Those of you who know me are aware that I love the act of ranking more than any one particular type of thing that can be ranked. With that in mind, with a view toward emphasizing the rankings part of Ruby Rankings, this is the first ever RUBY RANKINGS MOVIE REVIEW!!! Best yet, I won't spoil crap (except spoiling whether the film was good or bad).
Film: Her (2013)
Dir: Spike Jonze (also writer, producer)
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams, Scarlett Johansson
Allow me to oversimplify things for a moment. A lot of movies are predictable without being inevitable. By that, I mean, you can see how the film is going to end, but the film hasn't really earned that ending. It's possible to make a perfectly good film this way, and a lot of films have to be like this. Disney films, for example. Why did things work out for Merida in Brave? The short answer is: because, duh, she's the hero. She's a strong independent good-role-model type, and the point of Disney/Pixar films is that these sorts of people win. I very much enjoyed Brave on a lot of levels. Feeling emotionally invested in the ending wasn't one of them.
Good movies, more often than bad movies, have endings that are, ok, predictable, more or less, but also inevitable. The writers, directors, and actors have really shown their work, making a film that works towards a very good payoff. That you can predict the Act 3 payoff at the close of Act 2 is no knock on these films, and a lot of masterpieces are in this category. The Usual Suspects is one of these, depending on how much you've heard about it. I raved about Gravity all winter. You knew how it was going to end, emotionally, even if you didn't know the details. It's emotionally fulfilling for a cycle of rebirth to come to the 360th degree. Even films like Hot Fuzz are like this; I'm not saying that you ever know the exact details of how something's going to end, but after the reveal makes things so absurd that the film sort of explodes out of the confines of its genre, you know the ending is going to be absurd to match.
Only a few films have endings that are perfectly inevitable but completely unpredictable. These are the ones where, after Act 2, you can't imagine in your wildest dreams how Act 3 is going to transpire, but after you've seen it, you can't imagine any other way it could've gone. You realize that something truly new happened. Many of my very favorite films are like this, such as All About Eve, Moonrise Kingdom, and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
So, what does that have to do with Her? I'm getting there. But first, let's talk about the plot, yes?
Her is about Joaquin Phoenix's attempts to find true love. It's also about artificial intelligence, organic intelligence, free will vs. mechanism, physical vs. spiritual, and a lot of other philosophical-type metaphysical-type things. But at its core, the story's told from the perspective of a man who's trying to find love (and getting over a break-up, and having things get complicated, etc.). It's a fairly conventional narrative with a very creative, sophisticated philosophical overlay.
If the movie's not exactly explosively innovative, there are definitely individual scenes that qualify as such. In particular, the film contained what I think is the best scene with a completely black screen as I've seen in film. There's also some true hilarity, although less and less as the film goes on.
Do note that an enormous percentage of the screen time is focused directly on Joaquin Phoenix's mustachioed face. Like, a ridiculously huge percentage. There are long conversations during which Theodore and Samantha (the not-quite-disembodied voice of Scarlett Johansson) simply talk while the camera is fixed on Phoenix's face. I mean, listen. I find his face quite pleasant to look at. So, that worked for me.
Why should I, the hypothetical reader asks, go see Her?
You should go see Her because it's a very well-made story of love and loss with enough complexities to keep things interesting (not exciting; I don't think it's ever exciting, but you're not going to Her for excitement). You should see Her because the colors and sounds are beautiful, and the individual scenes are top-notch. Again, I'm not convinced the overall narrative is a triumph or anything, but the individual scenes are so well-crafted that this movie should easily win Best Original Screenplay. The score is glorious, as is to be expected when it's created mostly by Arcade Fire with some help from Karen O. Perhaps very intentionally, it really aims to be something of a sensory experience. The filming and camera work reinforce the subject matter quite well.
Any drawbacks?
It's a little long, at 126 minutes. That is to say, there are movies that come in at 126 minutes that I think could have benefited from being expanded. This was not in that category. There were two particular instances at which I thought the movie could've ended, and one at which I thought it actually was going to end (during the song "Photograph"). I'm not certain the narrative couldn't have stood on its own if it stopped there, but what happens at the end really is an emotionally mature conclusion. It might not be the one we want, but it's the one we should learn to accept.
So, back to the ridiculous idiosyncratic discussion of narrative theory...
Right, right. In short, Her is a very well-crafted example of the second kind of film. It was a top-notch effort, with an ending that was truly emotionally earned, but it didn't shatter any of my worldviews. Her is something that any reflective person should take in, reflect on, and not dismiss.
There were two films I saw this year that I hoped would be true masterpieces. Gravity was a true masterpiece. Her wasn't, and the point I'm trying to make is this: we should be all right with that.
RANKING SYSTEM!!!
Of course we need a ranking system. Basically, I've seen 412 full-length films in my life, and I've created a "Medal" system as follows:
Unranked: Bottom 50%
Bronze (B): Roughly one of the top 50% of films I've seen.
Double Bronze (BB): Top 40%.
Triple Bronze (BBB): Top 25%.
Silver (S): Top 15%
Double Silver (SS): Top 12%
Triple Silver (SSS): Top 7.5%
Gold (G): Top 5%
Double Gold (GG): Top 2.5%, roughly one of the 10 best films I've ever seen.
Triple Gold (GGG): Top 1%, roughly one of the 5 best films I've ever seen.
FINAL VERDICT ON HER:
Her was very good but not great. It was one of the very best films I've seen in the last 3 or 4 years, and a worthy Oscar nominee, pretty firmly in the "must-see" category. It wasn't a game-changer for me, though, and I'm not sure how it could have been.
Borderline BBB/S.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Monday, January 13, 2014
Some thoughts on the 2014 Australian Open!
Hey everyone. For as much as I love sports, Tennis is the only one I actually played in an organized capacity after the age of 13. Just like most athletic endeavors, I found myself very knowledgeable about what was going on and completely unable to make my body do the things it had to do. Alas!
