fivethirthyeight--2020-10-05--Who’s The Best Of The NFL’s Worst?

Who’s The Best Of The NFL’s Worst?

sara.ziegler ( Sara Ziegler , sports editor ) : We ’ re a quarter of the way through a surreal NFL season .
We had our first game postponements because of COVID-19 outbreaks : Eighteen members of the Tennessee Titans organization have tested positive , pushing their game against the Steelers to Week 7 and casting doubt on whether they ’ ll be able to play in Week 5 .
And positive tests for both Kansas City and New England , including Patriots quarterback Cam Newton , forced that game to move from Sunday to Monday .
After few coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the season , this weekend ’ s events — both in and out of the league — served as a stark reminder that there is still a pandemic raging .
But games continue .
And despite all of the strange things this season , some goings-on feel completely normal .
Russell Wilson is still really good !
The Lions are still blowing double-digit leads !
The Eagles are still very confusing !
So let ’ s talk this week about some of the most confounding — and maybe predictable — performances at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the NFL , 2020 edition .
There are three 0-4 teams in the league , with another — the Atlanta Falcons — likely to join them tonight .
Which 0-4 team surprises you the most ?
joshua.hermsmeyer ( Josh Hermsmeyer , NFL analyst ) : I think the Houston Texans are the most surprising winless team left .
While Bill O ’ Brien has perhaps predictably struggled in his dual role of general manager/head coach ( and now play-caller ! )
, I thought Deshaun Watson would be able to help the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and sideline baggage .
Salfino ( Michael Salfino , FiveThirtyEight contributor ) : It ’ s got to be the Texans , right ?
If we say Watson is a legit franchise QB , which I think we should , then that usually correlates to winning .
If not , that means there must be something really unusual with the team , like injuries .
But the Texans are just legit bad , I think it ’ s fair to say , even though they ’ ve had a tough schedule .
sara.ziegler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schedule , don ’ t we ?
They ’ ve played the Chiefs , Ravens and Steelers already .
They were bound to struggle there .
( I have no explanation for the Vikings game . )
neil : I agree that is a tough schedule , Sara , although they are bad even in the schedule-adjusted metrics .
They ’ re ninth-worst in the league in schedule-adjusted expected points added per game , after finishing 13th-best last year .
We all knew a drop-off was coming for Houston , after trading DeAndre @ @ @ @ @ @ @ THIS much of a drop-off .
That move has kind of failed in every possible way .
Their passing game got worse ; meanwhile , Johnson is averaging 3.9 yards per carry , and the Texans ’ rushing EPA per game ( adjusted for strength of schedule ) is down from sixth in the league to 24th .
Their defense is still terrible , too .
joshua.hermsmeyer : One of the really interesting ways to make sense of which teams are good and bad — and to try to isolate the effect of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look at some tendency data .
For instance , the percentage of plays that incorporate motion pre-snap explains around 36 percent of team wins so far this season .
Houston ranks 28th out of the 32 teams .
Salfino : I ’ d play Duke Johnson , but O ’ Brien is on the line for David Johnson as a GM and I guess is wedded to him starting .
This is why the coach shouldn ’ t be the GM , imo .
Look at their defense against the Vikings , hardly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ receivers and a 100-yard running back .
The trifecta .
neil : Only one team has lost more off of their Elo rating ( regular version ) since the preseason than Houston has : Mike ’ s Jets .
neil : I figured it would be useful to bring up the Jets , given that we ’ re discussing horrible teams .
sara.ziegler : If the Texans surprise you the most , are you at all surprised by the other winless teams ?
Salfino : Since 2017 , NYC “ professional ” football @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won 31.3 percent of their games , the Giants just 23.5 percent .
neil : And we are forced to watch here in NYC .
Salfino : The Giants have largely escaped notice for how bad they are relative to the Jets .
But this is very close to an all-time low in Giants futility .
From 1973 to 1976 , they went 12-43-1 .
The past four years , including this season , they are 12-40 .
The last time that happened , the NFL ultimately stepped in to recommend a general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Young .
joshua.hermsmeyer : The NFL should step in — and relegate them .
sara.ziegler : The Giants had a shot on Sunday !
And against a Rams team that seems decent .
Salfino : Both the Giants and Jets put their young quarterbacks in the hands of offensive coaches that did not have much respect around the league .
neil : 1976 was the only time the Jets and Giants had a lower average Elo rating between the two of them through four games .
Even the Richie Kotite-era Jets and Dave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1976 was Lou Holtz and Joe Namath in the Wishbone for the Jets and an 0-9 start for the Giants .
Good times !
The other winless team is the Falcons — and they really shouldn ’ t be winless .
Can we expect better things from them as the season wears on ?
neil : I don ’ t really think so — our model thinks they ’ ll finish 5-11 .
Salfino : This is where Bill Parcells says : “ You are what your record says you are.
” joshua.hermsmeyer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ above the New York teams .
Those orgs are in a league of their own .
Salfino : I agree they are better than the Jets and Giants , but talk about damning with faint praise .
neil : To paraphrase Billy Beane , there are good teams and bad teams .
Then , there ’ s 50 feet of crap .
And then there ’ s the NYC teams .
Salfino : Neil is having too much fun now .
sara.ziegler : But show me the lie… Salfino : Maybe Trevor Lawrence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the tunnel for one of these teams .
Though the Giants will probably draft a running back or a long snapper or something .
joshua.hermsmeyer : The Giants will draft a defensive tackle and celebrate their dominance over the trenches .
sara.ziegler : Heyyyy , an Iowa State mention in the NFL Slack chat , and it wasn ’ t even from me !
My work here is done .
neil : I thought you might appreciate that !
So let ’ s move on from the winless teams to the many , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including the rest of the NFC East .
Salfino : There ’ s only been one NFL team since 1970 that led its division through Week 4 with four games played and only one win : the 2020 Philadelphia Eagles .
The Cowboys being 1-3 is the most shocking thing this season .
neil : Especially given how well Dak Prescott has played .
Salfino : There is a controversy about whether Dak is playing well .
I say he is .
But the criticism is he ’ s not playing well early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up stats late .
neil : There ’ s probably an element to that .
But their defense has also been very bad .
Dak has had to try to pass — and pass and pass — them into games to compensate for that .
Salfino : The Dallas defense may be the worst unit I ’ ve ever seen .
How can it get better ?
Can defense just slump ?
A coaching change ?
The Browns had 24 first downs — in the first half !
But maybe Neil is right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weird season , defenses in general being worse than expected .
neil : I mean , look at this : NFL teams are scoring 25.8 points per game .
The old single-season record was 23.4. sara.ziegler : The scorelines have really been incredible .
Just SO many points .
joshua.hermsmeyer : I ’ ve begun to wonder if garbage time stats aren ’ t actually “ real ” stats , with the number of monumental comebacks teams have mustered so far this year .
neil : Defenses have been so horrible that no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Salfino : Josh ’ s point about “ garbage time ” is so good .
It ’ s almost impossible to define .
joshua.hermsmeyer : Since this is my brand , let me just point out that there is also an offensive explanation for the scoring increase — which we talked about last week : Pace of play is up .
Salfino : Is it offenses knowing that defenses are prone now to more mistakes and communication errors and they ’ re trying to keep their foot on the throat ?
neil : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s much less to disrupt offensive communications ?
( As we also talked about last week . )
joshua.hermsmeyer : Mike , I think it ’ s a blend of aggressive offense and bad defense .
But other things like going for it on fourth down are up , and 2-point conversion attempts at the correct moment are up .
Salfino : Josh are you saying there is no defense for analytics ?
joshua.hermsmeyer : I think we all know stats are for losers .
neil : Stats are for losers … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Salfino : Dak is really messing it up for the passing game , and there is an ABSURD number of run-to-win narratives .
On the Cowboys telecast Sunday , Daryl Johnston would not shut up about how the teams that ran more last year won more .
How hard is it to see that teams run because they ’ re winning ?
sara.ziegler : Judging from the comments of basically every TV analyst , it ’ s pretty hard !
neil : We ’ ve been fighting that battle for two decades now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really shocked that a guy nicknamed “ Moose ” who played fullback would be pro-running game .
joshua.hermsmeyer : I will always forgive and forget if it ’ s a fullback .
They are saints .
Salfino : It ’ s just incredible how hard it is to beat that narrative .
I mean , it ’ s so easy to beat it , but the counter just gets rejected for some reason .
joshua.hermsmeyer : Speaking of bad teams , I thought this was an interesting but very sad stat : Salfino @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that 14-point lead by us because they blew it in seemingly five minutes .
But we ’ re on to them !
neil : Normally I would feel like the football gods are conspiring against Matthew Stafford again .
But he hasn ’ t really been too sharp this season , either .
sara.ziegler : A first-quarter lead seems like it shouldn ’ t even count with them tbh .
Salfino : The Lions could immediately boost their offense if they just released Adrian Peterson , a creature from another offensive era .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ down until they came to their senses .
Maybe D ’ Andre Swift can be the Lions ’ Alvin Kamara .
joshua.hermsmeyer : I ’ ve seen some smart film analysts say that the Lions continue to trot out the same man coverage each down .
But I ’ m not sure if that ’ s the complete explanation — Seattle runs simple but effective defenses as well .
But against Drew Brees , I think you probably get punished a bit harder for being predictable .
Salfino : I expected the Lions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think Stafford is a good QB .
They have good receivers .
They have one of the most highly drafted TEs ever , and he looks good .
Swift clearly can be effective as a receiving RB and presumably as a running RB too .
There are pieces here on offense , but it ’ s not clicking I think because Peterson gets all those touches and snaps .
joshua.hermsmeyer : Mike , didn ’ t they use AP as a goal-line back for a TD on Sunday ?
I think that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Salfino : Can ’ t anyone do that ?
The average rate of conversion inside the 3-yard line is 50.3 percent since 2018. sara.ziegler : I saw Matt Patricia say that he had “ a lot of work to do ” when he got to Detroit three years ago , though Jim Caldwell had gone 9-7 in his last two years .
Salfino : He really should be ripped for that quote .
How could he lack the sense to say that ?
neil : Will there be a point where the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Or if the Pats keep winning , they ’ ll just fall for it again and again ?
neil : Does the futility of Belichick ’ s coaching tree reflect on his legacy for the better , or worse ?
Better , right ?
Like he ’ s such a genius it can ’ t be replicated ?
joshua.hermsmeyer : Neil , that ’ s a great question .
I think it just shows that the edges he finds are the result of attention to detail and not some overarching system like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : That ’ s a good argument , Neil .
But we ’ ve typically given great coaches credit for their trees .
So there is tension here .
neil : He plants the seeds , but they just won ’ t grow !
sara.ziegler : So to wrap this up , which of the zero-win or one-win teams do you all think will turn it around and make the playoffs ?
neil : The Cowboys , I think … just because that division is so awful .
joshua.hermsmeyer : Dallas is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them a better than 50 percent shot to win their division despite the lack of winning .
Salfino : Don ’ t the Eagles have the most impressive win ?
But yes , Dallas is the favorite .
sara.ziegler : The Eagles do have that half-win edge right now over the Cowboys .
Is there anyone NOT in the NFC East that might turn it around ?
neil : Among the oh-fers , I guess the Texans still have the potential to do something because of Watson , and we have no idea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now .
Salfino : I really don ’ t think Minnesota could .
I like the Chargers .
Justin Herbert is like 1983 Dan Marino throwing long TDs to guys I never heard of , when I thought I had heard of everyone .
joshua.hermsmeyer : Herbert has a better QBR than Philip Rivers so far this season .
Maybe he ’ ll finally help the Chargers win some of those close games .
neil : And let ’ s not forget , the Dolphins are probably better than their 1-3 record indicates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by 3 points against a not-so-easy schedule Salfino : But don ’ t the Dolphins have to make the QB change away from Ryan Fitzpatrick ?
Herbert is putting pressure on Miami to see what they have in Tua Tagovailoa , imo .
sara.ziegler : idk , there ’ s always time for a little FitzMagic .
neil : Give him an extra wild card , and there ’ s a chance !

