Chart Attack: Why Teams Should Go For Two-Point Conversions At Any Point (When the Math Dictates It) and Not Always Follow the Chart

One of the most baffling things to me in football is the concept of going "by the chart".

What is this chart you speak of, you're asking of course. Well I'll gladly tell you - it's the rule of thumb that coaches go by when determining the appropriate time to go for a two-point conversion after a touchdown instead of kicking the extra point.

The standard rule in going for two is to only go for it when you're nearing the fourth quarter or actually in the fourth. Otherwise, according to many people who support the chart, you become obsessed with chasing points and missing out on a guaranteed point when going for two is such a risk.

I am here to put my full support behind burning this so-called "chart" and tell you why I don't have a problem with teams breaking the conventional "wisdom" of not going for two until the latter stages of the game.

Origins of "The Chart"

Before I actually started this piece, I decided to Google the words "two point conversion chart" just to see if there was an actual chart or if this was some brilliant scheme hatched by play-by-play and game analysts to convince us that there is a right and a wrong time to go for two-points.

Dick Vermeil's chart

I was surprised to see that there is an actual chart. And it was designed by none other than Dick Vermeil. As an assistant coach with UCLA in the 1970s, Vermeil came up with the idea of a chart that would assist the coach on the appropriate times to go for 2 or just kick the extra point. To the right is what the chart looks like.

I believe the chart is good in theory, but its standard use by coaches, especially in the NFL, is what I find problematic. Most coaches by nature are too conservative and for whatever reason (whether it's a fear of losing out on a sure point or a fear of being critiqued for a failed two-point conversion by the media) just don't want to take a chance to go for two, even if it means that the potential conversion would either tie the game or put you up by a score that could be achieved in one play by the opposing team (i.e. going for two when up by 1 to go up a field goal or when up by 5 to go up by a touchdown).

If you notice, coaches usually only go for two in the late stretches of games in this particular situations, not in the second quarter of games as a team tonight did (read below for that).


The Death of Two-Pointers in NCAA

What surprises me (or perhaps it shouldn't) is that the use of the two-point conversion has actually gone down in the NCAA since then, according to an NCAA article from 2008 about the subject: 50th anniversary of 2-point conversion 

This particular article shows that the use of the two-point conversion has gone down from an all-time high of over 51% of all touchdowns in 1958 (the first instance of the two-point conversion being used as a possibility to follow touchdowns) to an al-time low of only 5% of touchdowns being followed by a two-point attempt in 2007

There could be several reasons for this:

1. NCAA Overtime didn't exist until 1996. Therefore, teams who didn't want to tie a game would be more likely to take a risk on a two-point conversion in order to go for the win as opposed to settling for the tie. Now, since there can't be any ties, there is less incentive now than there was in the period preceding the overtime rules in going for the win.
2. Coaches have become more concerned with how taking such a "risk" might look to media looking for any little thing to blast the coach about should such conversions fail.
3. The success rate for the conversions isn't high enough for coaches to justify going for two unless they have to.

From the article linked above - the use of 2-pt conversions since its advent in 1958

Out of those reasons, the chart, as it's best described during a game by the play-by-play and game analysts, best fits into the third category - minimizing risk of losing points for the sake of chasing for that extra point too early.

After all, why should you go for two-point conversions when you're up by one point in the second quarter when so many more possessions in the game remain for you to score. Why risk the two-point conversion when the chances of making an extra-point via kick are way more safe?

NFL writer Michael Lombardi is a big proponent of the chart, as evidenced by the article he wrote last year on the subject. I will not disagree with him on the math part of going for two versus going for one (since 2006, PAT kicks are made on average between 98.3 and 99.5% of the time, whereas the 300 attempts of going for two during that time succeeded at a 45.7% clip - thus justifying, in Lombardi's eyes, not going for two until you absolutely have to). To be worth the risk in the long-run, you'd need to convert the two-point conversion as least half as much as you would the PAT (since the kick is worth half as much). I can see that to some degree, but....

The elements I disagree with him and others about when it comes to the use of two-point conversions and strictly sticking to the chart:

1. Why does it need to be a particular point in the game when you should "follow the chart" when going for two? Just because the percentages of how two-point conversions have historically done shouldn't be the end-all, be-all in deciding that two-pointers aren't worth the risk until the fourth quarter.
   
