Heyman vs. the VORPies: round two

Jon Heyman makes it no secret that he HATES the VORP stat - going so far as to call those who like it "VORPies."

It's this fear of anything new that makes me hate mainstream sportswriters.

Them being dumb doesn't help much, though.

ONCE AGAIN, VORP HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MVP

No thing. Not even one thing.

Here's the top five in NL MVP voting last year with their corresponding VORP:

Rollins - 15
Holliday - 7
Fielder - 11
Wright - 5
Howard - 22

And the AL:

A-Rod - 1
Mags - 3
Vlad - 17
Oritz - 4
Lowell - not top 30

I see little in common.

Zero. There's a number the stat people will understand.

I love this sentence because it distances Heyman - an awesome dude - from "stat people" - soulless scum.

That's the relationship between VORP, the stat that the stat people love, and MVP.

Zero correlation.

Last year A-Rod was number one in VORP and won the MVP. Magglio finished second in MVP and was third in VORP. And on, and on, and on...

Baseball Prospectus, as of a few days ago, had Alex Rodriguez leading the AL in VORP (which stands for Value Over Replacement Player), the stat its enthusiasts think is the best stat in the world to determine player value, and also the best to help determine who's the Most Valuable Player.

Not a single "VORPy" thinks that. We think it's one of many tools that can be looked at to determine the goodness of a major league baseball player. We aren't like *robot voice* "Leader in VORP must win MVP beep boop beep."

But as you can see, while VORP may tell you something, it shouldn't determine who wins the MVP award. Beyond containing two of the letters in MVP, there appears to be almost no relationship whatsoever here.

Except a near 1:1 ratio for a number of AL VORP leaders compared to their MVP voting standings.

I happened to love A-Rod. He's turned himself into a very good third baseman (he's probably the best defender on the Yankees), he's a three-time MVP (though I don't believe he deserved it the year his Rangers finished last), he's the best all-around player in the game and he's not among the prime list of reasons for the Yankees' demise this year (though, there are plenty of Yankees officials who'd have him on that list).

Yet, A-Rod shouldn't sniff the MVP award this year.

You were fine until that last line. A-Rod is probably the sole reason the Yankees were in it as long as they were.

He's sixth in all of baseball in OPS. He's seventh in baseball in RC/27. He's one of the top five fucking baseball players in baseball. Until further notice, he should be in the top ten - at least - in MVP voting.

But nope, shouldn't sniff it.

If devotees of VORP (I'm already on their bad side after calling them VORPies last year) think their stat is key to determining the MVP, they should think again. It's worth a glance, at best.

Better measures? Clutchness. Being on a winning team. RBI. Times booed/PA. Wins.

But VORP is supposed to be an all-encompassing stat, and it led some numbers people to determine that Hanley Ramirez was a viable NL MVP candidate last year.

Which he was.

And led many to say that David Wright was the NL MVP in a year in which Wright's Mets choked

Which is irrelevant.

If one game decided the MVP, baseball has no hope.

(Wright himself says no way was he MVP).

A player's word is right up there on the list of MVP measures.

VORP, like other stats, doesn't come close to telling you everything.

Here comes the big diatribe against stats. "Durn fangled numbers can't tell me a player's look - that killer instinct. Those clutch hits. Do they got a number that tells me who I'm afraid of most? Din't think so."

It doesn't take into account how a hitter hits in the clutch (oddly enough, some stat people think that's just luck, anyway)

How odd, that some people think looking at an extremely small sample size over an arbitrary time period is luck.

or how many meaningful games he played in (at last count Grady Sizemore was high up on the VORP list, as well)

Sizemore is a fucking monster.

Does Pedroia roping a single in a game vs. the Rays matter more than Sizemore stealing a bag against the White Sox? No. They both happened during the 162 game regular season. Games aren't suddenly easier when you're 25 games out any more than they are harder 1-1/2 games out. Baseball games are competitive. They are being played by highly paid, finely tuned athletes who have been doing this since they were eight.

Shut the hell up. Please.

VORP has some value. But like all other stats, it doesn't replace watching the games or following the season.

Thank God Heyman has figured out we VORPies hate, nay, abhor, baseball. Hate watching it, following it, writing about it, thinking about it. Cold numbers are our only friend. Why have we chosen baseball instead of say, math? Simple - we hate baseball.