Who’s The Best Of The NFL’s Worst? Let’s be honest: There are no winners here.
sara.ziegler (Sara Ziegler, sports editor): We’re a quarter of the way through a surreal NFL season. We had our first game postponements because of COVID-19 outbreaks: Eighteen members of the Tennessee Titans organization have tested positive, pushing their game against the Steelers to Week 7 and casting doubt on whether they’ll be able to play in Week 5. And positive tests for both Kansas City and New England, including Patriots quarterback Cam Newton, forced that game to move from Sunday to Monday. After few coronavirus complications during the first two weeks of the season, this weekend’s events — both in and out of the league — served as a stark reminder that there is still a pandemic raging.
But games continue. And despite all of the strange things this season, some goings-on feel completely normal. Russell Wilson is still really good! The Lions are still blowing double-digit leads! The Eagles are still very confusing! So let’s talk this week about some of the most confounding — and maybe predictable — performances at the bottom of the standings: the worst of the NFL, 2020 edition.
There are three 0-4 teams in the league, with another — the Atlanta Falcons — likely to join them tonight. Which 0-4 team surprises you the most?
joshua.hermsmeyer (Josh Hermsmeyer, NFL analyst): I think the Houston Texans are the most surprising winless team left. While Bill O’Brien has perhaps predictably struggled in his dual role of general manager/head coach (and now play-caller!), I thought Deshaun Watson would be able to help the team overcome all of that front office and sideline baggage.
neil (Neil Paine, senior sportswriter): Yeah, I agree, Josh.
Salfino (Michael Salfino, FiveThirtyEight contributor): It’s got to be the Texans, right? If we say Watson is a legit franchise QB, which I think we should, then that usually correlates to winning. If not, that means there must be something really unusual with the team, like injuries. But the Texans are just legit bad, I think it’s fair to say, even though they’ve had a tough schedule.
sara.ziegler: We do have to consider their schedule, don’t we? They’ve played the Chiefs, Ravens and Steelers already. They were bound to struggle there. (I have no explanation for the Vikings game.)
neil: I agree that is a tough schedule, Sara, although they are bad even in the schedule-adjusted metrics. They’re ninth-worst in the league in schedule-adjusted expected points added per game, after finishing 13th-best last year.
We all knew a drop-off was coming for Houston, after trading DeAndre Hopkins for David Johnson, but not THIS much of a drop-off. That move has kind of failed in every possible way. Their passing game got worse; meanwhile, Johnson is averaging 3.9 yards per carry, and the Texans’ rushing EPA per game (adjusted for strength of schedule) is down from sixth in the league to 24th.
Their defense is still terrible, too.
joshua.hermsmeyer: One of the really interesting ways to make sense of which teams are good and bad — and to try to isolate the effect of play design and play-calling — is to look at some tendency data. For instance, the percentage of plays that incorporate motion pre-snap explains around 36 percent of team wins so far this season.
Houston ranks 28th out of the 32 teams.
Salfino: I’d play Duke Johnson, but O’Brien is on the line for David Johnson as a GM and I guess is wedded to him starting. This is why the coach shouldn’t be the GM, imo.
Look at their defense against the Vikings, hardly a juggernaut. They allowed two 100-yard receivers and a 100-yard running back. The trifecta.
neil: Only one team has lost more off of their Elo rating (regular version) since the preseason than Houston has: Mike’s Jets.
The NFL’s most disappointing teams of 2020 (so far) The 10 NFL teams with the biggest losses in standard Elo ratings* since the preseason Elo Ratings Team Preseason Current Change New York Jets 1458 1375 -83 Houston Texans 1528 1455 -73 Atlanta Falcons 1535 1481 -53 Dallas Cowboys 1532 1479 -53 New York Giants 1391 1342 -49 Jacksonville Jaguars 1439 1390 -49 Minnesota Vikings 1571 1532 -39 Philadelphia Eagles 1529 1491 -37 Los Angeles Chargers 1470 1436 -34 New Orleans Saints 1610 1580 -30 *Not adjusted for the starting quarterback. Source: ESPN
sara.ziegler: LOL — what a good segue.
neil: I figured it would be useful to bring up the Jets, given that we’re discussing horrible teams.
sara.ziegler: If the Texans surprise you the most, are you at all surprised by the other winless teams?
Salfino: Since 2017, NYC “professional” football has been awful: The Jets have won 31.3 percent of their games, the Giants just 23.5 percent.
sara.ziegler: 🤣
neil: And we are forced to watch here in NYC.
Salfino: The Giants have largely escaped notice for how bad they are relative to the Jets. But this is very close to an all-time low in Giants futility. From 1973 to 1976, they went 12-43-1. The past four years, including this season, they are 12-40. The last time that happened, the NFL ultimately stepped in to recommend a general manager, and the Giants got George Young.
joshua.hermsmeyer: The NFL should step in — and relegate them.
sara.ziegler: The Giants had a shot on Sunday! And against a Rams team that seems decent.
Salfino: Both the Giants and Jets put their young quarterbacks in the hands of offensive coaches that did not have much respect around the league.
neil: 1976 was the only time the Jets and Giants had a lower average Elo rating between the two of them through four games.
Even the Richie Kotite-era Jets and Dave Brown Giants were better!
Salfino: 1976 was Lou Holtz and Joe Namath in the Wishbone for the Jets and an 0-9 start for the Giants. Good times!
joshua.hermsmeyer: What is Dave Gettleman’s career Elo I wonder…
neil: Not good. LOL
Salfino: Insert Gettleman miming typing at the computer gif.
sara.ziegler: LOL
The other winless team is the Falcons — and they really shouldn’t be winless. Can we expect better things from them as the season wears on?
neil: I don’t really think so — our model thinks they’ll finish 5-11.
Salfino: This is where Bill Parcells says: “You are what your record says you are.”
joshua.hermsmeyer: I think they are a cut above the New York teams. Those orgs are in a league of their own.
Salfino: I agree they are better than the Jets and Giants, but talk about damning with faint praise.
neil: To paraphrase Billy Beane, there are good teams and bad teams. Then, there’s 50 feet of crap. And then there’s the NYC teams.
Salfino: Neil is having too much fun now.
neil: Hahaha
Salfino: More like muhahaha.
sara.ziegler: But show me the lie…
Salfino: Maybe Trevor Lawrence is the light at the end of the tunnel for one of these teams. Though the Giants will probably draft a running back or a long snapper or something.
joshua.hermsmeyer: The Giants will draft a defensive tackle and celebrate their dominance over the trenches.
sara.ziegler: (It’s funny cuz it’s true.)
neil: idk Mike, Iowa State’s Breece Hall is looking good.
(Would he even be draft-eligible? LOL)
sara.ziegler: Heyyyy, an Iowa State mention in the NFL Slack chat, and it wasn’t even from me! My work here is done.
neil: I thought you might appreciate that!
sara.ziegler: LOL
So let’s move on from the winless teams to the many, many one-win teams in the league — including the rest of the NFC East.
Salfino: There’s only been one NFL team since 1970 that led its division through Week 4 with four games played and only one win: the 2020 Philadelphia Eagles.
The Cowboys being 1-3 is the most shocking thing this season.
neil: Especially given how well Dak Prescott has played.
Salfino: There is a controversy about whether Dak is playing well. I say he is. But the criticism is he’s not playing well early in games and he’s piling up stats late.
neil: There’s probably an element to that. But their defense has also been very bad. Dak has had to try to pass — and pass and pass — them into games to compensate for that.
Salfino: The Dallas defense may be the worst unit I’ve ever seen. How can it get better? Can defense just slump? A coaching change? The Browns had 24 first downs — in the first half!
But maybe Neil is right that this is a product of this weird season, defenses in general being worse than expected.
neil: I mean, look at this: NFL teams are scoring 25.8 points per game. The old single-season record was 23.4.
sara.ziegler: The scorelines have really been incredible. Just SO many points.
joshua.hermsmeyer: I’ve begun to wonder if garbage time stats aren’t actually “real” stats, with the number of monumental comebacks teams have mustered so far this year.
neil: Defenses have been so horrible that no team is truly out of it!
Salfino: Josh’s point about “garbage time” is so good. It’s almost impossible to define.
joshua.hermsmeyer: Since this is my brand, let me just point out that there is also an offensive explanation for the scoring increase — which we talked about last week: Pace of play is up.
Salfino: Is it offenses knowing that defenses are prone now to more mistakes and communication errors and they’re trying to keep their foot on the throat?
neil: And at the same time, there’s much less to disrupt offensive communications? (As we also talked about last week.)
joshua.hermsmeyer: Mike, I think it’s a blend of aggressive offense and bad defense. But other things like going for it on fourth down are up, and 2-point conversion attempts at the correct moment are up.
Salfino: Josh are you saying there is no defense for analytics?
🙂
joshua.hermsmeyer: I think we all know stats are for losers.
Dak threw for 500 and they were never in the game. That’s why stats are for losers — Booger (@ESPNBooger) October 4, 2020
neil: Stats are for losers … to learn from to get good.
Salfino: Dak is really messing it up for the passing game, and there is an ABSURD number of run-to-win narratives.
On the Cowboys telecast Sunday, Daryl Johnston would not shut up about how the teams that ran more last year won more. How hard is it to see that teams run because they’re winning?
sara.ziegler: Judging from the comments of basically every TV analyst, it’s pretty hard!
neil: We’ve been fighting that battle for two decades now. Also, I’m not really shocked that a guy nicknamed “Moose” who played fullback would be pro-running game.
joshua.hermsmeyer: I will always forgive and forget if it’s a fullback. They are saints.
Salfino: It’s just incredible how hard it is to beat that narrative. I mean, it’s so easy to beat it, but the counter just gets rejected for some reason.
joshua.hermsmeyer: Speaking of bad teams, I thought this was an interesting but very sad stat:
The Lions have now lost 6 consecutive games in which they led by 10+ points, the longest such streak in NFL history. h/t @EliasSports — ESPN Stats & Info (@ESPNStatsInfo) October 4, 2020
Salfino: The Lions thought they could slip that 14-point lead by us because they blew it in seemingly five minutes. But we’re on to them!
neil: Normally I would feel like the football gods are conspiring against Matthew Stafford again. But he hasn’t really been too sharp this season, either.
sara.ziegler: A first-quarter lead seems like it shouldn’t even count with them tbh.
Salfino: The Lions could immediately boost their offense if they just released Adrian Peterson, a creature from another offensive era.
Remember that Peterson almost took the Saints down until they came to their senses. Maybe D’Andre Swift can be the Lions’ Alvin Kamara.
joshua.hermsmeyer: I’ve seen some smart film analysts say that the Lions continue to trot out the same man coverage each down. But I’m not sure if that’s the complete explanation — Seattle runs simple but effective defenses as well. But against Drew Brees, I think you probably get punished a bit harder for being predictable.
Salfino: I expected the Lions defense to be bad. But I think Stafford is a good QB. They have good receivers. They have one of the most highly drafted TEs ever, and he looks good. Swift clearly can be effective as a receiving RB and presumably as a running RB too. There are pieces here on offense, but it’s not clicking I think because Peterson gets all those touches and snaps.
joshua.hermsmeyer: Mike, didn’t they use AP as a goal-line back for a TD on Sunday? I think that’s a good use of Peterson still.
Salfino: Can’t anyone do that? The average rate of conversion inside the 3-yard line is 50.3 percent since 2018.
joshua.hermsmeyer: Selection bias!
sara.ziegler: I saw Matt Patricia say that he had “a lot of work to do” when he got to Detroit three years ago, though Jim Caldwell had gone 9-7 in his last two years.
Patricia is now 10-25-1.
Salfino: He really should be ripped for that quote. How could he lack the sense to say that?
neil: Will there be a point where the league just stops hiring Bill Belichick disciples? Or if the Pats keep winning, they’ll just fall for it again and again?
sara.ziegler: ^^^ that, probably.
neil: Does the futility of Belichick’s coaching tree reflect on his legacy for the better, or worse?
Better, right? Like he’s such a genius it can’t be replicated?
joshua.hermsmeyer: Neil, that’s a great question. I think it just shows that the edges he finds are the result of attention to detail and not some overarching system like, say, Bill Walsh.
Salfino: That’s a good argument, Neil. But we’ve typically given great coaches credit for their trees. So there is tension here.
neil: He plants the seeds, but they just won’t grow!
sara.ziegler: Bill Belichick, the constant gardener.
Salfino: Belichick’s assistants are Chauncey Gardiner, Sara.
neil: My goodness, a “Being There” reference.
Salfino: Bringing it today!
sara.ziegler: So to wrap this up, which of the zero-win or one-win teams do you all think will turn it around and make the playoffs?
neil: The Cowboys, I think … just because that division is so awful.
joshua.hermsmeyer: Dallas is the favorite, for sure. We give them a better than 50 percent shot to win their division despite the lack of winning.
Salfino: Don’t the Eagles have the most impressive win? But yes, Dallas is the favorite.
sara.ziegler: The Eagles do have that half-win edge right now over the Cowboys.
Is there anyone NOT in the NFC East that might turn it around?
joshua.hermsmeyer: Minnesota could!
sara.ziegler: Stop that.
neil: Among the oh-fers, I guess the Texans still have the potential to do something because of Watson, and we have no idea what is going on in Tennessee right now.
Salfino: I really don’t think Minnesota could.
Texans: Dead.
Forget the Falcons.
I like the Chargers. Justin Herbert is like 1983 Dan Marino throwing long TDs to guys I never heard of, when I thought I had heard of everyone.
joshua.hermsmeyer: Herbert has a better QBR than Philip Rivers so far this season. Maybe he’ll finally help the Chargers win some of those close games.
neil: And let’s not forget, the Dolphins are probably better than their 1-3 record indicates. They’ve only been outscored by 3 points against a not-so-easy schedule
Salfino: But don’t the Dolphins have to make the QB change away from Ryan Fitzpatrick? Herbert is putting pressure on Miami to see what they have in Tua Tagovailoa, imo.
sara.ziegler: idk, there’s always time for a little FitzMagic.
neil: Give him an extra wild card, and there’s a chance!
Check out our latest NFL predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-05--How Americans Are Reacting To Trump’s COVID-19 Diagnosis

