So is Roy Halladay Actually Done Now?

After Roy Halladay suffered his season-altering injury last season, I wrote a brief post basically saying that we should have expected him to either decline or get injured at some point, and Phillies fans should just be happy we got what we did for the first two years of his tenure there.  However, at that time there wasn't anything terribly substantial that appeared to be wrong with him.  Well, after a bumpy end of 2012 and two abysmal starts to begin 2013, it looked like Doc was possibly both injured and declining. His pitch counts were up, his control was all over the place, and there was that whole 14+ ERA thing.  But I decided to give him the opportunity to redeem himself in his third start against the Greg-Dobbs-led Marlins, if for no other reason than to give him another few innings to allow his statistics to stabilize a bit.  Now that he got everyone to calm down with his 8-inning, 1-run victory, let's take a look at what everyone's worried about.

2013 All-of-MLB Preview

Now that I've come up with a reasonable number of wins to predict for my hometown Phillies (although I might like to adjust that given the first two games of the season), I can stop being such a homer and say something about the other 29 teams in Major League Baseball.  Yes, even the Astros.

Some might consider this post to be too late, but I swear I wrote the predictions on Sunday and filled in the analysis afterward.  But let's be real here, you don't care that much, and by the end of the month I'll probably regret half of these predictions anyway.

Let's go to work.  I'll go division-by-division, giving my guess at each team's record, including the difference in wins from last year that that record would represent.

NL East

Nationals: 98-64 (even)

Braves: 96-66 (+2)

Phillies: 84-78 (+3)

Mets: 70-92 (-4)

Marlins: 65-97 (-4)

The Nationals and Braves were two of the top teams in the NL last season and managed to improve in the offseason.  Washington added pitching depth in Dan Haren and Rafael Soriano and a year of experience (and a month's worth of games) for Bryce Harper and Stephen Strasburg.  Atlanta added the Upton Girls (shoutout to Jon Patrice).  Meanwhile, the Phillies added and subtracted some middling players, the Mets lost a Cy Young winner, and the Marlins traded their entire roster and more than a few fans away.  Health will boost the Phils, but I don't see them sniffing Atlanta or Washington.

NL Central

Reds: 95-67 (even)

Cardinals: 85-77 (-3)

Brewers: 81-81 (-2)

Pirates: 79-83 (even)

Cubs: 62-100 (+1)

The Reds were sneaky good last season despite missing Joey Votto for much of the season, and they added some more offense in Shin-Soo Choo and Ryan Ludwick.  The Cardinals have Adam Wainwright a year removed from a significant injury, so he's expected to bounce back, but the loss of Kyle Lohse and Lance Berkman should be enough to cause them to fade a bit.  The Brewers gain Lohse, but the loss of a half-season of Zack Greinke should bring about a bit of a downswing.  The Pirates are oh-so close to that elusive winning season, but the lack of 18 games against the AAA-stros (see what I did there?) will probably be a downer.  And so will the Cubs.

NL West

Giants: 93-69 (-1)

Dodgers: 89-73 (+3)

Diamondbacks: 79-83 (-2)

Padres: 75-87 (-1)

Rockies: 68-94 (+4)

The Giants had another fortuitous closing stretch of the season and nabbed another World Series, and I don't see them being unseated, especially if Tim Lincecum can figure himself out.  The Dodgers get a full season of Mo' Money, Mo' Problems (Greinke, Josh Beckett, Carl Crawford, Hanley Ramirez, and Adrian Gonzalez added in the past year on top of Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier), so they should stay close.  The D'Backs traded away Justin Upton, but I think they stay at least marginally competitive thanks to the emerging Paul Goldschmidt and an underrated pitching staff.  I'll be honest, I know very little about the Padres (and I'm just fine with that) but I bet their pitching and ballpark should keep them more competitive than the by-far-league-worst pitching staff that the Rockies put on the field in 2012.