A-Rod may have the best VORP. But he shouldn't be on anyone's MVP ballot, much less at the top of the ballot.

People who appeared on the 2007 Major League Baseball Most Valuable Player ballot:

Carlos Marmol, Aaron Rowand, Jose Valverde and Eric Byrnes.

If A-Rod is NOT on the 2008 MVP ballot (a big stretch, I know) I will deliver a hand-written letter - written in Japanese calligraphy - to Heyman apologizing and praising his all-knowing wisdom about all things baseball.

Heyman, I await your counter-bet.

43 games doth not an MVP make

Or something like that.

Look, I love me the Manny Ramirez. I felt he was wrongfully run out of Boston and it's no surprise to me he is hitting .565 with 75 homers and 290 RBI.

But there is no fucking way he is the MVP of the National League. Most people know this from one simple stat:

43 games played.

That is not a full baseball season.

Jon Heyman says fuck you. There is no way Pujols, Wright, Howard, Berkman, Delgado or others are deserving. No way.

And surprise, he is not on this list of "best players of the year," which could be called MVPs.

Manny Ramirez has gone from savant to savior.

The world's most famous hitting savant has saved the storied Dodgers, lifting them from also-ran status to the cusp of the playoffs. By the true definition of the Most Valuable Player

That definition: no one knows because no one will define it.

award, Ramirez is the MVP.

Thanks to his short tenure in Los Angeles, he may not get the NL award. But he should. Manny has taken his new team and carried them to first place in the NL West. As long as they make it to October (and there's no reason now to think they won't), the award should be his.

The NL West is awful. Like, the worst division in baseball, by far. The Dodgers lead and are 79-72. The St. Louis Cardinals - led by the shitty Albert Pujols - are 78-72. And in fourth place. Toronto and the Yankees have a better record than the Dodgers (80-71) and have already wrote the moratoriums on their seasons. Even the Florida "$2.50 Payroll" Marlins are 78-72 and sit in third.

Manny's statistics are ridiculous by any measure. Nobody hits .401 on a new team in a new league in a pitcher-friendly park. Nobody has a 1.227 OPS over 43 games (not in the post-steroid era, anyway) to go with 14 home runs and 44 RBIs.

No one.

Berkman in March/April/May (56 games) - 1.219 OPS

So yeah, I guess that .008 points of OPS (over a longer game span) makes Hey-man right.

There are a handful of other candidates, most of them power-hitting first basemen:

Albert Pujols kept hitting while his team came back down to Earth.

Ryan Howard's going to lead the National League in home runs and RBIs, and he has led the Phillies into first for now.

Carlos Delgado has carried the Mets as they try to avoid a second straight collapse.

But no one can match Manny.

Really? No one can match him? Say Howward goes 39-39 with 20 homers and 65 RBI over the last dozen+ games.

Not good enough.

Pujols keeps OPSing over 1.100 and leads the Cards on a miracle playoff run?

No sir.

Ramirez's stats are otherworldly. But his impact is immeasurable.

Ifuckingmeasurable.

Far be it for me to blame/attribute wins to one player, but the Dodgers are 25-19 since Manny's first game on August 1. 25-19. Not like 35-9.

The NL West: where a little more than .500 ball gets you the division!

Before Ramirez came to the Dodgers in the steal of the decade (all L.A. had to give up in the three-team trade was Class-A pitcher Bryan Morris and fading prospect Andy LaRoche)

"Steal of the decade." Wowzers.

Manny is a rent-a-hitter who is going to ask for a hundred cabillion dollars this off-season and will most likely leave LA - mainly because they have a ton of crappy players making way too much money.

Not Kazmir from the Mets to the Rays for Victor Zambrano or Aramis Ramirez from Pittsburgh to the Cubs for Jose Hernandez, Matt Bruback and Bobby Hill? Those were pretty awful.

Best trade of the decade? One that will almost surely end in a first round exit by the .500 Dodgers and have zero impact after the ~50 games Manny plays this season.

they were running second in the worst division in baseball,

Still in that division.

a .500 team and down in the dumps. Now they nearly are a playoff certainty.

Who are still pretty much .500.