   I was following a game this afternoon where the Buffalo Bills were trailing 28-20 mid-way through the third quarter. After scoring a touchdown to go down by 2, I figured they might attempt a two-point conversion so they can tie the game - they didn't. They kicked the extra point to cut the lead to 28-27. The Bills went on to score another TD and didn't go for two again, although at that point I expected it even though a two-pointer could give them a full-touchdown lead as opposed to two field goals.
   
   But Brian, if they miss the two-pointer in either of those situations, they are losing out on a point that could help them later in the game. If they miss the conversion when scoring and up by 5, they'll be leaving themselves exposed to losing because the other team could kick two field goals and win.
   
   Well, the Bills took a 34-28 lead into the fourth quarter and never scored another point. However, the Tennessee Titans did - via a touchdown with about a minute left that gave them the 1-point win.
   
   On the other hand, the Pittsburgh Steelers went for two against the Bengals in the second quarter after a touchdown put them down 14-12. They went on to convert it and ended up winning the game 24-17. The conversion didn't end up playing a role in the final score as much as the non-conversion did with Tennessee. But it would have had the Bengals ended up scoring a touchdown in the waning part of the game (as the Titans did). The Bengals would have been forcing overtime if they scored, which is what the Titans didn't need to do because of the Bills not going for two after two touchdowns in the third.
   
2. If you have the chance to tie a game, do it, no matter the time of game. Yes, the math of conversions may not benefit the two-point conversion in general, but I believe they should be attempted more frequently and earlier in games.
   
   The worry that coaches and media personalities stress when going for two early in games is that you are "chasing points", which shouldn't be done if you have many more possessions left in a game to achieve more scores.
   
   However, who's to say that the Steelers, who were down by two in the second quarter after scoring a touchdown, might not score the rest of regulation time? Even though they may have 7-10 more possessions, there's no guarantee that they are able to find the end zone or have another scoring opportunity in the game again.
   
   Hell, it practically happened to the Bengals at that point in the game - they'd only go on to score three more points. Giving yourself the best chance to win might not always be by following the math of PAT vs. two point risk, but rather letting game situations at any point in the game (not just the fourth quarter) dictate your move after a touchdown is scored.
   
   In the situation described in Lombardi's story from last year, he mentioned the Packers going for two (and failing) when a touchdown put them up by 1 with about 18 game minutes left. He believes that the fourth quarter should be the only time a two-point conversion should be attempted, but if that ends up being the last score the Packers have in regulation, a one-point lead is essentially the same as a two-point lead (not taking into account a safety, which should never really be considered a serious scoring option for any team).
   
   After all, if the opposing team kicks a field goal in the Packers situation, they're up by a point in the situations where an XP is kicked prior to that (as the Titans were today) or up by two if the two point conversion fails. If the two-pointer is attempted and then converted, this gives the team added insurance should they be shutout in the final quarter and their opponent scores the necessary score (field goal or touchdown) to tie the game.
   

You best believe that had the Steelers missed the two-pointer, you would have heard critiques of the choice to "chase points" by the guys in the booth. In fact, I heard Cris Collinsworth make a comment about not agreeing with Mike Tomlin's choice to go for two before the attempt. His voice would have taken on a paternal "you should know better" tone if the conversion failed - and especially if the Steelers would have gone on to lose by only a point.

It's the conservative nature of coaches and the media perpetrating this myth to new heights that allows for this "chart" to have its place only in the fourth quarter of games.

If I have the time (or had the time - we'll see if I can really get to doing this), I'll try seeing how often teams are in the Bills position of trailing by eight in the early-to-mid stages in a game and NOT going for two after scoring a touchdown to see how often they end up losing by one.

For now, I will remain a proponent of trying to tie the game or expanding your lead to a standard score (i.e. attempting a two pointer when up by 1 so you can go up by a field goal) whenever you get the opportunity to after a touchdown, and you (nor some stupid chart) can't convince me otherwise.

Even Mike Vick Wouldn't Fight These 'Dogs - Week 7 Picks

If you're a gambler and like most people I know who gamble, you usually like to bet favorites at a high rate. If you're doing that this year, you're doing yourself wrong. Way wrong.

According to Covers.com, underdogs are covering at a record pace. If you blindly bet underdogs this year, your record would be 58-32-2 (including last night's amazing ending from a gambling perspective - I'll touch on that in a minute).