For a while now , attitudes toward the COVID-19 pandemic have been growing increasingly partisan .
Republicans , for instance , have been less likely to see COVID-19 as a threat and more resistant to taking public health precautions like reducing their movement and practicing social distancing measures .
That may change , though , as the country ’ s long-running battle with COVID-19 hit a new inflection point on Friday when news broke that President Trump had been infected .
There ’ s still a lot we don ’ t know at this point , but polls in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hospitalization show signs of Republicans taking the virus a little more seriously and maybe even adjusting their own behavior in response .
But political scientists who have been following public opinion over the course of the pandemic cautioned us that a lot still depends on how long Trump remains ill , whether he continues to insist that he ’ s recovering quickly and , perhaps most importantly , whether the Trump team starts handling the virus differently — for example , by starting to wear masks .
“ Attitudes and behaviors around COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — it will take a lot to move them in a significant , lasting way , ” said Shana Gadarian , a political science professor at Syracuse University who is part of a team that has repeatedly surveyed Americans about COVID-19 since March .
One big question is whether Trump will change his own behavior as a result of his experience with the virus , which could have a significant impact on how Republicans respond .
[ Editor ’ s note : After publication , Trump tweeted that he planned to leave the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be afraid of covid.
” ] Here ’ s a look at what we know so far : Americans — including some Republicans — don ’ t think Trump took enough precautions At this point , we only have five polls asking Americans what they think about the president ’ s diagnosis and how it has ( or hasn ’ t ) affected how they think about the coronavirus , but one thing that stands out is that most Americans , including some Republicans , don ’ t think Trump has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Reuters/Ipsos poll , for instance , they found that 67 percent of registered voters agreed that if Trump had taken the coronavirus more seriously , he probably wouldn ’ t have been infected , including about 9 in 10 Democrats and half of all Republicans .
Meanwhile , a Yahoo News/YouGov poll found that 52 percent of registered voters didn ’ t trust Trump to give accurate info about his health and his COVID-19 treatment .
And Politico/Morning Consult found that 56 percent of Americans did not trust Trump to give accurate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of trust is largely in line with other surveys we saw prior to the president ’ s diagnosis , as Americans have long distrusted Trump to handle the coronavirus pandemic .
There ’ s some evidence that Republicans might take the coronavirus more seriously Some polls point to a small but meaningful increase in how seriously the public perceives the threat of the coronavirus , especially among Republicans .
In an ABC News/Ipsos survey conducted Oct. 2-3 , 37 percent of Americans said they were very concerned that they or someone they knew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said they were somewhat concerned .
This represented a 9-point uptick in concern from the same survey in mid-September , when 29 percent said they were very concerned and 43 percent somewhat concerned .
Notably , this change was driven entirely by Republicans and independents , too : 70 percent of Republicans and 82 percent of independents were concerned , up from 52 percent and 69 percent , respectively .
Conversely , concern among Democrats didn ’ t budge .
But not every survey found as large of an increase in concern .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ found 22 percent of registered voters were very worried and 39 percent somewhat worried about personally contracting the virus , almost identical to what it found in late September .
And the share of voters who said they were very worried about the coronavirus was essentially unchanged in Morning Consult ’ s polling .
Still , some Americans may be taking the coronavirus a bit more seriously after Trump ’ s diagnosis , at least when it comes to broader public health measures .
For instance , Politico/Morning Consult found that the share @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were very effective at preventing the spread of the coronavirus increased slightly , from 56 percent in late September to 59 percent .
And what ’ s more , 52 percent of Republicans answered this way , which marked the first time the share of Republicans had topped 50 percent since the pollster started asking about the effectiveness of masks in early March .
Politico/Morning Consult ’ s survey also found that a majority of Americans said the news about Trump made them more likely to wear a mask in public or practice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who view the threat of the coronavirus as somehow overblown may also be down .
Axios/SurveyMonkey found that , compared to numbers from back in March , more Americans believed that news reports about the seriousness of COVID-19 are generally correct and fewer say they ’ re generally exaggerated .
But public opinion on how Trump ’ s handled the pandemic may be pretty baked in When it came to what Americans thought about Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus , there was little or no change in public opinion .
Among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s approval rating at 36 percent , slightly down from 39 percent in late September .
And Reuters/Ipsos found his approval among all Americans at 41 percent , not too different from the 43 percent who approved of his response in a poll conducted just before the news of his diagnosis .
Lastly , Yahoo News/YouGov found little movement among registered voters compared to its late September survey ( 43 percent versus 41 percent ) .
As you can see in our tracker on coronavirus polling , these latest polls broadly match the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diagnosis became public : On Oct. 1 , about 40 percent approved of his handling of the coronavirus .
It ’ s hard to imagine at this point that there will be a meaningful shift in public opinion on how Trump has handled the virus .
On the one hand , it is somewhat good news for Trump that there aren ’ t signs of public opinion plummeting .
But at the same time , other political leaders ’ approval ratings have not moved all that much after they became infected with COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sees a boost .
Although Trump ’ s overall approval rating has ticked up somewhat .
Some experts think it ’ s going to take a lot to shift public opinion It ’ s been less than a week since the news of Trump ’ s diagnosis broke , and we ’ re still getting mixed signals about the actual state of Trump ’ s health from his doctors .
So it ’ s possible what we ’ re seeing in the polls now could change .
But Marc Hetherington , a political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Chapel Hill who has been studying public opinion around COVID-19 and the government response since the pandemic began , said that he isn ’ t holding his breath for a big shift in Republicans ’ opinions .
“ It all depends on how he [ Trump ] handles this , ” Hetherington said .
“ He could say , ‘ Boy , I got that one wrong , we ought to be wearing masks and so forth , this is a really serious virus.
’ But that ’ s very much not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past few months , research by Hetherington , Gadarian and other political scientists has found that Republicans and Democrats have gotten further apart on pretty much everything having to do with COVID-19 , from their personal concern that they might get sick to their support for government public health interventions like mask mandates .
And as we wrote earlier this summer , Republicans have become less and less likely than Democrats to say they ’ re extremely concerned they will get COVID-19 and require hospitalization .
Recent weekly surveys by the Democracy Fund @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finding , showing that Americans continue to be divided by party on whether it ’ s a good idea for states to close businesses and restrict travel in response to the pandemic .
Hetherington ’ s team is still in the process of publishing the third wave of their research , which was completed just before Trump ’ s diagnosis became public , but in an email Hetherington shared with us some preliminary findings , including that the share of Republicans who are somewhat or very concerned about COVID-19 fell from 63 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Meanwhile , Republican support for stay-at-home orders and business closures fell even more dramatically during that period .
It ’ s worth noting , though , that Hetherington ’ s team also found some startling gaps between what individuals said they were doing and their support for those government-enforced public health measures .
By September , for instance , 85 percent of Republicans said they were wearing masks in public indoors “ very often , ” although only 71 percent supported government-imposed mask mandates ( and support for stay-at-home orders and business @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not impossible for these attitudes to reverse course , though .
A study conducted in March found that the partisan divide on risk perception and health behavior did narrow after a number of conservative politicians announced they were self-quarantining after possible exposure to the virus and the White House released social distancing guidelines .
And research by Hetherington suggests that Americans become more supportive of policies like mask mandates when they are more afraid that the virus could affect them personally — which could , in theory , happen as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But Hetherington said he thinks it will take more than Trump becoming sick — or even being hospitalized — for us to see really big or lasting changes in Republicans ’ attitudes .
In part , that ’ s because he expected Republican views to shift over the summer , when COVID-19 cases began to spike in areas of the country where more Republicans live .
That ’ s not what happened , though .
In fact , according to his surveys , Republicans actually got less concerned about the threat of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the attitude is [ COVID-19 ] is just something we ’ ve got to tough out , ’ will Trump getting the virus really change that ?
” Hetherington asked .
More likely it will depend , he said , on just how long Trump remains hospitalized , and how his health fares over the next few weeks .

