Michael Rand started RandBall with hopes that he could convince the world to love jumpsuits as much as he does. So far, he's only succeeded in using the word "redacted" a lot. He welcomes suggestions, news tips, links of pure genius, and pictures of pets in Halloween costumes here, though he already knows he will regret that last part.
Follow Randball on Twitter
Is that a good idea?
Five Thirty Eight doesn’t seem to think so. Maybe Nate Silver is right, but his logic doesn’t quite seem right, either:
According to my previous research, the six current NHL markets with the fewest number of hockey fans are Nashville, Miami, Raleigh, Columbus, Phoenix and Tampa. Those franchises lost a collective $51 million in 2013-14, according to Forbes. Now there’s momentum to place an NHL expansion team in Las Vegas, another idea that makes little sense. Our 2013 analysis estimated that there are just 91,000 NHL fans in metro Las Vegas. That’s tiny even by comparison to the six smallest NHL markets that I mentioned before, which have between 146,000 (Nashville) and 279,000 (Tampa) hockey fans. And it’s well below Seattle’s 241,000 or Quebec City’s 530,000 fans.
Silver also argues against an NHL team in Vegas because the city hasn’t supported minor league teams well in the past, while concluding that an NBA team makes far more sense.
On that last part, I agree. But the minor league reasoning seems far-fetched. And to a larger degree, so does the argument about a small base of NHL fans. Any team based in Vegas in any major league is going to be more about capturing the tourism crowd than the locals.
Yes, the NBA is a better fit than the NHL — and probably the ideal draw in Vegas. But even without a full house night after night in an NHL arena in Vegas, the league exposure in Sin City would be worth it. I’d put a team there before I’d put one in, say, Kansas City.
(Photo of Blues coach Ken Hitchcock in Vegas for 2012 league awards was a wonderful bit of serendipity).
Advanced stats in the NHL are still fairly new and sometimes terrifying. I still don’t know quite what to make of all of them, but I did use them a few months ago to build a compelling case after Devan Dubnyk was traded as to why he could very well be a massive upgrade in goal.
That turned out to be one of the few things I’ve ever been truly right about, so I am taking a moment to reflect on that. I’m also offering this disclaimer: I still don’t know exactly what I’m doing here. I’m just a guy who likes numbers and wants to see meaning in them.
As such, some of the numbers from War on Ice from Game 3 jumped out at me more from the standpoint that what I saw in the stats and what I saw in the game were two very different things.
What I saw was a Wild team that either dominated or at least carried the play from about midway through the first period all the way through the rest of the game — and even in those first 10 minutes, Minnesota wasn’t in real trouble. Just tentative. St. Louis barely had a sniff on Devan Dubnyk, while the Wild buzzed the Blues for long stretches.
What the numbers say is that the game was — at least during 5-on-5 situations, which was almost all of the game — far more even. “Corsi,” which measures not just shots on goal but shots blocked and those that missed the net, shows both teams were almost the same: Minnesota had 45, St. Louis had 43. And St. Louis was actually credited with more scoring chances (20 to 19) than the Wild.
Was I watching the game with an inherent bias, getting caught up in the emotion of the crowd and a couple of nice goals, thus distracting me from a much closer game than I imagined?
Or is this a case where the numbers lied and the quality/tone/flow of the play was a much better measure than the raw data?
I tend to think it was the latter, since the general consensus was that the Wild badly outplayed the Blues. But it bears watching on Wednesday.
Speaking of Game 4, here are some fun historical numbers per Who Wins that should make Wild fans feel pretty good about things going forward:
In all NHL best of 7 series in history (443 of them), a team with a 2-1 series lead has gone on to win the series 69.3 percent of the time. That winning percentage dips to 61 percent when the team up 2-1 is the one that started out without the home-ice advantage — which makes sense because the team with home-ice is presumably the stronger team — as is the case with the Wild. But those are still pretty good odds.
Interestingly, the team up 2-1 only wins Game 4 specifically 47 percent of the time, with the road/home splits almost exactly the same. That speaks to the desperation of teams down 2-1, which is what the Wild should expect tonight.
If Minnesota wins tonight, the numbers get even better (of course): Teams up 3-1 all-time in NHL series go on to win the series 90.2 percent of the team (248-27 series record).
Why Don’t All Of You Just “STOP” Writing About A P & His Agent, Who Cares. This Team Could Have Batman & Superman On It They Will Only Win 6 Games This Year, Our Great Q/B Can’t See Over The Line, He Is To Short.
