The Best Clutch Starting Pitcher of Our "Era" (Whatever THAT Means)

This weekend, I had a discussion over drinks and garbage plates with my friend Melissa about clutch pitching, particularly who is the best clutch STARTING pitcher (aka, pitchers who aren't the messiah and wear No. 42 for the New York Yankees) of our era (let's define it as 1990ish until the present.) She said Pettitte, I said Beckett. My mom always stressed that it's not important to prove you're right, etc. at every moment, especially when you're dining with a female, and I definitely learned that lesson the hard way in 2002 when I survived an assassination attempt (excerpted from "Things You Don't Know About Joe Checkler," Houghton Mifflin, 2007.). In this case though, I was generally interested in looking at the numbers of those two to see which one was a better argument, not to publicly embarrass Melissa on a highly read public forum like Liners, Sliders and Scoops.

I then - the next day of course because it would have been really rude to do this in the middle of a garbage plate - decided to off the top of my head take eight others who might want to be considered. I'm talking about pitchers who pitched a lot of postseason ball since 1990, and I came up with this list. I really think you'll like it:

DAVID CONE: 18 career postseason starts (3 relief appearances), 111.1 innings.

ANDY PETTITTE: 40 career postseason starts, 249 innings (of course
helped out by the Yankees ruling and expanded playoffs. Cone only
pitched in expanded playoff seasons for half of his career.

RANDY JOHNSON: 19 career postseason starts (3 relief appearances), 121 innings.

PEDRO MARTINEZ: 16 career postseason starts (3 relief appearances),
94.1 innings.

GREG MADDUX: 35 career postseason starts (5 relief appearances), 198 innings.

JOSH BECKETT: 14 career postseason starts (1 relief appearance), 93.2 innings.

CURT SCHILLING: 19 career postseason starts, 133.1 innings.

TOM GLAVINE: 35 career postseason starts, 218.1 innings.

JOHN SMOLTZ: 27 career postseason starts (14 relief appearances), 209 innings.

ROGER CLEMENS: 35 career postseason starts (1 relief appearance), 199 innings.

So those are our guys.

Now, I didn't just saturate your eyes with stats because I (like most people who have a baseball IQ above 74) don't believe in all stats telling all the story, ESPECIALLY wins and losses, and ESPECIALLY wins and losses in the postseason, when a manager is more likely to take out his pitcher early because the game means so much and he needs to get his best reliever in. That said, I felt like I had to eliminate from our argument any pitcher who has a career LOSING record in the postseason... (bye-bye Johnson, Maddux and Glavine). That leaves us with Schilling, Smoltz, Beckett, Pettitte, Pedro, Cone and Clemens.

Again, stats aren't everything, but I think we can easily right here just take out anyone with at or above 3.50 career ERA in the postseason (not because that's bad - pitching against really good hitters in the postseason, that's actually a fine ERA. It's just that with this sample, there are guys that are so much better than that (like .75 runs or more better) that we can easily eliminate some people here that don't belong in the discussion. (Bye-Bye Clemens, you're a steroid-pilfering douchebag anyway. Unfortunately, Cone and also Melissa's loverboy Pettitte is also gone here. He has the highest (by far, besides Cone at 3.80) ERA of any of these pitchers, 3.90. That's roughly the SAME ERA Pettitte's had in his regular season starts (3.91), which is NOT bad.

Many people think clutch performance is defined by fulfilling the barfbag quality cliche "rising to the occasion" and doing BETTER in the postseason or big games than the regular season, but I disagree because I'm much smarter than you and I've researched this, and - well - just sit down and listen to me. The key is to stay AT the level you've reached during the postseason (or maybe be sometimes better, it's okay to be better), because if you can have the same performance against GOOD competition as you do against a mix of GOOD and BAD competition, well then Johnny Appleseed, you're doing a frickin' amazing job.

Pettitte for his career in the postseason is 17-8 with a 3.90 ERA, which is very good. He has also, however, given up MORE hits than innings pitched in the postseason, which shouldn't be a surprise.