For a while now, attitudes toward the COVID-19 pandemic have been growing increasingly partisan. Republicans, for instance, have been less likely to see COVID-19 as a threat and more resistant to taking public health precautions like reducing their movement and practicing social distancing measures.
That may change, though, as the country’s long-running battle with COVID-19 hit a new inflection point on Friday when news broke that President Trump had been infected. There’s still a lot we don’t know at this point, but polls in the wake of Trump’s diagnosis and hospitalization show signs of Republicans taking the virus a little more seriously and maybe even adjusting their own behavior in response.
But political scientists who have been following public opinion over the course of the pandemic cautioned us that a lot still depends on how long Trump remains ill, whether he continues to insist that he’s recovering quickly and, perhaps most importantly, whether the Trump team starts handling the virus differently — for example, by starting to wear masks.
“Attitudes and behaviors around COVID-19 have become really concrete at this point — it will take a lot to move them in a significant, lasting way,” said Shana Gadarian, a political science professor at Syracuse University who is part of a team that has repeatedly surveyed Americans about COVID-19 since March. One big question is whether Trump will change his own behavior as a result of his experience with the virus, which could have a significant impact on how Republicans respond. [Editor’s note: After publication, Trump tweeted that he planned to leave the hospital today, telling Americans “Don’t be afraid of covid.”]
Here’s a look at what we know so far:
Americans — including some Republicans — don’t think Trump took enough precautions
At this point, we only have five polls asking Americans what they think about the president’s diagnosis and how it has (or hasn’t) affected how they think about the coronavirus, but one thing that stands out is that most Americans, including some Republicans, don’t think Trump has taken the coronavirus seriously enough.
In a Reuters/Ipsos poll, for instance, they found that 67 percent of registered voters agreed that if Trump had taken the coronavirus more seriously, he probably wouldn’t have been infected, including about 9 in 10 Democrats and half of all Republicans. Meanwhile, a Yahoo News/YouGov poll found that 52 percent of registered voters didn’t trust Trump to give accurate info about his health and his COVID-19 treatment. And Politico/Morning Consult found that 56 percent of Americans did not trust Trump to give accurate updates on his health.
This lack of trust is largely in line with other surveys we saw prior to the president’s diagnosis, as Americans have long distrusted Trump to handle the coronavirus pandemic.
There’s some evidence that Republicans might take the coronavirus more seriously
Some polls point to a small but meaningful increase in how seriously the public perceives the threat of the coronavirus, especially among Republicans. In an ABC News/Ipsos survey conducted Oct. 2-3, 37 percent of Americans said they were very concerned that they or someone they knew would become infected, and 44 percent said they were somewhat concerned. This represented a 9-point uptick in concern from the same survey in mid-September, when 29 percent said they were very concerned and 43 percent somewhat concerned. Notably, this change was driven entirely by Republicans and independents, too: 70 percent of Republicans and 82 percent of independents were concerned, up from 52 percent and 69 percent, respectively. Conversely, concern among Democrats didn’t budge.
But not every survey found as large of an increase in concern. A Yahoo News/YouGov poll in early October found 22 percent of registered voters were very worried and 39 percent somewhat worried about personally contracting the virus, almost identical to what it found in late September. And the share of voters who said they were very worried about the coronavirus was essentially unchanged in Morning Consult’s polling.
Still, some Americans may be taking the coronavirus a bit more seriously after Trump’s diagnosis, at least when it comes to broader public health measures. For instance, Politico/Morning Consult found that the share of adults who said that face masks were very effective at preventing the spread of the coronavirus increased slightly, from 56 percent in late September to 59 percent. And what’s more, 52 percent of Republicans answered this way, which marked the first time the share of Republicans had topped 50 percent since the pollster started asking about the effectiveness of masks in early March. Politico/Morning Consult’s survey also found that a majority of Americans said the news about Trump made them more likely to wear a mask in public or practice social distancing.
The share of people who view the threat of the coronavirus as somehow overblown may also be down. Axios/SurveyMonkey found that, compared to numbers from back in March, more Americans believed that news reports about the seriousness of COVID-19 are generally correct and fewer say they’re generally exaggerated.
But public opinion on how Trump’s handled the pandemic may be pretty baked in
When it came to what Americans thought about Trump’s handling of the coronavirus, there was little or no change in public opinion. Among adults, Politico/Morning Consult found Trump’s approval rating at 36 percent, slightly down from 39 percent in late September. And Reuters/Ipsos found his approval among all Americans at 41 percent, not too different from the 43 percent who approved of his response in a poll conducted just before the news of his diagnosis. Lastly, Yahoo News/YouGov found little movement among registered voters compared to its late September survey (43 percent versus 41 percent).
As you can see in our tracker on coronavirus polling, these latest polls broadly match the same poor ratings Trump had before his diagnosis became public: On Oct. 1, about 40 percent approved of his handling of the coronavirus.
It’s hard to imagine at this point that there will be a meaningful shift in public opinion on how Trump has handled the virus. On the one hand, it is somewhat good news for Trump that there aren’t signs of public opinion plummeting. But at the same time, other political leaders’ approval ratings have not moved all that much after they became infected with COVID-19, so it’s unlikely Trump sees a boost. Although Trump’s overall approval rating has ticked up somewhat.
Some experts think it’s going to take a lot to shift public opinion
It’s been less than a week since the news of Trump’s diagnosis broke, and we’re still getting mixed signals about the actual state of Trump’s health from his doctors. So it’s possible what we’re seeing in the polls now could change. But Marc Hetherington, a political scientist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who has been studying public opinion around COVID-19 and the government response since the pandemic began, said that he isn’t holding his breath for a big shift in Republicans’ opinions. “It all depends on how he [Trump] handles this,” Hetherington said. “He could say, ‘Boy, I got that one wrong, we ought to be wearing masks and so forth, this is a really serious virus.’ But that’s very much not the message so far.”
Over the past few months, research by Hetherington, Gadarian and other political scientists has found that Republicans and Democrats have gotten further apart on pretty much everything having to do with COVID-19, from their personal concern that they might get sick to their support for government public health interventions like mask mandates. And as we wrote earlier this summer, Republicans have become less and less likely than Democrats to say they’re extremely concerned they will get COVID-19 and require hospitalization. Recent weekly surveys by the Democracy Fund’s Voter Study Group echo this finding, showing that Americans continue to be divided by party on whether it’s a good idea for states to close businesses and restrict travel in response to the pandemic.
Hetherington’s team is still in the process of publishing the third wave of their research, which was completed just before Trump’s diagnosis became public, but in an email Hetherington shared with us some preliminary findings, including that the share of Republicans who are somewhat or very concerned about COVID-19 fell from 63 percent in March to 48 percent in September. Meanwhile, Republican support for stay-at-home orders and business closures fell even more dramatically during that period.
It’s worth noting, though, that Hetherington’s team also found some startling gaps between what individuals said they were doing and their support for those government-enforced public health measures. By September, for instance, 85 percent of Republicans said they were wearing masks in public indoors “very often,” although only 71 percent supported government-imposed mask mandates (and support for stay-at-home orders and business closures was even lower).
It’s not impossible for these attitudes to reverse course, though. A study conducted in March found that the partisan divide on risk perception and health behavior did narrow after a number of conservative politicians announced they were self-quarantining after possible exposure to the virus and the White House released social distancing guidelines. And research by Hetherington suggests that Americans become more supportive of policies like mask mandates when they are more afraid that the virus could affect them personally — which could, in theory, happen as a result of Trump’s illness.
But Hetherington said he thinks it will take more than Trump becoming sick — or even being hospitalized — for us to see really big or lasting changes in Republicans’ attitudes. In part, that’s because he expected Republican views to shift over the summer, when COVID-19 cases began to spike in areas of the country where more Republicans live. That’s not what happened, though. In fact, according to his surveys, Republicans actually got less concerned about the threat of the virus during that period.
“If the attitude is [COVID-19] is just something we’ve got to tough out,’ will Trump getting the virus really change that?” Hetherington asked. More likely it will depend, he said, on just how long Trump remains hospitalized, and how his health fares over the next few weeks.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-05--These NBA Playoffs Are All About The Clutch Shooters