AL East
Rays: 94-68 (+1)
Blue Jays: 90-72 (+17)
Orioles: 84-78 (-9)
Red Sox: 78-84 (+9)
Yankees: 76-86 (-19)

The AL East and West are definitely the hardest divisions to pin down.  Sure, the Yankees won it last year, but they're getting worked by the previously-terrible Red Sox to start the year, and have more 2013 payroll on the DL right now than a bunch of teams (after all, A-Rod is making more than the entire AAA-stros team).  The Blue Jays added the entire Marlins team and aren't likely to be ravaged by injury like they were last year, so they should be right up there.  The Orioles got absurdly lucky in terms of performance in close games in 2012, and with the Sox and Jays being more competitive, I see them dropping back a bit.  But when you look at it, the Rays are the one team that you know is going to be right there at the end of the season (unless they trade David Price, in which case all bets are off), so I think they're sort of the safest pick to come out of the East.

AL Central
Tigers: 90-72 (+2)
White Sox: 83-79 (-2)
Indians: 74-86 (+6)
Royals: 72-90 (even)
Twins: 64-98 (-2)

The AL Central, on the other hand, might be the easiest division to pick.  The White Sox were close last year, but the Tigers' ridiculous lineup and strong top end of the rotation should keep them on top.  The Indians added a lot of speed in Drew Stubbs and Michael Bourn and a manager who likes to run in Terry Francona, so maybe they'll get back to respectability.  The Royals added James Shields and Wade Davis from the Rays in a win-now move, but they compromised their future by trading away top outfield prospect Wil Myers.  Not that relevant here, but I just don't see the added pitching as getting them over any humps unless Eric Hosmer and Mike Moustakas improve.  The Twins, well, don't have Francisco Liriano anymore.  That's a good thing.

AL West
Rangers: 93-69 (even)
Angels: 92-68 (+3)
Athletics: 90-72 (-4)
Mariners: 80-82 (+5)
Astros: 54-108 (-1)

And now it gets tricky again.  The A's made a ridiculous run to catch the Rangers at the end of last year, and Texas lost Josh Hamilton to last year's underperformers, the Angels.  I see the A's losing a bit of their mojo, but they are a young roster with some really interesting pieces in Yoenis Cespedes and their starting pitching (Parker, Milone, Griffin, Straily), so I don't see too much of a drop-off.  The Angels have a ridiculous Trout-Hamilton-Pujols combination, but the rotation is headed by an apparently-declining Jered Weaver and 2012 underperformer CJ Wilson, and follows with a possibly-broken Tommy Hanson and Big Joe Blanton.  The Mariners added some bats (Michael Morse, Kendrys Morales) and moved their outfield fences in, so maybe they have a little bit more life in them.  But really, what's keeping the rest of this division afloat record-wise is that the Astros are entering the fray.  After all, the AL West had 6 more wins per team than the non-Houston NL Central teams, so I can't see the 'Stros doing much other than boosting the records of their new division rivals.

Phillies 2013 Preview

Now that my brackets are dead, it's time to shift my focus for the next five months (September is really a football month) to the diamond.  And while I will of course give a prediction for all of Major League Baseball, it seems most appropriate to take a deeper look-see at my hometown team, the Philadelphia Phillies.  In case you forgot, here's a list of the things you need to know since the start of last season:

• The 2012 Phillies went 81-81, finishing third in the NL East (13 games out of second place, however)
• Additions: CF Ben Revere, 3B Michael Young, OF Delmon Young, RP Mike Adams, SP John Lannan
• Subtractions: 3B Placido Polanco, CF Shane Victorino, RF Hunter Pence, LF Juan Pierre, SP Joe Blanton, SP Vance Worley

Let's take a stroll through some of the storylines to watch this year:

The Lord of the Pentagons: Return of This Thing

Guess what?  Today, I missed my first Phillies game of the year!  There will be more were that came from, considering I don't have Comcast and don't feel like paying for MLBTV, but I digress.  The point is that the 2013 regular season is (relatively) just around the corner, so if it's time for the players to get into shape, it's probably a good idea for me to do so as well.  You know, from a writing perspective.  Let's be real, there's no aerobic activity going on here.