But now that I'm, ostensibly, grown up, I remain a tennis fan. I watch the Slams pretty religiously, and at least nominally keep tabs on the remainder of the season. So, I'm pretty thrilled about the 2014 season finally starting up! Tonight (Day 2 of the Open) I finally look at the Men's and Women's Singles Draws, and here are some preliminary thoughts:
Men's Draw
-Wasn't Jordan Thompson v. #20 Jerzy Janowicz fun? Now, even after he got up 2-0, I gave the kid maybe a 40% chance of taking the match - come on, Janowicz can't lose to a guy making his TOUR DEBUT, eh? - but those first two sets were certainly fun to watch. A total of 5 unforced errors over those two sets will give the 19-year-old something to look back on fondly as he tries to climb into the Top 100 and the Tour scene.
- I think #11 Milos Raonic has a pretty good shot to get to the QFs to face Nadal. He'll have to take out (if seeding holds) Hanescu, #22 Dimitrov, and #5 Del Potro to do so, but I think that's a fairly kind road. I am a big JMDP fan, but with all the injuries he's been very inconsistent lately (truth be told, I haven't heard anything about his present health). It wouldn't shock me if, like last year, he made at least one Grand Slam SF this year and also bowed out in R64 of a Grand Slam.
- I really like the 32nd of Cilic v. Granollers and Brands v. #18 Simon. Whoever gets out of that foursome - keep your eye on Cilic - is set to face #10 Tsonga. Whoever wins that match will face a beatable #6 Federer for a berth in the QFs.
- #7 Tomas Berdych (crazy striped shirt and all) is a popular SF pick, and he should be. The other seed in his 16th is #32 Dodig, and #12 Tommy Haas already retired from his 8th. That leaves #19 Kevin Anderson as Berdych's only big-name competition before a QF match-up with #3 Ferrer. Berdych is definitely the kind of player who can beat Anderson at the big man's own game, and Ferrer is the usual whipping boy among the Top 4 Seeds. If Berdych and Ferrer meet, I call it a coin flip.
- The bottom quarter seems to be the most straightforward, and the most likely QF match-up in the whole tournament, I think, is #8 Wawrinka v. #2 Djokovic. I'd be *very* surprised if they didn't meet in the last 8.
Joe's Picks:
QFs: #11 Raonic v. #1 Nadal; #10 Tsonga v. #4 Murray; #7 Berdych v. #3 Ferrer; #8 Wawrinka v. #2 Djokovic
SFs: What a Shock!!! #1 Nadal v. #4 Murray; #3 Ferrer v. #2 Djokovic!!! I NEVER expected THAT.
Finals: #1 Nadal v. #2 Djokovic
Winner: #2 Djokovic
Women's Draw
Admittedly, I follow the Women's game a little less closer than the Men's, but I still follow it, which is a lot more than most of my tennis-watching fans can say. I do often catch myself cheering for the prettier player, and I keep reminding myself that this is not proper, and whatnot, but I digress. Like on the Men's side, I have my favorite players in this draw as well.
- Obviously, #1 Serena Williams is going to win. Right? Yeah. Probably. I'll give her, maybe, 60%, which is probably short-changing her. Interestingly, Serena's best record is in the Australian Open (5 wins in 13 tries), but she's gone longer without hoisting the trophy than she has for the other 3 Slams. Interestingly enough, she's never reached the QFs without winning the tournament. To get to the QFs, she'll have to beat #31 Hantuchova - not a pushover - and either #17 Stosur or #14 Ivanovic.
- And who will Williams face in the QFs? Yesterday was a bad day for the Italian women, with #12 Vinci and #7 Errani both falling. That leaves #30 Bouchard and #18 Flipkens as the remaining seeds. Obviously, the wild card is - hopefully, for we Yanks - going to be 18-year-old American Madison Keys, who is currently 36th but is predicted by many to leap as high as the Top 10 by year's end. Keys doesn't have an easy path; her first match is against Zheng Jie, the 2010 Aussie Semifinalist who defeated Keys in the first round of the 2012 Australian Open. However, an 18-year-old vs. a 30-year-old is quite different from 16-vs.-28, and Keys should be the favorite. She'll then have Flipkens and Bouchard to contend with, in that order. Call me a homer, but I'll say Keys makes her first big breakthrough here.
- Much like Serena, #4 Li Na has seen her main stumbling block to the Semifinals - #6 Petra Kvitova (a favorite player of Joe's, alas) - fall in the first round. Unlike Serena, though, she won't find her path a cakewalk, as #26 Safarova, #15 Lisicki, and especially #9 Kerber are significant threats. I still like Li to win this quarter, but would not be surprised if Kerber, Lisicki, or maybe even an unseeded opponent like Luksika Kumkhum, who looked fantastic taking out Kvitova, got there instead.
- The third quarter is #3 Sharapova's to lose, but lose she might. The winner of #8 Jelena Jankovic and #11 Simona Halep (who is one of the bust players in the world, ha ha! But seriously. Look up her story, which raises, among other things, interesting sports ethics questions) will pose a serious threat.
- Finally, call me an unabashed #5 Agnieszka Radwanska fan. She and #10 Wozniacki - Rory McIlroy's newly ringed fiancée - should be the best QF match if it happens. Obviously, though, #2 Victoria Azarenka, who is looking for a three-peat in Australia, is Serena Williams's biggest threat.
Joe's Picks:
QFs: #1 Williams v. Keys; #4 Li v. Kumkhum; #11 Halep v. #3 Sharapova; #5 Radwanska v. #2 Azarenka
SFs: #1 Williams v. #4 Li; #11 Halep v. #2 Azarenka
Finals: #1 Williams v. #2 Azarenka
Winner: #1 Williams
Let me know why I'm an idiot! Time to go back to my room and watch all of the people I just put in the SFs lose and make me look dumb.
But now that I'm, ostensibly, grown up, I remain a tennis fan. I watch the Slams pretty religiously, and at least nominally keep tabs on the remainder of the season. So, I'm pretty thrilled about the 2014 season finally starting up! Tonight (Day 2 of the Open) I finally look at the Men's and Women's Singles Draws, and here are some preliminary thoughts:
Men's Draw
-Wasn't Jordan Thompson v. #20 Jerzy Janowicz fun? Now, even after he got up 2-0, I gave the kid maybe a 40% chance of taking the match - come on, Janowicz can't lose to a guy making his TOUR DEBUT, eh? - but those first two sets were certainly fun to watch. A total of 5 unforced errors over those two sets will give the 19-year-old something to look back on fondly as he tries to climb into the Top 100 and the Tour scene.