Manny surely has been the key to the Dodgers' bottom line. They're filling up Dodger Stadium again. They're selling Manny jerseys in their clubhouse stores for $302, and folks are grabbing them like there's a shortage.

Jersey sales - the smart man's MVP criterion.

Manny has been the key to their season, too. Once manager Joe Torre inserted Ramirez into the batting order and settled on an everyday lineup that also include the emerging Andre Ethier, it was clear who was best in the West.

Playing Andre Ethier over Juan Pierre is something Torre should have done from day one - considering Pierre's OPS+ is 67 and Ethier's is almost double that at 126. But no, Manny being there made Torre smarter.

MVP.

But really, it's all Manny, who authored this Hollywood story.

*Puuuuuke*

At domestic abuse, maybe

Because really, Brett Myers is not a better pitcher than a certain portly Brewer hired gun who will make a cazillion dollars next season.

Ted Keith thinks otherwise.

THE NL'S BEST PITCHER OF THE LAST MONTH IS NOT NAMED CC SABATHIA

Maybe this is a trick and it'll be like "His name is Carl Christopher Sabathia" and be a really well-written article about how freakin' nuts Sabathia has been over the past month+.

But since returning to the Phillies in early August, he has been far and away the team's best and most dependable starter and -- brace yourselves, Brewers fans -- arguably the best pitcher in the National League. In fact, Myers is 6-1 since his return with a 1.55 ERA, and as the intensity of the moment has increased, so too has his performance. In 31 innings pitched over his last four starts, Myers has yielded only two runs (for a 0.58 ERA), while winning all four games, striking out 35 and walking just six.

So much for that.

Let's look at the August splits, shall we?

CC Sabathia: 5-0/3 CG/2 SHO/48.1 IP/1.12 ERA/51 K/8 BB
Brett Myers: 4-1/1 CG/1 SHO/43.2 IP/1.65 ERA/42 K/7 BB

Keith says "arguably." If he argues Myers is better, he is wrong. It's not an argument.

Oh wait, one less walk. Mrs. Myers can sleep a little better tonight.

White Sox use voodoo magick (home runs, good pitching) to win games

"They just aren't clicking" is one my (least) favorite sports writer cliches. It's use comes from this thought process:

*writer's brain*
"I can't think of any reason why this team/player isn't doing well. They have all the talent in the world and should be better, but I don't feel like looking up stats or coming up with a real answer so I'll just write 'they just aren't clicking.' Beautiful."

The White Sox, apparently, just aren't clicking.

THE UNLIKELY WINNING WHITE SOX

Have...
one of the top five MVP candidates in Carlos Quentin
the third best run diff in baseball at +80
the AL's third best OPS at .786
174 homers, first in all of baseball
70 quality starts, second in the AL
a 1.30 WHIP, third in the AL

That + rest of your division playing like poop = first place. Not that difficult.

I mean, really, the Sox? The Sox are good enough to be in first place -- evidently -- but nothing about this team screams "division winner," let alone "World Series."

The Twins, meanwhile, are screaming DIVISION WINNER from the rooftops. What follows is the Sox lineup along with their HRs. How the fuck are they in first!?!?!?

OF Quentin - 33
OF Dye - 28
DH Thome -25
OF/1B Swisher - 17
3B Crede - 17
OF Griffey Jr. - 15
C Pierzynski - 11
SS Cabrera - 6
2B Uribe - 4

Their lineup is painfully one-dimensional, tailored to their hitting-friendly home park, U.S. Cellular Field.

That dimension being hitting home runs, a.k.a the best result a hitter can get.

GM: "One thing I don't want on my team is hitters that hit too many home runs. You need guys who can bunt, run, sacrifice, buntacrifice, stealandrun..."
Fans of that team: *collective groan*

This isn't the NBA where there are only so many shots to go around on a team. Each hitter is an isolated incident with a home run being the best possible outcome. A lineup with nine hitters who have 30 homers each is fucking nuts while one with two guys with 30 and a bunch of David Eckstein's sucks.

Their rotation has a 4.07 ERA, right in the middle of the AL pack,

But they have the second most quality starts, third best WHIP and fifth best OPS allowed. They seem fine to me.

with a bit more power pitching than most and a little more control than others. Their bullpen is pretty good (3.49 ERA), but it's not great.

