By Mikee Salud

It's been quite awhile since I have talked about baseball, and I figured what better way to get back into it than talking about the Hall of Fame. Tomorrow, the BBWAA is going to announce which retirees have reached the oh-so-precious 75% voting threshold to become the next inductees in Cooperstown. Within the past year or two, I've become quite interested with the ballot and the players now that I'm at the age where I have seen most of these players play for a good amount of years. Take for example last year, when Vladimir Guerrero got elected. Being a huge Angels fan since I started watching baseball around 2006, Guerrero was one of the first players that made me realize my love for the game, and seeing him get elected last year almost made me tear up. This year a new batch of players have been added to the ballot in addition to those who have not quite reached that 3/4 majority. In this article, I am going to identify who I would put in my theoretical Hall of Fame ballot.

To get entered into the ballot, all you really need is ten years of MLB experience. So while there are a decent amount of first-year ballot members who will either make it into the Hall or will at least get an extended look, there are many other first-year members who will leave the ballot as quickly as they entered and will not get to the 5% voting threshold needed to be on the ballot next year. That being said, it would be unfortunate for them to go without a mention. Here are some lightning-quick opinions of them from yours truly.

Rick Ankiel: He probably has one of the most interesting baseball careers of the 21st century. It's a shame what happened to him as a pitcher, but it was truly inspiring to see him reinvent himself as a hitter. 
Jason Bay: Back in 2009, he was truly terrifying. Unfortunately, he signed with the Mets.
Freddy Garcia: Solid innings eater.
Jon Garland: Solid innings eater. (Garland gets bonus points from me for being an ex-Angel)
Travis Hafner: I was actually shocked to find out he never made an All-Star team in his career. His run from '07-'09 was really good.
Ted Lilly: He perpetually looked like an old man every time I saw him pitch. He was alright.
Derek Lowe: His career is probably what the worst-case scenario would have been for John Smoltz.
Darren Oliver: The fact that he managed to stay in the league for 20 years by being an okay reliever is very impressive.
Juan Pierre: If there was a Hall of Fast, he would get automatic entry.
Placido Polanco: His 2007 season and defensive skills were great, but had a ho-hum career otherwise.
Vernon Wells: Why the Angels decided to trade Mike Napoli for you is beyond me.
Kevin Youkilis: If you haven't already, check out his batting stance. It's great. He also got walks for days.

Everyone has their own methodology when determining who belongs in the Hall. Here are some of mine:

• The most important thing that matters to me is how well — and how long — their career peak was. When looking at one's career, we almost always remember them by their best seasons. By that logic, being able to dominate the game, especially for a long period of time, should be very and weigh heavy on the voting.
• Secondly, longevity should have some importance to this process; the average Hall of Famer played an average of 18 seasons, so I'm looking for any legit candidate to play around that many seasons. Being able to stay durable and have a lasting impact on the game is important.
• Finally, there will always be some sort of intangible quality when voting for certain players. While this has nothing to do with numbers, I always feel like a person who's made it into the Hall of Fame should be someone that had some sort of importance or impact during their playing career. In other words, one could not describe baseball during a certain players career without mentioning their name. For example, one needs to mention Vladimir Guerrero when describing the MLB during the late 1990s and early 2000s due to his five-tool package and intimidating presence, but could leave out Vernon Wells' name and it wouldn't feel like there's a piece of baseball history that is missing (seriously — we traded Mike Napoli for you?!?!).​
• One stat that I am commonly going to use is JAWS. JAWS, created by Jay Jaffe, "evaluates a player's worthiness for enshrinement in the National Baseball Hall of Fame by comparing him to the Hall of Famers at his position," per MLB.com. A player's JAWS is calculated by taking the average of one's career WAR (Wins Above Replacement) with the Total WAR of a player's 7-year peak (the 7 years can be consecutive and nonconsecutive). This stat is very helpful to deciphering who is Hall of Fame worthy, as it both factors in career longevity while also helping players who have had shorter careers but had a dominant peak. Kudos to you, Jay Jaffe.

Mariano Rivera is going to be inducted this year. No doubt about that. The only thing that will be interesting to see about Rivera's case is whether he is going to be unanimously voted in — something that has never been done before.

His career resume is about as impressive as there ever has been for a relief pitcher. He is widely known as the greatest closer in the history of baseball, and there's good reason for that. Rivera is a 13-time All Star, 5-time World Series Champion, 1999 World Series MVP, 2013 AL Comeback Player of the Year, and is the All-time saves leader with an astounding 662 saves. 

The average JAWS score for a relief pitcher is 32.3; Rivera has a JAWS score of 42.5, the second highest JAWS score among all relief pitchers. Rivera's Adjusted ERA+, which adjusts a pitcher's earned-run average to the ballpark and the era in which they are playing in, is 1st all-time at 205. Elsewhere, Rivera is 3rd all-time in WHIP at 1.00, and fifth all-time in Win Probability Added (WPA) at 56.59. During his peak years from '97 - '11, he averaged a 2.01 ERA and 40 saves, clearly being a cut above the rest. In fact, he also managed to be in the top five in Cy Young voting 5 times in his career, an amazing achievement considering that relief pitchers almost never win the Cy Young award. But even with all of these achievements, he actually proved his worth by rising to these already lofty occasions in the postseason. In the playoffs, Rivera was on another level:

I understand that since Rivera is a sure-fire induction, some voters might feel swayed to vote for others who aren't as safe. If that is the case, I will only slightly be annoyed at you. Other than that, Rivera deserves to be unanimously voted in for his dominance and longevity as the best closer ever. ​

Roy "Doc" Halladay had a rough start to his career and had an abrupt ending to his career. Sandwiched in between these tumultuous edges, however, was a ten-year stretch that was as dominant as any pitcher in this modern era. Roy Halladay was an 8-time All Star and 2-time Cy Young winner, and has pitched both a perfect game and a postseason no-hitter.

