Tebow continues to confound his critics (ie: the experts)

"WE'LL NEVER LET TEBOW BEAT US PASSING THE BALL" - FABLED PITTSBURGH STEELER DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR, DICK LEBEAU, BEFORE THE DENVER BRONCO/PITTSBURGH STEELER PLAYOFF GAME

Never say never, Chief. You may have to eat your words.

Strangely enough, this article from the Wall Street Journal (the Wall Street Journal has a sports section?) does as good a job as any of focusing on the central issue to explain the success of Tim Tebow. It focuses more on the things that Tebow CAN do and less on the things he presumably CANNOT do.

FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204124204577151071688443732.html

Clearly he poses a dilemma for defenses around the league.

The Steelers were the #1 defense coming in. All of a sudden they were a band of walking wounded who couldn't stop the most abysmal passer in NFL history afterward.

Dick Lebeau didn't go from one of the most highly regarded defensive coaches in the league to a dunce-cap overnight. Only Romeo Crennel and the Lions have short-circuited the Tebow train and it seems like he has adjusted to each challenge. Who would have thought that a guy with his make-up would be able to respond to adversity? ;)

The Broncos KNOW what Tebow CAN do (see his teammates quotes below). Others are coming around slowly but surely. Then again, that's the problem with experts. They can't account for something that doesn't fit into their preconceived "expert" notions.

Maybe it's time to turn the tables on the experts, and put them under the same microscope.

EXPERT BIAS:
http://thoughtrefuse.wordpress.com/2009/04/15/study-supports-expert-bias/

One of the more common logical mistakes we make is to turn to the expert bias, also known as the logical fallacy arguing from authority. The logical error is committed by espousing expert credentials for sound logic, in order to make a logical argument. A logical argument is founded on logic alone. No amount of degrees or experience can supplant concrete logic.

Recently, a study was done on how expert advice affects the decision making part of the human brain, and lends physiological evidence that we are predisposed to experts over logic. This has long been the contention of logical proponents, the most well known being Nicholas Nassim Taleb, who detailed in his New York Times best selling book, The Black Swan, just how detrimental and pervasive the expert bias can be.

The real problem is, with painful acuteness, in dividing the non-expert “experts” from the expert “experts”. Or, put in another way, how do we know the advice your getting is good advice? That often depends on the particular area of advice sought. The advice of a plumber is quite different then that from a market analyst, in terms of accuracy.

What delineates good advice from bad advice, as the study alludes to, is the level of uncertainty within the realm of the expert. The higher level of randomness found within a field respectively increases the chance any advice given from an expert in said field will be wrong. This all boils down to the number of variables the expert must account for. Just compare what a plumber has to account for and what a market analyst has to. Quite often we feel adequately capable of tackling that leaking faucet in the kitchen, but when trying to plan our retirement investments feel vastly inferior to it’s daunting complexity.

With justification, we approach the expert economist for investment advice without hesitation. We simply don’t know much about that sort of thing. But how much does the expert really know? Considerably more then you do, but the massive degree of randomness in financial markets cannot mean that expert economist can know everything there is to know. His advice has to be approached with a level of skepticism.

The expert bias problem becomes exceedingly dangerous when we remove that layer of skepticism and take the advice as ad hoc certainty. The expert is hardly beyond fallibility, and those decisions you blindly had over to the expert can and do result in disaster. Case in point, the current financial meltdown fueled by poor housing market predictions and the creation of a little understood mortgage-backed security market.

Time for the critics / experts  to regroup and change their narrative. AGAIN. How many times has that been done during the continuing football odyssey that is Tim Tebow?



And I don't want to hear for a moment the argument that the supporters of Tim Tebow are operating on blind faith and not logic. My logic for supporting Tebow has centered on the FACT that this kid has succeeded / dominated on every level he has played at. On the FACT that the QB position in the NFL is in FACT one of the most misunderstood and most poorly evaluated positions in sports. Do I need to bring up the Peyton Manning versus Ryan Leaf debate again? And on the FACT that all this kid has ever done is LEAD his team and WIN games and that given time and patience with the right organization, he would do the same thing in the NFL.

The only place where my logic and my argument has failed is, I didn't think he would do it this soon. Way to go, Timmy!!!