Jenks is pretty good. A 0.97 WHIP and 24K/10BB with 25 saves in 28 tries. Linebrink, also pitching well. He's got 19 holds, a 0.92 WHIP and 33K/6BB. Even the ageless Octavio Dotel is pretty nasty with his 75K/24BB in 54 innings and a 1.15 WHIP.

Three very good to awesome pitchers (at least this season) in your bullpen = pretty good, not great. They don't have K-Rod!!!!

They're tough to beat in The Cell (42-19) but awful away from it (26-33).

Sounds like every team!

Teams "in the hunt" with similar records on the road:

Tampa 29-31
Boston 28-35
Minnesota 26-31
LA Dodgers 26-32

You shitty ass division/wild card contenders. Play better on the road!

They hit a lot of homers -- 172 of them, the most in baseball, including four straight Thursday afternoon against the Royals -- but when they don't hit them, they stink.

Maybe because hitting homers is awesome and when it doesn't happen it dramatically decreases ANY team's chances of winning. Except Anaheim, they're so plucky!

They have little speed. They're not particularly good defensively.

Both instrumental in "winning the right way." Not doing so causes sports writers to be confused.

Yet the Sox, despite the quadruple shots on Thursday, aren't clicking like Williams would like them to click. They aren't clicking, in fact, like the probably less-talented but seemingly just-as-good Twins are.

Clicking clickers click well on click trip.

The Twins have a +47 run diff. which, while not awful, is not what a first place team should have. They're lucky. And not as good as the Sox.

And, pretty soon, Williams won't be able to make another trade to try to better this team. Pretty soon, we're going to have to accept the Sox for what they are.

A divison contender that hits a metric ton of homers and has a solid staff?

Ken Williams being dumb

Right before the trade deadline, Williams made another bold move, trading for Griffey. Critics wondered why Williams would put the 38-year-old Griffey in centerfield, a position he hadn't played in years, and pointed to his lack of production at the plate. ... Williams also talks about the "threat" of Griffey in the lineup.

/Ken Williams being dumb

The Sox run out a lineup that relies almost solely on swinging for the fences. When they hit a home run, they are 61-28. When they don't, they are 7-24.

This is a junk stat. The Sox won last night 2-1. Guess what? They didn't hit a homer.

Here's my stat: The White Sox are 69-53 when scoring at least zero runs. They are 0-0 when scoring less than zero runs.

In the postseason, it's imperative to have other ways to score when the home runs dry up.

No, no it's not. They should be living by the sword and dying by the sword. I don't want Quentin up there bunting over Pierykksiyrznski with one out. That is dumb.

But the Sox's reliance on power has come at the cost of speed on the basepaths. Gone are the days of Scott Podsednik swiping 40 or 50 bases. The Tigers are the only team in the AL that has stolen fewer bases than the Sox.

Scott Podsednik was and is an awful baseball player. He has a career .337 OBP - .329 this season. He's like a worse Juan Pierre, which is saying something. Pods also gets caught a lot, including 23 times (with 59 steals) in that magical 2005 season. In 300+ PA going back to '07 (so what if he was hurt) he has an astounding 22 steals and 8 CS. *foghooooooooorn*

Is a chip on the shoulder, a so-so pitching staff and a big-swinging lineup enough to win the division? Is it enough to do more?

Yes?

Warm, limp football myths

For a site with the word "facts" in it, coldhardfootballfacts.com doesn't strike me as very factual. Perusing the front page I see "Most Overrated" (which promises to "bitch-slap hype") and "Underrated" quarterbacks articles, two phenomena that cannot actually be measured.

Also, gaze upon this from the "Icy Issues" for the AFC South: "But those are just the anecdotes. Consider the Cold, Hard Football Facts: the AFC South combined to go 42-22 (.656) last season, the best record ever by an entire division.

"Manning is still only 32 and still in the brief window of prime performance age for a quarterback. He’d give even a bad team a fighting chance each week. And the Colts are hardly a bad team."

So one fact followed by three more anecdotes? I'm sold.

Naturally, SI.com picked up CHFF writer Kerry J. Byrne's article because (duh) it's about how Bill Belichick sucks at life.

And it makes little sense. That always helps.

I couldn't bookmark this site fast enough in a folder with the NY Post, Boston.com and others as "Dumb sports sites."

