We want a pitcher, not a belly-itcher!

So in our last installment of "let's see how much time Alex can waste looking at baseball statistics,"  I highlighted three hitters who had great years last year, and tried to see if they were destined for a fall back to earth.  This time around, I'm not going to focus on a particular player, but some interesting stats about pitchers in 2010 that can help us predict what will happen in 2011.

Again, it's probably prudent to give a little intro into the stats I'll be referring to:

Earned Run Average (ERA): runs allowed per 9 innings pitched.  The MLB average was 4.11 last year.

Batting Average on Balls-In-Play (BABIP):  refer to the last post for a better explanation, but in the case of a pitcher it's essentially a measure of how lucky or unlucky he got in terms of where the balls that were hit against him happened to land.  The league average was .302 this year.

Fielding-Independent Pitching (FIP):  a pitcher's expected ERA had his fielders and game situations been equivalent to the year's league average.  The MLB average was 4.08 last year (note that it's essentially the same as the average ERA).

ERA - FIP:  Subtracting the FIP from ERA gives an estimate of how much of an effect the pitcher's fielders or luck had to do with his performance.  A high value indicates that the pitcher pitched better than his ERA indicated, and a low value indicates that he got lucky and pitched worse than you might think.

Run Support per 9 IP (RS/9):  the amount of runs the pitcher's team scored when he was on the mound, adjusted on a per-9-inning basis.  A pitcher who had an unusually high or low value for this stat is likely to move back towards the middle, likely resulting in a change in his win total.

Walks and Hits per Inning Pitched (WHIP):  not sure if I will refer to this, but it's essentially the number of baserunners a pitcher allowed per inning that were his fault (aka excluding errors).  The MLB average last year was 1.33.

All right, let's get to the numbers.

Keep in mind here that the rankings and such I will be using will be among pitchers with 150+ innings, which limits the field to just over 100 pitchers.

BABIP

In the hitting piece, I relied a lot on BABIP to show a hitter's luck.  In the pitcher's case, it's pretty much the same.  In 2010, some of the best pitchers in terms of BABIP also had surprisingly good years:

Trevor Cahill (OAK) -- 18-8, 2.97 ERA, .236 BABIP  (the year before: .272)

Tim Hudson (ATL) -- 17-9, 2.83 ERA, .249 BABIP (didn't really pitch in 2009, but career avg: .280)

Jonathan Sanchez (SF) -- 13-9, 3.07 ERA, .252 BABIP (the year before: .276)

Matt Cain (SF) -- 13-11, 3.14 ERA, .252 BABIP (the year before: .263)

Additionally, studs like Roy Oswalt, Clay Buchholz, and Felix Hernandez were all in the top 11 among qualifiers in opponents' BABIP.

Note that all of these guys (with the slight exception of Cain) had large reductions in opponents' BABIP in 2010, which may have contributed to their success.  The top three guys here should see a step back, since they don't really have the track records (and in Hudson's case, the health stability) to expect a similar performance in 2011.

On the other side of the coin, here are some pitchers who had unusually high BABIP.  Note the difference in the quality of their seasons last year.

James Shields (TB) -- 13-15, 5.18 ERA, .341 BABIP (the year before: .308)

Francisco Liriano (MIN) -- 14-10, 3.62 ERA, .331 BABIP (the year before: .319)

Joe Blanton (PHI) -- 9-6, 4.82 ERA, .321 BABIP (the year before: .291)

John Lackey (BOS) -- 14-11, 4.40 ERA, .319 BABIP (the year before: .299)

AJ Burnett (NYY) -- 10-15, 5.26 ERA, .319 BABIP (year before: .295)

There are some pretty big names on this list, and the bottom three are big question marks on each of their respective teams this year.  What is interesting here is that Liriano had one of his best years last year, and if he can get his BABIP down towards .320 or .310, he could stand to have an even better year.  "Big Game James" Shields had a rough go of it, and we'll see later that he should be in for a bounceback.  Both Burnett and Lackey have shown that they CAN perform better, and it looks like they are going to have a chance to.

ERA - FIP

Again, this stat reflects the degree to which a pitcher's teammates and luck impacted his performance.  A high ERA-FIP indicates that the pitcher played better than conventional stats would indicate, and a low ERA-FIP indicates the opposite.