- I think #11 Milos Raonic has a pretty good shot to get to the QFs to face Nadal. He'll have to take out (if seeding holds) Hanescu, #22 Dimitrov, and #5 Del Potro to do so, but I think that's a fairly kind road. I am a big JMDP fan, but with all the injuries he's been very inconsistent lately (truth be told, I haven't heard anything about his present health). It wouldn't shock me if, like last year, he made at least one Grand Slam SF this year and also bowed out in R64 of a Grand Slam.
- I really like the 32nd of Cilic v. Granollers and Brands v. #18 Simon. Whoever gets out of that foursome - keep your eye on Cilic - is set to face #10 Tsonga. Whoever wins that match will face a beatable #6 Federer for a berth in the QFs.
- #7 Tomas Berdych (crazy striped shirt and all) is a popular SF pick, and he should be. The other seed in his 16th is #32 Dodig, and #12 Tommy Haas already retired from his 8th. That leaves #19 Kevin Anderson as Berdych's only big-name competition before a QF match-up with #3 Ferrer. Berdych is definitely the kind of player who can beat Anderson at the big man's own game, and Ferrer is the usual whipping boy among the Top 4 Seeds. If Berdych and Ferrer meet, I call it a coin flip.
- The bottom quarter seems to be the most straightforward, and the most likely QF match-up in the whole tournament, I think, is #8 Wawrinka v. #2 Djokovic. I'd be *very* surprised if they didn't meet in the last 8.
Joe's Picks:
QFs: #11 Raonic v. #1 Nadal; #10 Tsonga v. #4 Murray; #7 Berdych v. #3 Ferrer; #8 Wawrinka v. #2 Djokovic
SFs: What a Shock!!! #1 Nadal v. #4 Murray; #3 Ferrer v. #2 Djokovic!!! I NEVER expected THAT.
Finals: #1 Nadal v. #2 Djokovic
Winner: #2 Djokovic
Women's Draw
Admittedly, I follow the Women's game a little less closer than the Men's, but I still follow it, which is a lot more than most of my tennis-watching fans can say. I do often catch myself cheering for the prettier player, and I keep reminding myself that this is not proper, and whatnot, but I digress. Like on the Men's side, I have my favorite players in this draw as well.
- Obviously, #1 Serena Williams is going to win. Right? Yeah. Probably. I'll give her, maybe, 60%, which is probably short-changing her. Interestingly, Serena's best record is in the Australian Open (5 wins in 13 tries), but she's gone longer without hoisting the trophy than she has for the other 3 Slams. Interestingly enough, she's never reached the QFs without winning the tournament. To get to the QFs, she'll have to beat #31 Hantuchova - not a pushover - and either #17 Stosur or #14 Ivanovic.
- And who will Williams face in the QFs? Yesterday was a bad day for the Italian women, with #12 Vinci and #7 Errani both falling. That leaves #30 Bouchard and #18 Flipkens as the remaining seeds. Obviously, the wild card is - hopefully, for we Yanks - going to be 18-year-old American Madison Keys, who is currently 36th but is predicted by many to leap as high as the Top 10 by year's end. Keys doesn't have an easy path; her first match is against Zheng Jie, the 2010 Aussie Semifinalist who defeated Keys in the first round of the 2012 Australian Open. However, an 18-year-old vs. a 30-year-old is quite different from 16-vs.-28, and Keys should be the favorite. She'll then have Flipkens and Bouchard to contend with, in that order. Call me a homer, but I'll say Keys makes her first big breakthrough here.
- Much like Serena, #4 Li Na has seen her main stumbling block to the Semifinals - #6 Petra Kvitova (a favorite player of Joe's, alas) - fall in the first round. Unlike Serena, though, she won't find her path a cakewalk, as #26 Safarova, #15 Lisicki, and especially #9 Kerber are significant threats. I still like Li to win this quarter, but would not be surprised if Kerber, Lisicki, or maybe even an unseeded opponent like Luksika Kumkhum, who looked fantastic taking out Kvitova, got there instead.
- The third quarter is #3 Sharapova's to lose, but lose she might. The winner of #8 Jelena Jankovic and #11 Simona Halep (who is one of the bust players in the world, ha ha! But seriously. Look up her story, which raises, among other things, interesting sports ethics questions) will pose a serious threat.
- Finally, call me an unabashed #5 Agnieszka Radwanska fan. She and #10 Wozniacki - Rory McIlroy's newly ringed fiancée - should be the best QF match if it happens. Obviously, though, #2 Victoria Azarenka, who is looking for a three-peat in Australia, is Serena Williams's biggest threat.
Joe's Picks:
QFs: #1 Williams v. Keys; #4 Li v. Kumkhum; #11 Halep v. #3 Sharapova; #5 Radwanska v. #2 Azarenka
SFs: #1 Williams v. #4 Li; #11 Halep v. #2 Azarenka
Finals: #1 Williams v. #2 Azarenka
Winner: #1 Williams
Let me know why I'm an idiot! Time to go back to my room and watch all of the people I just put in the SFs lose and make me look dumb.
Saturday, January 4, 2014
NFL PLAYOFFS?! YAYYY! ^__^ WILD CARD SATURDAY: Predictions, Analysis, and Snark
Everyone! It's NFL Playoff time! This is, obviously, a good thing, a seasonal consolation for those of us who return to school around this time every year. It's an excuse to stay inside out of the cold. It's an excuse to drink, whether in joy or agony. Most of all, it's about 40 hours of fun spread out over 4 weekends.
Before I take a look at this year's playoff games, let's take a quick look at the teams I picked to get into the playoffs. In the AFC, I snagged 3 of the 4 division winners (Patriots, Broncos, and Colts, all of who were never really in danger), and admitted that I really was not confident in my Ravens pick. I did have the Bengals as my first wild card, noting that their offense was the probably the third-best in the AFC, behind the Broncos and Pats. Well, what do you know: the top 3 AFC scoring offenses were the Broncos, Pats, and Bengal; the Chargers sneaked ahead of the Bengals into 3rd place in total yards. I really liked Cleveland coming into this year, and took a flyer on them as the last wild-card team. That... didn't work, but, whatever. Gordon was fun to watch.