It's hard to pick a subject to start off a season like this, so my inspiration had to come from an external source.  I was recently informed by my friend Matt that as part of a discussion on the merits of spider/radar graphs, he had shown my revolutionary analysis by way of the terribly-named Vigdergon.  I had already meant to revisit that means of analysis with a bit more frequency this season, so it really was just a little nudge in this direction that I needed.  In case you missed it, check out the first two posts here and here, and once you're done catching up, let's leap into action!

Stickin' with Vick

Man, it's a drain on your free time to have 2.5 hours of commuting a day. I don't even remember the last time I blogged, and I could easily just look at the list! Laziness wins again.

Anyway, I figured I'd return from mini-hiatus to briefly talk about the fact that the Eagles restructured Michael Vick's contract to bring him back for an incentive-laden 1-year contract, essentially. Vick has deserved a great deal of the criticism that he has received over the last couple seasons, and fans are certainly right to give an inquisitive head tilt over this decision. So what makes this action by the new regime so intriguing?

FINANCE

Vick signed a 6-year, $100 million contract after the 2010 season, but because of the structure of NFL contracts, the Birds could have released him without so much as a cap hit after this season. After all, he was set to be paid as a top-10 quarterback while performing below-average for two straight seasons. There was zero chance of Philly keeping him at that cost if they wouldn't be hurt financially by cutting him.

Instead, they managed to get him to agree to a contract that, if miracles happen, will pay him just $10 million, and the team has the option to keep him an extra two years if said miracles do happen. His salary will put him right in the middle or the pack among QBs next year, and behind luminaries Kevin Kolb, Ryan Fitzpatrick, and Matt Flynn. But will he be worth it?

ON-FIELD

I'm currently on a train, so I'm going to go (gasp!) statless on this one. No one needs a stat to tell them that the Eagles' offensive line was ravaged by injury in 2012, including a preseason injury to one of the best left tackles in the league, Jason Peters. Even the "quick release" of rookie Nick Foles didn't help him much, as by the time he was starting, four of the five starting linemen were out. I'm willing to bet that a healthy line will do wonders for whoever is behind center.

Then there's the new offensive system. Everyone is aware by now of the famed Oregon offense that new coach Chip Kelly is bringing to the table, featuring dynamic athletes especially effectively in both the run and pass game and staying aggressive in both field position and speed of play. Given that situation, I feel much more comfortable handing the keys to that kind of offense over to, well, not the loafing 6'6" youngin'. I know that Vick is t the kind of threat he was even two years ago, but his offense is more likely to benefit from his presence than Foles'. Oh, and we have all those fancy expensive skill position players too.

LONG-TERM OUTLOOK

This is where Kelly et al. lose me. After a season in which the team imploded, every coach got fired, and the result was a top-5 pick in the draft, it sure seems backwards to bring back an old QB on a 1-year deal instead of starting over with a new guy. Sure, Nick Foles didn't set the world ablaze in his audition like many rookie QBs have done of late, but maybe another year, a fresh new offense, and an improved defense would help.

Well, you don't net the big fish in the coaching pond only to constrain him by forcing him to cater his offense to a second year QB who didn't do anything to earn that kind of respect. Rumors of Dennis Dixon and similar mobile QBs surface because everyone assumes Kelly wants a guy like that, and that's probably why Vick was resigned. But why not go with a younger mobile guy who has a better chance to develop alongside the new offense? Maybe the options just aren't out there, or maybe the draft will give us more clarity.

In sum, I'm not really bothered by this move, mostly because Vick comes at a significant discount (I mean he has a Super Bowl clause, let's be real here). We can still acquire the kind of young, promising talent that everyone assumes is a better fit for the offense, and maybe Foles will show some fight and take the job himself?

Five Things I Hate About You, Super Bowl XLVII

And so, the time has come.  Thirty teams have fallen by the wayside, and only two remain, as the Orioles face off against the Giants in the World Series.  Oh, wait.  Wow, I actually just realized that San Francisco has a really nice year going, although they don't have the representation in the NBA and NHL to allow them to really go for the gold.  