So, here are some interesting names out of the pitchers who threw 150+ innings in 2010:

2. Francisco Liriano (MIN) -- 3.62 ERA, 2.66 FIP, 0.96

3. James Shields (TB) -- 5.18 ERA, 4.24 FIP, 0.94

6. Zack Greinke (KC) -- 4.17 ERA, 3.34 FIP, 0.83

...

101. Trevor Cahill (OAK) -- 2.97 ERA, 4.19 FIP, -1.21

102. Tim Hudson (ATL) -- 2.83 ERA, 4.09 FIP,  -1.26

103. Clay Buchholz (BOS) -- 2.33 ERA, 3.61 FIP,  -1.28

You'll note some familiar faces in both the top and bottom of the list.  Liriano and Shields both show a high factor of bad luck and/or poor fielder positioning that makes their conventional stats look worse than they actually pitched.  On the other end of the spectrum, Hudson and Cahill both showed particularly good luck, and probably should have pitched closer to the league average.  For all four of these guys, we should expect a regression toward the mean of zero in this stat, which should indicate better performance for Shields and Liriano and worse for Hudson and Cahill.  Greinke won the Cy Young Award in 2009, but had a rough go of it to start last year, and it shows that he should bounce back this year, especially since he's moved to the Brewers in a less threatening National League (and doesn't have to face his own lineup).  Buchholz led the league in ERA in 2010, which was a big breakout year for him.  Unfortunately, it seems that his performance was a bit of a fluke, and while he should still have a solid year this year, no one should expect a repeat.

Run Support Per 9 IP

This really has no impact on a pitcher's performance itself, but increased win totals never hurt anyone, especially if you're looking for a postseason award.  Although, if you look at the guys who had some of the worst run support, it's a pretty impressive list.

1. Phil Hughes (NYY) -- 18-8, 4.19 ERA, 7.45 RS/9

3. CC Sabathia (NYY) -- 21-7, 3.18 ERA, 6.13 RS/9

7. David Price (TB) -- 19-6, 2.72 ERA, 6.00 RS/9

8. Joe Blanton (PHI) -- 9-6, 4.82 ERA, 5.94 RS/9

...

96. Cole Hamels (PHI) -- 12-11, 3.06 ERA, 3.49 RS/9

100. Johan Santana (NYM) -- 11-9, 2.98 ERA, 3.17 RS/9

101. Roy Oswalt (PHI) -- 13-13, 2.76 ERA, 3.15 RS/9

102. Felix Hernandez (SEA) -- 13-12, 2.27 ERA, 3.10 RS/9

OK, so if the Phillies still managed to be the second-highest-scoring team in the National League last year despite the injuries, how are there two Phillies starters at the bottom of this list?  Well, Oswalt played for the Astros for half the year, so we'll give him a pass.  At least Joe Blanton got the benefit of the Phils' lineup.  Note that the Yankees' top-of-the-league lineup produced the top two pitchers, and it shows that Hughes' big win total is likely a mirage, especially since his ERA was about league-average.  On the other hand, aces Santana and Hernandez couldn't get any help, but Santana is out till June and Hernandez won the AL Cy Young award, with one of the worst win-loss records of anyone to win the award.  You'd like to think that the Phils' pitchers will get a little more support without all those injuries, so maybe both Hamels and Oswalt can get up to 15 wins this year.  But that's a discussion for a different time.

So what have we learned?

Young guys who had good years last year (Cahill, Buchholz, Sanchez, Hughes) are likely to regress, although some guys like Liriano and Greinke should be even better in 2011.  Some veterans like Blanton, Lackey, Shields, and Burnett, are likely to see their ERAs improve this year, although Blanton might see his run support adjust in the opposite direction.

Oh, and the Yankees can hit.

As a third installment in the stat-heavy series (coming up next week), I'm going to project the Phillies' 2011 season player-by-player, and as a result predict the regular season outcome.

Using the past to inform the future

I'm a big fan of just poking around a data set and looking for interesting things, and the folks at FanGraphs.com really oblige me by having a massive MLB player statistics database, chock full of all the WAR, UZR, and xFIP you could need.  With Spring Training getting into full swing (pun totally intended, duh), I thought it would be good to look at some of last season's top performers and see if I could find any evidence of a repeat performance this year or a fall back to reality.