That's what he's done in the regular season too. He gets a lot of ground balls, gets out of jams, has mental fortitude, believes Jesus Christ is the man who taught him the cut fastball, etc. But he's also given up 27 homers in the postseason. Which isn't a horrific number for 249 innings, but Jesus Christ only gave up 7 homers in 249 innings in the New Testament. Looking at him (Pettitte, not Christ) year by year, he has pitched some memorable great games (like that 1-0 game in Atlanta in '96), but his only superior postseason was 2000, when he pitched well in every round. While he's definitely a guy I wouldn't mind pitching a big game for me, he's not in the top 5 of our era.

The top 4 are (in no particular order): Schilling, Smoltz, Beckett and Pedro.

PEDRO
Compared to what you might expect from a legend, Pedro hasn't always been incredible in the postseason. He has pitched memorable games, like coming out of the bullpen against Cleveland in '99 or whatever year it was and throwing 6 no-hit innings, but he's rather underwhelming (6 wins, 4 losses, 3.46 ERA, for a guy who in the regular season is 219-100 with a 2.93 ERA). His strikeout rate, which is much better than 1 per inning in the regular season, drops to almost EXACTLY 1 per inning in the postseason. Again, these aren't bad numbers, they just eliminate him from our impossibly hard test. Bye Bye Pedro.

BECKETT
I'm wrong on Beckett. I let my eyes deceive me (I saw him pitch one of the toughest and best games anyone will ever pitch, a complete-game shutout as a rookie to win the World Series on the road at Yankee Stadium.)

(Side note: letting our eyes and our memories deceive us is the hardest thing about sports arguments. We tend to remember things we want to remember, and forget things we want to forget, and as time goes on we really start to get Fuzzy Zoeller. It's easy to remember Pettitte's 1-0 win in the '96 series, but he gave up roughly 1,842 runs in Game 1, if I remember.)

Back to Beckett, He's some kind of competitor, he's mean, he LOOKS like a winner whatever the hell that is (I think it means there are little "Ws" in his eyes), but really, I was irresponsible to call him the best postseason pitcher of our era. In 2003 and 2007, his numbers are amazing. In no series was his ERA over 3.26, and in ALL THE OTHER ONES it was less than 2. But in 2008 and 2009, he hasn't done the same. He would have to have another 2003 or 2007 before he gets himself back in the discussion. He was the best postseason pitcher of the first 7 years of the 2000s, that can be said. But not of our era...

SCHILLING AND SMOLTZ
That leaves us with Schilling and Smoltz. It's a tough one for me. I love Smoltz and I hate Schilling.

I think Schilling is just annoying, creepy, and perhaps a murderer. I think Smoltz reinvented himself 74 times, learned to pitch sidearm because his arm hurt too much when he threw overhand, he went to Iraq and captured Saddam Hussein with his bare hands and gripped Saddam's face like a split-fingered fastball and threw it 76 MPH. He's like great. But whatever, I can't worry about that now. I'm objective and stuff.

I've never seen numbers like these. Schilling's career postseason ERA is 2.23, which is 1.23 runs BETTER than his regular season ERA. That's unbelievable. Smoltz's is an also awesome 2.67.

Schilling is 11-2, Smoltz is 15-4. These are the only two on this list whose numbers GET BETTER in the postseason. Do you know how hard that is? You're only playing against the best teams in baseball (and early in Smoltz's career and also Schilling's, only the FOUR best teams made the playoffs instead of the eight best). That's like REALLY hard (that's what she said.)

I loathe just looking at numbers to do this, they really don't tell all the story. So what I might do is just give this to Schilling based solely on the fact that his teams won 3 World Series titles, and Smoltz's only won one. Schilling also pitched that shutout in the '93 World Series the day after a 15-14 loss that kept the Phillies alive (I'm not looking this up, but I think I'm right) and was one of the two reasons that the D'Bags (I mean backs) spanked the Yanks in 7 in '01 (despite giving up that toe-level homer to Soriano to lead off the 8th in Game 7.)

Maybe that is a tad unfair, especially considering that Smoltz only really had one bad start in his World Series career. But that's what I'm doing. I'm going with Schilling.

Either way, you can take your pick. But unfortunately, neither my or Melissa’s argument - and believe me we're both really smart (she solved the Rubix Cube in 8.4 seconds at the age of 3) - have much juice to them...