Anyway, I don't know about any of you, but I'm not much of a fan of the fact that the Super Bowl has two weeks of hype behind it after the conference championships, as if it needed the extra exposure.  What that produces is an oversaturation of the same headlines for two straight weeks with only a wee little Pro Bowl interruption (and that might be gone after this season).  So instead of adding to the hype train that is already gaining steam, I'm going to give you the five storylines that you will be sick of by as early as this Wednesday, more than ten days before the actual game is played.

5. The 49ers' championship history

I don't know how many of you have heard of Joe Montana and Steve Young, but they combined to win five championships in the span of 14 years in the 80's and 90's, and are both in the Hall of Fame as a result of their dominance during this period.  Only the Steelers have more Super Bowl wins (6).  The problem with this whole "storied franchise" thing is that they have not been in a Super Bowl before or since that period.  They had two of the greatest quarterbacks and the greatest receiver of all time for a continuous period, and they won a lot during that time.  Other than that, not so much.

4. Colin Kaepernick and the Read-Option

Last year we whetted our appetite for this stuff with Cam Newton's breakout.  This year we went full-on bonkers for the read-option running scheme, with RGIII, Russell Wilson, and Colin Kaepernick all having great success using an offensive philosophy that was previously mostly limited to the college ranks.  Yes, Kaepernick is a much more exciting player to watch than Alex Smith, but it's interesting to note that the Niners averaged 170 rushing yards per game in their 9 games with Smith, but just 159 with Kaepernick, and we can all agree that Kaep is adding a lot more rushing value than Smith.

3. Is Joe Flacco an elite quarterback?

This discussion actually started about Eli Manning at the start of last season, and he validated his own confidence by winning a Super Bowl.  Flacco made a similar claim about his "eliteness" at the start of this season, stating that his expected contract value was only going to go up as the year went on.  Well, he made it to his first Super Bowl, and does own a very impressive 54-26 career regular season record, and perhaps a more impressive 8-4 postseason record.  Even if he wins this game, I'm not going to engage in the "Oh, he got a ring, so he's gotta be elite" discourse until I see more consistency out of him.  Flacco's Total QBR for each season in his career has never been higher than 12th in the league, and this year was a dismal 25th, while his playoff-snakebit contemporary has never finished lower than 14th and has finished in the top 5 in his other four seasons.

2. Ray Lewis' Farewell Tour

After soon-to-be-Hall-of-Fame-linebacker Ray Lewis announced at the start of the playoffs that this season would be his last, we all knew that people would be talking about it all over the place.  And the Ravens have given Lewis an opportunity to go out on top, a feat that has recently been accomplished by the likes of Elway, Bettis, and Strahan.  Lewis has also had a pretty good postseason amid all the hoopla, with 25 solo tackles and 19 assisted tackles in three games.  It's hard to argue with the attention being paid to the retirement (potentially with a Super Bowl ring) of one of the three greatest players at his position of all time, it's just been a lot of attention, and it's already been cooking for three weeks.

1. The Harbaugh Bowl (Harbaughl?)

I think that the over/under for references by the announcers to the Ravens and 49ers' coaches being brothers during the game should be set somewhere around 30, and that might be conservative.  There will be all sorts of prop bets in Vegas on the number of times they show the parents, or which Harbaugh they show more often, or whatever.  I actually feel that the attention that will be paid for this pales in comparison to the explosion that would happen if we ever get a Manning Bowl (and God help us if that happens), but we'll deal with this for now.  As I found out from my friend Allyson after I told her the story, there's a good chance that non-football-people could find this game more watchable than usual, so I suppose that's all right.  But I really don't need to deal with the comparisons, contrasts, baby pictures, and plays on words that are going to ooze out of the media in the next two weeks.

Maddening Manning

Well, that Divisional Playoff weekend certainly lived up to any hype it could have had.  A lot of talking heads call it the best weekend of football of the year, because of the combination of excellent quality and good-enough quantity of games available.  Unfortunately, the actual results of these games didn't quite tickle my fancy.  I was banking on a Brady/Manning AFC Championship followed by the winner going up against Rodgers for the title, but two of those teams managed to lose thanks to dramatically ineffective defenses.