There was so much in such a small space that it would have been easy to overlook one of the most glaring points of controversy: A team with Batman and Superman would only win six games? I don’t think so. Thankfully, a lot of other folks jumped in on Twitter after I posted the letter. What follows here is a smattering of their thoughts combined with my scouting report of Batman, Superman and how they would impact the 2015 Vikings.
In this area, it seems as though Superman has a clear edge over Batman. In fact, I’m not even sure a lot of Batman’s powers are relevant on a football field because he’s so dependent on gadgets and a fancy car. Superman, though? Faster than a speeding bullet; able to leap tall buildings in a single bound; those are transferable skills. Also, there’s this intangible:
@RandBall If they lose Superman can spin the world backwards and they can try again.
— John Sharkman (@JohnSharkman) April 22, 2015
That said, Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges jumped into the Twitter discussion on Wednesday morning with a good point in favor of Batman, calling Superman, essentially, a one-trick pony while Batman has the ability to evolve in an ever-changing NFL.
— Betsy Hodges (@MayorHodges) April 22, 2015
FILM REVIEW Any good scout, though, will go back to the film instead of just relying on preconceived notions and raw data. Here we see the official trailer for Batman vs. Superman. At around the 30 second mark, you see Superman’s strength really coming through when he holds up what appears to be an entire rocket ship. The combine doesn’t test for that kind of thing, but I have to think in basic bench press drills, he’d kill it.
The first glimpse of Batman is around 1:10, and he’s stoic; dark; brooding. He’s not even really doing anything. Sure, in previous film sessions he’s saving people and showing off tremendous strength. But I want to see it every time I turn on the film.
Superman is a reluctant hero, but he never seems to shy away from the call of duty. That’s a guy I want on my team on 3rd-and-6 with the game on the line.
Batman? Yeah, maybe if the play is called for him he will go all out, but he seems to have some Randy Moss “I play when I want to play” in him. The guy has also retired and unretired more than Brett Favre. Am I questioning Batman’s motor? Yeah, I think I am. Not saying I don’t want him on my team or that he couldn’t help the 2015 Vikings. Just wondering how much he wants it.
Superman seems like a natural wide receiver with his speed/athletic ability. Maybe even a modern tight end considering he’s so strong. Imagine trying to cover him in the Red Zone. Talk about a matchup nightmare.
Batman, while a tremendous athlete himself, seems like a man without a position. Maybe try him at running back? Middle linebacker where he can scan the field and fly to the ball? I just don’t know, but I guess it’s a good problem to have?
We haven’t even opened the Pandora’s Box of what the NFL would do about both these guys. This is the No Fun League that was mad T.O. had a Sharpie. There would be anti-superhero rules in place within five minutes, not to mention this:
As great as both of them would potentially be on the field for the Vikings, I don’t see either as a QB. And this is still a quarterback league. Regardless of how good we think Teddy Bridgewater will become, the Vikings will only go as far as he can take them, even with Superman and/or Batman are on the roster. And we haven’t even gotten into player acquisition. Are they free agents? I’m not even sure they’re draft-eligible, and even if they are, there’s this:
@RandBall What an idiot. Like either Batman OR Superman will still be there at #11.
— Tim Klobuchar (@timklobuchar) April 22, 2015
Maybe it’s for the best? I see the Vikings as a 13-3 playoff team with Superman, maybe 11-5 with Batman and probably 14-2 with both. But in the playoffs … can one of them kick a field goal when the Vikings need it most? Will they avoid jumping into the huddle and causing a critical penalty? Will they try to do too much? Those kinds of questions are best left unanswered.
Mock drafts are ridiculous, speculative, low-hanging Internet fruit.
But we are hungry. Oh how we are hungry. So we picked up the bruised apple off the ground and took a bite — in this case, Chad Ford’s latest ESPN.com NBA mock draft.
It’s particularly absurd at this point because the draft ORDER hasn’t even been determined. We won’t know that for another month. And still, it’s fun to sit and think … what-if?
So we’ll note here that Ford has the Wolves taking Karl-Anthony Towns, the Kentucky center, with the No. 1 overall pick. There’s no guarantee the Wolves will do this. There is nothing about this that is factual. But Ford did say nice things about the Wolves:
While the Wolves had the worst record in the NBA, they actually have one of the brightest futures in the league. Andrew Wiggins will likely win the Rookie of the Year Award and has the talent to be a transcendent player. Zach LaVine finished the season strong and won the dunk contest. Ricky Rubio, Shabazz Muhammad and Gorgui Dieng all had their moments, and several other players such as Anthony Bennett and Adreian Payne have strong futures as well. Adding Towns to the team just makes them scarier — an athletic big man who can score inside and outside and protect the rim. In two years, this team is going to be very hard to contend with.