Predicted: 1) Broncos; 2) Ravens; 3) Patriots; 4) Colts; 5) Bengals; 6) Browns
Actual: 1) Broncos; 2) Patriots; 3) Bengals; 4) Colts; 5) Chiefs; 6) Chargers.
I picked the Broncos to get to the Super Bowl. Really went out on a limb there.
Like in the AFC, I managed to pick 4 of the 6 NFC teams, although it was a little more jumbled here. In the East, noting that no one had any bloody idea what would happen, I picked the Cowboys to win. Of the Philadelphia Eagles, I wrote: "[they] will be one of three things: 1) the most exciting playoff team in the NFL, 2) the most exciting mediocre team in the NFL, or 3) the most exciting trainwreck in the NFL." I am thrilled that they are pretty darn close to #1. I expected #2.5. In the North, I had the Packers, but with 12 wins, not 8 and a half. I had the Saints in the playoffs as the 6-seed (bingo!) but was (like virtually everyone) mistaken about which team would go 12-4 to take the South. In the West, I got the two squads, but had them switched.
Predicted: 1) 49ers; 2) Packers; 3) Falcons; 4) Cowboys; 5) Seahawks; 6) Saints
Actual: 1) Seahawks; 2) Panthers; 3) Eagles; 4) Packers; 5) 49ers; 6) Saints
Here, I picked the Packers. Ultimately, I had a rematch of Super Bowl XXXII - the first one I watched! - going the other way, with Rodgers getting his second ring.
So, that was the plan. I'm gonna give those picks a B. I got all the ones that were more likely than not, and both of my Super Bowl teams made it. We now, however, have an entire season's worth of games and statistics and storylines to take into account, so perhaps we can be even more successful going forward!
Fat chance. I'd call three of this weekend's four games a coin-flip, but I think it's more like four. Here's my Informed Analysis(c)(notreally) of this weekend's games:
(5) Kansas City @ (4) Indianapolis - 4:35 Saturday
Kansas City surprised a lot of people with their 9-0 start, but came way back down to earth with a 2-5 finish. Those five losses came to the Broncos, Broncos, Chargers, Chargers... and Colts, albeit in a game that didn't have much meaning for either team. The Colts played in the easiest division in the NFL this year; the Jaguars never had much of a chance, and while I wasn't shocked the Texans missed the playoffs - I had them stumbling to a flat 8-8 - I don't think anyone envisioned them deciding whether to keep or trade the #1 overall pick. Even the Titans, at 7-9, had the worst record of any division runner-up.
Chiefs Offense
... starts and ends with Jamaal Charles, is how that sentence goes. Charles was 3rd in the NFL in rushing this year, the only player in the pass-heavy AFC to be in the top 6. He was tied for the most rushing TDs with 12, which is likely the lowest total ever in a 16-game season (I only checked back to 2003). The NFL these days is very different from the game that Priest Holmes (27 in 2003), Shaun Alexander (27 in 2005), and LaDainian Tomlinson (28 in 2006) played only a few years ago. Even in a run-depressed NFL, it's clear that Charles has to be on any intelligible shortlist of offensive MVP candidates. That's in large part due to his amazing consistency catching the ball out of the backfield too; despite being the single-game receiving yards leader for the Chiefs only twice this year, he led the team in receiving yards, receptions, and touchdowns.
In other news, another season goes by and we *still* have no idea if Alex Smith is any good. What he can do: win when he has weapons. Get a good number of TDs without throwing picks, which is a damn-valuable skill (just ask Jay Cutler or Eli Manning). Run, apparently - he snagged 431 rushing yards this year (his previous high was 179). Also, he hasn't lost a fumble since 2006. That's 70+ games.
What he can't do, though, it seems, is go downfield, make a particularly athletic play, or really do any of the things that separate good, plus QBs from the ones we remember, the ones that win playoff games, the ones that win even though the opposing defense is better than their own offense. I am an unashamed QBR fan, and Smith comes in at a 49.4 this year. That's the very definition of mediocre.
Ultimately, even with Charles, if I was drafting playoff team offenses, these guys would be in the bottom three.
Colts Offense
And so would these guys, I think. When Andrew Luck came into the league a mere 20 months ago, I told people that he would, physically, in terms of arm strength, make throws that only 5 or 6 other starters could make. I had him, when he first stepped on an NFL field, as the 12th-best QB in the league. It did take him a little while to really hit his stride, but he's a quick learner, and those forlorn franchises that have had x+1 QBs over the last x years (Bills, Browns... looking at you) must be furious that the Colts went from one sure-fire franchise QB to the next.
The Colts are actually 20th in rushing, although their leading rusher - Donald Brown - only snagged 537, good for 42nd individually in the NFL. Trent Richardson... who the hell knows? I have no idea why he can't move the ball in the NFL, but after he was traded to the Colts, his yard per carry actually went down. He snagged only 2.9 per with Indy.
T.Y. "Don't Call Me Ty" Hilton was Luck's favorite target this year, going over 1,000 yards and legitimately stepping up when Reggie Wayne was lost for the season. Coby Fleener, Luck's Stanford buddy, has done all right as well.
Although the pieces are good-not-great, you can do a lot with a little when you don't turn the ball over. The Colts only turned the ball over 14 times this year, four better than the second-most efficient team which, as you should have guessed by now, is the Chiefs.
Colts Defense
Defensively, the Colts seem to match up poorly with KC. Robert Mathis was the Colts' only Pro Bowl selection on either side of the ball, and he certainly earned it; as far as OLBs go, however, he's quite pass-oriented. He snagged 19.5 sack this year (the next-highest LB had 12), but much of the run-stopping was done by the solid team of Antoine Bethea and LaRon Landry, both safeties. Ultimately, the Colts ended up 7th-worst against the run. This might be because no one in their division could throw, but this front seven isn't the sort that will strike fear into Jamaal Charles's heart.
The Colts are 5th in the AFC in takeaways, and - much like last year - this is a squad that is better than its names suggest. That's a credit to the coach. Ultimately, though, I'm not too high on this unit. I probably should be into these guys more, especially since they were 9th in points allowed, and I'm about to talk about how the Chiefs are great because they're 5th in points allowed, but remember: the Colts played in the barren South, and the Chiefs played in the explosive West.
