3 comments Woody Paige Closes His Eyes and Wishes It Will All Go Away

Woody Paige is very sad. Tim Tebow has not been named the starter for the Denver Broncos. Woody has written approximately 97 columns about how great Tebow is and how he needs to be the Broncos starter. Unfortunately, the John Fox coaching staff is the second Broncos coaching staff that seems to disagree with Woody about Tebow's current starting potential. But, oh, Woody Paige isn't defeated quite yet. He thinks if he writes enough about Tebow he can get him back in the starting spot for the Broncos. Of course, first Tebow has to take over the backup quarterback job from Brady Quinn.

In the first article, Woody says Tebow will be the starter at some point and then plays around with facts about John Fox in order to give his readers the impression Fox is an open-minded coach when it comes to playing young quarterbacks or switching quarterbacks on the fly. He's not. What's interesting is that Woody will put the words "open competition" in parenthesis during this column, as an acknowledgment that Fox didn't give an open competition for the starting quarterback job, yet he expects Fox to be more open minded in the future for some reason.

Tonight, in the Broncos' first exhibition at home, Orton, who was on the sideline for the last two regular-season games at home, is the starter — and will be followed by Tebow and Brady Quinn, but not necessarily in that order.

Don't forget Adam Weber. He's in the mix as well.

New coach John Fox's "open competition" is closed. No matter how well Tebow or Quinn plays in this exhibition, Orton will begin the season at quarterback.

What I think is really funny is that Woody Paige has been talking for months about the open competition at quarterback and how Tim Tebow was going to get a fair shot to win the starting job...fully expecting Tebow to be named the starter of course. Now Woody is being all snide and sarcastic at the idea of "open" quarterback competition in Denver. I knew there wouldn't be an open competition and probably posted my opinion too often on this blog. Woody cited, and continues to cite in this article, Fox’s past in Carolina as a reason why Tebow would have a chance at the starting quarterback job. I just laughed at this because the only way Fox would change quarterbacks in Carolina was based on injury or death to his starter.

However, in my opinion, he won't close the season at quarterback.

If the Broncos are out of the playoff chase at that point, this is quite likely. What does it tell Woody the Broncos won’t start Tebow when they still have a chance to be competitive, but will start him when they are out of the playoff race? This happened last year as well. Apparently it tells Woody nothing.

Unlike last year, Quinn has entered the conversation — based on performances in the team's scrimmages and at Dallas, with and against scrubs.

I’ve always enjoyed how Woody takes Tebow’s success and failure personally. He has written at least 3-4 articles about what a shithead Kyle Orton is and now he is basically saying Brady Quinn only looks good when going against other scrubs. He always finds a way to demean other quarterbacks in an effort to propel his boy Tebow into the starting gig.

Unlike his predecessor, who told me he would never change quarterbacks in a game or a season (barring injury), Fox has shown a willingness and necessity to do both.

I would love to learn a little bit about this alternate universe I never got to experience in the time John Fox was the head coach of the Carolina Panthers. Apparently in this alternate universe he had a willingness to switch quarterbacks based on performance and not based on an edict sent from the owner, the General Manager cutting Fox's favorite starter or because of an injury to Fox's favorite starter. He tends to stick with his guys to the very bitter end.

In 2010 Moore beat out prized rookie Clausen to start the season.

Now Woody Paige will give examples of this. Not surprisingly he only includes last year when Fox showed a “willingness” to switch quarterbacks. I say it is not surprising because Jake Delhomme was cut from the roster for the simple reason he would have been the starter had he been on the roster. Fox’s “willingness” to switch quarterbacks was forced on him by the front office and by injuries to Fox's other "guy," Matt Moore. Woody fails to mention this of course. Facts? Who needs those?

But after Moore suffered a concussion and four interceptions and a fumble, Clausen took over.

Fox was willing to play Clausen because Moore wasn’t active for the game. It beat not having a quarterback start the game and running the Wildcat offense all game, though rather than have Chris Weinke throw too many passes in a game Fox had the offense run the Wildcat offense and refused to throw the ball for nearly an entire game.

I'm not kidding.

However, when Clausen struggled for three games, Moore was named starter again.

Basically, Fox switched back to the more-veteran quarterback that he preferred anyway. This is something Fox does. He prefers veteran quarterbacks to young quarterbacks.

In a game against the Saints, Moore was hurt again. Clausen went in, played poorly and was yanked for another rookie, Pike.