Halladay's JAWS score is 57.5, which is below the average JAWS score for the average pitcher at 61.8. However, this has more to do with his relatively short career. What is more telling is his seven-year peak, which is about as good as any starter in the Hall of Fame. In a time when offense reigned supreme, Halladay was a cut above the rest. From 2002 - 2011, Halladay averaged a 2.96 ERA and 219 innings, as well as pitching a total of 63 complete games, 18 of which were shutouts. He topped the league in walks per 9 innings pitched (BB/9) 3 times, as well as leading the league in strikeouts per walk (K/BB) a whopping 5 times. His ERA+ of 131 is the 29th best mark among all starting pitchers in baseball history.  He also finished within the top ten in WPA in 9 seasons throughout his career.

Long story short, Roy Halladay was the most durable, dependable pitcher throughout the 2000s. He is a definite Hall of Famer, and it truly is a shame that he passed away too soon to give a speech. Rest in peace, Doc.

In his final year on the ballot, Edgar Martinez is trying to become the first player to primarily be a designated hitter in his career to be inducted in the Hall of Fame. Martinez is a 7-time All-Star, 5-time Silver Slugger, and 2-time batting champion.

Edgar's case, especially for older voters, is very controversial. He is the legitimate Hall of Fame-caliber player that spent most of his defensive career off the field. After two consecutive injury-riddled season, Martinez primarily became a DH in 1995. Overall, he has an elite batting slash line of .312/.418/.515 and a JAWS score of 56.0. Among all players who played from 1987-2004, Martinez had the 4th highest on-base percentage (OBP), the 10th highest weighted runs created (wRC+), and the 9th highest WPA. Among third baseman, which was his original position, he is 4th all-time in on-base plus slugging plus (OPS+). Furthermore, his seven-year apex from 1995 - 2001 saw him average a .328 batting average, 28 home runs, and 110 RBIs. 

His legacy as the first, great designated hitter should add to the allure of adding him to the Hall. Many detractors believe that he only played one side of the field for many years, and while true, his hitting skills were about as pure and elite as there was. Heck, the award that recognizes best DH in the league is named after him. He'll get in this year.

The first three players are rather easy choices to be inducted this year, in my opinion. Now we are heading into more borderline candidates whose inductions this year, or inductions at all, look a lot more murky. Todd Helton, dubbed "The Toddfather" for the Colorado Rockies, is a first-time candidate who I'm not sure will be inducted at all. Helton is a 5-time All Star, 3-time Gold Glover, 4-time Silver Slugger, and was the batting champion and RBI leader in 2000.

Helton had a slash line of .316/.414/.539, all elite numbers to say the least. In his seven-year peak, he averaged lines of a .337 batting average, 33 home runs, and 113 RBIs. His JAWS score is 53.9, a tad below the average JAWS score of a Hall of Fame first baseman at 54.7. Along with Edgar Martinez, Helton was one of the purest hitters in the game, with a BABIP (batting average with balls in play) of .330 and a wOBA (weighted on-base average) of .405, both of which are higher than that of Albert Pujols, who is a surefire Hall of Famer by the time his playing days are over. Among all first baseman, he ranks 17th in batting average, 8th in OBP, 13th in Slugging Percentage, and 17th in wOBA.  When you factor in his above average glove, it would look like he should be inducted eventually. However, a lot of his detraction comes from the fact he played his entire career in the notoriously hitter-friendly Coors Field in Colorado. 

As one can see, Helton was tremendously aided by the friendly confines he played in. However, I do believe that a person should not be penalized because of a stadium, and his stats away from Coors are good enough for me to believe that he should be a Hall of Famer. From a non-statistical standpoint, Helton is also the face of the Colorado Rockies and the franchise's best player, which should give him an added bonus. The Coors factor is daunting though, especially considering the next person I am "voting" for.

Similarly to Helton, fellow Rockie Larry Walker is facing HoF uncertainty due to the friendly hitting confines of Coors Field. Walker is in his penultimate year on the ballot, but his voting totals have been steadily rising. Larry Walker is a 5-time All Star, 7-time Gold Glover, 3-time Silver Slugger, 3-time batting champion, and 1997 NL MVP winner.

Walker's JAWS score is 58.7, which is above the average for a Hall of Fame right fielder at 57.8. Batting a career slash line of .313/.400/.565, he was one the best hitters in the game during the early '00s. Among all right fielders in history, Larry Walker ranks 10th in OBP, 3rd in Slugging Percentage, 7th in wOBA, and 12th in WAR. And while advanced defensive statistics were not created until the latter stages of his career, we have every inclination to believe he was a great defender out in right field, shown by the 10 defensive runs saved in his age-36 season in 2003.  When comparing Walker to a guy like Vladimir Guerrero, who got inducted last year, Walker blows him out of the water in in a number of categories, such as WAR, wOBA, and wRC+. So the question now is, why is he in the 9th year of his eligibility and he still hasn't been inducted?