BILL BELICHICK'S LEGACY NEEDS A HUG

This title is awful. In the copy editing room I would say "Mr. (?) Byrne, you can't hug a legacy." At least SI changed it to the better - if hyperbolic - "Disputing Belichick's legacy as defensive god."

Bill Belichick’s legacy cracked apart last year like the lobster claws at a Gillette Stadium tailgate.

The trouble should have come as no surprise. After all, the flaws in his game have been simmering for the better part of the 21st century. They finally boiled over in the fourth quarter of Super Bowl XLII, spoiling what should have been the greatest celebratory feast in New England since 1621.

You had me at lobsters, you lost 90 percent of your readers at the Boston Tea Party [Update: This is apparently a Thanksgiving joke. See, he even lost me] joke.

And it's not really "his game" as much as it is his player's game.

Instead, the cracks in Belichick’s legacy have everything to do with what’s transpired on NFL football fields over the last several years as he stalked the sidelines. Let's put it this way: when your defense surrenders a gruesome 54 fourth-quarter points in four Super Bowls, as Belichick's defenses have done, it will tend tarnish a rep here and there.

Let me do some quick math here, hold on. Carry the one...move the decimal. OK, that comes out to 13.5/fourth quarter. Now that doesn't look great or terrible, but context is everything. What if the Pats were up eight TDs in the fourth? Or they (gasp) got tired? Or offenses adjusted? Or the refs blew some calls? Or a hundred other things?

I would guess that a vast majority of teams allow more points in the fourth than they do in other quarters. It just makes sense. But Belichick's legacy is tarnished because his stinky three-time Super Bowl winning teams allow some points in the fourth quarter.

Still, Belichick has been considered the singular defensive “genius” of his generation. Some "pundits" even argued, right up until about 10 p.m. on Feb. 3, that he was the greatest coach of all time. Raise your hand if heard that one in the run-up to the Super Bowl? Anyone? Anyone?

That’s right. We see ya. We heard it, too.

I'm confused. Generally, when writing something "humorous" (I am an expert) the "Anyone? Anyone?" technique is to be used in a sarcastic manner, as to look for an answer that will never come. But then the "That's right..." business comes in an just clubs me over the noodle.

I mean Belichick is at least in the conversation of greatest coach of all-time, right? I mean the league prides itself of parity and the man - along with a talented bunch of players and a great owner - won 75 percent of the Super Bowls in a four-year span. That's nuts.

But enough anecdotes, back to the facts!

Belichick is still a great coach, ... But the savory flavor of the Belichick legacy has been soured by on-the-field issues too large to ignore.

In fact, if he fails to win another Super Bowl, Belichick might not be remembered for the three championships in four years. Instead, he might only be remembered for what might have been. He might be remembered for ...

You're kidding, right? This is some kind of elaborate joke in which the domain coldhardfootballfacts.com is actually registered to Candid Camera and my expression-less response as I read this joke article by a Candid Camera intern will be featured on national TV for all to ridicule?

"Might not be remembered for three (3) Super Bowls in four (4) years." Read that again. I'll copy/paste it for you: "Might not be remembered for three (3) Super Bowls in four (4) years."

You could stop reading now and I would understand.

1. The big-game defensive implosions

Despite his reputation as a defensive master-mind, Belichick’s defenses have habitually reserved their worst performances for the biggest moments in the biggest games.

Here we go. A site, with the word "facts" in it's address, is calling out Belichick's defenses in the "big games." Regular season games? Fuck those. They don't matter. Other playoff games? Get OUT OF HERE! Any of the not five games you're about to read about? They were never played!

Coach BeliOctoberchick is what they should call him!

NE Patriots points/game defense ranks from 2000-2007:

17, 6, 17, 1, 2, 17, 2, 4.

So three "meh"s and five "fucking awesome"s.

In fact, Belichick has overseen some of the greatest defensive catastrophes in modern NFL history, a series of gridiron Hindenburgs that explode live on national television year after year as all of New England cries out for humanity. Consider these fourth-quarter debacles:

This is some pretty good writing. Comparing defensive metldowns to an American tragedy? Not the most tactful route, but well-written. Although there seem to be quite a few metaphors...

As a Pats fan (which clearly Byrne is not) I remember one terrible, infuriating defensive collapse: the Colts in '06. I could not be spoken to for like an hour after that.