Less than seven months after LeBron James argued that it would be “ impossible ” to play games without fans , he and the Lakers are in a fight for a championship with the Miami Heat .
After two largely one-sided games to open the NBA Finals , Jimmy Butler and Miami found their sea legs on Sunday night with a ferocious series of late-game drives and free throws to pull the Heat within a game of the Lakers .
It was a fitting twist for what has been one of the greatest crunch-time postseasons in recent memory .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ 30 for 30 ” after they became the first team ever to overcome 3-1 deficits in consecutive series .
Luka Dončić went for a 43-point triple-double on a bum ankle and hit a step-back buzzer-beater to beat the Clippers , becoming the youngest player in NBA history to hit a game-winner in the postseason .
The late-game offense featured in the double-overtime Game 6 of the Toronto-Boston series set Twitter on fire .
The last month and a half has included end-of-game scoring heroics from Butler , Dončić , Donovan Mitchell , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Davis , Nikola Jokić , Fred VanVleet and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander .
Entering the Finals , 14 shots had been made in the final half minute of either the fourth quarter or overtime that resulted in a tie or a lead change , tied for the most of any entire postseason since 2015 .
Four shots were made in the final second of the fourth quarter or OT to take the lead , tied for the second most of any postseason since 2007 .
“ When it gets to clutch time , fourth quarter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for it , some people shy away from it , ” said Oklahoma City point guard Chris Paul , who entered the bubble on the heels of a historically clutch regular season .
This postseason has largely been an exercise showcasing the former .
As The Ringer ’ s Zach Kram noted last month , the bubble has been a hooper ’ s gym .
While offensive rating isn ’ t at an all-time playoff high , shooting efficiency is .
Relative to the regular season , this year ’ s playoffs through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ biggest jump in shooting efficiency since at least the 2013-14 postseason .
With the exception of third quarters , the 2020 playoffs feature high-water marks in shooting efficiency in every period , but this spike in overall shooting performance is most obvious — and dramatic — in the nail-biting moments when games seem to hinge on single possessions .
There have been a lot of those : Entering the Finals , the average playoff game included 10 fourth-quarter possessions in which one team led by no more than 3 points .
The previous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Broadcaster Jeff Van Gundy noted that one of the biggest differences in the bubble has been the lack of crowd during the final minutes of games .
The removal of rabid opposing fans certainly could have lifted something off the shoulders of shooters in do-or-die scenarios .
In the final 30 seconds of one-possession games through the conference finals , teams had an effective field-goal percentage of 52.3 this postseason , nearly 6 percentage points higher than any previous postseason since at least 2013-14 , according to Second Spectrum data .
Tenuous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the norm .
In the final 30 seconds of the fourth quarter or later , teams trailing by a possession had an effective field-goal percentage of 65.2 , 15 percentage points higher than any previous season and a full 22.6 points higher than last year ’ s playoffs .
And it ’ s not because the shots are coming easily .
Quantified Shot Quality ( qSQ ) is a Second Spectrum metric that parses the likelihood of a shot being made in a given situation , taking into account defender distance , shot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ postseasons for which data is available , this year ’ s playoffs rank fourth in qSQ in the final 30 seconds of one-possession deficits .
By turning to quantified Shooter Impact ( qSI ) , we can measure how much better than average a shooter is for the shots they take in those game-defining situations .
This year ’ s postseason , again through the conference finals , ranks first among all playoffs in the metric by a huge margin , suggesting that we ’ ve experienced crunch-time greatness throughout the playoffs .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s step-back 3-pointer , Davis ’ s 3-pointer from the wing and Kyle Lowry ’ s pass to Anunoby for years to come .
And it should come as no surprise that the two teams still standing haven ’ t withered on the vine or cratered in high-leverage situations .
Among all playoff teams since 2013-14 , this year ’ s pre-Finals Lakers and Heat rank first and third respectively in effective field-goal percentage in one-possession games in the fourth quarter or later .
Behind the theatrics of Butler and baby-faced Tyler Herro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ playoff teams over the past seven postseasons in effective field-goal percentage in the fourth quarter or later and sixth in points per possession in those situations .
In one-possession games in the fourth quarter or later , the Lakers have produced the high-water mark for all playoff teams in qSQ dating back to 2013-14 , having put themselves in position to make timely buckets throughout the bubble .
Miami has had to work a little harder but still ranks 12th .
The Heat and Lakers also rank in the top five among playoff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Finals are staging a marquee matchup of shot-makers under pressure .
These Finals have yet to require a buzzer-beater , but given what we know about these teams , we shouldn ’ t be surprised if we see late-game heroics in one of the remaining games .
If we do , that would fit in well with the crunch-time show of these playoffs .
This postseason has accounted for three of the top four performers in fourth-quarter-or-later effective field-goal percentage and the top two performers in qSI in those situations among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ field-goal attempts since 2013-14 .
In this most unique of postseason tournaments , we had no shortage of questions heading into the bubble about what would be different .
It stood to reason that drama , largely molded by the thousands of fan-to-player interactions that take place over a single game and the general swell of support from home crowds , would be diminished .
Some athletes feed off of adrenaline , and it would certainly be difficult to manufacture a supply of it with one of the most important variables removed from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the spotlight .
“ So much of what makes playoff basketball special is that give and take and that relationship with the crowd , ” New Orleans Pelicans guard JJ Redick said on his podcast shortly after the NBA restart .
“ And there ’ s no home-court advantage .
There ’ s no energy you can feed off .
So that energy has to be supplied by the team .
And that ’ s it .
And I think that ’ s going to be a little different.
” It has certainly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the difference was positive .