Chiefs Defense
Here's where the star power in this game is. The Chiefs' defense has 5 Pro Bowlers, and is one of the best in the game. The unit is a testament to the worthlessness of Total Yardage statistics; KC is 24th in total yards allowed but 5th in points allowed.
A big part of that is the Chiefs' ability to get turnovers. Their 36 takeaways trailed only the near-legendary Seahawks' defense this year. Justin Houston and (Penn Stater) Tamba Hali, both Pro Bowlers, each had 11 sacks, and Hali was one of only 4 players to return both an INT and fumble for a TD this year (not that there's any predictive value to that info, but, hey, it's neat).
PREDICTION:
I know KC stumbled to the finish line, but in the NFL, the more talented team wins more often than not. The team with more talent is the Chiefs, and they're going to storm into Indy this afternoon and snag a tough victory. KANSAS CITY 31, INDIANAPOLIS 21
(6) New Orleans @ (3) Philadelphia - 8:10 Saturday
These teams combined for 11 wins last year, the fewest of any possible playoff duo this year unless the Chiefs and Eagles make it to the Super Bowl (that'd be 6 combined wins). Most people who were paying attention expected the Saints to get back after the Bounty-gate hiccup, and most people who were paying attention still had no idea whether Chip Kelly would work, whether the defense could actually tackle, or whether Nick Foles was going to set the all-time TDs to INTs ratio for someone with at least 13 TDs.
An interesting note: Nick Foles and Drew Brees graduated from the same high school, Westlake HS in Austin, Texas. It's also worth noting that Brees is one of the shortest QBs in the league - listed at 6'0" but widely believed to be 5'11" - and Foles comes in at 6'6". I wonder if anyone's compiled a list of the biggest height differences in playoff games. If not, they should. If so, they should send it to me.
Saints Offense
Obviously top notch, with the caveat that everyone believes them to be far worse on the road than at home. Let's see if that's true:
- 8-0 at home, 3-5 on the road. Oohf.
- 34 ppg for at home, 17.5 ppg for on the road. Ouch.
- 15.6 ppg allowed at home, 22.4 ppg allowed on the road. Meh.
Of course, almost all teams will have some significant shift home-to-away, but that seems pretty extreme. When everyone believes something to be true and stats suggest it's true, it's a lot easier to think "hey... it's probably true."
But let's get to the actual offense. Just for kicks, whenever I cite a player stat, I'll put home and road splits too. Drew Brees is obviously a fantastic passer. I still remember thinking he was done when the Chargers let him go, and the Dolphins didn't want to take a flyer on him. Yeah. In his 8 seasons with the Saints, he's only missed one game. He put up his 4th-highest passer rating this year, notching a 104.7 (126.3 home, 84.8 road). He was also second in the NFL in TDs, with his 39 scores (27 home, 12 away) equal to approximately 70% of Peyton Manning's total.
A big part of that success is Jimmy Graham, who, with apologies to the injury-riddled Rob Gronkowski, is almost certainly the biggest single match-up problem in the NFL. Graham led the league in receiving TDs (including WRs) with 16 (10 home, 6 road). Note that, if the Saints are to have offensive success in the Linc, it will be led by Graham, who has actually has more receptions and yards on the road despite missing the shockingly-unlikely defeat to the Patriots at Gillette.
No one would mistake the Saints' offense for a rushing attack; their 92.1 per game slot them at 25th in the NFL and worst among the playoff teams. They have a real RB-by-committee thing going; they have 6 players with a rushing TD and none with more than 3. The real RB threats are Darren Sproles and Pierre Thomas coming out of the backfield to receive. Pierre Thomas is a true screen back: he has 513 total receiving yards but 642 yards after catch (tops in the league). That means his 77 receptions were made an average of 1.7 yards behind the line of scrimmage. Sproles is just as good, and probably more explosive, with 604 yards, 507 YAC.
One of the best offenses in the league, but at 25.9 per game they're not the true air-it-out circus we've seen in the past from this team.
Eagles Offense
Also among the best in the league. It's hard to look at season stats for this squad, because of the QB switch mid-season. Even with the Birds scoring 10 combined points in back-to-back division losses this year (with Matt Barkley at the helm for most of that time), they ended up with the 4th-highest scoring offense in the league (27.6), just fractions of points per game behind the Bears and Patriots (both 27.8). Oh, yeah, and 10.3 behind the Broncos. But... the Broncos.
A lot has been made of Nick Foles's tremendous season, and I won't beat it to death here. Suffice to say that, although he's been tremendous statistically (27:2 TDs:INTs, more importantly: 9.12 yards per attempt, which is ridiculous), a fair portion of it is the system he's in. He is not the Eagles' best offensive player.
That would be LeSean McCoy who, after leading the NFL in rushing TDs a few years ago, got his rushing yardage title this year, his 1,607 besting Matt Forte by 268. When this guy touches the ball, special things happen. His 5.1 yards per carry was 5th-best, and his 9 runs of 20+ yards was worse only than Alfred Morris's 10. McCoy may be the best in the NFL at making really stop-and-start cuts (at least when Peterson's banged up).
People complained about Foles being snubbed for the Pro Bowl, but I think DeSean Jackson was maybe the bigger snub. Maybe I'm biased, because I was sitting in Row 17 when he went for 193 in the Eagles' Week 2 loss to the Chargers, but he had arguably his best season, putting up a career-high 1,332 yards. Importantly, he was simply far more sure-handed this year than in years past: coming into this season, he had caught just over 52% of the passes thrown to him; this year, he improved that mark to 65%, which translated to almost 20 more catches. How much of that is system, and how much of that is better passing, and how much of that is Jackson... well, it's an interesting question, but no one will care as long as it keeps happening.
Basically, this is a match-up of two of the 6 or 7 best offenses in the league, and - especially with the Saints on the road, in the cold - the Eagles get the edge in this one.
Eagles Defense
Much maligned a year ago (though not like the Saints; more on this soon), the Eagles' defense managed to be at least mediocre this year, with a lot of individual performances standing out (at least to the fans, who were treated to a bland mixture of missed tackles and lethargy last year). It definitely appears as though the unit got better as the year wore on; over the first four games, they allowed 27, 33, 26, and 52 (to the Broncos, of course), whereas they only allowed more than 22 once in their last 12 games (a seemingly aberrational 48-30 loss at Minnesota in Week 15). The Eagles gave up a league-high 290 passing yards per game, but we've seen over and over that that stat doesn't matter much, because the team in that spot is often one with a quick, high-powered offense that a lot of teams have to play catch-up against. More telling is the Passer Rating of QBs facing the Eagles D: 84.0, good for 15th in the NFL. Also, the Eagles' 31 takeaways were 2nd-best in the NFC, helping them tie for 2nd-best in the NFC in turnover margin (+12).