Answer: the voters ding a lot of his value to the fact that he played in Colorado.

His Away numbers may not look Hall of Fame worthy, but they at least are All-Star worthy. If you look at his career OPS, he has the second highest of all-time among right fielders, but if you use OPS+, which adjusts for a player's ballpark, he drops all the way to 17th all time -- which, while it is a decent drop, is still freaking impressive. Overall, Larry Walker's candidacy hinges on whether you believe Coors field turned him from a good player to an elite player. While I won't deny that playing in the lower altitudes of Colorado helped him, I do not think that it is fair to indict him for it. Walker belongs in the Hall of Fame.

Lost in the shuffle in the main debates surrounding the ballot this year is third baseman Scott Rolen, who is in his second year on the ballot. Rolen is a 7-time All Star, 2006 World Champion, 1997 NL Rookie of the Year,  8-time Gold Glover, and 1-time Silver Slugger in 2002.

Rolen's JAWS score is 56.9, higher than the average JAWS score for a Hall of Fame third baseman at 55.7. Rolen's offensive numbers won't wow you, but rather the consistency he displayed with the bat. His slash line was .281/.364/.490, and for a ten-year stretch from '97-'06 he averaged .287 with 27 home runs and 100 RBIs. Among all third baseman who played during Rolen's career, Scott Rolen is 9th in Slugging Percentage, 8th in wOBA, 11th in wRC+, and 3rd in WAR. While his offensive varied from solid to great, it was Rolen's defense at the hot corner that was his calling card. Rolen's eight gold gloves at third base is the third most among all third baseman, right behind Brooks Robinson and Mike Schmidt. From when advanced defensive metrics first were calculated in 2002, Rolen has 114 defensive runs saved and a 107.1 Ultimate Zone Rating from '02-'13, both of which are only behind future Hall of Famer Adrian Beltre. Put everything together, and you get a third baseman who was a two-way force for close to two decades. He will not get inducted this year, but his case should be interesting to dissect in the years to come.

Garnering a continuous wave of support, Mike Mussina has increasing odds of joining Cooperstown — if not this year, but next. Mike Mussina is a 5-time All Star and 7-time Gold Glove winner.

Mussina's JAWS score is 63.8, a whole two wins above the average Hall of Fame starter, which is 61.8. Mussina's ERA, 3.68, would be the third highest ERA among Hall of Fame pitchers, which would seemingly hurt his case. However, it is important to note that he pitched right in the middle of the steroid era with inflated offensive numbers, as well as pitching a majority of his games in Camden Yards and Yankee Stadium, both notorious hitters park. With ERA+, which adjusts for a player's ballpark, Mussina is in the upper echelon of pitchers with an ERA+ of 123. Mussina is one of the most durable pitchers in the history of the game, averaging 226 innings pitched over his 18-year career. Mussina was also among the best defenders on the mound, having 16 runs saved above average from 2003 to the end of his career in 2008. Among all pitchers who pitched from 1991-2008, his BB/9 of 1.99 was just outside of the top 20, his ERA of 3.68 was the 35th lowest, his FIP (fielding independent pitching) of 3.57 was the 22nd lowest, and his WPA of 37.67 was the sixth highest. Sure, he may not have been the best pitcher in the game at any point in his career, but I would argue that it's a lot easier to be the best pitcher in the game for a season, and a lot harder to be the sixth best pitcher in the game for close to 18 seasons. So while his stats may not look terribly impressive, within the time he pitched, he was as good as they come.

Now we are going to approach more controversial choices, starting with someone whose off-the-field comments have provided enough controversy to taint  his production on the field. That being said, though, Schilling's career, especially during the postseason, garner more than enough attention. Schilling is a 6-time All Star, 3-time World Champion, 2001 World Series MVP, and 1993 NLCS MVP.

Schilling's JAWS score was 64.1, which is also higher than the 61.8 JAWS score that the average Hall of Fame starter has. Schilling's career was relatively average up until his age-30 season in 1997. After '97, Schilling averaged a 3.45 ERA and 206 innings pitched, displaying a dominance that was rarely seen during the steroid era. Additionally, Schilling had a 1.66 BB/9 IP (9th lowest among all pitchers from '97-'07), a 3.17 FIP (4th lowest),  and a 33.05 WPA (3rd highest). 

All this being said, none of this pales in comparison to his postseason numbers, where he rose to the occasion every time. From his World Series MVP performance in 2001 to his infamous bloody sock game in 2004, Schilling owned October. In 133 1/3 innings, Curt Schilling had an 11-2 record, a 2.23 ERA.

Unfortunately, his outspoken political comments have soured his candidacy. However, what he says off the field should not affect the impact he made throughout his playing days.

Before we talk about Bonds (spoiler alert: we're also gonna discuss Clemens later on), we have to talk about the elephant in the room — steroid-users. The steroid era of the early 2000s have tainted the record books, negatively impacted the way we view baseball during that time, and, most importantly to this article, backlogged many would-be inductees into ballot-purgatory. However, we also cannot deny that the steroid era brought new excitement to the game. We choose to take away the merit of those players, but we cannot take away the memories that many felt watching players like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, and McGuire. If one asked me to describe baseball during the early 2000s, I would first think about performance-enhancing drugs, sure, but I would also talk about the feats that many of those players had. It would be impossible to not discuss Barry Bonds when talking about one of the best position players ever. If we also factor in the case that he would have made the Hall of Fame during his pre-drug days, I think he is worthy of an induction.