You're welcome for being back.

Baseball Season Starts Today And Stuff

"You show me someone who thinks they can predict baseball, Suzyn, and I'll show you a fool." - John Sterling, the "voice of the Yankees." (I just threw up.)

After watching in horror last night as Villanova did its best impression of John Starks in game 7 of the 1994 NBA Finals, I'm so ready for baseball season. And I figured, why not give you my entirely amazingly prescient predictions for the season? But are you sitting down? I'm actually going to do this in a somewhat unconventional way. It's the first time ever that I've decided to do something unconventionally.

That's because it's a silly exercise, this whole predicting baseball thing. Think about it. How many teams are actually capable of making the playoffs this season? WELL, I'M ABOUT TO TELL YOU. Let's put them into three or more categories, I haven't really thought this out yet.

Better Than 65% Chance of Winning Their Division
*New York Mets – They’ve always figured everything out except for the bullpen. Now they have that figured out too.
*Chicago Cubs – It’s inconceivable that they’ll disappoint.
*Los Angeles Dodgers – Manny for a full season helps the Ethiers and Loneys of the world. Plus, Billingsley looks healthy now.
*Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim California United States of America North America Earth – They’re older and fragile, but Oakland doesn’t seem ready yet.

AL East Powerhouses Fighting For Two Spots
*New York Yankees – Seriously, the Sabathia and Burnett signings (at least for 2009) are going to pay off big time.
*Tampa Bay Rays – If you think they’re a fluke, you probably don’t know anything about baseball. They’ll probably be even better.
*Boston Red Sox – They’re still good, and will compete, but I smell another 2006.

Teams Fighting For the NL Wild Card
*Philadelphia Phillies – They’re not going to win the World Series again, I don’t think, but they’ll contend. It all comes down to one skinny left arm.
*Florida Marlins – If those young starters are as good as I think they are, they could be fun for a while.
*St. Louis Cardinals – The numbers don’t add up to them contending, but I’m not in the business of doubting Tony LaRussa’s voodoo.
*Arizona Diamondbacks – Webb and Haren at the top, plus they play in the NL West. The only team in this group with a chance of winning their division.

The Only Team That Could Conceivably Win the AL Central
Chicago White Sox – Okay, so the Indians could break through with a little luck, but in Kenny Williams and Ozzie Guillen I trust.

The Team That Will Pick off the AL West If The Angels Fail
*Oakland Athletics – If they’re over .500 at the trade deadline and the Angels are within striking distance, the A’s will make a trade and make a playoff appearance. But their starting pitching is underwhelming.

The Sexy Sleeper Team That Needs Everything to Break Right (But It Won't)
*Kansas City Royals – They have some of the characteristics of the “breakout” team, but not enough of them. If *they start off strong though, seriously watch out.

THE REST

Okay, that's actually not that bad. Fourteen teams have a shot at making the playoffs, although I’m going to say that MAYBE you can take the Cleveland Indians as a possibility – everything hinging on whether they can hit enough - and make it 14 ½.. You might think a few other teams have a shot, but they don’t. The Brewers lost their top two pitchers; The RockiesBlue Jays aren’t bad and could contend for a division title, but they play in the AL East; The Braves will improve markedly – last year they were just terribly unlucky in one-run games – but 81 wins isn’t going to gain a playoff spot. need good pitching, and the last time I checked, they play 81 games at Coors Field; The

Now I’ll make 10 random predictions about things, some of them off-the-wall, some of them not so much.

1. Alex Gordon of the Royals will have his first really good season, and at the very least, Kansas City will be interesting for a few months. But I’m serious when I say they aren’t going to be this year’s Devil Rays.

2. David Ortiz’s decline is going to really show this year. And that’s trouble for Boston. They’re the weakest of the Big Three in the AL East, and might win fewer than 87 games.

3. Cliff Lee is really good, and while he won’t be as amazing as he was last year, he still has several great years ahead of him. Some experts say he won’t win another Cy Young award, but I think he’ll contend for at least two more.