Pike was put in the game during the fourth quarter because Clausen performed poorly. As if anyone needs further proof Fox isn’t open to young quarterbacks starting NFL games, the Panthers then signed Brian St. Pierre, who was retired, and 5 days later he started a game for the Panthers.

John Fox would rather have signed a veteran quarterback off the street and 5 days later have him start an NFL game, than start Clausen. This says a lot about Clausen’s talent level and about how Fox feels about young quarterbacks.

The Panthers signed journeyman backup St. Pierre, who started one game — and stunk.

He wasn’t absolutely terrible for a guy who walked off the street 5 days earlier and then was forced to start an NFL game.

If Orton had wound up with the Dolphins, the Broncos' situation would be totally different — with comparisons and a real open competition in camp and exhibitions between Quinn and Tebow.

If Orton went to Miami, the Broncos would now be in the situation where they didn’t have an NFL caliber starting quarterback on the roster. Apparently this is a preferable situation in the opinion of Woody Paige.

I also like how Woody is now bitter towards John Fox that there wasn’t a “real” open competition in camp. He blatantly ignored Fox’s record as an NFL head coach when he was getting all jittery-excited at the thought his favorite little man Tim Tebow might have a shot at being a starter this year. Anyone who has followed Fox’s coaching career would know Orton would have that starting job, almost regardless of what Tebow did. Like any biased beat writer, Woody reports on what he wants to happen rather than reporting on reality.

In one scenario for the Broncos — if, say, they keep the three quarterbacks and Quinn were to start 12 games — the outlay to quarterbacks would be more than $21 million, which is Manning money.

And of course this is Kyle Orton’s fault for making so much money and being a quality NFL starter. It definitely isn’t Tim Tebow’s fault, even though he has been given a lump sum of $6.28 million for this year to be the 3^rd quarterback on the depth chart. God knows if Kyle Orton was the backup and made $6.28 million then Woody Paige wouldn’t let us hear the end of how terrible Orton truly is.

So then after writing that Tebow will be the starter by the end of year, due to the Broncos not making the playoffs based completely on the terrible play of Kyle Orton, imagine Woody's horror when Mike Silver of Yahoo Sports wrote an article saying the Broncos players liked Orton better over Tebow and saying an undrafted heathen devil named Adam Weber was looking better than Tebow in camp.

This is a direct attack on the Church of Tebow and must be met with anger and derision by Woody. By saying anything negative about Tebow's football skills, Mike Silver was also attacking the very foundation of the Church of Tebow that Woody belongs to. The foundation being, "any criticism of Tim Tebow must always been taken personally and is not to be taken as an independent and fair evaluation of his current performance." So saying Tebow isn't the best quarterback on the Broncos roster AND his teammates agreeing is seen as completely counting Tim Tebow out and this pisses Woody Paige off.

Go ahead, give up on Tim Tebow.

Gang-tackle him, and use whatever mechanically flawed arm motion and mentally faulty thought process you've got to fling the young quarterback to the curb.

I think journalism schools should use Peter King's material on Brett Favre from about 1998-2008 and Woody Paige's columns on Tim Tebow as great examples of sports writers getting too emotionally involved with the athletes they cover. I'm at the point I think Woody Paige would jump on a grenade or murder a person for Tim Tebow.

Berate and belittle him, demean and demote him, sneer and jeer at him, barrel and Merril him, but Tim is stronger of mind, body, soul and heart than you are.

I can’t believe the Denver Post allows Woody Paige to write shit like this for them. These are the words of an adolescent child who isn’t getting his/her way, not the written words of a grown man who is supposed to be very good at his chosen career.

Tebow "can't play. He can't throw," Esiason was quoted as saying, and Beuerlein offered, "I'd say he's closer to third-teamer than a first-teamer."

Oh no! Criticism of Tim Tebow! Can’t the media just leave Tebow alone when it comes to evaluating his football skills and only pay attention to what a good person he is? It’s so unfair to him. Why can’t the cameras follow Tebow around telling word of his good deeds and not critique his skills at football?

In a Yahoo Sports article, veteran NFL writer Mike Silver wrote he was told by "one highly knowledgeable member of the (Broncos) organization Monday: 'If everything was totally equal, and this were a competition based only on performance at this camp, Tebow would probably be the fourth-string guy. (Kyle) Orton is far and away the best, and Tebow's way behind (Brady) Quinn too. And I'm telling you, Adam Weber is flat-out better right now.' "

The key part about this group of sentences are the last words in these group of sentences. “Right now.” This is the part Woody Paige and other overly-supportive Tebow fans don’t get and is what causes them to get all up in arms over any criticism of Tebow. This statement by the unknown Broncos official isn’t a complete indictment of Tebow as a person or Tebow’s quarterback skills two years from now, but is the reality of his skills right now.