The accolades speak for themselves. Barry Bonds is a 14-time All Star, 7-time NL MVP, 8-time Gold Glover, 2-time batting champion, and 2-time home run leader. Oh, and he also is baseball's all-time home run leader with an eye-popping 762 total home runs. Several accounts believe that Bonds might have started to take steroids as early as the 1998 season; Bonds' career prior to '98 was Cooperstown-worthy by itself, with a slash line of .288/.408/.551. He also averaged 31 home runs, 91 RBIs, and 35 stolen bases during this time, and had a career WAR of 91.8. All-time, Bonds has the 5th highest wRC+ with 173, 6th highest OBP in .444,  and the 2nd highest WAR in 164.4, right behind Babe Ruth. Defensively, his 8 Gold Gloves came before a time where defensive metrics weren't developed yet, but it is with good faith that Bonds was a great defensive player in his athletic prime. Regardless of everything, Bonds was the ultimate five-tool player and arguably the best player of the 1990s. His Frankenstein transformation during the 2000s tainted the overall view of his legacy, but with the reasons I highlighted above, Bonds should be a Hall of Fame inductee sooner or later.

Continuing with the worthy steroid users, Roger Clemens' resume, while tainted during the latter portion of his career, still stands as one of the most impressive in baseball history. Clemens is an 11-time All Star, 2-time World Series Champion, 7-time Cy Young Winner, 1986 AL MVP, 4-time Wins leader, 7-time ERA leader, and 5-time AL strikeout leader.

Like Bonds, we are mainly going to look at his career through the 1997 season, which still shows that he was an elite pitcher. From 1988-1997, Roger Clemens averaged a 2.97 ERA, 217 innings, and 206 strikeouts. During this time span, he had the 2nd lowest FIP at 2.88, the 5th highest K/9 IP at 8.54, the 8th lowest WHIP at 1.15, and the highest WPA at 50.13. All-time, Clemens owns the 3rd highest WAR among all pitchers at 139.6, and the 9th highest ERA+ at 143. All in all, Clemens was the greatest pitcher of the past 30 years -- with or without steroids -- and deserves induction just like Bonds.

One final note: I do believe at some point both Clemens and Bonds will be inducted into the Hall of Fame, and with that, there will be a lot more leniency for other controversial candidates such as Sammy Sosa and Manny Ramirez, and future candidates like Alex Rodriguez. I thought about including guys like Sosa and Ramirez in favor of, say Scott Rolen and Todd Helton. However, Bonds and Clemens are undoubtedly the two best players who used PEDs, and until they get inducted, I will not vote other players who are in this drug limbo. Maybe it is an unfair and unjustified qualification, but if players on the magnitude of those two cannot get enough votes due to their complicated careers, then I believe no one like them ever will.

While these are the ten players that I would choose, this does not mean that no one else on the ballot is worthy of consideration. Players like Andruw Jones, Omar Vizquel, Andy Pettitte, and Billy Wagner all have decent cases for Cooperstown, as well as previously mentioned steroid users like Manny Ramirez and Sammy Sosa. Maybe in another year, they'll be in my ballot, but for now, they will remain in the purgatory that is the Hall of Fame ballot. We should also give our condolences to Fred McGriff, who is in his last year of eligibility and will not make it.

Looking at how things are actually shaping up, we will have at least 3 inductees this year: Mariano Rivera, Roy Halladay, and Edgar Martinez. Mike Mussina is also above the 75% voting thresh hold, but with only about half of the ballots revealed, it is not a sure thing that he is safely in the Hall. After those 4, Clemens, Bonds, and Walker are knocking on the door, which should make things more interesting next year, especially with guys like Derek Jeter and Bobby Abreu entering the ballot.

*Stats courtesy of Baseball Reference and Fangraphs*

By Mikee Salud

​If you have followed the NBA over the years, you might have noticed the increase in running. Players are running faster, fast break opportunities are increasing, and points are coming in bunches. In this new age of sport analytics, basketball has seen many changes in the way the game is being played today: "inefficient" mid-range shots are being eschewed for long-range three-point shots, teams are driving to the rim with greater frequency, and the overall pace of play has been dialed to eleven as teams are playing faster than they have in decades. I had a good amount of free time one day, so out of sheer boredom and curiosity, I decided to look specifically at pace statistics and see how the league has changed over the past couple of seasons and see whether or not an increase of pace really does lead to wins.

 When Steve Kerr was hired to coach the Warriors, I doubt he had "change the way NBA offenses are being played" as one of his objectives. But, with his hire brought a new mindset for Golden State: play fast, but with control. Out went the heavy doses of Curry-isos with Mark Jackson, and in went playing with (almost) reckless abandon. Golden State had almost 5 more possessions than  the league average team, and almost 2 more than the next fastest team. The correlation coefficient is not significant enough for there to be conclusive evidence that a faster pace leads to more wins, but in this copycat-league, NBA front offices started to take note of what Golden State was doing. I also found it interesting that the upper half of the league played a bit faster than the bottom 15 teams, an occurrence we will not see in the following seasons.