----
Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Denver Broncos - Recap - January 08, 2012 - ESPN New York:

"Tebow's passer rating of 125.6 was the highest in Broncos postseason history.
“
They say (Tebow) couldn't throw. They said we wouldn't be able to run the ball on them. We did that. I wonder what they're going to say next week.
”
-- Broncos CB Champ Bailey
responding to critics


"He showed he's a quarterback in the NFL, case closed," McGahee said. "They say he couldn't throw. They said we wouldn't be able to run the ball on them. We did that. I wonder what they're going to say next week.""

---

It seems like they will say the only thing they have left to throw at a second year QB -- he hasn't won a Super Bowl. Of course, my wife had to jinx that for this year by asking me who I would root for in a Giants - Broncos Super Bowl. Very tough question though. Very tough.

GIANTS CONTINUE TO ROLL:

2012 NFL playoffs -- Jason Pierre-Paul says New York Giants 'gonna win' game vs. Green Bay Packers - ESPN New York:

""We gonna win ... we gonna win," Pierre-Paul later added."

Let's just say I would be very happy regardless of the result and who would have thought that I would say I could even be anything but miserable after a Giants Super Bowl loss. Thanks Timmy Boy!!!

Sorry, didn't mean to interrupt.

Lincecum Playing Hardball In Negotiations

Ruh-Roh, Raggy!! This decision ( and a similar one with Matt Cain ) will determine the direction of the franchise for the next decade. Can you keep both pitchers happy from a salary standpoint while at the same time keep the rest of the roster strong enough to compete for divisional titles and championships.

Both Lincecum and Cain seem poised and savvy enough to make the transition from power pitcher to finesse pitcher. Both should remain top of the rotation guys through the low to mid thirties at least.

Then do you rinse, lather and repeat the same exercise with Bumgarner in a couple of years.

Interesting time for the Giants front office. I would like to see both Lincecum and Cain in Giants uniforms for a LONG, LONG time, FWIW.

Lincecum Playing Hardball In Negotiations:

The Giants and Tim Lincecum are trying to work out a long-term deal for the two-time Cy Young Award winner, but there is a sizable gap in what the team is offering and what Lincecum is willing to accept, Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com reported Wednesday.


The sides appear to have significant differences on the number of years of the contract, and they are tens of millions of dollars apart on the salary.

The Giants had made signing Lincecum and Matt Cain to long-term contracts a high priority this off-season. Lincecum’s current contract expires after the 2013 season, and Cain’s ends after the 2012 season.

CBSSports.com reported that the Giants apparently raised an earlier offer to Lincecum that was for four years and about $80 million, but Lincecum is looking for an eight-year deal.

The two sides are also considering a one-year or two-year deal if they can’t agree on a long-term deal.

A long-term deal for Lincecum probably would cost the Giants more than $100 million, according to CBSSports.com, but they want to avoid arbitration as well. Lincecum made $14 million in 2011, and he could make around $20 million in an arbitration settlement for 2012 and perhaps $25 million or more in 2013.

Can a Christian be a libertarian? - ZIONICA.com

I hope so, because I'm sure I am both. This article perhaps explains some of the reasons why better than I could do it myself, so here it goes.

Viva la Revolution. Good Luck in Iowa RP. Shock the World!!

Can a Christian be a libertarian? - ZIONICA.com:

"Can a Christian be a libertarian?

Christians in American politics have argued for years that God endorses the political agenda of Republicans or Democrats, but is there a third way to think about the relationship between God and government?

Christians from the left and the right are increasingly turning to libertarianism not because it is a “middle ground,” but because it is an entirely different way of thinking about government and power."

The core of libertarianism is the non-aggression principle: that the initiation of force against person and property is immoral, and it is in many respects a kind of political corollary to the Golden Rule. Thus, Christian libertarians think that government power should be limited, sound money and truly free markets should return, aggressive war must cease and civil liberties must be preserved. Despite objections raised by other Christians, many Christian libertarians have found a friend in Texas congressional representative, presidential candidate, and lifelong Christian Dr. Ron Paul, because he also believes in these important principles.

Libertarianism treats man’s sinful nature realistically. James Madison famously quipped that if men were angels no government would be necessary. Christian libertarians take this a step further, saying that it is precisely because men are not angels that government must have extraordinarily limited powers. God does not show favoritism nor does he give special privileges of position. Everyone is accountable to the moral law in the same way. When governments and politicians extend their power so that they can abridge people’s natural rights with impunity, they have crossed the line into immorality. Rep. Paul’s message is that the United States government has been far across this line for decades and the remedy is to follow the Constitution. The Founders created the boldest attempt in history to limit state power, yet presidents and congresses, both Republican and Democratic, have repeatedly refused to adhere to their own rules. True, lasting change can only be found in reducing the power of the federal government.