I wouldn’t go quite that far with some of those players (Payne is intriguing at best, while Bennett has shown next to nothing). But this much is true: adding more top-end talent to this collection could — could — make the Wolves dangerous in the future.
Minnesotans love to love their own players, but they might be even better at hating opposing players. Finding villains is a point of pride we take very seriously.
Blues center Steve Ott is playing that role beautifully in this Wild playoff series. He’s an agitator. He’s a desperate man. He’s a cheap-shot artist. And he isn’t playing particularly well (unless losing the puck on a breakaway is advised. I don’t know. I never played the game, but it seems to be a bad idea).
Minnesota fans have decided that Ott — for good reason — is their latest villain. Maybe, as Jim Souhan says, he isn’t worthy of that status. But whatever he is doing, he is agitating fans; a picture that accompanied Souhan’s column showed a close-up of a seemingly mild-mannered, glasses-and-sweater-wearing, middle-aged Wild fan giving Ott a one-finger salute during Game 3.
Ott isn’t the last villain fans will chose. And he most certainly isn’t the first. I asked readers on Twitter to name their all-time greatest Minnesota sports villains. Here is a sampling of their responses:
@RandBall Todd Bertuzzi
— Angie Andresen (@angieandresen) April 21, 2015
@RandBall The rally monkey
— Aaron Gernes (@aarongernes) April 21, 2015
@RandBall Al Secord
— tjsimplot (@tjsimplot) April 21, 2015
@RandBall Tim Duncan during KG’s heyday. I hated that anyone other than KG could be considered the best PF.
— Tyler Glieden (@gliedt13) April 21, 2015
@RandBall Brad May.
— Steve Skavnak (@steveskavnak) April 21, 2015
— Mike Rose (@mrosemn) April 21, 2015
@RandBall Dave Hakstol, Mike Eaves, Barry Alvarez, Terry Pegula, the Dutch, whoever scored that goal for Holy Cross, humidity
— Fake Don Lucia (@FakeDonLucia) April 21, 2015
@RandBall pre-2009 Favre was on the list, then after 2009, “we respected him the whole time”
— Scott (@sdreier21) April 21, 2015
@RandBall Bertuzzi is the champion emeritus, but Roy is the current title holder.
— Rand Paul’s Boutique (@cinatyte) April 21, 2015
@RandBall Ed Hightower
— Sam Pokorney (@the_snead) April 21, 2015
@RandBall Phil Cuzzi.
— Aaron Gleeman (@AaronGleeman) April 21, 2015
— Fake Tim Brewster (@FakeTimBrewster) April 21, 2015
|Cleveland - LP: T. House||1||FINAL|
|Detroit - WP: A. Simon||4|
|Houston - WP: S. Feldman||9||FINAL|
|Oakland - LP: K. Graveman||3|
|NY Mets - WP: M. Harvey||8||FINAL|
|NY Yankees - LP: C. Sabathia||2|
|Washington - LP: S. Strasburg||0||FINAL|
|Miami - WP: T. Koehler||8|
|Toronto - LP: B. Cecil||2||FINAL|
|Tampa Bay - WP: E. Frieri||4|
|Atlanta - WP: S. Miller||5||FINAL|
|Philadelphia - LP: D. Buchanan||2|
|Boston - LP: K. Uehara||4||FINAL|
|Baltimore - WP: B. Matusz||5|
|St. Louis - WP: M. Belisle||5||FINAL|
|Milwaukee - LP: W. Peralta||3|
|Pittsburgh - WP: T. Watson||2||FINAL|
|Arizona - LP: A. Reed||1|
|San Francisco - WP: J. Machi||5||FINAL|
|Colorado - LP: B. Brown||4|
|Los Angeles - WP: B. McCarthy||11||FINAL|
|San Diego - LP: I. Kennedy||8|
|Texas - LP: C. Lewis||1||FINAL|
|LA Angels - WP: V. Pestano||4|
|Minnesota - WP: T. Stauffer||8||FINAL|
|Seattle - LP: J. Paxton||5|
|Real Salt Lake||0||FINAL|
|Sporting Kansas City||4||FINAL|