Super Bowl XXXVI (Patriots 20, Rams 17) – Hardly a colossal breakdown, but the cracks began to show in the Belichick legacy – ironically – at the furious end of this, his greatest triumph. The Patriots held the Greatest Show on Turf to 3 points through three quarters.

That Rams team was 14-2, had the number one offense in both yards and points and the number seven ranked defense in points (third in yards). Marshall Faulk had 2000+ yards of total offense, Kurt Warner threw 36 TDs, they had two 1,000 yard receivers. The Rams scored 503 fucking points in the regular season - over 31/game. They scored 45 and 29 in their playoff games. They were favored by 14 in the Super Bowl.

I think it goes without saying but, the 2001 Rams were a juggernaut. And the shitty-ass Patriots let them score 17 whole points. And 14 in the fourth! Are you kidding? BeliOctoberchick should give that trophy back.

At one point, it even looked like a rout: a fumble return for a TD by New England defensive back Tebucky Jones would have given the Patriots a 24-3 lead late in the third quarter. But the play was overturned by a penalty against – you guessed it – Belichick’s defense.

Assbags.

The Rams stormed back, scoring two fourth-quarter touchdowns – following their two longest drives of the game (55 yards and 77 yards) – to force a tie with 90 seconds to play. If not for the typical Tom Brady heroics, leading the only walk-off scoring drive in Super Bowl history in just his 17th NFL start, this game might be remembered only for New England’s defensive collapse.

Let's say the Pats lose. The story in the NE papers would be something like "Pats put up fight, lose close one." Lines like "it was theirs for the taking" and "let one slip away" would be there, sure. But they held maybe the best offense ever to 17 points in the goddamn Super Bowl. That they were two TD dogs in.

Super Bowl XXXVIII (Patriots 32, Panthers 29)

This one was ugly defensively. I'll concede here.

2004 AFC title game (Patriots 41, Steelers 27) – A pigskin portent of things to come reared its head here in the 2004 AFC title tilt. It was the coldest game in Steelers franchise history. Yet the Patriots offense made a mockery of the weather and Pittsburgh’s No. 1 defense and largely controlled the game.

The weather shit - who cares?


I looked at the box score. The Pats were up 24-3 at the half. Safe to say they felt they had the thing won going into the third. They then went up 31-10. Can you really call this a "defensive collapse?" I'd call it "Hey guys, rest up for the goddamn Super Bowl!"

Super Bowl XXXIX (Patriots 24, Eagles 21) – Everybody remembers Philly quarterback Donovan McNabb heaving on the field in the late moments of the game. ... Belichick’s defense did hold up its end of the bargain, though, picking off passes on two of Philly’s other fourth-quarter drives. But the outcome was still in doubt when the physically ill QB shredded the Patriots defense for a late fourth-quarter TD.

That Philly passing attack was bonkers, by the way. McNabb - whose sick excuse may or may not be true - threw 31 TDs and 8 INTs . Terrell Owens caught 14 TDs, 1200 yards and played the Super Bowl on a busted wheel, still killing the Pats.

I am beginning to see a theme here. Good teams make it to Super Bowls.

Also: held them to 21 points.

2006 AFC title game (Colts 38, Patriots 34) – Indy’s victory in the 2006 AFC championship game begets a simple question: 'Can you be a defensive genius when your defense suffers the greatest meltdown on American soil since Three Mile Island?'

Yes?

It's the best QB ever, playing at home in a dome. Weird shit happens sometimes. As a retort I give you

NE 20 IND 3

The game where the Patriots defense played so ferociously the NFL had to change the rules so it wouldn't happen again. That Indy team was number one in scoring and number two in yards on offense. They also paced the league in bitching and were second in moaning, behind the Steelers.

Big. Game. Imp. Los. Ion. S. They're all Belichick knows, really.

We think even Ray Charles could see a pattern here, folks: despite the legend, Belichick’s defenses routinely collapse in the late stages of the biggest games of the year.

In the five examples we picked, four of which were wins and two of which the teams were held to 21 or less, which I call good in the playoffs.

Here is a Cold Hard Fact: In the their Super Bowl years ('01, '03, '04, '07) the Patriots have allowed 17.0 points/game in the playoffs.