Libertarians talk a lot about economics, and rightfully so. Money is central to a healthy economy. Christians are also concerned about money; in fact God talks frequently about money in the Bible. God’s warning against unjust “weights and measures” in Leviticus 19 is a warning not to tamper with the market ecosystem of money and trade. Rep. Paul acknowledges the Bible’s concern for honest money as well in End the Fed : “The Bible is clear that altering the quality of money is an immoral act… It is dishonesty in money that has been a major source of evil throughout history.” If the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil, as 1 Timothy 6:10 says, how much more seriously ought we to take how our society views the control over the supply of money? If it is true, as many libertarians contend, that the Federal Reserve is the primary cause of the economic crisis we have today, then the only solution is to restore honest, sound commodity money, free from political machinations and special interests.

It is truly unfortunate that modern American churches seem to think the state’s means of “spreading democracy” through aggressive war is more important than spreading the peaceful message of the Gospel of Christ. Jesus came to bring “peace on earth, good will to men,” and by extension the Christian’s goal ought to be the same. Rep. Paul wrote in Liberty Defined : “It’s a far stretch and a great distortion to use Christianity in any way to justify aggression and violence.” War kills the innocent, destroys property, and bankrupts nations. Christian libertarians believe that a non-interventionist foreign policy of peace, commerce, and honest friendship is more consistent with how God expects us to interact with world neighbors.

Libertarians think that everyone should be free to do as they will provided they do not infringe upon the rights of others. Christians can recognize the importance of this principle by simply observing history, recognizing how often that other Christians have been prevented from practicing their religion as their conscience requires of them. If we do not afford others the freedom to live their lives as they choose, how can we expect to receive the same freedom to do as we choose? Rep. Paul explains that government does not make people good in The Revolution: “The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous… God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.” God created us to be free to carry out the dictates of conscience. We cannot continue to demand state control to restrict people’s personal activity and yet assume our liberty is safe.

Through libertarianism, many Christians have found a way to move past their previous beliefs about politics and embrace a more consistent, more biblical political philosophy. The message of abolishing government power is powerful on its own. In Ron Paul, many Christian libertarians see a leader who points to principles that conservatives and liberals have long forgotten: “A system of government without limit, if unchecked, will destroy production and impoverish the nation. The only answer is to better understand economics and monetary systems, as well as social and foreign policies, with the hope that they will change once it becomes clear that government policies are a threat to all of us.” Libertarianism is not going away, and it surely will take an increasingly prominent place in the political discussion of Christians for years to come.

Norman Horn is the founder and editor of LibertarianChristians.com.

Michael Cuddyer, Colorado Rockies reach multiyear agreement - ESPN

Cuddyer would have been a good fit for the Giants. The article makes it seem like the Rox overpaid, but for the price of an Aubrey Huff you get a more versatile RH power bat. A swing and a miss.

Michael Cuddyer, Colorado Rockies reach multiyear agreement - ESPN:

"The Colorado Rockies have reached a three-year agreement with free-agent outfielder Michael Cuddyer.

The contract is reportedly worth about $30 million.

Michael Cuddyer is a nice player, can play right field or first base or second or third in a pinch, has some power and is apparently a great guy. But he's hardly the fix the Rockies need, Cuddyer, 32, is a career .272 hitter in 11 seasons with the Minnesota Twins. He hit .284 with 20 homers in 2011.

He brings a big bat and a veteran presence to Colorado, where general manager Dan O'Dowd has talked about changing the clubhouse culture after a disappointing 2011 season."

Giants bring back Boof Bonser!! - MLBTradeRumors.com

Not a bad pick up for the G-men. Trying to get a little more ROI from the 2002 bonus budget. The Giants are on the prowl for the 2012 version of Ryan Voglesong. Bonser was solid MLB pitcher when healthy.

Giants Sign Boof Bonser: MLB Rumors - MLBTradeRumors.com:

"The Giants signed right-hander Boof Bonser to a minor league deal, his agency, Reynolds Sports, announced on Twitter. Bonser has a 5.18 ERA with 7.2 K/9 and 2.9 BB/9 in 416 2/3 career innings and hasn't pitched at the Major League level since 2010. Bonser underwent Tommy John surgery early in the 2011 season and likely won't be ready to pitch for San Francisco until midway through the 2012 campaign. The Giants selected Bonser, now 30, with the 21st overall pick of the 2000 draft."