This season will forever be known for the Warriors historic dominance in the regular season, and their historic collapse in the NBA Finals against LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers. That being said, Golden State grabbed the league but its throat for the first 82 games, playing with the second fastest pace in the game. Around the league, other teams started to play faster, especially for those in the bottom half of the league; as such, the correlation coefficient tipped to the negative this season. The Sacramento Kings were awarded as the fastest team in the league this season, as George Karl, known for his fast-paced offenses, had his first and only full season as the head coach.

Before anything, I just wanted to give a shout-out to the Utah Jazz for being the slowest team in the league three years in a row...really impressive stuff. Starting with the 2014-2015 season, the Jazz hired Quinn Snyder as their head coach. He has lead a more calculated offensive attack, being one of the only teams in this modern era to focus on having a glacial pace to help amplify their defensive strength in the half-court.

There was a slight increase in the average pace, but the Warriors, now with Kevin Durant, still finished in the top-three in pace. Probably the most interesting thing that I noticed was the gap in pace between the upper half of the league and the lower half of the league, led by the Brooklyn Nets, who owned the league's worst record, but also the league's fastest team. At this point, while the correlation coefficient slowly increased from last season, it's pretty clear that the correlation coefficient between wins and pace will not appear to be significant.

The league's obsession with pace really explodes this year, with 5 teams averaging over 100 possessions per game. An interesting fact about the Warriors' pace statistic is that despite slightly increasing their pace each year, their standing as one of the fastest teams in the league has steadily dropped since their first season with Kerr at the helm. During Kerr's first season, they were the fastest team in the league; now, they were the fifth fastest. Furthermore, the gap between the upper half of the league and the bottom half of the league lessened, which implies that practically the entire league is homogeneously becoming a game with pace. Because everyone is becoming faster, the correlation between wins and pace have become close to zero. The New Orleans Pelicans, coached by Mike D'Antoni stalwart Alvin Gentry and their singular-browed superstar Anthony Davis, get the title of fastest team, while the Sacramento Kings, this time being coached by the Grit-and-Grind disciple Dave Joerger, own the title of the slowest team in the league. That being said, their pace this season would have actually placed them among the top ten fastest teams in the league during the 2014-2015 season.

In this new age of sport analytics, pushing the pace has been one of those interesting facets. To be completely honest, I was a little disappointed to see that there was close to no correlation between wins and pace in every season I researched. However, this lead me to thinking: why are teams playing with pace in the first place? 

The logic of playing faster makes sense: the quicker you can get into transition, the easier shots you can get (ie: open layups and open threes). However, the logic of going faster can also be a tad bit counter intuitive. If a team has more possessions to score, so will the other team. A team having a bunch of opportunities to score means nothing if they cannot defend the extra opportunities the opposition has to score. What makes a team like Golden State special is the fact that they can play fast, but also have a stout defensive unit.

We can also see that most teams today with a generally quick pace tend to be at the lower half of the league. A lot of this can be attributed to the lack of talent those teams have, and to compensate this lack of talent, they will try to find as much easy baskets as possible. Teams like the Rockets can employ elite isolation players in James Harden and Chris Paul, so they don't need to worry about plays breaking down or the game slowing down, as those two can get a bucket anytime they want. On the flip side, a team like the Sacramento Kings needs as many easy points as possible since they do not have an elite isolation player when the game slows down. Finding easy baskets whenever possible is a must.

So far this season, about 2/3 of the league is playing with a pace of over 100 possessions per game, with all of those teams with varying degrees of success. What this exercise has proven is that pace is not what necessarily leads to wins, but rather how they perform due to their pace. Does a team playing faster sacrifice their defense? Does stopping the fastbreak cause struggles when a game slows down? And this exercise was only performed for the regular season. The playoffs are typically slowed down. Can teams keep this fast pace past the initial 82 games?

All in all, a faster pace does not lead to wins. This, however, does not seem to be stopping teams today from running. Whatever the case may be, it certainly does not hinder the excitement of the game today.

*Stats courtesy of stats.nba.com*

By Mikee Salud

​Despite Doncic outplaying Young thus far, adding context is every bit important here. Dallas has a better team with better players surrounding Luka, such as Dennis Smith Jr., DeAndre Jordan, and the ultimate veteran presence in Dirk Nowitzki. Trae Young, on the otherhand, is expected to be the main offensive talent of an Atlanta team that is still trying to add more young talent through these next couple of drafts. After one month, I would say Dallas has the better rookie, but when you add in the fact that Atlanta has Dallas’ first round pick next year, maybe the Hawks did not get fleeced as some (such as yours truly) thought they did. If anything, both rookies are performing at a high level and both franchises should be happy with their trade thus far.

Finally, let’s wrap this up with some feel good stories. The Milwaukee Bucks, Memphis Grizzlies, and Los Angeles Clippers have all performed tremendously during the early portion of the season, and all of their successes seem to sustainable enough to believe their hype.

The Milwaukee Bucks made only small changes with their actual roster, adding floor-spacing big men in Brook Lopez and Ersan Ilyasova. Their most prominent move came in the form of their head coach, changing from Jason Kidd and Joe Prunty to Greg Popovich disciple Mike Budenholzer. The new system that Milwaukee runs is much more in line with new-age NBA offenses, and it has led to an invigorated Giannis Antetokounmpo, and better results. Their offense has completely flipped to becoming a three-point focused system. They are shooting the second most three-pointers in the NBA while still converting them in an efficient 38%. Furthermore, their defense has become incredibly staunch as well, holding opponents to the lowest defensive field goal percentage and having the lowest defensive rating in the NBA; for comparison, the Bucks were middle of the pack last year in defensive rating.