That is a percentage of over 64% - well above the necessary 52/53% mark you need to hit in order to profit (assuming you bet the same on every game). Most reasonable people would project that number will go down quite a bit (likely around 54-55%). With how much parity there is in the league, there's no telling that perhaps underdogs will still have some value for another couple weeks.

Yesterday's game featured another underdog (Seattle) covering a spread by the slightest of margins (spread started at 7 but closed anywhere between 7.5 and 9 points, depending on the book). The Niners didn't deserve to cover - but they almost did.

If you didn't see the ending, you missed out. The Seahawks were in desperation mode trailing 13-6, trying to score a miracle touchdown to force OT against the vaunted San Fran defense. On fourth down, backed into their own end zone, Russell Wilson completed a pass that was close to the first down, but an offensive penalty in the end zone caused the refs to throw a flag and rule the play a safety. Except....

Jim Harbaugh asked for a measurement of where the pass ended up. His logic - which is correct - was that if the Seahawks didn't convert the first down, the Niners would get the ball and be able to do one kneel down to end the game. Some might cry that the game was rigged and Harbaugh bet on the Seahawks, with the mindset that the Niners aren't going to lose anyways being up 9 (literally two scores) - and they're probably right.

However, the easiest path to a victory there was taking a knee and ending the game. You don't have to worry about any funny business, no matter how rare it could be. Your players won't have that extra opportunity to get injured. And you get the win, assuming the center-to-QB exchange doesn't get jacked up.


On to Week 7 NFL Picks


Fool's Gold Picks this year: 4-3 (3 straight covers - I think I'm eyeballing these better now)

Fool's Gold Pick 1: GB -5.5 at St Louis - Everyone is crowning Green Bay (once again) after an impressive throttling of previously undefeated Houston Texans. I attribute that to GB playing in desperation mode and Houston's defense coming out flat after a short week and a season-ending injury to stud linebacker Brian Cushing.

Now they go to face an under-rated Rams squad who continues to play teams close, losing by three to the Dolphins, which gave St. Louis its third straight cover. The Rams have played solid ball at home, beating three decent teams (Washington, Seattle, Arizona) straight up and like this game, were underdogs in all of those games.

Green Bay may win this game, but taking the points here is the smart move. This isn't the same GB squad of year's past. This team is a lot more inconsistent, exchanging loss/win pattern throughout the first six games of the year. Don't be a fool - take the points.

Fool's Gold Pick 2: NYG -6 vs. Washington - Wait...how could this be a bad pick? After all, the Giants just beat down on the 49ers, considered by many to be a favorite to make it to the Super Bowl this year. Last week's actual score should be a surprise, but the Giants winning shouldn't be. This is what the Giants under Eli Manning have done - they play up (or down) to their competition.  When it comes to big games and the Giants are underdogs, it's always smart to take the Giants and the points. This isn't the spot to back them though.

Washington will play them tough. Hell, they beat the Giants twice last year - including a week after a similar spot for the Giants, who won an emotional game against the Cowboys in Week 14 only to follow that up with a stinker at home against the Redskins (lost 23-10). I don't necessarily think they'll stink up the joint like last year, but I do expect this to be a tougher game than many might think.

Take the dog. (Seems to be a theme here).

Other Bets I Am Considering: Jax +4 (may be hard to pull trigger), Det +6.5 (too high a number in division game), Ariz +6.5 (so Minnesota goes from +6.5 at home against SF to -6.5 against Arizona? San Fran isn't 13 points better than Arizona. Lots of value on Arizona), Cincy pick'em (Cincy's passing attack should shred depleted Pitt D)

College bets: Oklahoma St -14 over Iowa St, WVU -2.5 over Kansas State, BYU +13 over Notre Dame (might roll the dice on Tennessee +20 against Alabama)

Enjoy your weekend everyone.

A Ray to Remember: Ray Lewis and a Reflection on My Evolution Watching Football

Can you imagine the NFL without Ray Lewis? Well, you may not need to imagine much longer. In fact, it may be a reality.

Ray - It Ain't So

Lewis left yesterday's game against the Cowboys with a torn tricep, leaving his season (and career) in serious doubt.

I don't know about you, but whenever he is done (if it is a fact that he is done now), I will definitely miss watching games and highlights featuring Lewis, probably the best and most feared linebacker that I've grown up watching.

I thought about it earlier today, and the thought simply blew my mind. Ray Lewis, part of the original Baltimore Ravens squad in 1996, started in the league when I was in middle school. Since then, I've gotten two college degrees (neither of which I've used to their fullest as of yet - that's another story), had three dogs come and/or go in my life, stood up in four weddings, among plenty of other random crap that I'm sure I could come up with.

