Photo: the Browns’ QB competition just jumped up a notch
August 11, 2014Browns finally sign Rex Grossman
August 12, 2014Sigh.
I normally start this off with a “Happy Tuesday” greeting, but this Tuesday is anything but. I opened my laptop to start writing this post last night, and I was immediately hit in the face with the news of Robin Williams’ death.
I’ll be honest with you guys: I don’t normally feel all that affected by celebrity deaths. I mean, I feel bad for their families and friends, and yes it is sad, but I’ve never been good about connecting their deaths to my life. There have been a few exceptions, though…Certain artists and celebrities who meant something to me in some personal way: Kurt Cobain, Dale Earnhardt, Layne Staley, Chris Farley, Greg Giraldo. And now Robin Williams.
Robin Williams was a titan of my youth. He already had a long, prosperous career before I first remember noticing him, but in reality his career was just getting started. I still vividly remember seeing “Hook” in the theater as a young 12-year-old kid and just loving Robin Williams’ performance as Peter Pan. I remember seeing Mrs Doubtfire in the theater a couple years later and thinking it was just about the funniest thing I had ever seen. I’ve been a fan ever since, always trying to make an effort to see just about anything he does.
I can’t even totally grasp this news. Anyone who followed his career was familiar with his battles with addiction and depression, but Robin Williams was so full of life that it seems unfathomable that it could extinguished. Robin and Chris Farley both had a similar quality to them in that even when doing something that wasn’t funny, they could still make you smile and laugh. Robin always had that incredible, mischievous smile and twinkle in his eye, like he always knew more than he was letting on to and had something up his sleeve. His very essence and aura just oozed charisma and laughter.
The most beautiful part about living life at the same time as Robin Williams is that the capacity for happiness always existed. And that was both his gift and his burden. I remember once, while watching one of Robin’s many late night appearances, thinking to myself how exhausting it must be to walk in his shoes. Every time he was in public, there was pressure for him to be “on”. And the remarkable thing is, he never failed to deliver. If he was ever tired of entertaining us and making us laugh, he certainly never let us see even a hint of it. He simply lived his life to make the rest of us laugh and experience happiness.
It would be easy to think only about all the great things Robin Williams gave to society, but obviously this news also serves to remind us that there was another side to the man, hidden from most of us. It’s been said that humor is a kind of defense mechanism, and I think that might be why some of the funniest people to ever grace this planet have also had some of the biggest demons. Often times the humor is used to disguise the very real hurt underneath the surface. And the lifestyle of comedians can naturally lend itself to addiction, excess, and depression. Yet it’s hardly unique to comedians. People in all walks of life suffer with the same afflictions and struggles. We all deal with things differently, and clearly we all have varying capacities for coping with these issues. But no matter how common this connection might be among us all, it always seems to be a shadow lurking beneath the surface. It’s an unspoken side effect of conscious thought and self-awareness. It’s something we’re still evolving inside of and trying to better understand how to make sense of it all, especially in the wake of this kind of tragedy.
For all the uncertainty in a time like this, though, the one thing we know for sure is that while Robin Williams may be gone and will be forever missed by his family, friends, and fans, the man leaves behind an incredible legacy of work that we will be able to enjoy forever. The breadth and versatility of work across all genres is truly astounding. The highlights are too many to list in totality, but just think about some of the memorable roles he has played, including Good Morning Vietnam, Mrs Doubtfire, Insomnia, One Hour Photo, Good Will Hunting, Dead Poets Society, Moscow on the Hudson, Hook, Jack, Jumanji, The Birdcage, Toys, Death to Smoochy, Patch Adams, What Dreams May Come, and on and on and on.
Yet I think the two most memorable performances that I’ll always remember him for came off the big screen. The first was his unforgettable cameo in an episode of Louie. It showed us a slightly different side of Robin that we didn’t often get to see. It was a more subdued and introspective side of the man who always seemed to have the largest personality.