As of this writing, the Memphis Grizzlies and Los Angeles Clippers are the two top teams in the wild, wild Western Conference. After an injury-riddled 17-18 season, Memphis has come out better than ever, and they have even retained their signature Grit and Grind nature. Memphis has done a tremendous job of zigging while the rest of the league is zagging; as the league has increasingly become faster, Memphis is still playing at their glacial, last-place pace. This has allowed Memphis to get other teams out of their comfort zone and play slow, defensive, and in a halfcourt set, which is to their own benefit. They are third in the league in defensive rating (103.4), so teams are unable to score on them. Carrying Memphis' return are Marc Gasol and Mike Conley, two aging stars who look to be finally healthy again. Gasol is averaging 17.6 points, 9.8 rebounds, and 3.9 assists per game and looks to reinvigorated to be playing meaningful basketball again. Conley is perennially known as one of the most underrated, yet overpaid players in the game, but is roaring with a vengeance this season, averaging 20.2 points and 6.3 points per game. Even Jaren Jackson Jr. is proving his worth as the 4th overall pick in this year's draft, with 12.9 points and 1.9 blocks. With those three leading, maybe there's hope for Memphis to make a meaningful run this season.

LA's other team has been such a surprise considering their lack of star power. But what they lack in star power, they have in quality players. I would argue that the Clippers have one of the deepest teams in the league. All 15 players on their roster could be justifiable rotation players, and that gives a reinvigorated Doc Rivers multiple options for his attack. The interesting thing about their offense, which scores the third most points in the league, is that the bulk of their points come without a bunch of three-point attempts, with only 28.6% of their field goal attempts are three point shots. That being said, they make their three-point attempts matter, as they are shooting 38.3 % from three, good for fourth in the league. They also get to the free throw line a ton, shooting an NBA-high 29.3 free throws a game and converting them at a second-best clip at 82.5 %. While I previously mentioned their lack of star power, Tobias Harris is putting together potential All-Star campaigns. Harris is averaging 20.8 points and 8.6 rebounds per game with a shooting slash line of .516/.434/.817. Add in other standout role players in Danilo Gallinari, Lou Williams, Montrezl Harrell, and rookie Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, the Clippers are looking to continue their early success.

By Mikee Salud

After many thrilling weeks, numerous standout rookie performances, and some three-point chucking game 7's, we have finally reached the apex of the NBA season. Unfortunately, we might not be in for a real treat. The Golden State Warriors and Cleveland Cavaliers will be playing for the championship for the fourth consecutive year, the first time this has ever happen in NBA history. While there is unquestionably some fatigue that is rising among the public about having the same two teams playing in the Finals again, it still features a team that boasts four All-Stars and an offensive system that will impress even the most passionate NBA fans,  and another team that employs arguably the most marketable athlete in the world doing his best one-man-show routine. Despite the moaning of some media outlets, there is no doubt that the series will still draw in massive ratings.

​Despite lackadaisical and uninspired play throughout the regular season, they have appeared dominant through these past few weeks, and analytically, it appears to be no contest heading into the final round. The Warriors led the league with a 112.3 offensive rating while also having the ninth best defense in the league with a 104.3 defensive rating in the regular season. In the playoffs, the Warriors have ramped up their defense with a 99.7 defensive rating while still maintaining their top notch offense. They have also rebounded at an elite rate in the playoffs, grabbing 52% of available rebounds.  The third quarter has been their strong suit all season and where they create separation from their opponents, outscoring them by 33 points thus far. Just like their reputation demands, their offensive system is very pass happy, averaging 25 assists per game, as well as 301 passes per game.  Of course, their whole team is centered around their four cornerstones -- Stephen Curry, Kevin Durant, Klay Thompson, and Draymond Green. Kevin Durant, who was last year's Finals MVP, has been sensational this time around as well, scoring 29.4 points per game these playoffs. Stephen Curry, who missed the first seven games of the playoff run, has been inconsistent at times, but really turned it on during the last two games against the Houston Rockets, scoring an average of 28 points to lead them to the Finals. Klay Thompson has been his usual self, shooting 42% from the three point line these playoffs while providing sensational defense. And one cannot forget about Draymond, who leads the team in rebounds (11.6), assists (8.1), steals (1.9) and blocks (1.5). The four of them, along with veteran wing Andre Iguodala, form their so-called "Death Lineup". With the Death Lineup, they are beating their opponents by 22 points. However, the one wrinkle that hurts the Warriors is the injury to Andre Iguodala, as he is still nursing a leg contusion and will be out for at least game 1. Due to this, the Warriors will have to rely upon the combination of Kevon Looney, Nick Young, and Shaun Livingston to provide the Warriors a fifth guy to replace the production that will be missed due to Iguodala's absence.

​Speaking of the fifth guy, many already know what to expect from the Warriors' core four. With Iguodala out, the X-factor will have to be whichever one of Looney, Young, or Livingston the Warriors will look to as the replacement for him. Based upon what we saw against the Rockets, it looks like Kevon Looney will get the first crack to play center in this series. When Looney is inserted with the Warriors' All-Stars instead of Iguodala, they are five points worse, as while their defense improves, their offense noticeably dips. With Looney, the Warriors get a tough rebounder and added length down at the post, but lose the extra playmaking skills that Iguodala provides, which can lead the Warriors to pass less and become more isolation dependent. Furthermore, losing Iguodala for these first few games means that they will be without their best LeBron defender. The play of Looney can decide how fluid the Warriors will play. If not, someone like rookie Jordan Bell may takeover.