Less than seven months after LeBron James argued that it would be “impossible” to play games without fans, he and the Lakers are in a fight for a championship with the Miami Heat. After two largely one-sided games to open the NBA Finals, Jimmy Butler and Miami found their sea legs on Sunday night with a ferocious series of late-game drives and free throws to pull the Heat within a game of the Lakers. It was a fitting twist for what has been one of the greatest crunch-time postseasons in recent memory.
The Denver Nuggets alone were worthy of a “30 for 30” after they became the first team ever to overcome 3-1 deficits in consecutive series. Luka Dončić went for a 43-point triple-double on a bum ankle and hit a step-back buzzer-beater to beat the Clippers, becoming the youngest player in NBA history to hit a game-winner in the postseason. The late-game offense featured in the double-overtime Game 6 of the Toronto-Boston series set Twitter on fire.
The last month and a half has included end-of-game scoring heroics from Butler, Dončić, Donovan Mitchell, Jamal Murray, OG Anunoby, Anthony Davis, Nikola Jokić, Fred VanVleet and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. Entering the Finals, 14 shots had been made in the final half minute of either the fourth quarter or overtime that resulted in a tie or a lead change, tied for the most of any entire postseason since 2015. Four shots were made in the final second of the fourth quarter or OT to take the lead, tied for the second most of any postseason since 2007.
“When it gets to clutch time, fourth quarter, some people [are] built for it, some people shy away from it,” said Oklahoma City point guard Chris Paul, who entered the bubble on the heels of a historically clutch regular season. This postseason has largely been an exercise showcasing the former.
As The Ringer’s Zach Kram noted last month, the bubble has been a hooper’s gym. While offensive rating isn’t at an all-time playoff high, shooting efficiency is. Relative to the regular season, this year’s playoffs through the conference finals have featured the second biggest jump in shooting efficiency since at least the 2013-14 postseason.
These playoffs have seen a jump in shooting Difference in effective field-goal percentage from the NBA’s regular season to postseason per season since 2013-14 Effective Field-Goal % Season Regular Season Postseason Diff. 2016-17 51.36% 52.32% +0.96 2019-20 52.89 53.38 +0.49 2013-14 50.10 50.48 +0.38 2017-18 52.12 51.80 -0.32 2015-16 50.25 49.47 -0.78 2014-15 49.59 48.75 -0.84 2018-19 52.43 50.80 -1.63 2019-20 postseason data is through the conference finals. Source: Second Spectrum
With the exception of third quarters, the 2020 playoffs feature high-water marks in shooting efficiency in every period, but this spike in overall shooting performance is most obvious — and dramatic — in the nail-biting moments when games seem to hinge on single possessions. There have been a lot of those: Entering the Finals, the average playoff game included 10 fourth-quarter possessions in which one team led by no more than 3 points. The previous six postseasons all featured fewer one-score possessions.
Broadcaster Jeff Van Gundy noted that one of the biggest differences in the bubble has been the lack of crowd during the final minutes of games. The removal of rabid opposing fans certainly could have lifted something off the shoulders of shooters in do-or-die scenarios. In the final 30 seconds of one-possession games through the conference finals, teams had an effective field-goal percentage of 52.3 this postseason, nearly 6 percentage points higher than any previous postseason since at least 2013-14, according to Second Spectrum data.
Tenuous leads, it seems, have become the norm. In the final 30 seconds of the fourth quarter or later, teams trailing by a possession had an effective field-goal percentage of 65.2, 15 percentage points higher than any previous season and a full 22.6 points higher than last year’s playoffs.
And it’s not because the shots are coming easily.
Quantified Shot Quality (qSQ) is a Second Spectrum metric that parses the likelihood of a shot being made in a given situation, taking into account defender distance, shot location and movement. Of the seven postseasons for which data is available, this year’s playoffs rank fourth in qSQ in the final 30 seconds of one-possession deficits.
By turning to quantified Shooter Impact (qSI), we can measure how much better than average a shooter is for the shots they take in those game-defining situations. This year’s postseason, again through the conference finals, ranks first among all playoffs in the metric by a huge margin, suggesting that we’ve experienced crunch-time greatness throughout the playoffs. Fans will be talking about Dončić’s step-back 3-pointer, Davis’s 3-pointer from the wing and Kyle Lowry’s pass to Anunoby for years to come.
And it should come as no surprise that the two teams still standing haven’t withered on the vine or cratered in high-leverage situations. Among all playoff teams since 2013-14, this year’s pre-Finals Lakers and Heat rank first and third respectively in effective field-goal percentage in one-possession games in the fourth quarter or later.
Behind the theatrics of Butler and baby-faced Tyler Herro, the Heat rank eighth among all playoff teams over the past seven postseasons in effective field-goal percentage in the fourth quarter or later and sixth in points per possession in those situations.
In one-possession games in the fourth quarter or later, the Lakers have produced the high-water mark for all playoff teams in qSQ dating back to 2013-14, having put themselves in position to make timely buckets throughout the bubble. Miami has had to work a little harder but still ranks 12th. The Heat and Lakers also rank in the top five among playoff teams since 2013-14 in qSI, suggesting that the Finals are staging a marquee matchup of shot-makers under pressure. These Finals have yet to require a buzzer-beater, but given what we know about these teams, we shouldn’t be surprised if we see late-game heroics in one of the remaining games.
If we do, that would fit in well with the crunch-time show of these playoffs. This postseason has accounted for three of the top four performers in fourth-quarter-or-later effective field-goal percentage and the top two performers in qSI in those situations among all postseason players with at least 60 field-goal attempts since 2013-14.
In this most unique of postseason tournaments, we had no shortage of questions heading into the bubble about what would be different. It stood to reason that drama, largely molded by the thousands of fan-to-player interactions that take place over a single game and the general swell of support from home crowds, would be diminished. Some athletes feed off of adrenaline, and it would certainly be difficult to manufacture a supply of it with one of the most important variables removed from the equation. But players have owned the spotlight.
“So much of what makes playoff basketball special is that give and take and that relationship with the crowd,” New Orleans Pelicans guard JJ Redick said on his podcast shortly after the NBA restart. “And there’s no home-court advantage. There’s no energy you can feed off. So that energy has to be supplied by the team. And that’s it. And I think that’s going to be a little different.”
It has certainly been different. The surprise has been that the difference was positive.
Check out our latest NBA predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-05--Jimmy Butler Outplayed LeBron James And Bought Miami Some Breathing Room

It would have been very easy to write off the Miami Heat at different points on Sunday .
Some likely counted them out as soon as the Heat announced that injured star forward Bam Adebayo and guard Goran Dragić , their second-leading scorer , would be forced to miss Game 3 .
Others likely thought they were done when the Lakers tied the score mere seconds into the second period after an unbelievably sloppy first quarter that saw L.A. end up with more turnovers ( 10 ) than field goals ( seven ) .
And if the doubt wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the fourth , when the Lakers surged back from 14 down to take a 91-89 edge — and were just nine minutes from taking a 3-0 series stranglehold .
But the Heat ’ s flame never burned out in Game 3 because Jimmy Butler wouldn ’ t let it .
Without his two best teammates , Butler became the first player to outscore , outrebound and outassist LeBron James in a Finals game .
He posted a ridiculous 40-11-13 line and lifted his short-handed club to a 115-104 victory , bringing Miami @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and possibly buying enough time for Adebayo to return .
Simply put , Butler ’ s performance was a masterpiece .
A subpar perimeter shooter , Butler stuck to what he did best , declining to attempt a single three while instead keeping his foot on the pedal by going to the basket .
He got to the line 14 times and shot a highly efficient 70 percent from the floor Sunday .
Another point that can ’ t be overlooked : Butler logged 45 of the game ’ s 48 minutes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear why he had to play so much : Miami was an impressive +20 during Butler ’ s 45 minutes , but in the three minutes he took a breather , the Heat got outscored by 9 .
Aside from Butler , a couple other things played a pretty big role in the outcome of the contest .
Anthony Davis got his third foul midway through the second and never found a rhythm .
( Sunday marked perhaps his worst and least aggressive showing of the entire postseason . )
Miami drastically reduced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an alignment the Lakers neutralized in Game 2 with nifty high-low passing between James and Davis .
After going zone 67 times in Game 2 , Miami used it just seven times in Game 3 , according to Second Spectrum .
Ultimately , though , regardless of the other factors , one thing is clear : The Heat weren ’ t walking out with a Game 3 win unless Butler had a takeover performance like this one .
Sharpshooter Duncan Robinson , one of Miami ’ s best weapons all year , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And while Tyler Herro scored a couple times late , he ultimately shot just 6-of-18 for 17 points .
Kelly Olynyk had a nice shooting game off the bench , helping narrow the enormous gap between Miami ’ s reserves and those of the Lakers .
But at the end of the day , Butler was usually the one setting things up for his teammates .
By game ’ s end , he was responsible for 73 points , either as the scorer or the assist man , the second-most in Finals history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What made the game so different , really , was the fact that it was a rare instance of an opponent thoroughly outplaying James — particularly on a grand stage , at virtually the same position .
( With just over a minute left in the fourth , after Butler scored a basket that was essentially a dagger , Butler told James , “ You ’ re in trouble ” — something he claimed James had said to him earlier . )
James had a vast impact on the game , too .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a -15 or worse throughout the game , James was almost neutral , at a -4 , in a game they lost by 11 points .
He came up two assists shy of a triple-double and , at 9-of-16 , was efficient shooting the ball .
Still , it was unlike him to finish with just as many turnovers ( eight ) as he had dimes .
More concerning : He often matched up with Butler to slow him down defensively , only to then switch assignments after a Miami player would set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an easier defender to go to work on .
That situation played out 13 times — or just over half the ball screens Butler got while James was guarding him — per Second Spectrum .
Sure enough , Miami scored a blistering 133 points per 100 possessions on direct actions after a switch .
( For context : The Dallas Mavericks just posted the most efficient offense in NBA history , scoring 115 points per 100 plays . )
Jimmy Butler was out for blood in Game 3 , and he ultimately left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nowhere near as banged up as the Heat are .
But if Los Angeles isn ’ t careful in Game 4 , and Adebayo does make his return , the series could get more competitive than we all thought it would be .

It would have been very easy to write off the Miami Heat at different points on Sunday.
Some likely counted them out as soon as the Heat announced that injured star forward Bam Adebayo and guard Goran Dragić, their second-leading scorer, would be forced to miss Game 3. Others likely thought they were done when the Lakers tied the score mere seconds into the second period after an unbelievably sloppy first quarter that saw L.A. end up with more turnovers (10) than field goals (seven).
And if the doubt wasn’t there yet, it likely was by the fourth, when the Lakers surged back from 14 down to take a 91-89 edge — and were just nine minutes from taking a 3-0 series stranglehold.
But the Heat’s flame never burned out in Game 3 because Jimmy Butler wouldn’t let it. Without his two best teammates, Butler became the first player to outscore, outrebound and outassist LeBron James in a Finals game. He posted a ridiculous 40-11-13 line and lifted his short-handed club to a 115-104 victory, bringing Miami within a game of tying the series and possibly buying enough time for Adebayo to return.
Simply put, Butler’s performance was a masterpiece. A subpar perimeter shooter, Butler stuck to what he did best, declining to attempt a single three while instead keeping his foot on the pedal by going to the basket. He got to the line 14 times and shot a highly efficient 70 percent from the floor Sunday.
Another point that can’t be overlooked: Butler logged 45 of the game’s 48 minutes. And looking at plus/minus, it was clear why he had to play so much: Miami was an impressive +20 during Butler’s 45 minutes, but in the three minutes he took a breather, the Heat got outscored by 9.
Aside from Butler, a couple other things played a pretty big role in the outcome of the contest. Anthony Davis got his third foul midway through the second and never found a rhythm. (Sunday marked perhaps his worst and least aggressive showing of the entire postseason.) Miami drastically reduced how often it went zone on D, an alignment the Lakers neutralized in Game 2 with nifty high-low passing between James and Davis. After going zone 67 times in Game 2, Miami used it just seven times in Game 3, according to Second Spectrum.
Ultimately, though, regardless of the other factors, one thing is clear: The Heat weren’t walking out with a Game 3 win unless Butler had a takeover performance like this one. Sharpshooter Duncan Robinson, one of Miami’s best weapons all year, has yet to get things rolling. And while Tyler Herro scored a couple times late, he ultimately shot just 6-of-18 for 17 points.
Kelly Olynyk had a nice shooting game off the bench, helping narrow the enormous gap between Miami’s reserves and those of the Lakers. But at the end of the day, Butler was usually the one setting things up for his teammates. By game’s end, he was responsible for 73 points, either as the scorer or the assist man, the second-most in Finals history, per the Elias Sports Bureau.
What made the game so different, really, was the fact that it was a rare instance of an opponent thoroughly outplaying James — particularly on a grand stage, at virtually the same position. (With just over a minute left in the fourth, after Butler scored a basket that was essentially a dagger, Butler told James, “You’re in trouble” — something he claimed James had said to him earlier.)
James had a vast impact on the game, too. While his fellow Laker starters were all a -15 or worse throughout the game, James was almost neutral, at a -4, in a game they lost by 11 points. He came up two assists shy of a triple-double and, at 9-of-16, was efficient shooting the ball.
Still, it was unlike him to finish with just as many turnovers (eight) as he had dimes. More concerning: He often matched up with Butler to slow him down defensively, only to then switch assignments after a Miami player would set a screen in hopes of getting Butler an easier defender to go to work on. That situation played out 13 times — or just over half the ball screens Butler got while James was guarding him — per Second Spectrum. Sure enough, Miami scored a blistering 133 points per 100 possessions on direct actions after a switch. (For context: The Dallas Mavericks just posted the most efficient offense in NBA history, scoring 115 points per 100 plays.)
Jimmy Butler was out for blood in Game 3, and he ultimately left the Lakers wounded. They’re nowhere near as banged up as the Heat are. But if Los Angeles isn’t careful in Game 4, and Adebayo does make his return, the series could get more competitive than we all thought it would be.
Check out our latest NBA predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-06--The Economy Was Trump’s One Remaining Advantage. Now He Might Have Blown It.

