being the cutter, he only throws 3% of the time. 3 good starts, 2 bad ones, yup that's what Marquis considers consistent.

But now he is one of the top pitchers on a team that has become the seventh in league history to go from 12 games under .500 to 15 games over .500 in the same season.

Kurkjian really needs to put down the box scores. Are you sure it's only the 7th time in the same season? What about seasons separated by a decade? has any team been 12 games under one year and then up 15 games 10 years later? I need to know!!

"When you combine competitiveness with good mechanics,'' Marquis said, "the sky is the limit.''

Wait, I thought it was about winning and nothing else?! Selfish bastard

Harold Reynolds has opinions on OPS

Time to FireJoeMorgan this shit. Best part the article came directly from ken tremendous, as i'm following ken on twitter, cause i luv twitter!

It's been real interesting in the last couple years as I've watched how the importance of statistics has taken over how to analyze a baseball game.

Why do black people make it a habit to write exactly how they speak. Nothing better than starting a published article than with a grammatically incorrect run-on sentence. In the words of Chris Rock, "Black people love to keep it real. Real dumb".

Not all statistics work. Some do, some don't. And one of the stats that has become real popular is OPS. On-base plus slugging. All of a sudden, it's this stat that defines whether a guy is a good ball player or not.

Real: being or occurring in fact or actuality; having verified existence; not illusory
Really: truly: in accordance with truth or fact or reality
Harold, you are looking for the adverb really, not real.

Actually wOBA defines whether a guy is good or not, but ESPN won't implement wOBA for another 25 years

If you're a power hitter then the situation will dictate what a pitcher does with you - either walk you or pitch you real careful. So more than likely you're going to end up on base and therefore your on-base percentage goes up. This in my mind has become the stat the everyone thinks is the be all and end all. It is not.

How can people who played professional baseball be so oblivious to the game of baseball. Real weird. So, getting on base and not making outs because you are a power hitter who pitchers are afraid to pitch to does not make you a good player. I can't wait to hear what does!

If you have a guy like Adrian Gonzalez, for example, his OPS is going to be high - he's got a lot of home runs and walks a lot...because you're not going to pitch to him. Power guys like Giambi and Dunn have always had high OPS because no one wants to pitch to them. But it takes two hits to score them from first.

OMG, why does every discussion have to involve Adam Dunn. He hates baseball and proves it by walking and hitting 500 foot homer runs. Moral of the story, no matter how high your OPS, you can only be a good player if you have guys behind you who can also hit. Remember that year(2001) when Sammy Sosa had 94 more RBIs than the next closest guy on the team and an OPS of 1.174? Yeah, worst season ever!

Big power hitters swing and miss and strikeout. Or they hit home runs and walk. And at the end of the year their OBP is always going to be higher than most of the other guys on the team because they clog the bases.

I don't care to look up Harold Reynold's career stats, but i'm guessing he excelled at not clogging the bases. He clogged the bases so rarely that he almost never scored runs or other frivolous things have no affect on baseball games. You know what helps unclogg bases? Sac bunts. I seriously want to find the guy who first used the term "clogging the bases" and punch him in the face. I will assume it was Tim McCarver.

A few years ago this stat grabbed my ear when someone said that Ichiro doesn't walk enough. So I said, "What do you mean?" And they said his OBP could be so much higher if he walked more. The guy gets 200 hits a season! And he scores over 100 runs. I think that speaks for itself.

What if we lived in a hypothetical world where Ichiro did draw 70 walks per year? How many runs would Ichiro score then? Ah, who cares. He gets 200 hits and 100 runs. No need to improve and maximize your ability. That would be real stupid