Raheem Morris of Tampa Bay Buccaneers -- 'I will never fire myself' - ESPN

The problem is, it may be done for you. I agree with Raheem's sentiment. You don't go from being one of the hottest young coaches in the league to pure garbage in one year. Only in a talk-show, 24-7 media-driven environment (which we live in today) would this even remotely be under consideration.

Unfortunately, it's easier to replace a head coach (and staff and coaching systems and philosophies) than it is to replace 53 players. Or is it? Seems like that type of upheaval would be more stressful to an organization. And the new boss generally ends up turning over the roster -- in effect replacing the 53 guys -- within a couple of years anyway.

This is the news-cycle driven, analysis by the water-cooler type of environment that players, coaches and management have to deal with. Heck, Tebow went from 5th string to Pro-Bowl alternate in the space of one season, so somebody had their analysis wrong. Same here.

The Bucs would be wise to tune out the media jibber-jabber and go with what they see on the field, in the locker room and in meetings everyday.

Keep Raheem.

Raheem Morris of Tampa Bay Buccaneers -- 'I will never fire myself' - ESPN:

"Tampa Bay Buccaneers coach Raheem Morris made it clear Monday that he feels he shouldn't be made the scapegoat for his underperforming team, currently in the midst of a nine-game losing streak.

"I will never fire myself," Morris told reporters. "You don't go from being a coach of the year candidate to being the worst coach in the league to getting fired within a year.""

The Role of Schools in the Production of Achievement

This is what the schools should be doing. Teaching the core subjects -- the good old three R's -- that kids need to be functional citizens. Maybe motivate them to be life-long learners. Nothing more.

The schools should retrench and go back to mastering the basics before drifting to drifting to other areas that are not germane to their core mission.

I'm not sure why it takes a Fed study to 'prove' what most regular folks already 'know' intuitively (DUH!!). Goes to show that we generally know more than we can prove.

Thanks Fed. Still like to see you dead. END THE FED.

From the St. Louis Fed:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/more/2010-042

The Role of Schools in the Production of Achievement

Working Paper 2010-042B by Maria E. Canon

What explains differences in pre-market factors? Three types of inputs are believed to determine the skills agents take to the labor market: ability, family inputs and school inputs. Therefore to answer the previous question it is crucial to understand first the importance of each of those inputs. The literature on the production of achievement has not been able to provide an estimation that can take the three factors into account simultaneously at the student level. This paper intends to fill this gap by providing an estimation of the production function of achievement where both types of investments (families and schools) are considered in a framework where the inputs are allowed to be correlated with the unobserved term, ability to learn. I do that by applying Olley and Pakes’ (1996) algorithm which accommodates for endogeneity problems in the choice of inputs for the production of achievement and by using parents’ saving for their child’s postsecondary education to control for the unobserved component (i.e. ability to learn) in the production of skills. The estimates for the role of family inputs are in line to previous findings. Additionally, the estimates of school inputs show that they are also important for the formation of students’ skills even after controlling for ability to learn.

The full text:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/2010/2010-042.pdf

Jets' Darrelle Revis is a turnstile with a big mouth

This is what he said before the Denver game. A pretty big game for the Jets now disappearing playoff hopes.

Jets' Darrelle Revis says Tim Tebow's option offense can't work long-term in NFL | NJ.com:

Jets cornerback Darrelle Revis said today that while he thinks an option-style offense could possibly be successful in the NFL long-term — he doesn't think it can be with Tebow.

"Yeah, if you have Michael Vick and, I don't know, Chris Johnson at running back," Revis said in advance of the Jets' game at Denver on Thursday. "Yeah, it can work. Those are probably the two fastest guys that can probably get out on the edge on you. Yeah, those two."

What about Tebow?

Revis paused in thought and finally said, "No."

Not for a whole season?

"No, not for a whole season," Revis said. "Because we know what they're doing, and we feel comfortable in our game plan."

Revis called Denver's style of offense "Wildcat with a good passer." He said Tebow, the second-year player out of Florida, must be motivated by all the skeptics."

And her's what Revis actually delivered when the game was on the line.