4. Randy Johnson is going to have a resurgent season for the Giants. In fact, if Tim Lincecum, Matt Cain and Johnson are all healthy and good, they could be a .500 team. In past years, that would make them a contender. Not this year.

5.Matt Wieters, the best catching prospect since Johnny Bench Campanella Berra Piazza Munson, will be with the Orioles by May 15, contending for a batting title by July 25, running away with the Rookie of the Year award by August 15, and finish with .300/18/80-type numbers.

6. In no particular order, the four worst teams in baseball will be the Orioles, Pirates, Nationals, Rangers. Just look at their opening-day starting pitchers.

7. The Phillies will miss Pat Burrell, because Raul Ibanez is going to decline very rapidly starting this year. I mean Burrell’s bat, of course. He will also win the Gold Glove at DH for Tampa Bay.

8. Felix Hernandez of the Mariners will contend for – or win – the AL Cy Young Award. The same can be said for Ricky Nolasco of the Marlins in the National League.

9. Four no-hitters will be pitched this year, the most since 1991.

10. The New York Mets will win the World Series.

The Super Bowl Prediction You Don’t Care About
2009 Playoff Record (6-4)

2009 Playoff Record against the spread (6-4)

Sure it’s the lousiest possible matchup the NFL could’ve ever gotten. Sure we have to really squeeze that orange to get juice out of this story (Kurt Warner loves his Bible more than he loves his playbook, says a different kind of “Hail Mary,” and is thankful to little 8-pound, 6-ounce Baby Jesus that he is back in the Super Bowl, Larry Fitzgerald plays sports and his daddy writes about them, Steelers fans still like to wave towels around and work in the mill or the iron shop or wherever tough people work, Arizona has an NFL franchise). But it’s the Super Bowl. It’s still exciting. It’s going to be anti-climactic compared to last year’s game, but it’s still compelling for THESE reasons.

1. Nobody in the entire world could have imagined Arizona making it here. Among all the playoff teams coming into the playoffs, the Cardinals ranked last in points allowed, last in rushing yards, last in giving up touchdowns in the red zone, second-to-last in first downs allowed, you get the point. Seriously, they outscored their opponents in the regular season 427-426. By ONE point. Can you believe that? But somehow, in the playoffs, they started generating a pass rush, running the ball kind of effectively, and voila, they’re suddenly always playing from ahead. And when you play from ahead and can rush the passer a little bit, you can win games. Imagine that.

2. Larry Fitzgerald is God. I’m sorry Kurt Warner. Well, actually, that’s probably why you throw to him so much. You probably know he’s God. He seriously is though. And he played in college at Pitt., where he was also awesome. So there’s a little hometown thingamajiggy goin’ on. He’s seriously amazing. The best player on the field, and it isn’t even close.

3. The Steelers looked like they had peaked earlier in the season, but they fooled us. They’re ACTUALLY peaking right now. Beating the Chargers and the Ravens wasn’t easy. The Chargers were playing great, and the Ravens looked like that ultimate “sneak into the Super Bowl” team. Pittsburgh knocked everyone out.

4. Really, this is the most important thing. These two teams – at this point in the season and perhaps ONLY at this point in the season – are clearly the best teams in their respective conferences. Nobody is in this game because of anything flukey. If you knew nothing about football and watched the playoffs, and you knew nothing about point spreads or defending champions or playoff experience or coaching experience or any of that crap, and you just watched the Steelers and Cardinals play, you would have thought this game was inevitable. And now it’s here. And now it’s time for me to make my pick.

THE PICK:

Talent-wise, the Steelers are seriously the better team. They hit much harder, they’re much more consistent, they have a quarterback who never goes down after the first hit, they have one tough safety wearing No. 43. They’re pretty well-coached.

But here’s the problem: The way the Cardinals are playing, the way they’ve basically changed the way they play this past month, the Steelers aren’t THAT much better than them. They’re better, but only marginally. If you remember playing Super Mario Bros. for Nintendo, each world had 4 boards. Well, the Cardinals are on the eighth world right now, and beating the Falcons, Panthers and Eagles brings them to the last board. It’s called 8-4.