In this post, though, I'm going to focus on one player who appears to not only be getting a disproportionate amount of blame for his team's loss, but this loss appears to have tarnished his career legacy somewhat.  I am of course referring to Broncos QB Peyton Manning, whose two interceptions, one resulting in a pick-six early in the game and one in overtime, clearly had a significant impact on Denver's loss.  For the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to ignore this game in particular, in which the Broncos secondary imploded in an inexcusable way to allow the Ravens to have several big passing plays that won them the game.  As a result of this last game, some of these aforementioned talking heads have now started questioning Manning's ability to perform in the clutch once again, a practice that was commonplace just under a decade ago.  But doesn't even having that discussion around a 4-time MVP and Super Bowl champion seem unfair?  I'm not so sure.  Really, I'm not sure.  I'm going to decide as I write this.  Sort of a choose-your-own-adventure thing.  Or a lack of prior research. 

First, the detractors' argument. 

Here are a few standard stats over Manning's career in both the regular season and postseason:

Regular season         

69% WinPct    65% Completions       266 Yds/Gm    1.9 TD/Gm      0.9 INT/Gm      7.63 Yds/Att

Postseason    

45% WinPct    63% Completions       284 Yds/Gm    1.6 TD/Gm      1.1 INT/Gm      7.46 Yds/Att

So it looks like he's producing more yards in the playoffs but fewer touchdowns and more interceptions, which probably produces the dips in completion percentage and yards per attempt.  However, the striking difference is clearly in the winning percentage, where he loses an extra 1/4 of his games in the playoffs than in the regular season.  It certainly stands to reason that the lost touchdown every three games and the extra interception every 5 games might be the difference between 9-11 and something like 11-9.  In fact, of his 11 postseason losses, 7 of them were by a touchdown or less.  If Peyton throws an extra touchdown in two of those, that's a jump to 11-9 right there.  On the other hand, those touchdowns could have occurred in a game which he would already have won, in which case nothing important happens.

Now, the supporters' argument.

We're going to set aside the whole "HOW COULD YOU DISPARAGE PEYTON MANNING, HE'S UNDOUBTEDLY ONE OF THE TOP TWO OR THREE QUARTERBACKS OF ALL TIME!" thing for the sake of rationality.  The first step in acquitting Manning is probably to point out that he was 3-6 in the playoffs from '99 to '05, and has been 6-5 since, including a Super Bowl trip.  There's also a point that some people appear to be missing, and that is that the level of opponent is significantly increased in the playoffs, which should produce declines in performance in the playoffs relative to the regular season.  This decline may not manifest itself strongly in passing statistics, as there are many good teams that have bad defenses and would allow similar performances statistically to bad teams.  However, they are still good teams, meaning that Manning likely faces teams with an average win percentage of around 65-70 (i.e. 10-11 wins) in the playoffs compared to 50 in the regular season.  If his team normally wins 69% of his games, but they are facing a team that wins 65-70% of their games, one would expect his team to at best win just barely over 50% of the time, which would probably make his "expected" wins 10 out of 20 instead of his actual 9.  Is this enough to crucify him over?  Probably not.  

That being said, contemporaries Brady, Brees, McNabb, Warner, Roethlisberger, Favre, and his brother Eli (all of whom have playoff records over .500) have a combined regular season win percentage of 63, with their average playoff win percentage 61.  This represents a sample of some of the most successful quarterbacks that have played over much of Manning's career, and yet he still has a significantly better regular season record than these players.  Despite that, his postseason record is nontrivially worse than theirs, and he is 1-4 in playoff games against these quarterbacks (and 0-2 against Philip Rivers, who could theoretically have been included in the above list).

I'm not one to lean on wins and losses as a measure of one player's performance, but with the quarterback position being so much more critical to a team's success than any other position in any other sport, it's hard to ignore the contrast between Peyton Manning's playoff success and the success of his rivals.  Yes, two close losses turning into wins would probably kill the detractors' argument, so it's pretty unreasonable to make any strong claim about Manning's "clutchness," or lack thereof, but the difference between his playoff performance and everyone else's makes for a compelling discussion, at least.  I'm inclined to give the man who will probably end up the most prolific quarterback of all time a little bit of slack, though.