ESPN analyst Merril Hoge is the engineer on this runaway locomotive, but so many others — inside and outside the Broncos — are traveling along for the ride.

I'm not jumping aboard.

Of course Woody isn’t jumping aboard. He is not capable of being impartial when the topic of Tim Tebow comes up in discussion, so he throws all ability to reason out the window.

Less than a month ago, Tebow was deemed to be the Broncos' starter —

By you. He was deemed the starter by you. The head coach for the Broncos, John Fox, stated there was a competition for this position. Even you, Woody Paige, have stated repeatedly there was a quarterback competition for the starting job. Let’s not let the details get in the way of Woody Paige writing his column though.

the returning starter.

Tebow was the returning starter under a different head coach and the only reason Tebow started at the end of the year was because the Broncos were out of contention and Josh McDaniels had nothing to lose by starting Tebow to see what he can do. Though Tebow didn't do poorly, saying he was the returning starter is a bit misleading.

And Orton, for those who have forgotten, was about to be traded to Miami — at his own and the Broncos' wishes.

Because he is an NFL quality starter and doesn’t want to sit behind a lesser quarterback. That's why he wanted to be traded. I can’t really blame him for feeling this way.

Much has been made of Orton's lack of a running game and a miserable defense in such starts as Oakland (59-14), San Diego (35-14) and Arizona (43-14). Tebow had the same backs and defense at Oakland (39-23) and at home against Houston (24-23) and San Diego (33-28).

Tebow had the same defensive backs in those three games, but the defense also gave up 137 points in Orton’s three starts described here and the defense gave up 95 points in Tebow’s three starts described here. That’s 42 less points the defense gave up, or two touchdowns per game, when Tebow started. So while Orton and Tebow had the same defense, the defense played better when Tebow was the starter. Clearly this is the product of the defense responding to Tebow's massive intangibles and leadership.

So what explains why many of the current players are on record as saying they want Orton to be the starter in 2011. If the defense doesn't play well for Orton and he doesn't have the world famous intangibles like Tebow does...so why do the Broncos players prefer Orton? Perhaps Woody should think about this and then try to figure the answer out.

In the 13 games Orton started, the Broncos scored touchdowns inside the red zone on 17 of 104 trips (one on a Tebow run). With Tebow as the starter, the Broncos scored touchdowns 6-of-8 times inside the 20.

Tebow is great in the red zone. This means he is valuable to have when the Broncos are in the red zone and doesn’t mean he is ready to be an NFL starter.

When the deal with the Dolphins couldn't be completed, Orton was back at No. 1, and Tebow was dropped to No. 2. The so- called "open competition" never really developed because Tebow and Quinn rarely worked with the first unit.

Have you noticed that Tebow’s fall on the depth chart is everyone else’s fault except for his? I’m not saying Tebow wasn’t hurt by John Fox’s love for a veteran quarterback or he wasn’t hurt by the lockout, but Woody has never pinned the fall in the depth chart on anything Tebow did or didn’t do. Woody has no reason for Tebow to be the starter, he only has reasons Kyle Orton and Brady Quinn suck.

This was clear: The lack of organized team activities hurt Tebow's progress;

True. Quinn and Orton were learning a new offense as well and quarterbacks were allowed to practice on their own during the lockout, so each quarterback was on a similar playing field...the difference is Tebow just doesn't have the experience Orton has right now.

the new offense was not tailored to Tebow's shotgun strengths;

Translation: It was a pro-style offense, not the offense he ran at the University of Florida under Urban Meyer.

If Cam Newton fails in Carolina, can he use the fact the Panthers don’t use the spread-style option style offense that he ran at Auburn under Gus Malzahn as a reason?

So again, it isn’t Tebow’s fault he is falling down the depth chart, he just doesn’t have the skills right now to run the pro-style offense that John Fox prefers. For any other quarterback, this would be a bad thing and he would be criticized (see: Alex Smith), but for Tebow this is an excuse to be used.

and the adjustments in Tebow's throwing mechanics and his practices under center were not going as smoothly as everyone wanted.

Based on this statement, wouldn’t you say the adjustments in Tebow’s mechanics are hard to change and could make it hard for Tebow to be a starting NFL quarterback? This is essentially what Merril Hoge criticized Tim Tebow for that got Woody Paige all worked up. So apparently Woody agrees in part with Merril Hoge, he just doesn’t come to the hard conclusion Hoge came to.