Some perspective - the number one team in scoring defense on '07 (Indy) allowed 16.4 points/game.

I'll take 17.0 points per, thanks. But they weren't the "big games" - a.k.a the five we picked that supported our argument.

We could have included Super Bowl XLII among the many other times a Belichick defense wilted like week-old lettuce when the game mattered most.

But Super Bowl XLII deserves to stand alone.

After all, New England’s collapse in this game was so historic, so massive, so colossal, that it joins the Great Wall of China as the only man-made objects that can be seen from space.

If one (uno) play (of maybe five) turns out different, the Pats win that game.

The helmet catch. The dropped pick on the sideline. Eli Manning running perpendicular to the ground, avoiding a sack to get the helmet catch throw off. If one (1) of those plays goes the Pats way, they win. Done. Fuck everyone, we're the evil empire.

From those paragraphs you'd think the Pats gave up 140 points. The score was 17-14. Shut up.

But also remember that, with the Super Bowl on the line, with the first 19-0 season on the line, with football immortality on the line, and with the biggest audience in American sporting history as witness, Belichick’s defense crumbled faster than the French Army in 1940.

There are so many similes/metaphors in this article (14, including Joe Theismann's tibia, Amelia Earhart, Sherman's army and the Great Wall of China) that I am going to be sicker than McNabb in the Super Bowl 39!!!!

Note to NBA owners: Do not hire Chris Mannix as your GM

I am a pretty big NBA fan. Now, I don't get paid to write about it, so I doubt I know more than Chris Mannix at SI.com.

His article, mock drafting the NBA, might make me reconsider.

Before reading this, I quickly threw together my top eleven. Keep in mind this took all of ten minutes and I didn't have player ages handy. I also really overlooked Yao. Oops.

1. LeBron James - duh
2. Chris Paul - ditto
3. Kobe Bryant - nothing to see here
4. Deron Williams - underrated, slightly worse than Paul, but killed him head to head and has good size
5. Amare Stoudamire - monster, better than Howard
6. Gilbert Arenas - there are, at most, three other guys I want shooting the last shot of a game more than Gil
7. Dwight Howard - physical specimen, needs to work on moves
8. Carlos Boozer - most polished big man out of the three
9. Brandon Roy - crazy upside, next best PG
10. Josh Smith - best swingman/multifaceted player
11. Dwayne Wade - injured and it's mostly his own fault, has a lot to prove next season

2. Miami Heat: Dwight Howard, C, 22. Shot-blocking, physically intimidating, attack-the-rim centers are hard to come by. Actually, outside of Howard, they are nearly impossible. As he proved this past season in Orlando, Howard is capable of dominating even with undersized help.

Know what else is rare? Post players with actual basketball moves. Howard's best move is "slam a miss back down with one arm." 30% of his shots were dunks last year. That's nuts. And while he does block shots, he isn't really that good defensively. Ask Chris Bosh, who drops like 40 on him every time they play.

He also sucks from the line (59%) and turns the ball over a lot - 263 times last season, which was fourth highest. The top three (and much of the top ten) were all guards.

5. Memphis Grizzlies: Yao Ming, C, 27. Size? Check. Skills? Double-check. Aggressive personality? Check, check, check. He has shrugged off his passive demeanor and become fiercely competitive, perhaps the lone attribute that had stood between Yao and greatness. Well, that and better health.

Hasn't played more than 57 games since 2004-05? Check. Will play in the Olympics/various Chinese basketball leagues during the offseason, increasing his injury chances? Check. Loyalty lies in a freakin communist country? Check, check, check.

I may have overlooked Yao, but number five is way too high considering the age and injury problems.

6. New York Knicks: Kevin Garnett, PF, 32. Yes, with KG as your cornerstone, you will have to find a fourth-quarter scorer. But that's about all you will need to find to complement this ultimate team player and defensive menace.

That, and the fountain of youth. KG is 32. He has, what, 3-5 more years being this good? But this is the Knicks, so maybe Mannix is making an awesome, elaborate joke.

7. Los Angeles Clippers: Amaré Stoudemire, F/C, 25. Lingering questions about the health of his surgically repaired knees vanished after a 25.2-point, 9.1-rebound season in 2007-08. Dominating offense, questionable defense.