On their way through the game, the Cardinals have had to learn how to win in different ways, like an experienced Nintendo player has to learn how to win with little Mario after he gets hit with a boomerang. They’ve had to go through the water worlds, they’ve used their might at times to squash those flying ducks, or Eagles, or wherever this metaphor is going.

But now, on 8-4, they’re at the last dragon. On their way, they’ve learned all the tricks. They can play a little bit of a power running game – thanks to the resurgence of Edge James – or they can just throw the ball over you, thanks to Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin and Steve Breaston. And their defense isn’t amazing, but it has guys who can cover, and guys who can rush, and you can’t run all over them. They can force Roethlisberger into mistakes, and I think he’s going to make one too many.

In the end, I think this is going to come down to one final drive. I really do. And I think that the ball is going to be in Warner’s hands, and it’s the equivalent of Mario having fireballs. I think that the guy who has both the No. 1 AND No. 2 biggest passing-yard games in Super Bowl history is going to do it. And what better way to do it then to find Fitzgerald – the best player on the field – in the end?

I think that if these teams played seven times, Pittsburgh would win five of them. But tomorrow night, I don’t think it’s going to happen. Sorry, Steelers. Our princess is in another castle. Cardinals 30, Steelers 27.

The Al Michaels/John Madden Drinking Game
I don't necessarily think I'll partake in this debauchery, since I'm nearly 30 years old and am obviously 451 times more sophisticated than your average "drinking game" type, but I feel like it's a shame - a damn shame - that nobody seems to have ever created an Al Michaels/John Madden drinking game. And I'm sure that some people like to search "Al Michaels/John Madden Drinking Game" when they do the Google, thus making it possible that my blog will for once become mildly relevant. So here we go. On the eve of the Super Bowl, we've got it. We've finally got it. The Al Michaels/John Madden Drinking Game. Aren't you excited?

*I've gotten help from people with the initials M.A., G.R., D.B., B.S. and perhaps others on this, but I don't want to use their names because they probably don't want to be associated with me or drinking games.

Take ONE drink if...
Al decides not to describe the play, but rather just use player names and the result of the play. Like, "Warner....Fitzgerald.....first down."

Madden says a word from the "boom," "pow," or "bam," family of Emeril Lagasse favourites.

Madden mentions food.

Al weaves in a quick comment about politics, business or general news.


Take TWO drinks if...
Madden says something like, "I kind of like what _________ is doing here."

Al, or an NBC graphic, must be used to correct a mistake by Madden.

Madden references his time as a coach, or what he would do if he were in this situation. (Take an extra drink if he says something like, "I'd play for overtime" when there's still more than a minute left on the clock and a team has the ball at the 40-yard line.)

Madden mentions something along the lines of, "I would start my team with this guy," or, "If I was choosing a kicker this would be my kicker," or anything remotely similar.


Take THREE drinks if...
Madden makes a mistake, but the only thing that makes you realize it was a mistake is three-to-six seconds of stone silence and heavy-ish breathing.

Al makes a reference to the point spread or gambling. The NFL HATES announcers doing this. One example of how Al likes to sneak these references in would be if the score of the game is 28-17 and the over/under is 46. If the team that's ahead scores a touchdown, Al might say something like, "this game is OOOOOOOver in more ways than one."

Madden mentions he's still not over the "Immaculate Reception" game. Especially applicable for games involving the Pittsburgh Steelers.

GOOD LUCK!

Playoff Picks, Conference Title Games
I haven’t been able to read anything about these games. Heck, I still haven’t even been able to read a recap of last Sunday’s Giants/Eagles game. It’s been tough. I know, I know, you feel super sorry for me. My defending Super Bowl champions, playing in the largest market in the world, weren’t able to defend their glorious championship. Poor Joey. Poor New York.

It’s debatable, or should I say it WAS debatable, whether I’ll be able to watch these games today. It’s going to be tough. I’m not going to lie. But when the clock hits 3, I can do it. I can watch this stuff. Come on. The winners of these games are going to the damn Super Bowl. So what if the Giants are out. So friggin’ what. I’m going to the most historic Inauguration in history on Tuesday, and I’m going to bitch about how the Giants aren’t going to make the Super Bowl? (I will bitch right now about one thing, though. Has it ever in the history of the NFL ended up that ONE team had beaten ALL FOUR of the conference title game participants? Because the Giants beat them ALL this year. And they’re sitting at home. Ughhh.) Okay. Here we go.