In the first exhibition, Orton led the Broncos inside the Cowboys' 10 — and a field goal was the result. Tebow completed a 43-yard pass (from under center), but the drive was stalled at the Cowboys' 24, and the Broncos kicked another field goal. In his fourth series, Tebow was the beneficiary of an interception, and set up at the 7-yard line. He ran for a touchdown that was called back because of a holding penalty. The Broncos kicked a third field goal.

In the fourth quarter, Quinn led touchdown drives of 39 and 79 yards.

Tebow was dropped to No. 3.

In the Bills' exhibition, Orton was at quarterback for two touchdowns, Quinn for one and a field goal. Tebow barely played.

I hope Woody does know coaches decide on the depth chart based on more evidence than just what happens in preseason games. So we can’t conclude Tebow’s move to 3^rd on the depth chart is because solely on what happened in the games.

Now, if "one highly knowledgeable member of the Broncos organization" is correct, perhaps Weber will get playing time against the Seahawks and the Cardinals, and Tebow will be dropped to No. 4.

Weber did not get playing time against the Seahawks, so Tim Tebow probably will stay at #3. Even if the knowledgeable member of the organization is correct and Weber versus Tebow are competing for the 3rd quarterback spot, it may not matter which quarterback looks better because Tebow is going to stick on the roster no matter what happens. He is a 1^st round pick from 2010 and incredibly popular, there is no way he will be cut this year in favor of Adam Weber.

Earlier this month ESPN's Rick Reilly quoted John Elway as saying Tebow "didn't get an offseason to work on (playing from the pocket). He didn't get much of that in college. And it's a completely different thing than the shotgun. Plus, he's only had one (NFL) season. But he's amazing football player. I'd never give up on Tim Tebow."

When quoting something Rick Reilly has said in order to help prove your own point, please understand this is basically admitting that you have no point. Even in the case of Reilly quoting John Elway, I would be suspicious of something Reilly has printed.

What’s interesting is Woody Paige is proving my major criticism of the Church of Tebow followers. They take any criticism as an insult and an indication the person saying that criticism believes that Tebow will NEVER get be an NFL quarterback. That’s not much of what Mike Silver’s column said. It indicated Tebow wasn’t the third best quarterback on the roster right now. Obviously things can change in a few years and Adam Weber won’t make the roster at the expense of Tim Tebow for this year. The article didn’t say the Broncos organization had given up on Tebow, but any criticism of Tebow has to be blown out of proportion and made to be a bigger deal than it is. The Church of Tebow does not allow for criticism of their idol.

I didn't give up on Steve Young or John Elway, and I won't give up on Tim Tebow, either.

But so many others have — prematurely.

It is annoying how Woody Paige refuses to give up on Tim Tebow, but he also refuses to give Kyle Orton the benefit of the doubt. It’s like Woody can’t accept that Tebow isn’t the best quarterback on the roster right now and has to demean the coaches, the front office or anyone else who indicates the reality of the situation. How sad for him.

2 comments I'm Not Sure This Is the Most Effective Way to Compare Tom Brady and Peyton Manning

Michael Ventre has a brief article titled "Why Manning is more vital than Brady" for NBCSports. Apparently Ventre's brief articles are called "Trash Talk," which means he's edgy and will say things you believe but are just too damn afraid to say. Regardless, the Brady/Manning argument is a interesting one, but I am not sure the way Ventre compares these two is the best way to solve this argument. Basically he says because Peyton Manning's backups stink, that means Manning is a better quarterback than Tom Brady.

First of all, I’m of the opinion that Peyton Manning will be ready to go when the regular season starts,

I can’t hold this against Ventre because I am not 100% convinced the Colts very own Forrest Gump (southern drawl, doesn’t seem really smart…I'm possibly only one who thinks is funny) won’t be out there for the first game of the regular season.

even if he comes onto the field for the opener at Houston in a full-body cast designed to keep his neck stable. With a nurse in the backfield.

If the Colts had a nurse in the backfield, then the nurse could probably run the ball more effectively than the Colts running backs did last year!

(Searches for a high-five to give someone)

But the fact that the Indianapolis Colts could conceivably go from playoff contender to bottom feeders simply because of the presence or absence of one player tells you a lot about the value of Manning –

This just in: A franchise quarterback is valuable.

This just even more in: Peyton Manning is very important to the Colts.

So yes, the idea that Peyton Manning is very important to the Colts and his mere presence on the field could take the Colts from playoff contenders to one of the 10 worst teams in the NFL without him says a lot about Manning. It also says a lot about the Colts choice for a backup to Manning. If Matt Schaub was backing up Manning then the Colts may not struggle as much without Manning. Therein lies the rub with today’s Tom Brady-Peyton Manning comparison.