The point - Ray Lewis has been a staple in my football watching lifetime. Back when he joined the league was around the time I would have a weekly pick'em pool with me, my dad and two neighbors down the street.

When I got my first job at Jewel and met many people who would become my best friends, that's when the confidence pools started, where you pick each game and then rank them based on how confident you are in them winning.

As a little bit of cash flowed in came the online betting - which I still do to this day. Add in fantasy football, my constant blogging about football and my recent introduction to DirecTV, and I've experienced just about every aspect of football in the past 16.5 years aside from playing it competitively.

All the while, Ray Lewis developed into and maintained elite status as the best linebacker in the league. My experiences with football-related items have evolved, from picking for or against Baltimore in a fun pool with my neighbors as a teenager to worrying about whether I should start my running back against his defense in fantasy football - normally I wouldn't unless I had no other options.

Some might remember him negatively for the obstruction of justice charge involving a double murder that occurred at a Super Bowl party in 2000, a year before he would go on to win Super Bowl MVP in the Ravens' first-ever franchise title. While I can't blame people for holding that against him, since he was acquitted of the most serious of charges, I won't hark too much on that memory of him when thinking back on his career.

When I think of Ray Lewis, I'll think of the scariest guy to step on the field. I never thought someone could look scary in purple - I was wrong.

I hope this isn't the end of his career. No one matched his energy - from his rookie year as a 21-year old kid to a 37-year old grizzled vet. If it is the end of his career, a part of my childhood NFL experiences watching the game has gone with him.

Rocktober: The Best Sports Month (and Week 6 Picks)

Yesterday was a very sad day for me to bury the remains of my World Series bets, and boy, did the Giants and Tigers help speed up that burial process by beating the Reds and Athletics, respectively.

It still doesn't change the fact that for me, this is my favorite month of sports. This month contains the start of the MLB playoffs, the start of conference play in college football and the initial separation of the pretenders and contenders in the NFL.

There's also the start of NBA training camp and for you hockey fans, the start of another great hockey season. Sorry hockey fans - from everything I've heard, it doesn't look good for this year. But I said the same thing about the NBA, and they got their act together for an abbreviated schedule. And for my friends (ok, friend) who watches and bets on the WNBA, you got their finals going on right now.

This month has just about every sport that Joe American gives a crap about. While my World Series bets didn't pan out (none of the six - yes....six - even made it to baseball's final four), I'll still be paying close attention. Hell, maybe I'll make a seventh bet and take my initial hunch entering the postseason (Detroit).

If you're a sports fan and don't like this month, I seriously doubt the sincerity of your enjoyment of sports.

NFL Picks for Week 6

Last week, I went 9-4 with my picks. Not all of them were posted - I've been doing a really shitty job of updating my picks. I'll try doing a better job of posting them, especially since I'm doing a little better as of late.

Bets won: StL +2, Ariz/StL Under 19 1H, Cle/NYG Over 43.5, KC +6, SF -10, NO/SD Over 53.5, NO/SD Over 27 1H, NYJ +10, Hou/NYJ Under 40.5

Bets lost: Cle +8, KC Money Line, Sea/Car Over 42.5, Jax +6 (oops on that one - big whiff)

For this week, here are my picks:

Fool's Gold 1 - Dallas +3.5 at Baltimore - People will think of these things (Dallas's last game, Baltimore's record and defensive reputation) and be willing to fork over their cash on Baltimore. Yes, Dallas took a dump on their home field a couple Monday nights ago against the Bears. But Baltimore isn't as good as their 4-1 record indicates. Outside of their first week game when they blew out Cincy, each of their last four games have come down to the final possession. Despite the points allowed per game (17.8, good for 7th in the league), their defense is fairly average (14th in yards per play, including 22nd in yards per pass attempt). Playing Kansas City, who somehow only mustered 6 points with 214 rushing yards, will help with that PPG. Dallas comes into the game rested and hungry for a win - take the points.