This post is going to highlight three hitters who had particularly good seasons that came out of nowhere.  I'll give player statistics in a quick-and-dirty format.  A player's stat line will consist of:
BA / OBP / SLG / OPS, BABIP, HR, RBI, WAR
(That's batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percentage, on-base-plus-slugging percentage, batting average on balls-in-play, home runs, runs-batted-in, and wins-above-replacement)
For those not so savvy on the numbers, here's a quick primer:

BA: hits / at-bats

OBP: (hits + walks + HBP) / (at-bats + walks + HBP + sac-flies)

SLG: (singles + 2*doubles + 3*triples + 4*HR) / at-bats   (a measure of a player's power output)

OPS: OBP + SLG  (a measure of a player's overall hitting ability, combining power and contact)

BABIP: (hits - HR) / (AB - K - HR + SF)   (batting average when the ball is in play, aka excluding home runs and strikeouts)

HR:  come on, seriously

RBI: again, you probably shouldn't read this if you don't know what an RBI is

WAR: a complex formula that gives an estimate of how many wins a player is worth as compared to an average "replacement" player at that position who faces the same situations


Don't worry, I'll explain stuff as I go.

So let's take a look at our contestants...

Jose Bautista, OF, Blue Jays
2010: .260/.378/.617/.995, .233, 54, 124, 6.9

Bautista came out of absolutely nowhere last year, hitting almost as many home runs (54) as he had in the past 4 years combined (59).  He signed a 5-year, $64 million contract as a result, but will he keep it up?
Obviously no one expects Bautista to repeat what he did last year.  However, there is some indication that he won't just regress back to his average WAR of 0.3 per year.  First of all, his power surge does extend into late 2009, as he hit 10 home runs in September that season, so it's at least not just a one-year deal.  Secondly, his absurdly low BABIP (third lowest in the league among qualifiers, and 40 points below his career average) indicates that he got pretty unlucky with the balls he hit that didn't land in the stands, so he should see an improved batting average that might balance out an inevitable power reduction in terms of runs produced.

Verdict?  Slight regression, but not as much as you might think.  I'm thinking a .270, 40 HR, 120 RBI year.

Carlos Gonzalez, OF, Rockies
2010: .336/.376/.598/.974, .384, 34, 117, 6.0

CarGo had a monster year in his first full year as a starter, finishing towards the top of the National League in homers, RBI, and batting average.  Like one-year-wonder Bautista, Gonzalez was rewarded with a 7-year, $80 million contract.
Gonzalez' impressive performance in 2010 seems to be a bit risky to bet on in 2011, mostly because of his absurdly high BABIP, which is the opposite of Bautista as the third highest among qualifiers and 30 points above his career average.  This should predict a regression in his particularly high batting average to the same degree that Bautista's should rise.  Additionally, not that this is really an indictment of Gonzalez, but while one of the more memorable moments of the 2010 Rockies season was his walk-off grand slam, he was actually in the bottom 20 in the league in terms of his performance in high-leverage/clutch situations as compared to his performance in average scenarios (which, admittedly, was solid).

Verdict?  Again, the small previous sample size should worry people as well, so I'm seeing a regression at least in the batting average department to more of a .325, 30, 115 type deal.


Joey Votto, 1B, Reds
2010: .324/.424/.600/1.024, .361, 37, 113, 7.4

Votto won the NL MVP in 2010 thanks to leading the league in home runs and coming close in batting average and RBI.  He too was rewarded for his performance, receiving a 3-year, $38 million extension.
Votto's case for a repeat performance is much more convincing than those of the above two players.  He was in his third year of everyday play, and had averaged .310, 24 HR, 84 RBI in the previous two years.  In 2010, he added a good deal of power without sacrificing average.  His BABIP, while high at .361, is under 10 points above his career average, so we shouldn't expect a vastly different year this season.  However, his 25% home-run-to-fly-ball ratio in 2010 was so high that it's pretty expected that he lose a little bit of power.  Just not much.  Besides, the Cardinals' loss of Adam Wainwright should net him a couple extra hits, right?

Verdict?  This time around, I'm seeing a repeat performance that will have Votto competing with the likes of Pujols and CarGo again this year.  Right in the same area, like .320, 34, 115.


Next time, I'll look at some pitchers who should be expecting a fall from grace.  And maybe I'll dole out some good news for a change.  We'll see.

NBA Second, uh, Half? Preview.

All right, so the NBA All-Star game isn't exactly at the halfway point in the season, but who said it needed to be?  The NFL has its All-Star game after the season's over, and MLB starts the balloting after only a month and a half of the season.