– and how he rates with Tom Brady.

Not at all. This is where a comparison between Manning and Brady should not be made based on what happens when each player not being his team’s starting quarterback. Simply because the Patriots have had decent backups in the past, and the Colts have stuck with Curtis Painter as Manning’s backup, doesn’t mean Manning is a better quarterback than Brady. It means the Colts have a worse backup quarterback than the Patriots do. It also potentially means Tom Brady has a better team around him than Peyton Manning has. It doesn’t necessarily mean Tom Brady isn’t as good of a quarterback as Peyton Manning or is a system quarterback any more than Manning is a system quarterback.

When Brady was out of the New England Patriots’ lineup in 2008 with a knee injury, Matt Cassel stepped in and led the team to an 11-5 record, although it missed the playoffs.

Now Cassel is the starting quarterback for the Kansas City Chiefs. Matt Cassel put up a 93.0 quarterback rating (I refuse to use ESPN’s QB rating at this point), 3116 yards with 27 touchdowns and 7 interceptions. Matt Cassel, and I have been critical of him in the past so it is possible I was wrong, was a pretty good starting quarterback last year. The Patriots had the luxury of a competent backup quarterback, which doesn’t necessarily say something about a Brady v. Manning quarterbacking discussion. It says the Patriots had a competent quarterback as their backup in 2008 when Tom Brady got injured.

Matt Cassel. I think Cassel is an able quarterback, and he might take the Kansas City Chiefs to the promised land someday. But at that time he was just a guy.

Cassel was “just a guy” until he stepped on the field and played for the Patriots that year. Much in the way every single NFL player is “just a guy” until he steps on the field and actually plays the game.

Is this the “Well, he wasn’t a good NFL player until he actually played in an NFL game” argument? If so, I haven’t ever heard this one before today.

His claim to fame while at USC was being Matt Leinart’s backup, and he also recovered a big onsides kick against UCLA once.

Ventre is desperately trying to demean Cassel in an attempt to call Tom Brady a system quarterback. Sorry I ruined the surprise of what follows. So the “Patriots’ system” is what caused a backup college quarterback who is only good for recovering onside kicks, a guy who wasn’t a good NFL quarterback until he got the chance to play the position in the NFL, and is the system that turned him into a capable starting quarterback in 2008? I guess the memories of his 2008 competence are what caused Cassel to have a good 2010 season as well? Did he just forget how to be a good “Patriots’ system” quarterback in 2009 and then remember how to run the Patriots system well in 2010 for the Chiefs? I am sure it was probably the Charlies Weis offense that did it.

Isn't nearly every quarterback is a system quarterback? Every quarterback runs one offense the best, but this doesn’t mean they can’t run other offensive systems well, just possibly not as well. Joe Montana? System quarterback in the West Coast offense. Steve Young? He didn’t do much in the NFL until he got in the West Coast offense. Are they system quarterbacks?

In other words, Cassel benefited from New England’s system.

Cassel had been in the system for a few years as Brady's backup. Any player would benefit from a system he has had 2 years to learn. So Tom Brady isn’t a great quarterback, he just runs a great NFL system? In the mind of Michael Ventre, the fact the Colts haven’t had a competent backup since Jim Sorgi left only proves how great Peyton Manning is. While the Patriots success with that long-haired, anti-American, model-marrying, non-focused-on-the-NFL guy, Tom Brady, isn't as impressive because the Patriots have better backup quarterbacks. These backup quarterbacks' success only goes to show what a system quarterback Tom Brady is.

That tells you that Brady – while still one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time – also is a product of Bill Belichick’s tutelage.

I take exception to this. Tom Brady can’t be one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time if he is completely a product of his coach and his tutelage. I don’t know. Maybe he can be, but I am not sure I could consider a quarterback one of the greatest ever if he played in a different system and still wasn't one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time.

I also find it interesting that Ventre holds this opinion while Peyton Manning has played with far superior receivers during his career compared to Tom Brady. Only lately, when the Patriots haven’t won the Super Bowl (because of the curse of Spygate, why else would this happen?) has Brady had great receivers.

So I am not sure how you can compare two quarterbacks, both of whom have played in nearly the same offense system their entire career, and say Player X is superior to Player Y because Player Y’s backup performed well when starting for the team. To me, that says Player Y’s backup is a good quarterback and may not necessarily say anything about Player Y and his quarterbacking abilities.