When talking about the Eagles' defense, you simply can't overstate the importance of DeMeco Ryans as a stabilizing force. In his second year as an Eagle after coming up from Houston, Ryans has been a rock in the middle of the field, doing a little bit of everything. Trent Cole and Connor Barwin both came up huge, the latter especially in the Week 17 win over the Cowboys. And the rest of the defense - Mychal Kendricks, Nate Allen, Cedric Thornton, Brandon Boykin, Fletcher Cox - basically reads like a list of future Pro Bowlers.
The thing that Eagles fans need to keep in mind, even if Philly loses today, is this: the arrow is pointing up on these guys. This team will be better next year, and you can't say that with any confidence about most of the NFC.
Saints Defense
Rob Ryan quipped that he'd be unemployed for five minutes. Well, someone probably should have snatched him up in four. While the Cowboys watched their defense go from held-together-by-threads to completely in pieces, Ryan simply went to the Big Easy and turned an historically bad defense - granted, one with some talent (but with no motivation or direction) - into one of the best units in the game. The Saints were 4th-best in terms of both total yards and scoring defense. Against the Eagles' rushing attack, though, it's worth noting that the Saints were 2nd against the pass and 19th against the run.
A big part of their success against the pass was their pass rush, led by the breakout seasons of Cameron Jordan (12.5 sacks) and Junior Galette (12.0). Interestingly, the Saints' defensive success has not translated into takeaways, as their 19 is dead last in the NFC.
The Saints defense has been very good this year. Not flashy, not exciting, but good. Very Ryan-like.
PREDICTION:
The Eagles won't be able to keep up with NO if this turns into a pure QB battle. New Orleans's defense is too good, Jimmy Graham's too good, and Drew Brees is too good. But there are a lot of reasons why this shouldn't turn into a passing battle: it's in Philly, it's gonna be COLD, and the Eagles would be content with feeding LeSean McCoy the ball over and over. The Eagles aren't built to try to keep the other offense off the field, but they should be better at it than the Saints. If it was in New Orleans, I'd say Saints 35, Eagles 34. But it's in Philadelphia. PHILADELPHIA 28, NEW ORLEANS 20.
So, that's what we have for today's action. I'll hit you with another monster opus before tomorrow's games!
Seriously, comment. Tell me how much of an idiot I am, or why you agree with everything I've said, or something in between.
Before I take a look at this year's playoff games, let's take a quick look at the teams I picked to get into the playoffs. In the AFC, I snagged 3 of the 4 division winners (Patriots, Broncos, and Colts, all of who were never really in danger), and admitted that I really was not confident in my Ravens pick. I did have the Bengals as my first wild card, noting that their offense was the probably the third-best in the AFC, behind the Broncos and Pats. Well, what do you know: the top 3 AFC scoring offenses were the Broncos, Pats, and Bengal; the Chargers sneaked ahead of the Bengals into 3rd place in total yards. I really liked Cleveland coming into this year, and took a flyer on them as the last wild-card team. That... didn't work, but, whatever. Gordon was fun to watch.
Predicted: 1) Broncos; 2) Ravens; 3) Patriots; 4) Colts; 5) Bengals; 6) Browns
Actual: 1) Broncos; 2) Patriots; 3) Bengals; 4) Colts; 5) Chiefs; 6) Chargers.
I picked the Broncos to get to the Super Bowl. Really went out on a limb there.
Like in the AFC, I managed to pick 4 of the 6 NFC teams, although it was a little more jumbled here. In the East, noting that no one had any bloody idea what would happen, I picked the Cowboys to win. Of the Philadelphia Eagles, I wrote: "[they] will be one of three things: 1) the most exciting playoff team in the NFL, 2) the most exciting mediocre team in the NFL, or 3) the most exciting trainwreck in the NFL." I am thrilled that they are pretty darn close to #1. I expected #2.5. In the North, I had the Packers, but with 12 wins, not 8 and a half. I had the Saints in the playoffs as the 6-seed (bingo!) but was (like virtually everyone) mistaken about which team would go 12-4 to take the South. In the West, I got the two squads, but had them switched.
Predicted: 1) 49ers; 2) Packers; 3) Falcons; 4) Cowboys; 5) Seahawks; 6) Saints
Actual: 1) Seahawks; 2) Panthers; 3) Eagles; 4) Packers; 5) 49ers; 6) Saints
Here, I picked the Packers. Ultimately, I had a rematch of Super Bowl XXXII - the first one I watched! - going the other way, with Rodgers getting his second ring.
So, that was the plan. I'm gonna give those picks a B. I got all the ones that were more likely than not, and both of my Super Bowl teams made it. We now, however, have an entire season's worth of games and statistics and storylines to take into account, so perhaps we can be even more successful going forward!
Fat chance. I'd call three of this weekend's four games a coin-flip, but I think it's more like four. Here's my Informed Analysis(c)(notreally) of this weekend's games:
(5) Kansas City @ (4) Indianapolis - 4:35 Saturday
Kansas City surprised a lot of people with their 9-0 start, but came way back down to earth with a 2-5 finish. Those five losses came to the Broncos, Broncos, Chargers, Chargers... and Colts, albeit in a game that didn't have much meaning for either team. The Colts played in the easiest division in the NFL this year; the Jaguars never had much of a chance, and while I wasn't shocked the Texans missed the playoffs - I had them stumbling to a flat 8-8 - I don't think anyone envisioned them deciding whether to keep or trade the #1 overall pick. Even the Titans, at 7-9, had the worst record of any division runner-up.