President Trump was already in a deep electoral hole following the first debate , but one remaining bright spot for him was the economy .
So calling on Republican leaders to end talks with Democrats on another stimulus package — as Trump did on Tuesday — would seem like a bad move for the president , and , in fact , it did send the stock market tumbling .
True , U.S. GDP fell at an annualized rate of 31.7 percent in the second quarter , the largest ever quarterly decline .
But Trump ’ s approval ratings on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : 51 percent of voters approve of his economic handling and 47 percent disapprove of it , according to the Real Clear Politics average .
The economy has also been one of the few issues on which polls regularly find that voters prefer Trump to Joe Biden .
How to explain this seeming disconnect ?
Well , Trump can actually make some decent arguments to voters about the economy that are grounded in the data .
For instance , the economy was pretty good during his first three years in office .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Atlanta Federal Reserve ’ s “ nowcast ” estimates that GDP grew by a 35.3 percent annualized rate in the third quarter , which ended on Sept. 30 .
That still leaves the economy in worse shape than before the pandemic , but not that much worse .
Trump had also been able to patch a lot of holes in the economy with the series of stimulus packages passed by Congress earlier this year , which injected trillions of dollars into the economy in the form of direct cash payments , expanded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Indeed , one of the economic indicators that has historically been among the most reliable predictors of the election — disposable income — sharply increased amid the pandemic because of the stimulus benefits , although it has since fallen as those benefits have lapsed : The FiveThirtyEight economic index , an element of our presidential forecast , is pretty consistent , too , with Trump ’ s decent approval ratings on the economy , in part because of that growth in disposable income .
Here ’ s what it said as of Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the table below , three of the six categories we use — income , inflation and the stock market — were actually slightly positive for Trump .
That partly makes up for exceptionally poor jobs numbers , and fairly poor pandemic-driven numbers on manufacturing and consumer spending .
( The values in our economic index are z-scores , or the number of standard deviations above or below the mean in each category , based on past and projected economic data in the two years in the runup to the election with recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And , overall , if we average the six categories together , the economic index is only about half a standard deviation below average .
In a time of high polarization and since Trump is an elected incumbent — elected incumbents usually win reelection — this isn ’ t that bad .
In fact , the “ fundamentals ” part of our model actually predicted an almost 50/50 split in the popular vote based on recent values of the economic index .
Clearly the economic index doesn ’ t capture all that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — especially since Trump is 8 or 9 points behind in national polls .
But stay with me for a moment .
We can use the index to get some rough idea of how much the stimulus funding earlier in the year might have helped Trump .
Suppose , for instance , that absent any stimulus , the disposable income component of our index had a z-score of -2.39 , which was as bad as the jobs component .
If that were the case , Trump would then have been favored to lose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the index , instead of it being tied .
So maybe instead of being 8 or 9 points down in polls — given how poorly voters think he ’ s handled COVID-19 and everything else — he might have been 11 or 12 points behind instead .
And that probably isn ’ t going far enough , since the stimulus package likely also helped with other categories such as manufacturing and consumer spending .
Judging by the reaction of investors after talks broke off on Tuesday , it also helped keep the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that five of the six indicators in our index — everything other than inflation — had a z-score as bad as the jobs component ( -2.39 ) .
Under that scenario , Trump would have been expected to lose by 8 points based on the economic index and incumbency .
Throw his other problems into the mix and we ’ d potentially be talking about a mid-double-digit loss .
That ’ s certainly not to imply that the collapse of further stimulus spending will cause a further 3-point or 8-point shift in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes pretty close to the election ( in our model , only 11 percent of the forecast is now based on the economy and incumbency , and this will fall to 0 percent by Election Day ) , the stimulus wasn ’ t necessarily likely to pass anyway , and the failure of further stimulus funding doesn ’ t entirely erase the fact that people and businesses did get some help in the spring .
But it ’ s still a hard move to comprehend , especially at a time when the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mildly in some polls , and sharply so in others .
And the way Trump went about it makes matters worse for him , politically .
Up until this point , House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi had faced at least a little bit of a risk : Though the stimulus might have helped Trump , she could have been partly blamed if talks collapsed .
But now , Trump ’ s tweets make it clear that he was the one who pulled out of the talks .
Further stimulus spending was also really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York Times/Siena College national poll in late September favored a $ 2 trillion stimulus package by a 72-23 margin .
The possibility that the race would tighten in the stretch run because of economic improvement was one of the things helping Trump most in our model .
Trump ’ s Electoral College chances were at 17 percent in our forecast as of Tuesday afternoon — his lowest figure of the year — but still a lot better than zero .
The economic index was responsible for part of that 17 percent , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibly encountering news of layoffs instead of renewed growth , Trump may have undermined his best comeback strategy .

President Trump was already in a deep electoral hole following the first debate, but one remaining bright spot for him was the economy. So calling on Republican leaders to end talks with Democrats on another stimulus package — as Trump did on Tuesday — would seem like a bad move for the president, and, in fact, it did send the stock market tumbling.
True, U.S. GDP fell at an annualized rate of 31.7 percent in the second quarter, the largest ever quarterly decline. But Trump’s approval ratings on the economy had remained relatively solid despite this: 51 percent of voters approve of his economic handling and 47 percent disapprove of it, according to the Real Clear Politics average. The economy has also been one of the few issues on which polls regularly find that voters prefer Trump to Joe Biden.
How to explain this seeming disconnect? Well, Trump can actually make some decent arguments to voters about the economy that are grounded in the data. For instance, the economy was pretty good during his first three years in office. And the rebound has been pretty swift. The Atlanta Federal Reserve’s “nowcast” estimates that GDP grew by a 35.3 percent annualized rate in the third quarter, which ended on Sept. 30. That still leaves the economy in worse shape than before the pandemic, but not that much worse.
Trump had also been able to patch a lot of holes in the economy with the series of stimulus packages passed by Congress earlier this year, which injected trillions of dollars into the economy in the form of direct cash payments, expanded unemployment benefits and protections for businesses. Indeed, one of the economic indicators that has historically been among the most reliable predictors of the election — disposable income — sharply increased amid the pandemic because of the stimulus benefits, although it has since fallen as those benefits have lapsed:
The FiveThirtyEight economic index, an element of our presidential forecast, is pretty consistent, too, with Trump’s decent approval ratings on the economy, in part because of that growth in disposable income. Here’s what it said as of Tuesday morning, and as you can see in the table below, three of the six categories we use — income, inflation and the stock market — were actually slightly positive for Trump. That partly makes up for exceptionally poor jobs numbers, and fairly poor pandemic-driven numbers on manufacturing and consumer spending. (The values in our economic index are z-scores, or the number of standard deviations above or below the mean in each category, based on past and projected economic data in the two years in the runup to the election with recent quarters weighted much more heavily.)
The economic news wasn’t all that bad FiveThirtyEight’s economic Index as of 8 a.m. Eastern on Oct. 6, 2020 Category Indicator Z-Score Income Real disposable personal income +0.57 Inflation Consumer price index +0.64 Jobs Nonfarm payrolls -2.39 Manufacturing Industrial production -1.34 Spending Personal consumption expenditures -1.11 Stock Market S&P 500 +0.79 Combined Average of all six indicators -0.47 The values in our economic index are z-scores, or the number of standard deviations above or below the mean in each category, based on past and projected economic data in the two years in the runup to the election with recent quarters weighted much more heavily.
And, overall, if we average the six categories together, the economic index is only about half a standard deviation below average. In a time of high polarization and since Trump is an elected incumbent — elected incumbents usually win reelection — this isn’t that bad. In fact, the “fundamentals” part of our model actually predicted an almost 50/50 split in the popular vote based on recent values of the economic index.
Clearly the economic index doesn’t capture all that is going on in the country, though — especially since Trump is 8 or 9 points behind in national polls. But stay with me for a moment. We can use the index to get some rough idea of how much the stimulus funding earlier in the year might have helped Trump.
Suppose, for instance, that absent any stimulus, the disposable income component of our index had a z-score of -2.39, which was as bad as the jobs component. If that were the case, Trump would then have been favored to lose the popular vote by 3 points based on the index, instead of it being tied. So maybe instead of being 8 or 9 points down in polls — given how poorly voters think he’s handled COVID-19 and everything else — he might have been 11 or 12 points behind instead.
And that probably isn’t going far enough, since the stimulus package likely also helped with other categories such as manufacturing and consumer spending. Judging by the reaction of investors after talks broke off on Tuesday, it also helped keep the stock market happy. So suppose instead that five of the six indicators in our index — everything other than inflation — had a z-score as bad as the jobs component (-2.39). Under that scenario, Trump would have been expected to lose by 8 points based on the economic index and incumbency. Throw his other problems into the mix and we’d potentially be talking about a mid-double-digit loss.
That’s certainly not to imply that the collapse of further stimulus spending will cause a further 3-point or 8-point shift in the polls away from Trump. The news comes pretty close to the election (in our model, only 11 percent of the forecast is now based on the economy and incumbency, and this will fall to 0 percent by Election Day), the stimulus wasn’t necessarily likely to pass anyway, and the failure of further stimulus funding doesn’t entirely erase the fact that people and businesses did get some help in the spring.
But it’s still a hard move to comprehend, especially at a time when the president’s numbers were already declining — mildly in some polls, and sharply so in others. And the way Trump went about it makes matters worse for him, politically. Up until this point, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi had faced at least a little bit of a risk: Though the stimulus might have helped Trump, she could have been partly blamed if talks collapsed. But now, Trump’s tweets make it clear that he was the one who pulled out of the talks.
Further stimulus spending was also really popular. Voters surveyed in the New York Times/Siena College national poll in late September favored a $2 trillion stimulus package by a 72-23 margin.
The possibility that the race would tighten in the stretch run because of economic improvement was one of the things helping Trump most in our model. Trump’s Electoral College chances were at 17 percent in our forecast as of Tuesday afternoon — his lowest figure of the year — but still a lot better than zero. The economic index was responsible for part of that 17 percent, however. Now, though, with voters possibly encountering news of layoffs instead of renewed growth, Trump may have undermined his best comeback strategy.