Fool's Gold 2 - Buffalo +4.5 at Arizona - One of the things I've learned over the years when it comes to gambling: when a team looks just so bad and pathetic over a couple week stretch, the very next week is a very good time to cash in on them. And by cashing on them, I mean actually betting them. Most people see Buffalo's last couple weeks (allowing 48.5 points & 600 yards A GAME), numbers that certainly scream to most that I should probably bet on the other team. That's usually the perfect time to strike. Arizona is not a true 4-1 team (after watching them last week, I'm convinced they will fade, likely to about .500 by year's end). Their offense is terrible. They'll be starting a third-string RB behind a crappy offensive line. Expect this to be an ugly game. In ugly games, I like to take the points. So yeah, take the points.

Other (possible) bets: GB +3.5, NYJ -3/3.5, Mia -4, Cin/Cle Over 43

NCAA Week 7

Tex Tech +4, Purdue -1, Pitt +3, Duke +10, Min +3.5

Good luck to everyone with their teams/picks this week. Enjoy another great October weekend of sports.

Sox To Be You: How the South Siders Have Fared Recently in Last Month of MLB Season

At this moment, I should be getting ready to go to a White Sox playoff game. At least that's what my hope was when I bought tickets to Game 1 of the ALDS a couple weeks ago.

However, as the White Sox have done many times over in the past decade, they faded into the sunset as Detroit's pitching hit their stride which helped them overtake Chicago without looking back.

It'll be tough to watch the Tigers when I thought a couple weeks ago it was going to be the White Sox, but I'll get over it. The expectations weren't too high for the year, but as the team starts to prove your expectations wrong, you start to slightly adjust your thoughts. Other White Sox fans - you can't tell me that your expectations didn't change when you saw them enter the All-Star break with the lead. Even though we weren't expected to win the division, I am very disappointed because down the stretch, I did expect to win it.

Here's an example of how the White Sox have done since 2000 before September and in September:

	Entering Sept
	Record	Place	Games Back or Ahead
2001	68-65	3rd	Down 7.5 games	to Cleveland
2002	65-70	2nd	Down 14 games	to Minnesota
2003	73-64	1st	Up 1.5 games	to Minnesota
2004	64-66	3rd	Down 8.5 games	to Minnesota
2005	80-51	1st	Up 7 games	to Cleveland
2006	78-56	2nd	Down 4.5 games	to Det
2007	57-78	5th	Down 20.5 games	to Cleveland
2008	77-59	T-1st	Up 1/2 game	to Minnesota
2009	64-68	3rd	Down 6 games	to Det
2010	72-60	2nd	Down 4 games	to Minnesota
2011	68-66	3rd	Down 6 games	to Det
2012	72-59	1st	Up 2 games	to Det

And here's how things ended in Sept/Oct

					Champ
	Sep/Oct	Final Record	Final Finish	Final Games Back/Ahead	or 2nd
2001	(15-14)	83-79	3rd place	Down 8 games	Cleveland
2002	(16-11)	81-81	2nd place	Down 13.5 games	Minnesota
2003	(13-12)	86-76	2nd place	Down 4 games	Minnesota
2004	(19-13)	83-79	2nd place	Down 9 games	Minnesota
2005	(19-12)	99-63	1st place	Up by 6 games	Cleveland
2006	(12-16)	90-72	3rd place	Down 6 games	Minnesota
2007	(15-12)	72-90	4th place	Down 24 games	Cleveland
2008	(12-15)	89-74	1st place	won division (1 gm playoff)	Minnesota
2009	(15-15)	79-83	3rd place	Down 7 games	Detroit/Minn
2010	(16-14)	88-74	2nd place	Down 6 games	Minnesota
2011	(11-14)	79-83	3rd place	Down 16 games	Detroit
2012	(12-18)	85-77	2nd place	Down 3 games	Detroit

In this twelve year span, the team in first place entering September has won eight out of the 12 division titles. The White Sox (2003, 2012) and Detroit (2006, 2009 - lost tiebreaker to Minn) were the teams who blew their division leads in the last month.

If you notice, the only year the White Sox gained ground on the competition closest to them was in 2002, when they gained that magical half game to finish 13.5 back of the Twins. You can say 2006 was gaining, but the Sox needed a one-game playoff to win the division.

Otherwise, in the past 12 years, we haven't seen a year where the White Sox had a better record than the team they are chasing or who is chasing them. Since the World Series win in 2005, they've barely broken .500 a couple times but otherwise have dragged to the finish line.

Sure, the Cubs are known as Completely Useless By September to the folks who like to stir up the White Sox/Cubs "rivalry", but when it comes to September, the White Sox have been pretty much completely useless.