Chiefs Offense
... starts and ends with Jamaal Charles, is how that sentence goes. Charles was 3rd in the NFL in rushing this year, the only player in the pass-heavy AFC to be in the top 6. He was tied for the most rushing TDs with 12, which is likely the lowest total ever in a 16-game season (I only checked back to 2003). The NFL these days is very different from the game that Priest Holmes (27 in 2003), Shaun Alexander (27 in 2005), and LaDainian Tomlinson (28 in 2006) played only a few years ago. Even in a run-depressed NFL, it's clear that Charles has to be on any intelligible shortlist of offensive MVP candidates. That's in large part due to his amazing consistency catching the ball out of the backfield too; despite being the single-game receiving yards leader for the Chiefs only twice this year, he led the team in receiving yards, receptions, and touchdowns.
In other news, another season goes by and we *still* have no idea if Alex Smith is any good. What he can do: win when he has weapons. Get a good number of TDs without throwing picks, which is a damn-valuable skill (just ask Jay Cutler or Eli Manning). Run, apparently - he snagged 431 rushing yards this year (his previous high was 179). Also, he hasn't lost a fumble since 2006. That's 70+ games.
What he can't do, though, it seems, is go downfield, make a particularly athletic play, or really do any of the things that separate good, plus QBs from the ones we remember, the ones that win playoff games, the ones that win even though the opposing defense is better than their own offense. I am an unashamed QBR fan, and Smith comes in at a 49.4 this year. That's the very definition of mediocre.
Ultimately, even with Charles, if I was drafting playoff team offenses, these guys would be in the bottom three.
Colts Offense
And so would these guys, I think. When Andrew Luck came into the league a mere 20 months ago, I told people that he would, physically, in terms of arm strength, make throws that only 5 or 6 other starters could make. I had him, when he first stepped on an NFL field, as the 12th-best QB in the league. It did take him a little while to really hit his stride, but he's a quick learner, and those forlorn franchises that have had x+1 QBs over the last x years (Bills, Browns... looking at you) must be furious that the Colts went from one sure-fire franchise QB to the next.
The Colts are actually 20th in rushing, although their leading rusher - Donald Brown - only snagged 537, good for 42nd individually in the NFL. Trent Richardson... who the hell knows? I have no idea why he can't move the ball in the NFL, but after he was traded to the Colts, his yard per carry actually went down. He snagged only 2.9 per with Indy.
T.Y. "Don't Call Me Ty" Hilton was Luck's favorite target this year, going over 1,000 yards and legitimately stepping up when Reggie Wayne was lost for the season. Coby Fleener, Luck's Stanford buddy, has done all right as well.
Although the pieces are good-not-great, you can do a lot with a little when you don't turn the ball over. The Colts only turned the ball over 14 times this year, four better than the second-most efficient team which, as you should have guessed by now, is the Chiefs.
Colts Defense
Defensively, the Colts seem to match up poorly with KC. Robert Mathis was the Colts' only Pro Bowl selection on either side of the ball, and he certainly earned it; as far as OLBs go, however, he's quite pass-oriented. He snagged 19.5 sack this year (the next-highest LB had 12), but much of the run-stopping was done by the solid team of Antoine Bethea and LaRon Landry, both safeties. Ultimately, the Colts ended up 7th-worst against the run. This might be because no one in their division could throw, but this front seven isn't the sort that will strike fear into Jamaal Charles's heart.
The Colts are 5th in the AFC in takeaways, and - much like last year - this is a squad that is better than its names suggest. That's a credit to the coach. Ultimately, though, I'm not too high on this unit. I probably should be into these guys more, especially since they were 9th in points allowed, and I'm about to talk about how the Chiefs are great because they're 5th in points allowed, but remember: the Colts played in the barren South, and the Chiefs played in the explosive West.
Chiefs Defense
Here's where the star power in this game is. The Chiefs' defense has 5 Pro Bowlers, and is one of the best in the game. The unit is a testament to the worthlessness of Total Yardage statistics; KC is 24th in total yards allowed but 5th in points allowed.
A big part of that is the Chiefs' ability to get turnovers. Their 36 takeaways trailed only the near-legendary Seahawks' defense this year. Justin Houston and (Penn Stater) Tamba Hali, both Pro Bowlers, each had 11 sacks, and Hali was one of only 4 players to return both an INT and fumble for a TD this year (not that there's any predictive value to that info, but, hey, it's neat).
PREDICTION:
I know KC stumbled to the finish line, but in the NFL, the more talented team wins more often than not. The team with more talent is the Chiefs, and they're going to storm into Indy this afternoon and snag a tough victory. KANSAS CITY 31, INDIANAPOLIS 21
(6) New Orleans @ (3) Philadelphia - 8:10 Saturday
These teams combined for 11 wins last year, the fewest of any possible playoff duo this year unless the Chiefs and Eagles make it to the Super Bowl (that'd be 6 combined wins). Most people who were paying attention expected the Saints to get back after the Bounty-gate hiccup, and most people who were paying attention still had no idea whether Chip Kelly would work, whether the defense could actually tackle, or whether Nick Foles was going to set the all-time TDs to INTs ratio for someone with at least 13 TDs.
An interesting note: Nick Foles and Drew Brees graduated from the same high school, Westlake HS in Austin, Texas. It's also worth noting that Brees is one of the shortest QBs in the league - listed at 6'0" but widely believed to be 5'11" - and Foles comes in at 6'6". I wonder if anyone's compiled a list of the biggest height differences in playoff games. If not, they should. If so, they should send it to me.
Saints Offense
Obviously top notch, with the caveat that everyone believes them to be far worse on the road than at home. Let's see if that's true:
- 8-0 at home, 3-5 on the road. Oohf.
- 34 ppg for at home, 17.5 ppg for on the road. Ouch.
- 15.6 ppg allowed at home, 22.4 ppg allowed on the road. Meh.
Of course, almost all teams will have some significant shift home-to-away, but that seems pretty extreme. When everyone believes something to be true and stats suggest it's true, it's a lot easier to think "hey... it's probably true."
But let's get to the actual offense. Just for kicks, whenever I cite a player stat, I'll put home and road splits too. Drew Brees is obviously a fantastic passer. I still remember thinking he was done when the Chargers let him go, and the Dolphins didn't want to take a flyer on him. Yeah. In his 8 seasons with the Saints, he's only missed one game. He put up his 4th-highest passer rating this year, notching a 104.7 (126.3 home, 84.8 road). He was also second in the NFL in TDs, with his 39 scores (27 home, 12 away) equal to approximately 70% of Peyton Manning's total.