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-06--Which Bill O’Brien Was Worse, The Coach Or The GM?

We start with the NFL , where the Houston Texans fired dual GM and head coach Bill O ’ Brien after the team ’ s 0-4 start .
Several other teams with bad starts , including Houston ’ s neighbors in Dallas , aren ’ t quite out of things yet .
But the Texans ’ situation is particularly bad , as they don ’ t even have many draft picks they could use to tank for next year .
Their investment in running backs is in opposition to how most of the league operates , and it works against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Watson .
Maybe only Bill Belichick could coach and GM successfully , but O ’ Brien definitely wasn ’ t up to the job ( s ) .
Speaking of Belichick , we also discuss the impact that COVID-19 has had on his team and the rest of the league this week .
The NFL has precious little wiggle room if more teams suffer outbreaks , but on a league level , so far it ’ s a navigable situation .
On the team level , there ’ s hope for a renewed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one wants to be in the position Cam Newton was in this week — watching the New England Patriots hang in with the Kansas City Chiefs until they couldn ’ t .
Next , we ’ re joined by Lyndsey D ’ Arcangelo of The Athletic to talk about the WNBA Finals between the Las Vegas Aces and the Seattle Storm .
The Storm could clinch the title as early as tonight after putting in dominating performances the first two games .
A lot of that is down to the team ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are having a great postseason , as many would expect , but the Storm had five players in double figures in Game 2 .
They have a well-rounded and opportunistic style of play that has kept them dangerous throughout the playoffs .
The Aces haven ’ t found a way to win without Dearica Hamby , even though regular-season MVP A ’ ja Wilson scored 20 points herself in Game 2 , but if they can tighten up their defense , they might be able to claw a game back .
The real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself , though .
Expanded access to games on ESPN and increased visibility has helped grow the league ’ s popularity — one bright spot in the midst of 2020 .
But that means the WNBA will need to really push for that visibility to continue into next year .
There are no laurels to rest on yet .
Finally , in the Rabbit Hole , we talk about the curious case of Dion Waiters , who played for both the Los Angeles Lakers and Miami Heat this year and so will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the NBA Finals .
Neil takes us on a tour of other players who were guaranteed rings because of a trade — there aren ’ t too many in basketball or football , but it turns out there ’ s a good group of baseball and hockey players who were guaranteed a ring by playing both sides .
What we ’ re looking at this week : • The best of the NFL ’ s worst .
• How the Seattle Storm are on the brink of another title .
• And check @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Lonnie Smith .

We start with the NFL, where the Houston Texans fired dual GM and head coach Bill O’Brien after the team’s 0-4 start. Several other teams with bad starts, including Houston’s neighbors in Dallas, aren’t quite out of things yet. But the Texans’ situation is particularly bad, as they don’t even have many draft picks they could use to tank for next year. Their investment in running backs is in opposition to how most of the league operates, and it works against the incredible talent they have in Deshaun Watson. Maybe only Bill Belichick could coach and GM successfully, but O’Brien definitely wasn’t up to the job(s). Speaking of Belichick, we also discuss the impact that COVID-19 has had on his team and the rest of the league this week. The NFL has precious little wiggle room if more teams suffer outbreaks, but on a league level, so far it’s a navigable situation. On the team level, there’s hope for a renewed effort to prevent outbreaks, as no one wants to be in the position Cam Newton was in this week — watching the New England Patriots hang in with the Kansas City Chiefs until they couldn’t.
Next, we’re joined by Lyndsey D’Arcangelo of The Athletic to talk about the WNBA Finals between the Las Vegas Aces and the Seattle Storm. The Storm could clinch the title as early as tonight after putting in dominating performances the first two games. A lot of that is down to the team’s depth — Sue Bird and Breanna Stewart are having a great postseason, as many would expect, but the Storm had five players in double figures in Game 2. They have a well-rounded and opportunistic style of play that has kept them dangerous throughout the playoffs. The Aces haven’t found a way to win without Dearica Hamby, even though regular-season MVP A’ja Wilson scored 20 points herself in Game 2, but if they can tighten up their defense, they might be able to claw a game back. The real winner this year has been the WNBA itself, though. Expanded access to games on ESPN and increased visibility has helped grow the league’s popularity — one bright spot in the midst of 2020. But that means the WNBA will need to really push for that visibility to continue into next year. There are no laurels to rest on yet.
Finally, in the Rabbit Hole, we talk about the curious case of Dion Waiters, who played for both the Los Angeles Lakers and Miami Heat this year and so will be getting a ring regardless of who wins the NBA Finals. Neil takes us on a tour of other players who were guaranteed rings because of a trade — there aren’t too many in basketball or football, but it turns out there’s a good group of baseball and hockey players who were guaranteed a ring by playing both sides.
What we’re looking at this week:


fivethirthyeight--2020-10-06--Who Will Win The Vice Presidential Debate?

How likely do you think each is to win ?
How likely are you to vote for each ?
On Wednesday evening , Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris will meet in the only scheduled vice presidential debate .
Normally , vice presidential debates are lower-stakes affairs than presidential debates , but with President Trump contracting the coronavirus , the VP debate has grabbed headlines as the two remaining presidential debates hang in limbo .
We ’ re once again partnering with Ipsos to see how the debate shapes people ’ s views of the vice presidential contenders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole — using Ipsos ’ s KnowledgePanel to interview the same people before and after the debate .
Respondents were also given the option of third-party candidates or ‘ someone else.
’ Additionally , they could indicate that they will not vote .
Similar to our poll for the first presidential debate , most respondents had strong feelings about the two presidential tickets , saying they were absolutely certain to vote for one or the other .
And in line with our polling average , more people said they were likely to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 43 percent said they were “ absolutely certain ” to vote for Biden , while only 31 percent said the same for Trump .
But as was true in the first debate , Biden ’ s lead among respondents was n't reflected in their views of his chances .
Many respondents , regardless of who they planned to back , thought the race was more of a toss-up : When asked to rate the candidates ’ chances of winning on a scale of 0 to 10 , they gave Trump a score of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , on average .
Supporters are more certain to vote than they are excited to do so How likely and how excited respondents are to vote in the 2020 presidential election , by preferred candidate Respondents were asked to rate how likely they were to vote for each ticket on a scale of 0-10 , and their preferred ticket is the one who received the higher score .
Respondents who gave both candidates the same score are not included .
Respondents who already voted are included in the “ absolutely certain ” bucket @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shot of voting are included in the “ not too likely ” bucket .
Overall , the vast majority of respondents say they are highly motivated to vote .
And those who know which candidate they ’ re backing are especially motivated : 86 percent of Biden voters and 82 percent of Trump voters say they are “ absolutely certain ” to vote .
That includes 10 percent of Biden ’ s supporters who say they have already voted ; for Trump ’ s supporters , that number is 5 percent .
Excitement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half of each candidate ’ s supporters said they were “ very excited ” to vote and another fifth said they were “ somewhat excited .
”

On Wednesday evening, Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris faced off in the first and only vice presidential debate. Though less tumultuous than last week’s presidential debate, it featured a lot of disagreement — and a lot of evasive answers. We once again partnered with Ipsos to see whether the debate changed Americans’ views of the candidates, using Ipsos’s KnowledgePanel to track opinions among the same group of people before and after the debate. The verdict: While the debate didn’t really change how people are planning to vote, Harris did improve her favorability ratings.
The Biden-Harris ticket is still ahead, but many think Trump-Pence have a good chance of winning
How likely respondents are to vote for each candidate and how likely they think each candidate is to win, on a scale from 0 (no chance) to 10 (absolutely certain)
Respondents were also given the option of third-party candidates or ‘someone else.’ Additionally, they could indicate that they will not vote.
As with last week’s presidential debate, it doesn’t look like the vice presidential debate moved the needle much — somewhat unsurprising, given how baked in respondents’ opinions seem to be. In fact, Biden’s lead over Trump was exactly the same as his lead in our pre-debate poll.
The debate also didn’t really change who people think will win the presidency, although like last week, some people shifted from thinking it was a complete toss-up (50-50) to thinking Biden had closer to an 80-20 chance of winning, which is more in line with the odds our forecast gives him.
Harris got higher marks for her performance — and her policies
How respondents rated each candidate’s debate performance and their answers on policies
Performance Policies Candidate good poor good poor Pence 59.5% 38.8% 44.1% 52.6% Harris 69.3 28.7 61.7 35.6
Only among respondents who said that they had watched some or all of the debate.
Debate watchers were more impressed with Harris’s performance than Pence’s, with 69 percent saying her performance was “very good” or “somewhat good,” compared to 60 percent who said the same for him. They were also more impressed with the policies she outlined. It’s noteworthy, though, that both vice presidential contenders got better marks for their performance than Trump did last week — just 33 percent thought the president performed well.