Manning is different. You could plug Manning into any offense and he would raise that team’s fortunes exponentially.

So Manning is different because Ventre’s pure speculation that Manning could run any offensive system well says so? Fine, I say you could plug Tom Brady into any NFL offense and he would raise that team's fortunes exponentially. The truth is that Manning really hasn’t played in a different offensive system during his career than the one he currently plays in. So this is pure speculation that he could be plugged into any offensive system and succeed, while Brady could not.

His skills transcend any system.

Again, there is no proof his skills transcend any system more than Brady’s do.

That’s why the prospect of his absence is so dire that tweets from Colts owner Jim Irsay about being in Hattiesburg, Miss., hometown of Brett Favre, are making news.

No, those Tweets are not making news because Manning’s skills transcend any offensive system better than Brady’s skills do. Those Tweets are making news because the Colts current backups have looked horrible in the preseason and they are Tweets about Brett Favre. I’m not sure why Ventre, who seems like a smart guy, can’t seem to understand the Colts have terrible backups and that’s the reason the Colts freaked out enough to pay $4 million for Kerry Collins to be the starter.

The Colts’ current backups – Curtis Painter, Dan Orlovsky and Nate Davis – are completely inadequate replacements for Manning.

Oh, so he does realize they are terrible. So the terrible backups on the Colts roster makes Manning a better player, while the competent backup on the Patriots roster in 2008 makes Brady a product of Belichick’s system.

But I have to think that if one of them had to step in for Tom Brady in New England, they’d at least have a prayer.

Again, you can think this, but there really isn’t any proof this statement is true. The fact Matt Cassel stepped in for Brady in 2008 and has performed adequately since leaving the Patriots would attest to the fact he may have been a quality quarterback and his success isn’t a reflection Tom Brady’s success. Dennis Dixon could step in for Ben Roethlisberger and go 14-2 with the Steelers, but it doesn’t mean Roethlisberger is not as good of a quarterback as Mike Vick if he gets injured and the Eagles go 6-10 with Vince Young starting.

All of this discussion can be averted, of course, if Manning makes a speedy recovery. So put some ice on it, Peyton

So if Kerry Collins plays the entire season and the Colts go 9-7, does that mean Peyton Manning is a system quarterback? I would think it means Kerry Collins is a competent backup quarterback.

2 comments I Will Keep Writing Until Murray Chass Gets It

Murray Chass has tried, yet again, to get me to name this blog "Block Murray Chass' Non-Blog URL." He has a new post on his non-blog up and a sub-section of the post where Murray bemoans the increase in Wild Card teams he has a section titled, "Neo-Numbers May Have to Be Old Numbers." It's horrific. It's clear Murray is still bitter Felix Hernandez won the Cy Young Award in the AL last year. I don't think Murray wants to try and understand newer statistics, he just knows he doesn't like them and much like Joe Morgan doesn't care to hear arguments contrary to his opinion, nor does he attempt to understand the counter-arguments.

Maybe much could change in the last six weeks of the season to change this outlook, but from the looks of things now, the neo-number guys are going to have a tough time pulling an American League Cy Young award winner out of their computerized hat.

Wow. Murray threw a lot at us in that compound sentence. Let's break this down sentence fragment by sentence fragment to get a better understanding of Murray's lack of understanding.

Maybe much could change in the last six weeks of the season to change this outlook,

I don't believe what Murray is trying to tell us. So Murray is saying something could change over the last six weeks of this season and he would come to the conclusion those people who love more modern statistics are right about some things, check that---anything, related to the Cy Young race. Does anyone really believe Murray's mind is open enough to change? Not shockingly, last year the best pitcher in the American League, Felix Hernandez, was at the top of nearly every category excepts for wins and Murray still didn't think Hernandez should have won the Cy Young award.

As we will learn very, very soon...fans of modern statistics, neo-number guys as Murray calls them, were wrong last year when they relied on every single statistic except wins to say Felix Hernandez should have won the Cy Young award. Neo-number guys are wrong again this year when they rely on statistics like wins or use the other categories Justin Verlander leads the American League in because they are "old numbers" categories. See, neo-numbers people are wrong to use new numbers to evaluate a pitcher because these statistics are useless, but if they use old numbers that is further proof of how useless the "neo-statistics" are. So either way, if we use Murray's favorite statistics or not, the neo-numbers guys are wrong in Murray's mind.

but from the looks of things now, the neo-number guys are going to have a tough time pulling an American League Cy Young award winner

Here is the basic failure in Murray's gradually dementia-filled mind. He thinks, because he is an old fart who thinks this way so he just assumes everyone else is as stupid and closed-minded as he is, that fans of neo-numbers (I will accept this moniker because it is fairly short to write, I don't accept it because I like it) ONLY LIKE THOSE NEO-NUMBERS and don't care to use other statistics. This couldn't be further from the truth. Simply because Murray is a close-minded fool and can't accept new-age statistics doesn't mean fans of new-age statistics don't accept more modern statistics AND older statistics at the same time.