I guess the Broncos offense CAN work if Tebow plays against tacklers like Revis and his solid technique all season. Maybe he fell asleep during this pivotal drive. What with the game on the line and the fans screaming and junk, he may have fallen asleep.



To add to his stellar resume this week, against the cross-town rival Giants, Revis can actually be seen pulling away from Ahamd Bradshaw -- again during a pivotal drive -- with the Jets season on the line.

Revis is #24 offering no help to teammate Rodney Poole as Bradshaw runs him over. In fact, at about the :40 second mark, it almost appears as if Revis is pulling "away" from offering any help to Poole.



Revis is just like his coach. All talk, no action. He should learn how to tackle better, especially playing for a coach who built his reputation as a defensive genius. Rex Ryan must be so proud. I think I know how Buddy Ryan would feel.

ECB Study: Big Government Is Bad for the Economy....(DUH!!)

File this under we know more than has been proven. Finally, the socialists are grudgingly realizing that while socialism, Keynesian economic theory and big government may work in theory, in practice, not so much.

ECB Study: Big Government Is Bad for the Economy | Cris Sheridan | FINANCIAL SENSE:

"The European Central Bank may have just disproved the entire European big-government model in their recent release of an exhaustive study analyzing the relationship between government size and economic growth. After reviewing a massive 108 countries over a 38 year time period, they came to a shocking and definitive conclusion:

Big government is bad for economic growth!

“Our results show a significant negative effect of the size of government on growth.”

“Interestingly, government consumption is consistently detrimental to output growth irrespective of the country sample considered (OECD, emerging and developing countries).”"

Now, for most people who operate based on common sense and formulating their opinions from the natural world they experience every day, this is not a shocking result; but, unfortunately, many economists and others need 44 page research studies and sophisticated differential equation models (see pages 31-33) to conclude what most people have known and said for quite some time.

As a wise man once said, "The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus." (see video below)

CLASSIC!!! MILTON FRIEDMAN SCHOOLING PHIL DONAHUE:
http://www.ecb.int/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecbwp1399.pdf

"All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force." -- George Orwell

Giants Hot Stove League

CAREFUL!! The moves that are made during the Hot Stove League season could burn a team come regular season play.

I would have preferred Keppinger over Fontenot, but I can see with his flexibility both on the field and contractually ($$) why Fontenot was the choice.

Whiteside keeps the backup catcher seat warm for Hector Sanchez.

Rowand is gone, but not forgotten. The piece of his salary the Giants pay will still be an economic albatross around their neck. Ditto Zito.

Giants Notes & Quotes: Giants Choose Fontenot:

INF Mike Fontenot was tendered a contract, and INF Jeff Keppinger was not. The Giants were going to tender just one, and they kept Fontenot because of his ability to play shortstop -- a need considering young SS Brandon Crawford is in line to be the starter.


Both Fontenot and Keppinger are 31 with career on-base percentages of .332, but the Giants see Fontenot able to play second, third and short and Keppinger as someone who could play first, second and third. That Fontenot would be cheaper (he signed for $1.05 million) was a factor.
--C Eli Whiteside was non-tendered and became a free agent, but he then reached agreement with the Giants on a one-year contract that will pay him $600,000 if he's on the major league roster and $175,000 if he's in the minors. C Chris Stewart appears to have the edge to be C Buster Posey's backup. The Giants' best catching prospect, Hector Sanchez, seems ticketed for Triple-A Fresno.

--OFs Melky Cabrera and Angel Pagan, acquired in trades with the Royals and Mets, respectively, are arbitration-eligible and were tendered contracts. Each is expected to make more than $4 million in 2012. In fact, all three of the Giants' projected starting outfielders were tendered contracts, including RF Nate Schierholtz.

--OF Aaron Rowand signed with the Marlins, meaning the Giants might get a break. They're still paying Rowand, who's in the final year of his five-year, $60 million contract. But if Rowand makes the Marlins' big-league roster and stays all season, he'd be paid the major-league minimum of $480,000 -- which would be deducted from what the Giants owe him next year. Still, the Giants owe Rowand, with whom they severed ties on Aug. 31, an awful lot of money.

--1B Brandon Belt is going to have to earn his playing time in 2012. He was the Opening Day first baseman last season, but ineffectiveness and injuries made it a forgettable year. He's healthy and a little more seasoned, and he's coming off a decent winter-ball stint. He hit .300 with 30 hits in 100 at-bats in 28 games for Leones del Escogido. He played both first and the outfield.