Last Week's Record (2-2)
Last Week's Record against the spread (2-2)

2009 Playoff Record (5-3)
2009 Playoff Record against the spread (5-3)

Eagles at Cardinals (Eagles Favoured by 4)
I told you there was something scary about the Cardinals. I didn’t have the guts to pick them, that’s true. But I told you, there was something weirdly obvious about that game that made it not-so-obvious. Jake Delhomme played an awesome game, too. Other clutch performances include George W. Bush’s handling of Hurricane Katrina.

So. There’s a new dilemma that’s developed. All along, I’ve been scared the Eagles are last year’s Giants. Now that they’ve beaten the Giants, that obviously still has some merit. But but but but but. What if the CARDINALS are last year’s Giants? I mean, I never would have guessed it going into the playoffs, but didn’t they sort of reclaim their running game in the last game of the season? Didn’t they gain some extra confidence? Plus, they have home-field advantage, they don’t have to come East or anything, right?

The other side of the story is that the Eagles started turning THEIR season around on Thanksgiving, when they wrecked Arizona by four touchdowns. And besides that one grass-fed egg they laid in Washington, they’ve been winning. Now don’t mistake their winning for having played complete games. The Eagles have NOT been playing complete games. They’ve been spotty on offense, and a little bend-but-don’t breakish on defense.

I’m getting sick of misunderestimating the Cardinals – okay it only happened once – and then finding out that they’re really not that bad. I think they have a real shot in this game. But I don’t know, are the Cardinals really going to beat the Eagles and get into the Super Bowl? I kind of want to pick the Cardinals, because nobody believes in them and they really seem to think they’re going to do it, but this is Philadelphia’s year. The city, I mean. It just is. I’m getting ready for the Sixers to win like 25 games in a row, upset the Celtics in the playoffs and frickin’ win the NBA title. That’s how it’s gotten.

If you want a reason for why I think the Eagles are going to do it, let’s just say I think the Cardinals’ ability to mix in the run is going to stop today. I don’t think they’re going to successfully run the ball on Philly today, and that’s going to be a real key. The game will be played in the 20s rather than the 30s, which favours Philadelphia. Oh yeah, I also think Donovan McNabb is going to play a flawless game, one of those 135 rating, 3 touchdown, no interception beauties that Eagles fans forget about the next week. Well, they’re going to have two weeks to remember this one, and then they’re going to get one last chance – two Sundays from now – to get that Reid/McNabb administration ring. Eagles 24, Cardinals 20.

Ravens at Steelers (Steelers Favoured By 6)
The Ravens have no business being here, other than the fact that they’re the Ravens and they do things in a very ugly way. Pittsburgh has somehow regained momentum, and is playing like the most complete team in the playoffs. The fact that they beat the hottest team in the playoffs last week says a lot. Of course, I’m always scared with Big Ben. He’s super talented, keeps plays alive, is an awesome leader, but he DOES do weird things with the ball sometimes, like throwing it to the other team. This is the game, though, where Joe Flacco will probably start looking like a rookie. The Ravens aren’t going to be able to run the ball on Pittsburgh, in my opinion, and that puts it all on Joe. He’ll show me a lot if he hangs in, but it’s too early in his career to bet on it happening. Get ready for an all-Pa. Super Bowl. Pittsburgh 31, Baltimore 16.

Playoff Picks, Conference Semifinals
So last week, the one game I wasn't sure of was the one game I lost. And I still think that the winner of that game - the Chargers - could go to the Super Bowl, even though as I'm typing this, I think I might pick against them this week. That's how crazy the AFC is. The NFC, on the other hand, well, I think it's a lot clearer. Let's get to the picks.