The other comes from the Nerdist youtube channel, in a series called “Set List: Stand-Up Without a Net”. In this series, comedians come to a tiny stage in the back of a comic book store, and they are given a series of prompts in which the comedians must form their set around on the fly. It tests some of the best stand ups to think on their toes and to showcase their improvisational abilities. Some of the comedians absolutely bomb. Some of them struggle right before our eyes to formulate their jokes in real time.
But when Robin Williams was on, he just nailed it out of the park. And he did it without breaking a sweat. I remember him more as an actor than as a stand-up, but this episode gave me an amazing glimpse at his true comedic genius at his core.
RIP Robin Williams, and thank you for all the laughs and all the memorable performances.
*****
Browns’ QB competition heats up
I’ve read some fairly compelling arguments for both Brian Hoyer and Johnny Manziel starting Week One for the Browns. But the one thing I keep coming back to is just how quickly this race seems to have shifted. Hoyer came into camp the overwhelming #1 guy, with the front office saying Hoyer was ahead of Manziel “by a substantial margin”.
Yet over the last couple days we’ve been hearing reports from within Browns camp that Manziel has now pulled ahead of Hoyer, reports which Browns coach Mike Pettine has denied. Yesterday in his MMQB column, SI’s Peter King quoted Browns safety Donte Whitner as saying the locker room is split 50-50 between Manziel and Hoyer.
Look, it doesn’t really matter who is “leading” right now. This isn’t a literal race. The only thing that matters is who will ultimately be the starting QB for the Browns week one in Pittsburgh. But what I find interesting is that this is even a race at all. I’ll be honest, I believed the Browns were going to go with Hoyer unless Manziel played so well as to leave them with no choice but to give Johnny the nod. So far, that hasn’t been the case. The two QBs seem more or less even. I thought that would be enough for Hoyer, but the more we see and hear, the more I think a tie just might go in Manziel’s favor.
Regardless of who the QB is, though, the Browns simply must find a way to score TDs. The offense’s red zone struggles have been a recurring theme of training camp, it was an issue in the intra-squad scrimmage, and in preseason game one, it once again manifested itself on the field. We’ve seen this story over and over again in the Browns’ post-’99 return. I remember two years ago making the dreary walk into Cleveland Browns Stadium (as it was known at the time) for yet another home loss, and someone behind me yelled out “It doesn’t get any better than this guys….getting drunk in the morning and then going to watch Phil Dawson kick field goals all afternoon!”.
This has been an issue for too long, and while I know better than to put too much stock into one preseason game, I am certainly alarmed that red zone offense has been such an issue all training camp long. There’s a lot of optimism around this Browns team, but if we’re going to be watching them kick a bunch of field goals all season long, we’re all in for another very long season.
*****
Are advanced stats negatively impacting my love of sports?
I was listening to a recent Bill Simmons podcast with author Chuck Klosterman, and they got to talking about the World Cup. Klosterman mentioned that he felt that one of the nice things about the World Cup is that it was one of the few times it was just about watching the sport. We weren’t talking about free agency, trades, collective bargaining, players likeness rights, power struggles, etc. Instead, we just enjoy the games themselves.
Then they also briefly mentioned that watching soccer is one of the few team sports where advanced stats aren’t a main talking point. They didn’t really expand on that thought, but it did get me to thinking.
First of all, I am not an anti-analytics guy. I bought Bill James and Jim Henzler’s book “Win Shares” in 2002 and it opened my eyes to seeing sports and statistics in a completely different light. I’ve been using analytics as a tool to help me better analyze basketball for years. So I don’t want anyone to think I’m saying analytics are in any way bad.
However, I do think they are affecting my enjoyment of talking about sports in a negative way. As metrics have become ever more prevalent in basketball, there has been a shift in the way people discuss the sport. Part of the fun in sports is debating the merits of players and teams, and to project how players and teams might match up. But now, if I make a qualitative assessment of a player on Twitter, I will inevitably get a couple responses from people citing a certain stat that they deem to be the end of the discussion. I have been proven wrong, and that’s that. There’s no room for discussion or debate, and it’s just not as much fun as it used to be.