I figured that with the trade deadline in the NBA coming today, I should look at the state of the league and see what's what.  So I'm gonna give a little bit of my love to you... er, a little bit of Monica in my... no, a little bit of analysis of some teams in the hunt and some teams vying for a Jared Sullinger or somesuch.

So, in order of league standings, and excluding the teams I don't feel like have anything interesting to talk about...

1. San Antonio Spurs (47-10)
They have a six-game lead on the rest of the Western Conference, which can be easily explained through two simultaneous processes: the Spurs finally don't have one of their three best players (Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili) injured, and they're actually living up to their full potential with the help of young guns George Hill and DeJuan Blair.
Projected finish: 65-17 (1-seed in West)
Next year?  Down.  They're just too lucky this year, and Duncan is clearly on the decline.

2. Boston Celtics (41-14)
Both of the last two years, this team has defied expectations about their increasing age (Ray Allen is 35, Kevin Garnett is 34, and Paul Pierce is 33) and has performed well in the regular season.  Last year, they faded down the stretch as Coach Rivers rested his walking wounded, but turned it on in the playoffs and made the Finals.  This year, they look even better thanks to Rajon Rondo's emergence, and with a team  full of experience they look to be the best shot to come out of the East.
Projected finish: 59-23 (2-seed in East)
Next year? Down (they HAVE to age eventually, right?)

3. Miami Heat (42-15)
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Miami Thrice and all that.  They've gone 33-7 since starting 9-8, and I showed in a previous post that each of their stars is doing just fine.  Their real concern should be the fact that they haven't beaten the Celtics this year (0-3), and it doesn't appear like having homecourt against them by being the top seed in the East is going to matter too much in the playoffs.
Projected finish: 61-21 (1-seed in East)
Next year?  Up.  The improved chemistry and in-game execution can only help them, and they will have a better understanding of what pieces the Big 3 need around them in order to succeed.

5. LA Lakers (40-19)
After all that Andrew Bynum trade talk and the Grammy road trip starting off strong (4 straight wins) but ending up disgusting (losses to Charlotte and Cleveland), the Lakers must be pretty tired of this season.  They've still got Kobe, who showed in the All-Star game that he can still do it up real nice (albeit in a game with no defense), and three effective big guys in Gasol, Bynum, and Odom.  I just don't know if they have the mental fortitude to keep their intensity up this season.  I think they will stay about where they are in the playoff standings and just hope they get the 3 seed and avoid the Spurs.  At least the bottom of the playoff bracket looks to have thinned out thanks to the 'Melo and Deron Williams trades.
Projected finish: 57-25 (3-seed in West)
Next year?  Down.  Kobe and Derek Fisher are aging, and the Ron Artest thing isn't working out so hot.  They need an infusion of youth akin to that of the Spurs, because the whole get-another-superstar thing isn't going to work so well as long as Kobe's around.

11. Denver Nuggets (33-25)
After all that Melo-drama, they finally got the deal done.  And I think they made out like bandits.  Yes, they lost a top-10 player in Carmelo, but he was clearly going to leave for New York after the season, and they had to make something out of nothing.  And what they got was 4 of the Knicks better players who are young and talented, as well as moving a good deal of salary off their books in Chauncey Billups and Anthony.  With Ty Lawson at the point, this team is built to be a solid team for the next few years, although they could use a go-to scorer.  However, there IS that ticket sale thing...
Projected finish: 49-33 (7-seed in West)
Next year?  Up.  For all the reasons above.

15. New York Knicks (29-26)
After winning their first game in the Carmelo AnthoNY era, the Knicks are going to the 'ship!  No?  Oh, right, they need a little bit of time.  I do like the trio of Melo, Billups, and Amare Stoudemire, but the latter two play a similar position and may have some trouble when it comes to getting theirs on a game-to-game basis.  They're going to need some time to gel just like the Heat did, but they should be fine for a playoff berth, and at that point perhaps their star power can push them through a series.  I just don't know if they have what it takes to beat Miami and Boston, let alone Chicago.
Projected finish: 45-37 (6-seed in East)
Next year?  Up.  But the year after that?  Way up, thanks to the imminent Chris Paul acquisition.