You can tell me that this year was better than expected, and the March/April version of me would agree with you. But the September/October version of me feels like they let the fans down, And with how they've had problems closing out seasons as of late, you can't blame me for being disappointed.

A Better Bettor: #BolekBestBets Returns! NFL Week 5

Sometimes you need a period of time to clear your head after a bad stretch of time in life or a major event that crushes you emotionally. My time to myself wasn't relating to a life-or-death topic, but it did require me to take a step back.

Of course, if you read last week, you'd know I'm referencing my gambling. I had to take a week away from it to reflect on how bad I did and what I can do to become a better bettor.

In my bad run, one thing I am proud of is that I did not "chase" (or bet bigger to "chase" the losses I had in the week) - otherwise, my bad run a few weeks ago would have been an ugly site. The double down theory is not a good one when you lose 21 of 26 bets in a week.

In my week off, I realized several things

(1) I need to become more disciplined. This means not always needing to bet something every day. This is  typically a losing strategy for an inexperienced gambler who needs to create action every day. If you can find a good line, bet it. If you can't, lay off.

(2) Less bets might be better. Sometimes, I've been making bets on lines that I somewhat like when I should be focusing on lines that I really like or love. Being more selective should help me out.

(3) I don't need bets to enjoy NFL. Actually, I don't need fantasy football either, but I know that's not leaving my life anytime soon, so why fight it? Watching Week 4 of the NFL without a single wager was refreshing - I was actually able to enjoy the games on their own merit as opposed to rooting for particular outcomes. Even though I'm going back to wagering on some games, it makes me happy to say that I know I don't need gambling (or fantasy football) to enjoy NFL.

Note: Even though I may be down in my lifetime gambling, in the past couple years, I have made a concerted effort to become a better gambler and make it a very small part of my yearly income)

Without further ado, here's some lines that stick out this weekend and the games I'll be betting.

Balt  at Kansas City +6 (Fools Gold Pick) - This game has Fool's Gold written all over it. If you look at KC's numbers, they have outgained their opponents in all four games. Their 1-3 record is more the result of a -13 (yes, -13) turnover differential. That's one of those stats that tends to even out at some point. I think KC will pull off the upset despite John Harbaugh's spotless record against the spread after an extended rest in his short coaching career. KC has a desperation feel to it too. I'll be betting this on Sunday.

StL +2 vs. Arizona - Game tonight. Just bet it. So far, NFC West teams are 8-0 (7-1 if you count the Seahawks "win" as a loss vs the Packers) at home this year. Cardinals escaped with a win last week to remain unbeaten, but the travel on a short week usually favors the home team, who didn't have to go anywhere Sunday night.

Cle +8.5 at NYG - I should have bet this when it opened at +10, but I was still in hiatus phase. I may lay off, but I think Cleveland is better than their 0-4 record shows. They impressed against Baltimore last week, with the game almost going into overtime had they completed a pass with no time left. Plus, NYG is coming off a tough divisional game and doesn't usually cover big spreads at home.

SF -9.5 vs. Buff - I'm playing emotional factor here as well. Buffalo has to feel decimated after feeling like they had the division lead and a 2-game cushion on the Patriots at the tip of their fingers. Dating back to last year, San Fran has won 9 of its last 10 home games (only loss was to NYG), with covers in all of the straight up victories. I look for San Fran to romp on Sunday.

Lines I'm looking at/considering: NO -4, Den +6

NCAA Week 6

Northwestern +2.5, Purdue +3, Ariz +9.5

Have a good day and good luck with your teams/bets this week.

MLB - A Look Back (Preseason Predictions) & A Look Forward (Playoff Preview)

Note: I wrote most of this on Saturday (Sept 29th) under the notion that the White Sox fade would continue (it did), but I did not expect the Athletics to steal the division away from the Rangers, so my predictions are edited as such.

Please feel free to offer your own post-season predictions. Enjoy.

Good day to you all. I hope you enjoyed the end of the baseball season as much as I did - except for the White Sox not making the playoffs part. For a team that was projected to win about 75 games, they held their own most of the season, but the Tigers' last season surge timed out perfectly with the White Sox Swoon.

Before breaking down the playoffs, I'd like to see how well my projections from late February ended up turning out.