Last Week's Record (3-1)
Last Week's Record against the spread (3-1)

Ravens at Titans (Titans favoured by 3)
I was all prepared to pick the Titans in this game. I really was. "Joe Flacco is a rookie quarterback," my thinking went, "and since these teams are pretty even, I'm going to have to go with Kerry Collins, the experienced quarterback with the home-field advantage." But then, I was riding the subway, and I saw a guy reading the Daily News. On some fateful page within the sports section, the News had a side-by-side picture of Collins and Ravens' defensive touchdown machine Ed Reed. All of a sudden, I started getting horrible flashbacks to Super Bowl XXXV, when Collins threw four balls that were caught by Ravens and four others that should have been caught by Ravens. I drank nine Heinekens in the first half. The second that thought popped into my head, I realised something. There is no possible way the Ravens are losing this game. I am more sure about this game than any other game this weekend. And the only explanation I have is this four-word declaration: "Kerry Collins/Ed Reed." Ravens 17, Titans 6

Cardinals at Panthers (Panthers favoured by 10)
Technically, this should be the easiest game on the board. I have a weird feeling that Arizona could actually do some things early on, but I think that I'm just delusional. They don't do well on the road - especially on the East coast - and they certainly aren't as tough as the Panthers, or have any of the attributes of a dangerous road playoff team. Here are the things that DO make me uneasy about laying 10 points with Carolina:

1) Edge James ran real well against the Falcons, and the Panthers' defense gave up just about as many rushing yards as Atlanta this year.

2) The teams played a close game earlier this year. (But it was MUCH earlier in the year, before the Cardinals started playing like garbage.)

3) As Bill Simmons pointed out in his NFL picks column this week, Saturday night games can be crazysexywild, like Mike Vick winning in Green Bay a few years back, the "Tuck Rule" game, Romo's botched snap.

Despite all these things, the same Bill Simmons says in one of his 47 "Playoff Gambling Manifestos" that you should ONLY take an underdog if you think the team has a chance to win outright. That's a good axiom. And when I really think about it, I can't see the Cardinals winning this game outright. I think Carolina will run through Arizona early, build a lead, and then be able to rush the passer and all those fun things. Just remember I warned you that what appears to be the easiest pick this week has me feeling a tad uneasy. Carolina 27, Arizona 14

Eagles at Giants (Giants Favoured by 4)
Technically a tough game. They know each other real well. Philly has all the look of last year's Giants, right down to the whole "going into the No. 1 seed's/division rival's building in the second-round of the playoffs" thing. It's supposed to be scary. But I realised early in the week - perhaps Monday - that a lot of things are different. When the Giants went into Dallas last year, they were going against a team that not only had a lot of pressure on it, but that had shown trouble DEALING with pressure in the past. And it started with the quarterback. The Giants don't have that problem. Plus, Dallas is very much a pass-oriented team, and when you have a bye, sometimes your passing game gets out of rhythm, and you fall behind early and get frustrated. The Giants are very much a run-oriented team, so that problem seems unlikely. The Eagles are also woefully inconsistent, and I find it hard to believe they're going to play a third-straight good game. I would NOT be shocked if they kept it close or pulled off the upset - and I can all but GUARANTEE that the winner of this game IS going to the Super Bowl - but this is too much a step up in class for Philly. The Giants still have a chip on their shoulder, and their admirable defense of the Super Bowl title isn't going to end at the Meadowlands this weekend. Giants 20, Eagles 10.

Chargers at Steelers (Steelers Favoured By 6)
A big spread for two teams that played that "11-10" game earlier this year, especially considering the Chargers are the hottest team in the playoffs right now. And I HAVE said the Chargers/Colts winner could go to the Super Bowl. For the second-straight week, the Chargers are involved in the game I feel least confident about. Many forces are going against each other in this game. The Chargers are awesome picking up third downs, the Steelers are awesome at stopping third-down conversions. The Steelers don't give up points, the Chargers score a lot of them. Lots of weird stuff going on. Maybe I just think the home-field advantage is big enough, and that the Steelers are going to play their best game of the season. That doesn't mean it's going to be easy, but the Chargers aren't that good on the road, can't expect ANOTHER one of those games from Darren Sproles and are due for a loss. Plus, Pittsburgh has the uncanny ability to force teams to play their low-scoring, hard-hitting style - I mean they held the high-scoring Chargers to 10 POINTS earlier this year - so why wouldn't that happen again? Pittsburgh 20, San Diego 13.