This isn't a zero sum game. I am not a huge fan of wins, but I am not like Murray Chass either. I won't say "wins are useless and should never be used." I have no problem if wins are used to evaluate a pitcher. Evaluating a pitcher solely on wins without using supporting statistics is stupid, just like evaluating a pitcher on ERA with no other supporting statistics is stupid. That's why it was (is) so infuriating to hear Murray whining still about Felix Hernandez winning the Cy Young award last year. If he didn't have the best ERA in the American League or a great number of strikeouts you wouldn't hear whining from Murray, but because Felix didn't have enough wins (which is a team-based statistic, not an individual one) then his whole candidacy was shot.

That is the problem. Murray assumes fans of new-age statistics can't accept the use of old statistics to evaluate a pitcher. It's not true. Using ONLY old statistics and ignoring further, potentially contradictory, evidence from newer statistics is what is infuriating. So Murray assumes fans of new-age statistics will only want to use those statistics to evaluate Justin Verlander's Cy Young candidacy, when this couldn't be further from the truth. It is not the use of older statistics that irritates fans of new-age statistics, but the willful ignoring of new statistics which give a different perspective on that pitcher's performance. Those who use Sabermetrics aren't wanting to ignore what older statistics say about a player, they just don't want the older statistics to be the final answer in an evaluation on that player.

out of their computerized hat.

OHH!!!!!!!!!!!! Good one! Neo-number lovers don’t even use real hats. Instead they use a computer as their hat. You can always spot a new-age statistics lover because he is the one wearing a Sony Vaio on his head instead of a hat.

This is just silly. It’s just a cliché to say neo-numbers people love everything computerized. Let me guess, most of them live in their mother’s basement as well? This goes to show just how out of touch Murray truly is. The cliché of a Sabermetrician working out of his mother’s basement has been obliterated by mainstream acceptance of the use of Sabermetric statistics. To try and make a “computerized” joke is for Murray to simply show just how much he has fallen behind in the realm of player analysis commonly used in the media today.

As I have said before, it reflects more on Murray Chass and his baseball knowledge that he makes a comment like this more than it reflects on the target of his ridicule.

Last year they came up with Felix Hernandez,

I like the use of “they.” The second the BBWAA goes against what Murray Chass believes should be the result of the Cy Young ballot, they are now a part of the conspiracy to use computers instead of real baseball players.

whose 13-12 record belied everything the award had ever meant.

The Cy Young award was created for pitchers like Felix Hernandez. It was created to honor the best pitcher in the National and American League. Felix Hernandez was the best pitcher in the American League in 2010. I covered Hernandez’s numbers an enormous amount of times last year and Felix Hernandez was the best pitcher in the American League last year. So Murray Chass is full of shit when he says the 13-12 record belies everything the award had ever meant.

The Cy Young award wasn’t created to honor “the pitcher in the National and American League who have the most wins” nor “the pitcher in the American and National League who plays for the best team in each league.” It is to honor the best pitcher in each league. Felix Hernandez was the best pitcher in the American League. The only statistic he wasn’t among the leaders in was wins...which as I have covered very often is a team-based individual statistic.

The neo-number guys told us that wins don’t mean anything

That’s not true. Anyone can make the opposing view on an issue sound crazy or contradictory when it is framed in a false light. Neo-numbers guys said very plainly, if you are not going to give the Cy Young award to a pitcher based on the number of wins that pitcher has then you are wrong. This is because wins aren’t a statistical category for a pitcher that should be the final determinant of how well a pitcher pitched. That’s all that is being said. Wins are tied to run support, which is something a pitcher can not control, especially in the American League. So don’t deny a pitcher the Cy Young award based solely on that category.

That’s it. That’s the counter-argument to allowing wins to be the sole determinant of whether a pitcher should win the Cy Young award or not. Don’t frame the argument to make you sound sane. What is insane is to deny a pitcher who is at the top of nearly pitching statistic the Cy Young award because he doesn’t lead the American League in one category. That’s crazy and unreasonable.

that it’s the last thing on which to judge a pitcher.