Here's a look at it, just so you have proof: http://b-boknows.blogspot.com/2012/02/were-talkin-baseball-2012-mlb-preview.html


PLAYOFFS?!?
What went right: Giants, Nationals, Tigers, Rangers, Yankees, Cardinals
What went wrong: Marlins, Phillies, Angels, Rays
Who replaced the wrong: Braves, Reds, A's, Orioles

Notes: I had the Nats as a Wild Card and Cardinals as a division champion - but they both made the playoffs, so I'm happy to get it somewhat right. The Nationals surprised even the most optimistic of people on what they did this year. Question is - will the shutting down of Strasburg hurt them in the playoffs? Short series requires good pitching - one less great pitcher has to diminish their chances of winning it all.  I'd love to see the Reds advance to the World Series (I made a bet in early August for them to win it all at 10/1 odds), but I wonder if they have enough consistent arms to face the Giants, who have developed into a well-rounded team who have somehow gotten better without Mr. Testosterone (Melky Cabrera).

Can you believe that during the season, the Athletics were as high as 100/1 just to win their division? This was at the beginning of July when the Athletics were a season-high 13 games back from Texas. At that time, Oakland was 37-42 - they would go on to close the season on a 57-26 run to overtake the Rangers in the AL West. I like this team, but I don't like their draw (vs. Detroit). I see Detroit taking the series in 4.

Miguel Cabrera: From triple the legal limit (maybe not that high) to Triple Crown

The Tigers woke up in September after being out of first for pretty much the whole year. I have my money on the Rangers and A's to win the World Series (among 5 teams I bet - others include the Reds, Phillies and D-Backs), so I'm obviously rooting for one of them to make it there and win it all. However, I have the Tigers pegged as my AL favorites now. Getting two starts from Verlander (should the series go long), arguably the best starting pitcher remaining in the playoffs, with the lineup they have, I think they'll be able to overtake the Rangers this year and advance to the playoffs.

OVER/UNDERS (Total projected wins & my predictions)

How I did: 17-13

My best division was the NL West, which I was able to project 4 out of 5 teams totals correctly (missing on the Padres, who I had going under their projected total of 73.5). I also did well with the AL West, missing only on the Mariners.

I did below average with projecting the AL Central team's over/unders (I got the White Sox over & Twins under right).

I didn't guess any of the 30 teams exact records, but I was within 3 wins on ten separate teams.

The teams I did the worst predictions for: Baltimore 65 wins (won 93, "only" 28 wins off), Miami 92 wins (won 69 - 23 off), Oakland 74 wins (they won 94), Boston 87 wins (they won 69) and Cincy 80 wins (won 97). I find it funny that I have World Series bets alive with two of these teams


Individual Predictions:

What went right: Miguel Cabrera for AL MVP; David Price for AL Cy Young
What went wrong: Hanley for NL MVP; Halladay for NL Cy; Stanton for NL HR leader; Jose Bautista (in the Feb preview, I put Jose Cabrera, so perhaps I should get half credit for forgetting his name like a dumbass)

Notes: These votes won't be known till next month, but I feel good about Cabrera's chances of winning the MVP - he'd be the second Tiger in a row to win the MVP (Verlander). Likewise, Price is among a few AL pitchers who should be considered for the Cy (Chris Sale, Felix Hernandez, Jered Weaver - hell, Verlander with a "down" year compared to 2011 should also be considered).

When I went all-in with the Marlins, I set myself up for failure when thinking Hanley might win MVP this year. Even when healthy this year, Halladay wasn't Cy Young material. Stanton did finish top-5 in the NL in home runs, but finished way behind Ryan Braun. Jose Bautista (or Jose Cabrera as I called him in Feb) was doing well before getting hurt in July (averaging a HR every 15/16 at bats). He may have had a chance to win it. Oh well. I guess the Hanley & Roy predictions were the only really bad ones.

2012 Playoff Predictions (Version 3.0):

AL Wild Card (one game playoff): Rangers over O's (as long as it's not a one-run game or goes into extras)
NL Wild Card (one game playoff): Braves over Cards (Kris Medlen doesn't lose)

AL Divisional Round: Tigers over A's (I hope I'm wrong here); Rangers over Yanks
NL Divisional Round: Giants over Reds (I hope I'm wrong here too); Braves over Nationals

ALCS: Tigers over Rangers (initial prediction: Yankees over Tigers)
NLCS: Giants over Braves (initial prediction: Marlins over Giants)

World Series: Tigers over Giants (initial prediction: Marlins over Yankees)


Who I have left for World Series bets placed in-season (Rangers - 100 to win 450; A's - 30 to win 1200; Reds - 50 to win 500)