His defense is only as questionable as Howard's, but he doesn't send blocks to the 12th row, so I guess he sucks. He also has that sport-writer Viagra known as "playoff experience."

10. New Jersey Nets: Tim Duncan, F/C, 32. Only age keeps Duncan from going higher. Duncan operates out of the post like Bill Walton and is as fundamentally sound as they come. Unfortunately, the 11-year veteran has played nearly two full seasons in playoff games, meaning his decline should be only a few years away.

So put him at number ten! There can't be better players than a 32-year-old Duncan!

No 23-year-old Deron Williams, who I had at number four, yet...

14. Golden State Warriors: Greg Oden, C, 20. OK, so Oden hasn't played a game yet. But a 7-foot, 250-pound center with superior defensive ability has to be considered a franchise player. Any offensive skills he develops -- and he will develop them -- are a bonus.

Sam Bowie.

16. Philadelphia 76ers: Deron Williams, PG, 23. Big, strong, fast, good going to the basket and a lethal shooter.

Gets you number 16, behind Tony Parker, who's three years older and worse at basketball.

If Williams has any flaws, it's that at times he looks likes a shooting guard in a point guard's body.

If *Magic Johnson* has any flaws, it's that at times he looks like *every position* in *every position's body*.

17. Toronto Raptors: Paul Pierce, SF, 30. Pierce can get physical with smaller forwards and drive around bigger ones. A durable player (only one full season of fewer than 73 games),

Ugh. 30 years old. Better players on the board. Finals hangover?

the 10-year veteran proved in the NBA Finals that his defense is underrated.

Half the game is underrated.

20. Denver Nuggets: David West, PF, 27. West might be the most underrated 20-point scorer in the NBA. A dependable jump shooter, West will continue to grow as his inside game improves.

Paul is his PG. Paul is his PG. Paul is his PG. Paul is his PG. Paul is his PG. Paul is his PG.

Boozer, who is right after West, has been playing better longer, is a year younger and can board much better. Color me befuddled blue.

22. Orlando Magic: Brandon Roy, SG, 23. Roy is Dwyane Wade Lite, all the way down to his curiously spelled middle name (Dawayne). Nicknamed "The Natural," Roy attacks the basket with reckless abandon and, at 6-6, can play both guard positions.

Meanwhile, Deron Williams is a fatass.

23. Utah Jazz: Manu Ginobili, SG, 30.

24. Phoenix Suns: Steve Nash, PG, 34.

25. Houston Rockets: Richard Hamilton, SG, 30.

All guys over 30 with tons of playoff miles on them. Mannix understands we're drafting here right? Like, for the future?

Josh Smith (22!), Gasol (27), Igoudala (24), Durant (19!!!) and Redd (28) all (stupidly) come after them.

Raining on parades: first Hamilton, now TB Rays

I hate to keep doing it (not really, it's actually kind of fun), but all these end of May "this [team, player, trend] is the real deal!" features are getting to me.

This time, it's John Donovan of SI.com and the Tampa Bay Rays - the exciting, young, "playing the game the right way" team that is the sexy pick for a wild card spot. On May 15, with like 161 more games to play.

The offending portion is this:

There are a lot of reasons to believe in the Rays. To name just a few:

• A rotation with Shields, ace Scott Kazmir, Edwin Jackson, Andy Sonnanstine and offseason acquisition Matt Garza. Tampa Bay starters have a 3.98 ERA, fifth in the league. They have a 1.27 ERA over the last seven games.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "Don't two of those pitchers stink, one (two if you're counting Shields) of them unproven and the last super-injury prone?" And yes, you'd be right. But come on, it's mid-May! Get excited about the Rays and Andy "Cy Young" Sonnanstine!

Jackson: 34K/21BB, 1.30 WHIP

The Sonnanster: 26K/11BB, 1.33 WHIP, 5 HR allowed, 5.07 ERA

Kazmir: 10 IP, 11K/6BB, 1.50 WHIP

Garza: 14K/14BB (!), 1.38 WHIP, 32 IP in 6 starts

That, ladies and gentlemen, is the definition of a questionable staff. Yes, Shields is good. But beyond that, who on that staff is a lock to throw 200+ non-Andy Sonnanstine-like innings?

Up next: Florida Marlins: greatest team ever?