Solely. Wins are the last thing on which to judge a pitcher solely. The fact Murray Chass is framing the counter-argument in such an inaccurate light tells me either (a) he doesn’t comprehend the counter-argument so he just hates it rather than admit he doesn’t understand or (b) he doesn’t care to understand or listen to the counter-argument.

Either way, there’s no excuse for this willful ignorance. There’s nothing wrong with arguing against advances or movements towards different theories, but argue on the merits of your current argument compared to the counter-argument. Don’t argue based on framing the counter-argument poorly and clearly failing to even understand or want to understand the counter-argument.

Forget Tom Seaver, Roger Clemens, Catfish Hunter, Jim Palmer, Ferguson Jenkins, Robin Roberts and all those other guys.

I’m sorry, who are these guys again? Are these computers? I like neo-statistics and I want everything to be run by computers. I don’t even want there to be baseball games in stadiums with concession stands, I just want there to be computer simulations in stadiums where I can wear my computerized hat and eat computerized popcorn.

This season, however, Justin Verlander, CC Sabathia and Jered Weaver are not only the leading winners in the American League, but they are also the leaders in many other pitching categories like earned run average, opponents’ batting average, strikeouts and innings pitched.

Exactly. These three guys should be at the top of the list in the AL Cy Young race. They are leading or are at the top of the American League in many pitching categories, just like Felix Hernandez was last year. Yet for some reason, Hernandez led or was at the top of the American League in these categories last year and Murray didn’t champion his cause as the AL Cy Young award winner because he didn’t have enough wins.

(Also, I wouldn’t put CC Sabathia highly in the Cy Young race. If I did, he would be a distant 3^rd)

Murray is so dense, he doesn’t understand what he is writing doesn’t make sense. Why would neo-numbers guys re-think their position when the top 3 pitchers in the American League are at the top of most pitching categories, as well as near the top in wins, when this was all true for Felix Hernandez last year as well…except he only had 13 wins? Shouldn't this tell Murray something about wins? How a pitcher can pitch extraordinarily well and only end up with 13 wins?

Shouldn’t it be Murray who should re-think his position? These three guys show the direct correlation between runs support and wins. These three guys are in the same position as Felix Hernandez was last year, except the guy with the lowest run support, Jered Weaver, currently has the fewest wins. The two guys with the most run support, CC Sabathia and Verlander, have the two most wins. Verlander and Weaver have three and four “tough losses” each, while Sabathia has one “tough loss.” So Murray should re-think his position because if he took the time to delve into the numbers he could see Hernandez had 8 “tough losses” last year, which if he wins half of those games, then he has a 17 win season and clearly deserves to win the AL Cy Young award in the eyes of Murray Chass. Murray should re-think his position knowing the only statistic Felix Hernandez lacked being at the top of the leader board when compared to the three guys Murray is championing this year is “wins.” So couldn’t “wins” be a misleading statistic?

My goodness, Verlander even has the No. 1 WAR ranking among A.L. pitchers

So now Murray is using neo-numbers to help show the old statistics aren’t misleading anyone as to how good Verlander really is. This is exactly how neo-numbers should be used…in conjunction with older statistics. I would give Murray props for this, but unfortunately he is using a combination of new and old statistics not to show how the old and new statistics can meld together well, instead he is using the combination to show how only old statistics are useful. It’s madness.

What’s a voter to do? He might have to become instantly old and wise.

No, no, no, no. A voter is to use a combination of both statistics to come to a conclusion. That’s the purpose of neo-statistics, not to take over for old statistics, but to help supplement older statistics.

Which reminds me that in last Monday’s Boston Globe, Dan Shaughnessy had a terrific column about Carlos Slim, the world’s wealthiest man and a great and knowledgeable baseball fan, who was at Fenway Park for the series finale between the Red Sox and the Yankees.

That same day The New York Times’ baseball column was about WAR.

(speechless) And? What’s the point? I don’t get it. This is the end of the column. Seriously, Murray quits writing here. What kind of ending is this?

“This reminds me. I watched an alligator on television the other day suddenly rise of out the water and eat an unsuspecting deer at the water’s edge. Later that day, I ate a burrito.”

What is the intrigue with Dan Shaughnessy writing a terrific column (which I remain skeptical could actually happen, so perhaps I should read this column) about Carlos Slim and The New York Times writing about WAR? Maybe I am too stupid to understand the correlation between these two events. Either way, this is a weird way to end his column.

I should probably just be thankful when Murray quits writing about new-age statistics and not complain about how he quits writing about new-age statistics.