Maybe that’s part of why I enjoy soccer so much these days. As FiveThirtyEight’s Neil Paine recently pointed out, analytics do indeed exist for soccer. But in general they are in their infancy and not fully realized yet. Soccer still exists as the one last adjective-based team sport. Announcers in soccer frequently refer to a player’s “quality” and use terms like “bravery”, “intention”, and “mindset” to describe what we see on the field. Even terms that are rooted in analytics such as “pace”, “touch”, and “possession” have a more qualitative than quantitative meaning in the lexicon of the sport.
I’m sure many statistical-minded people scoff at embracing a qualitative adjective-based approach to something that can be quantifiably measured, and they should be. Just like when someone can statistically demonstrate why my basketball opinion is flawed, they should tweet at me to tell me. They are not in the wrong. Enhancing and furthering our understanding of anything and everything in life is tantamount to the human experience.
My only point is that one side effect of all of this is that following sports from an analytical perspective is losing some of its fun. And some might suggest that I simply don’t follow the stats if I don’t like them and just watch the sports and enjoy them the way I want. But it’s not that easy. Willful ignorance isn’t something I’m particularly good at. If there’s a better way to understand something, you better believe I want to know it. When I make a basketball judgment, I want to feel confident that what my eyes are seeing can be backed up with the proper stats.
So I’m not saying advanced stats are bad or that I want them to go away. I just sometimes think sports were more fun to talk about and debate before we became overcome with all these stats.
*****
New Music of the Week
Finally, we end this Tuesday’s WWW with some music. They say laughter is the best medicine, and it’s pretty darn good. But for me, music has always been my best medicine. So while this WWW started on a somber note, I’m happy to end it with a new album that I have been enjoying quite a bit – The Gaslight Anthem’s new album “Get Hurt”.
This album is something of a departure for the band. I have a feeling a lot of people will dislike it. It’s not flashy, it’s not groundbreaking, it’s not doing anything special. It’s just simple, solid, dependable rock and roll music. And something about that just resonates with me. Similar to how chasing advanced stats can be exhausting and watching a sport for the age itself can be refreshing, I also feel that always chasing innovation and uniqueness in music can sometimes get exhausting and sometimes it’s nice to recharge the batteries with something simple and reliable. That’s what the Gaslight Anthem is for me, particularly on this album.
*****
That’s all for me this week. I hope everyone has a great week filled with laughter and joy!
83 Comments
and I believe both are apt here. if the love and loss is genuine, then the outpouring of emotion and weeping with those who weep is rightfully done. if not, then it is merely being done for spectacle and attention, which also is likely a part of what many are doing.
that is most definitely the toughest verse to follow in application (for me). you must self-correct and ensure that you are following all of the principles of your own life while not letting yourself fall into the trap of then pointing out the faults in others.
the whole pointing out the speck in your brother’s eye while ignoring the plank in your own. it is at least my biggest struggle and what I attempt to work on constantly.
Yeah, I’m sort of getting that. I’ve got nothing against him and I guess I can sort of see it. I’m just genuinely surprised at it all. Didn’t see it coming. Guess it’s partially because of the suicide/depression/substance abuse factors too.
Um, of course it does. I was just presenting another point of view; not judging, correcting, or anything else. Hope you didn’t feel insulted.
It’s just a Simpsons quote. Not making any serious point.
Sure. Wasn’t implying anything else.
just trying to pull it all together.
well, if you weren’t going for a serious point, then you shouldn’t have referenced the Simpsons
🙂
http://cdn2.screenjunkies.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/the-big-lebowski-reunion-animated-gifs-29.gif
I briefly heard about the facebook emotions study. I think after today, I need to go and actually read it.
http://cdn.smosh.com/sites/default/files/bloguploads/simpsons-gifs-candy-girl.gif
yes, that makes sense. and, I think it is a movie that can be interpreted in a multitude of ways and that was part of the point. it takes direction from many different religions and philosophies in it’s afterlife interpretation and gives enough depth to them to allow you to bring your own thoughts into it as well.