Playoff Picks, Wild Card Weekend, 2009

I usually pick one road team to win a game on Wild Card Weekend, and then go with the three other home teams. It’s just the formula that seems to make the most sense.

Then, an 8-8 Chargers team, 9-7 Cardinals team, a Viking team with Tavaris Jackson playing quarterback, and the lowest scoring team in the entire playoffs (Miami) got home games. And they're ALL underdogs. What the hell am I supposed to do? After much scrambletating, I think I’ve got it figured out.

Because I’m an enormous dork, I made a spreadsheet ranking the teams in all the relevant categories – or at least all the relevant categories according to me – to see if I was missing anything. I ranked them – offensively and defensively – in scoring, rushing yards, passing yards, first downs per game (big stat: it shows you can move the ball – or not), third down percentage, red-zone touchdown percentage and turnover margin (the crapshoot stat.)

By no means will I absolutely honour everything these stats tell me, but if you believe the numbers, and analyse them the way I do, the best teams in the playoffs, in order, are:

1. (tie) Giants and Ravens

3. Steelers

4. Eagles

5. Colts

6. Titans

7. Dolphins

8. Falcons

9. (tie) Vikings and Chargers

11. Panthers

12. Cardinals

Of course, these numbers don’t account for how a team’s playing now, injuries, etc. For some of the teams, the numbers are telling. I mean, it's clear that the Cardinals are pretty much a piece of garbage as a playoff team. But there are some weird discrepancies. As far as balance goes, the Ravens aren’t even close to being as good as the Giants. But then again, I thoroughly THOROUGHLY believe that the Panthers could theoretically win a game at the Meadowlands to advance to the Super Bowl. I don’t think they will, but I think they could. They’re ranked 11^th? It’s kind of surprising. But I know what I’m doing here. Let’s do it.

Falcons at Cardinals (Falcons favoured by 1.5)

Okay, so the Cardinals are not just the worst team in the playoffs statistically, but they’re the worst unstatistically. They’re playing like garbage, they’re soft, they’re everything you don’t want to bet on in an NFL playoff game. It doesn’t matter though. One home team has to win this weekend – it’s impossible for all road teams to win – and so that’s really the only reason I’m going with Arizona. Well, that and the reality that Matt Ryan is a rookie, and rookie QBs do NOT typically fare well in their first playoff game. And the Falcons’ pass defense is just as bad as the Cardinals.’ And Anquan Boldin is going to play, meaning he’s going to catch 8 balls for 156 yards. I actually think Ryan will be okay, just not okay enough.
Arizona 38, Atlanta 31.

Colts at Chargers (Colts favoured by 1)

The way these two teams are playing, I really believe that the winner of this game could go to the Super Bowl. I’m not saying the winner WILL go to the Super Bowl, but it is very possible. I’ve wavered on this game. The Colts are playing as well as anyone, but the way the Chargers got into the playoffs – winning their last four games including a blowout win in a play-in game last Sunday night over Denver – makes me think THEY may be the hotter team. I don’t know, though. I just have to pick a winner here, and even though Indy can’t run OR stop the run, I’m going to go with Peyton Manning leading a few longish, clutch drives that end in touchdowns (they score touchdowns 68% of the time when they get inside the 20.)
Indy 23, S.D. 20.

Ravens at Dolphins (Ravens favoured by 3)

Miami’s a cute story. They’re 1-15, they get Parcells, they resurrect Pennington, they turn the ball over at a record-low rate, they get sweet redemption (or Pennington gets sweet redemption) by winning in East Rutherford in Week 17. It’s all so adorable. You know what’s not adorable? When they don’t score a single touchdown against the Ravens on Sunday.
Balt 24, Mia 6.

Eagles at Vikings (Eagles favoured by 3)

As a Giants fan, no team scares the hell out of me more than the Eagles. I have to root for the Vikings in this game, because I am scared to death that the Eagles are this year’s Giants. That said, Philly – the city in general – is having some sort of disgusting sports revival this year, and this is not the week it’s going to end. It might be ugly, too. The Vikings aren’t that good.
Phi 27, Minn 10.