​Speaking about the role players, the Cavaliers have a rotating cast of players that can only seem to turn it on when they are playing at home. When looking at home and road splits, the Cavs score 9 less points and give up 5 more points when playing on the road; this is a major problem, as they do not have homecourt advantage during this series. In order for Cleveland to win, they need more consistency out of guys like George Hill, JR Smith, Jeff Green, and Kyle Korver, all whom's effective field goal percentages drop considerably when on the road, if they want any chances of winning. On the other side, the Warriors will look to prevent any of the Cavaliers role players from getting hot, helping LeBron, and making this a series.

​That being said, there are some positives that the Cavaliers can look to. The five man lineup of LeBron, George Hill, JR Smith, Jeff Green, and Tristan Thompson have outscored their opponents by 25 points when trotted out together -- the second best lineup among 23 lineups that have played over 50 minutes in the playoffs. Furthermore, they play at a a much slower pace than the Warriors, with the second slowest pace among all playoff teams, averaging about 93.85 possessions per game. In comparison, the Warriors have averaged 99.88 possessions per playoff game. Furthermore, the ball tends to stay within LeBron's hands, as the Cavaliers average 247 passes a game and 18.8 assists per game these playoffs, both numbers being the third lowest among all playoff teams. If the Cavaliers can manage to make the Warriors play at their pace, the Warriors suddenly become vulnerable, as four of their five playoff loses have been when the Warriors score 100 or less points.

The play that will define the Finals is how the Warriors guard LeBron's isolation attempts. In today's switch-happy defensive schemes, LeBron will look to exploit the mismatches that the Warriors will give him. As shown in the video above of last year's Eastern Conference Finals against the Celtics, LeBron frequently punished the Celtics whenever they switched a slower or weaker defender on LeBron. During this year's playoffs, LeBron has been supremely efficient with isolation plays, averaging 1.04 points per isolation possession and having a 50% effective field goal percentage during these possessions. Even if the Warriors decide to double, it leave someone open for LeBron to pass to, whether it be a Tristan Thompson waiting near the rim or an open JR Smith or Kyle Korver out for an easy three. It is almost a guarantee that the Cavaliers will find a way for someone like Looney or Curry to get switched onto LeBron in order for him to get an easy layup, draw a foul, or find the open man. Whenever there is a switch, it is important for the Cavaliers and LeBron to take advantage of it as much as possible. For the Warriors, they will need to find a way to avoid these mismatches, which may mean that Curry could possibly get played out of certain stretches in favor of someone like Livingston or Young to avoid a huge mismatch against LeBron.

In the end, I do not see any chance of the Cavaliers winning unfortunately, despite how great LeBron James has been throughout these past few weeks, the Warriors have four stars who can carry them at any given moment, while also having a better defense and offense than the Cavaliers. In fact, there is not one thing that the Cavs do better than the Warriors in, as Golden State also has a higher rebounding percentage and both have nearly identical turnover percentages. However, I can see the Cavaliers stealing one at home due to LeBron's greatness and their role players stepping up in front of their home crowd.

VERDICT: The Golden State Warriors win the championship 4-1 over the Cleveland Cavaliers; Kevin Durant wins the Finals MVP.

By Kevin Hahn

These 2018 Astros are deeper and scarier than ever before. ​

Will the Nationals finally make it past the NLDS? Or will they continue to be baseball’s version of the Lob City Clippers? ​

By Mikee Salud

We are currently in the middle of March, and all eyes are on the NCAA, basketball, and March Madness. The First Round has already provided a historic upset with the 16-seed UMBC defeating 1-seed Virginia, something that many, myself included, did not think would happen in our lifetime (let's take a moment of silence for everyone's bracket). As the Round of 64 has come to a close, let us look at who has the best chance of winning the tournament right now as we head into the Second Round.

To start off, it must be said that using stats will always be the best way to predict winning. However, in the case of March Madness, where every round is decided by one game, there is a high degree of unpredictability that not even stats can quantify. No one could have predicted that UMBC would upset Virginia, no matter how many stats were being used. In fact, there are over 9 trillion different ways to make a bracket, which make it literally impossible to create the perfect bracket. All in all, this article can be seen as completely foolish within an hour of this article being released. That being said, all we can do is make our best predictions, and this is where statistics can come through. 

The First Round of March Madness had a general lack of upsets up until the historic UMBC win (Rest in Peace Arizona, DeAndre Ayton, and Sean Miller’s coaching career). While we cannot calculate certain variables such as momentum, what we can look at are stats that correlate the most to winning basketball games. Former Sacramento Kings and ESPN Director of Analytics Dean Oliver once stated that the four factors that most correlate to basketball wins are shooting, turnovers, rebounding, and free throw proficiency. Using these four factors, we will try determine which teams lead these categories and make an educated guess on who has the best chance to win.