A big part of that success is Jimmy Graham, who, with apologies to the injury-riddled Rob Gronkowski, is almost certainly the biggest single match-up problem in the NFL. Graham led the league in receiving TDs (including WRs) with 16 (10 home, 6 road). Note that, if the Saints are to have offensive success in the Linc, it will be led by Graham, who has actually has more receptions and yards on the road despite missing the shockingly-unlikely defeat to the Patriots at Gillette.
No one would mistake the Saints' offense for a rushing attack; their 92.1 per game slot them at 25th in the NFL and worst among the playoff teams. They have a real RB-by-committee thing going; they have 6 players with a rushing TD and none with more than 3. The real RB threats are Darren Sproles and Pierre Thomas coming out of the backfield to receive. Pierre Thomas is a true screen back: he has 513 total receiving yards but 642 yards after catch (tops in the league). That means his 77 receptions were made an average of 1.7 yards behind the line of scrimmage. Sproles is just as good, and probably more explosive, with 604 yards, 507 YAC.
One of the best offenses in the league, but at 25.9 per game they're not the true air-it-out circus we've seen in the past from this team.
Eagles Offense
Also among the best in the league. It's hard to look at season stats for this squad, because of the QB switch mid-season. Even with the Birds scoring 10 combined points in back-to-back division losses this year (with Matt Barkley at the helm for most of that time), they ended up with the 4th-highest scoring offense in the league (27.6), just fractions of points per game behind the Bears and Patriots (both 27.8). Oh, yeah, and 10.3 behind the Broncos. But... the Broncos.
A lot has been made of Nick Foles's tremendous season, and I won't beat it to death here. Suffice to say that, although he's been tremendous statistically (27:2 TDs:INTs, more importantly: 9.12 yards per attempt, which is ridiculous), a fair portion of it is the system he's in. He is not the Eagles' best offensive player.
That would be LeSean McCoy who, after leading the NFL in rushing TDs a few years ago, got his rushing yardage title this year, his 1,607 besting Matt Forte by 268. When this guy touches the ball, special things happen. His 5.1 yards per carry was 5th-best, and his 9 runs of 20+ yards was worse only than Alfred Morris's 10. McCoy may be the best in the NFL at making really stop-and-start cuts (at least when Peterson's banged up).
People complained about Foles being snubbed for the Pro Bowl, but I think DeSean Jackson was maybe the bigger snub. Maybe I'm biased, because I was sitting in Row 17 when he went for 193 in the Eagles' Week 2 loss to the Chargers, but he had arguably his best season, putting up a career-high 1,332 yards. Importantly, he was simply far more sure-handed this year than in years past: coming into this season, he had caught just over 52% of the passes thrown to him; this year, he improved that mark to 65%, which translated to almost 20 more catches. How much of that is system, and how much of that is better passing, and how much of that is Jackson... well, it's an interesting question, but no one will care as long as it keeps happening.
Basically, this is a match-up of two of the 6 or 7 best offenses in the league, and - especially with the Saints on the road, in the cold - the Eagles get the edge in this one.
Eagles Defense
Much maligned a year ago (though not like the Saints; more on this soon), the Eagles' defense managed to be at least mediocre this year, with a lot of individual performances standing out (at least to the fans, who were treated to a bland mixture of missed tackles and lethargy last year). It definitely appears as though the unit got better as the year wore on; over the first four games, they allowed 27, 33, 26, and 52 (to the Broncos, of course), whereas they only allowed more than 22 once in their last 12 games (a seemingly aberrational 48-30 loss at Minnesota in Week 15). The Eagles gave up a league-high 290 passing yards per game, but we've seen over and over that that stat doesn't matter much, because the team in that spot is often one with a quick, high-powered offense that a lot of teams have to play catch-up against. More telling is the Passer Rating of QBs facing the Eagles D: 84.0, good for 15th in the NFL. Also, the Eagles' 31 takeaways were 2nd-best in the NFC, helping them tie for 2nd-best in the NFC in turnover margin (+12).
When talking about the Eagles' defense, you simply can't overstate the importance of DeMeco Ryans as a stabilizing force. In his second year as an Eagle after coming up from Houston, Ryans has been a rock in the middle of the field, doing a little bit of everything. Trent Cole and Connor Barwin both came up huge, the latter especially in the Week 17 win over the Cowboys. And the rest of the defense - Mychal Kendricks, Nate Allen, Cedric Thornton, Brandon Boykin, Fletcher Cox - basically reads like a list of future Pro Bowlers.
The thing that Eagles fans need to keep in mind, even if Philly loses today, is this: the arrow is pointing up on these guys. This team will be better next year, and you can't say that with any confidence about most of the NFC.
Saints Defense
Rob Ryan quipped that he'd be unemployed for five minutes. Well, someone probably should have snatched him up in four. While the Cowboys watched their defense go from held-together-by-threads to completely in pieces, Ryan simply went to the Big Easy and turned an historically bad defense - granted, one with some talent (but with no motivation or direction) - into one of the best units in the game. The Saints were 4th-best in terms of both total yards and scoring defense. Against the Eagles' rushing attack, though, it's worth noting that the Saints were 2nd against the pass and 19th against the run.
A big part of their success against the pass was their pass rush, led by the breakout seasons of Cameron Jordan (12.5 sacks) and Junior Galette (12.0). Interestingly, the Saints' defensive success has not translated into takeaways, as their 19 is dead last in the NFC.
The Saints defense has been very good this year. Not flashy, not exciting, but good. Very Ryan-like.
PREDICTION:
The Eagles won't be able to keep up with NO if this turns into a pure QB battle. New Orleans's defense is too good, Jimmy Graham's too good, and Drew Brees is too good. But there are a lot of reasons why this shouldn't turn into a passing battle: it's in Philly, it's gonna be COLD, and the Eagles would be content with feeding LeSean McCoy the ball over and over. The Eagles aren't built to try to keep the other offense off the field, but they should be better at it than the Saints. If it was in New Orleans, I'd say Saints 35, Eagles 34. But it's in Philadelphia. PHILADELPHIA 28, NEW ORLEANS 20.
So, that's what we have for today's action. I'll hit you with another monster opus before tomorrow's games!
Seriously, comment. Tell me how much of an idiot I am, or why you agree with everything I've said, or something in between.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)