17. Philadelphia 76ers (28-29)
After starting 3-13, the young and plucky Sixers have gone 25-16 and are in position to lose in the first round to the Heat or Celtics.  Get psyched, Philly.  Unfortunately, the recent shift in star power to the East is not going to help matters this year or in the future, and unless Jrue Holliday and Evan Turner can turn themselves into bona fide stars, I don't see them really competing for a while.
Projected finish: 43-39
Next year?  Up, but so is everyone else, so perhaps it will be down, relatively.

25. New Jersey Nets (17-40)
Mikhail Prokhorov is a crazy Russian.  He re-entered the 'Melo sweepstakes so that he could raise the price for the Knicks, which he did, and then came out of nowhere to trade for Jazz PG Deron Williams, who no one really though was on the trade block.  Unfortunately for the Nets, Williams doesn't really have too much to work with other than that Lopez kid from Stanford, but he's been able to up the game of his teammates so far and is one of the better scoring threats at point guard in the league.  If they can convince some solid role players to come to Jersey/Brooklyn to play with Williams in the next year and a half, perhaps they can be a little more relevant.  I'm just not so sure Williams is going to be around after his contract expires in 2012.
Projected finish: 28-54
Next year?  Up, but how much?  We'll have to see what this offseason brings.

30. Cleveland Cavaliers (10-47)
After that 23-game losing streak, at least they've won two games to get them out of the conversation for the worst team ever.  However, the loss of Lebron James appears to have been utterly devastating both mentally and on-the-court, and this may be the best argument for James being the MVP of the NBA.  They just traded Mo Williams and Jamario Moon to the Clippers for Baron Davis, so maybe there will be a little more pep in their step, but this team is in the doldrums and I don't see a guy in the draft this year that's going to do much for them immediately.
Projected finish: 16-66
Next year?  Flat.  Just like their play this year.


Random Conference Finals predictions:
Lakers vs. Spurs
Celtics vs. Bulls

The One-Month Countdown!

It's February 15th: do you know where your children are?  Oh, I meant to say "do you know what that means?"  It's the day after Valentine's Day!  That means you can return all those lousy gifts you got for V-Day (at least the ones that weren't homemade).  Oh wait, that's a Christmas thing.

Oh, then it must be a month until March Madness!  Silly rabbit.  And it's good timing, because there's all this uproar in the sports commentary community about the fact that two teams that were #1 in the polls have lost in the last three days (Ohio State to 14 Wisconsin and Kansas to Kansas State).  People are complaining that these losses, though they seem big in the heat of the moment, really won't affect Ohio State's or Kansas' tournament seeding or chances much at all, and thus the hoopla is really not warranted.  They argue that the regular season games in college basketball are cheapened by their minimal individual impact on the playoff picture and the fact that the NCAA tournament is such a big deal.

Huh?

First of all, don't you think the game's sort of important to the winning teams, whose resumes are going to be critical come tournament selection time?  Wisconsin is now #10 in the polls and could really serve to benefit by moving up from a 4 to a 3 seed, thus potentially avoiding a top seed in the Sweet Sixteen.  Kansas State, despite being a top team at the beginning of the season, went 5-7 from the middle of December to the end of January and is now a bubble team.  A win against conference and in-state rival Kansas could be a huge boost for their confidence and tournament resume, and may give them the surge they need to make the tournament at all (where they got to the Elite Eight last year).

Second, of course regular season games aren't individually THAT important.  People on TV today were comparing the importance of a regular season matchup in basketball and football, but there are 3 times as many games in a college basketball season!  That means that each game is worth approximately 1/3 of what it would mean in a football season.  It's just simple math.  However, if you want to have a schedule that includes a sufficient amount of both conference and non-conference games, you're gonna have to deal with 30-some games and a little bit of an empty feeling inside sometimes.

Third, HELLO!  The NCAA Tournament is the greatest sporting event of the year, every year!  Why would you ever consider making changes to a system that has such profound success on an annual basis?  Pundits complain about the BCS playoff system all the freaking time because it's flawed and all that, but it makes the whole regular season essentially a double-elimination tournament.  You can't have your cake and eat it too here.  Increasing the excitement of the regular season in college basketball is just going to end up reducing the subjective impact of the tournament, and nobody wants that.  Just let me ignore the first few months of the season and have my five brackets busted in the first round of the tournament as I return home with my tail between my legs.

Stop complaining.

The Big Show, The Big Game, The Big Black Eyed Peas Concert?

Or the Super Bowl.  Whatever.