The objective of basketball is quite simple: one team needs to score more points against the other team before the time runs out. ​When looking at which team is the most efficient at shooting, we look at certain stats, most specifically effective field goal percentage. The difference between field goal percentage and effective field goal percentage is that eFG% adjusts for the fact that a 3 pointer is worth one more point higher than a 2 point field goal. This helps to more clearly identify which team is scoring more efficiently. The top five teams in effective field goal percentage that are still in the tournament are:

Villanova was already one of the favorites to  win the tournament altogether, and it is no surprise as they have with the most efficient offense in the nation. Their starting five alone boasts incredible shooting prowess, as all five shoot the three-ball 38% or higher, leading to a nice spread offense and wide open lanes for their players such as Jalen Brunson to penetrate through. Elsewhere, we have Kansas, who besides having Devonte' Graham, are also aided by the Nation-leader in Field Goal Percentage in Center Udoka Azubuike. Shockingly, eleventh-seeded Loyola Chicago had the fifth highest effective field goal percentage in the nation, which aided their attack as they upset Miami in their first round match up. 

The next thing that we need to look at is turnover stats. The importance of limiting one's own turnovers and creating turnovers against opponents cannot be understated. Turnovers can allow easy fast breaks and buckets, and can easily ruin the momentum for any team. To see which team prevents the most turnovers, we look at turnover percentage, which shows how many possessions a team coughs up per 100 possessions. 

Among the Second Round teams, Nevada and Florida take care of the ball the best, with the Wolf Pack having multiple ball handlers such as guard Cody Martin and forward Lindsey Drew, while Florida's offense is being mainly initiated by senior guard Chris Chiozza. There is also another appearance from Villanova, proving that they do not only shoot the ball well, but protect it also.

When looking at rebounding, we do not just need to look at rebounding percentage, but offensive rebounding percentage as well. Rebounds in general create possessions, and the more possessions one has means more opportunities to score. Having more offensive rebounds creates extra opportunities on the offense and can wear out a defense. Rebounding percentage tells us the percentage of rebounds a team grabbed.  

While Gonzaga is within the top five in Total Rebounding %, they are nowhere near close to the top five in the country in Offensive Rebounding %. This tells us that their rebounding percentage is most likely deceiving and could possibly be more of a result of opponents missing shots as opposed to a more all around rebounding prowess. Going further into the tournament, they are not the safest bets to create extra possessions the same way that a team such as Duke or Michigan State are. Duke currently has freshmen stars Marvin Bagley III and Wendell Carter Jr., who pull down an impressive 11.3 and 9.3 rebounds a game respectively, while Michigan State has a plethora of long, lengthy guys such as Miles Bridges and Jaren Jackson Jr. who can do the dirty work down low. The Spartans even have their point guard Cassius Winston pulling down 3.5 boards, an impressive number for a guy six-feet tall.
​
The last factor that needs to be looked at is free throw proficiency. Free throws should essentially be free points, so being able to get to the line will enable teams points that the defense cannot prevent. However, being able to have many free throw attempts is not enough, as teams need to make them. Take for example someone like Shaquille O'Neal, a career 52.7% free throw shooter, was fouled numerous times due to his inability to knock down free throws and ruined his teams flow and momentum. Being able to draw fouls and make free throws is crucial to winning basketball games. Free throw rate calculates the amount of free throw attempts per field goal attempt.

Xavier's one advantage by far is the ability to win the free throw game, as they consistently get to the free throw line often and convert them at a near 80% clip. They are led by Senior guard Trevon Bluiett, who attempts 5.5 free throws a game and makes them 86% of the time. Interesting to note that while Kentucky attempts the most free throws per field goal attempt among the teams that are left, they shoot free throws at a poor 70%, which can seriously hinder their team, especially at the end of games where hitting free throws are crucial to win. Some of their key players, such as PJ Washington, Hamidou Diallo, and Wenyen Gabriel will become almost unplayable in late game situations, as they all shoot below 63% from the free throw line.

With all of this in mind, Villanova should be the winner of the tournament. Led by Head Coach Jay Wright and star Juniors Jalen Brunson and Mikal Bridges, this is not at all a bold prediction in the slightest, as they are a number one seed in the tournament and NCAA.com reported that the majority of all brackets made have Villanova coming out on top. That being said, they score at an incredibly efficient clip, keep the turnovers low, and convert free throws at a good rate, making the most of every opportunity and giving themselves the best chance to beat anyone. However, they do lack in the rebounding department, which could hurt them if they face a dominant big man, such as Duke's Marvin Bagley. If we are looking at a potential upset or cinderella story, take a look at Loyola Chicago, who score incredibly efficiently and, while this stat was not discussed, also carry a decent defense with an Opponents eFG% of .475. Or you could look at UMBC, who already have etched their name in the record books and could ride this momentum into a Sweet Sixteen bid. Nonetheless, like I said in the beginning of the article, any team can theoretically beat anyone in any given night, which could make this prediction foolish. Heck, UMBC could win it all and truly surprise the entire world even more than it already has. After all, this is what makes the "Madness" in March Madness: exhilarating, unpredictable, and completely fun. ​

Sources: Basketball Reference, NCAA.com, Sportingnews

The biggest area of concern is inevitably Kershaw’s dubious postseason track record. Over the course of 7 postseasons that Kershaw has participated in, we have seen the full spectrum. On one night, we witness flashes of brilliance, whether it be spinning a World Series Game 1 gem or stifling the Cubs en route to Los Angeles’ first World Series since 1988. On another night, we witness lowlights of the Claw at his very worst, whether it be imploding in the 7th inning or getting lit up by the opposing team in crucial elimination games. ​