As you probably all know, the culmination of the NFL season will occur this Sunday at 6:30 Eastern time in the new Cowboys stadium (of giant 60-yard scoreboard fame) between the Green Bay Packers (13-6) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (14-4).  People kind of care about this game.  So, as any good sports fan should do, I will do my best to handicap the game and predict a score and winner.  The best way I see to do this is to compare the teams' run and pass defense and offense as well as their special teams and team discipline (i.e. penalty and turnover frequency), and see who comes out on top in each circumstance.

Running the Ball
Green Bay: 100.4 yards per game (118 in playoffs)
Pittsburgh D: 62.8 yards per game (52.5 in playoffs)

Pittsburgh: 120.3 yards per game (118.5 in playoffs)
Green Bay D: 114.9 yards per game (69.7 in playoffs)

The Steelers clearly should have the edge running the ball in this game, with 1200-yard rusher Rashard Mendenhall toting the majority of the workload and the Packers' run defense being slightly more beatable.  However, the late-season addition of rookie James Starks to the Green Bay backfield has at least given them some fresh legs, which has shown itself in their 20% improvement in rushing output during the playoffs.  Although I like what I've seen from the Packers' run defense in their first three playoff games (shutting down two top-third rushing offenses), I can't rely on the young pup to get it done in a big game against the league's top-ranked rush defense.

Steelers win, 65-35


Passing the Ball
GB (Rodgers): 248.6 ypg (251 in playoffs)
PIT D: 214.1 ypg (179 in playoffs)

PIT (Roethlisberger): 248.3 ypg (156.5 in playoffs)
GB D: 194.2 ypg (237 in playoffs)

Don't be fooled by Roethlisberger's sad-looking numbers in the Steelers' two playoff games; the Ravens had a down year defensively but always play their division rivals tough, and the Jets had a top-10 pass defense.  On the flip side, everybody's getting on the Rodgers bandwagon after strong performances against the Eagles and Falcons, but their pass defenses were both below-average.  As far as receiving corps are concerned, they're pretty similar and deep, with the Packers' receiver depth being offset by its weakness at tight end and the Steelers' inexperience at receiver being offset by Heath Miller at TE and Mendenhall's receiving ability.  Both quarterbacks have very good scrambling ability, so a big pass downfield on a broken play to Mike Wallace or Greg Jennings could make the game.  In the end, though, the Packers' offense runs through Rodgers much more than the Steelers' runs through Roethlisberger, and the Pack's receivers are just more explosive than Pittsburgh's.

Packers win, 60-40.

Special Teams

Really not much to go on here, as the teams combined for 1 kickoff or punt return touchdown this year.   Basically, it comes down to me trusting Mason Crosby more than I trust Shaun Suisham, and we know how kickers can impact Super Bowls (see Vinatieri, Adam).

Packers win, 60-40.

Discipline


GB: 38.8 penalty ypg, +11 turnover margin
PIT: 56.7 penalty ypg, +14 turnover margin

The possibility of Pittsburgh center Maurkice Pouncey missing the game means that there may be some issues along the offensive line, causing some possible false start/holding issues and increasing the difference in penalty efficiency between the teams.  Additionally, the gunslinger/never-go-down mentality of Roethlisberger could create some turnovers for the Packers.

Packers win, 60-40.


So here's a recap:
Run game-- Steelers, 65-35
Pass game-- Packers, 60-40
Special teams-- Packers, 60-40
Discipline-- Packers, 60-40

Oh, and we'll throw in a coaching/experience factor, which will obviously go to the Steelers since they were in the Super Bowl a couple years ago under Mike Tomlin.  Let's throw some arbitrary math in too:

Final score = Run*0.3 + Pass*0.3 + Special*0.1 + Discipline*0.15 + Experience*0.15
Steelers = 65*0.3 + 40*0.3 + 40*0.1 + 40*0.15 + 65*0.15 = 51.25
Packers = 35*0.3 + 60*0.3 + 60*0.1 + 60*0.15 + 35*0.15 = 48.75

All right, so I have the Steelers winning by about 6%.  I think we can assume a fairly average-scoring game despite the defensive quality (after all, these teams combined for 66 points the last time they met), so if I set the total score to about the current over-under (somewhere around 44.5), that means that I should be expecting a 24-21 Steelers final.  

Despite all that, go Pack go!  The Steelers just won.  Come on, share the wealth.