Sorry. Meant to reply to the Matthew 6 comment, and not the Simpsons comment (if that’s what happened). I love the Simpsons joke.
Apparently the PNAS uses Disqus too. For some reason, I find that hilarious.
on one hand, it was just a scientific journal proving that propaganda works (as if we didn’t know that already), which is the base of what they were doing.
one the other hand, it was a corporate entity purposefully affecting the moods of hundreds of thousands of users much like the common scare of Serendipity and hundreds of other books (though on a less radical scale).
Socialized services have their advantages. Research by the people, for the people 🙂
I stand corrected, PNAS doesn’t receive any public funding, but it is chartered by the US Senate.
/The more you know
The less you understand/
It’s more than just propaganda though. That’s intentional manipulation of emotions. The study concludes that emotions can spread naturally via social networks.
It’s still one of those – thanks, Dr. Obvious things. When you read/hear/see bad news, you feel sad. But then again, your CV isn’t going to pad itself.
I worked soccer.
for running, if you really want to record your numbers, get something smaller and easier, like adidas mi-coach or a nike fuelband, or fitbit or something. The only problem with all of those tracking devices is that i have heard that those companies can sell your data.
yes, but what they did was propaganda. they intentionally manipulated the emotions of those in their study to prove that they could manipulate their emotions.
also, went through the abstract of their study and it doesn’t even seem to be that it makes you sad. just that you are more likely to post “sad” things.
but, that isn’t even the Dr. Obvious (is he the uncle of Captain Checkdown?). that just doesn’t seem correct. yes, if one sees a bunch of tweets/news-feeds/etc. with negative connotations, then they are more likely to write about those, which will likely have the same type wording embedded. however, that doesn’t even mean they changed the mood of those posting (a “re-tweet” in the facebook world).
so, now I am doubly offended. not only did the researchers go about to try to affect the moods of hundreds of thousands of users just to prove that they could, but the method to prove their ultimate hypothesis doesn’t even look correct.
he was a great actor and person. he could do serious roles like Good Will Huunting and Insomnia just as well as comedy roles. thats what made him great. i feel bad for his family and close friends but not for Robin. he had all the fame and fortune someone could want and went out like a coward. he could have afforded the best help in the world if he needed it and had family and friends that could have helped him as well. instead he crushed the lives of his family by going out this way. i understand he had past issues with drugs and the drink, but how bad was his life, really. there are a lot more people that have far worse lives or are in horrible situations and deal with it, most of the time with no help at all. so i don’t feel sorry at all for him, just disappointed that he destroyed the lives of his family and put them in this situation. and i’d guess that he was on numerous anti-depressants also. more dangerous than the addictions he was trying to shake.
many people think there was something different about Princess Diana, and Elvis of course, which makes them still grieve in a fixated way for someone they think the know but never met. I get all sides in this discussion. But I try to be careful remembering that I don’t public figures. No matter how much I enjoy an actor’s or comedian’s performance it’s just a performance. I try to save my mourning for people whose loss is more personal, or for people who more substantively impacted lives.
Good point.
This is from the article: “These results suggest that the emotions
expressed by friends, via online social networks, influence our own
moods..” So they’re claiming it’s more than just the words you use… But I agree with you – I think there’s a leap to say that using positive/negative words necessarily means a person is happy/sad. Whole thing seems flawed. And even if they proved what they wanted to, I don’t see how profound those conclusions would really be.
Re: analytics, as a hockey fan it’s hard to argue how much analytics have taken over the analysis (heh) of the sport. Trades and FA signings no longer center around the number of goals a player scores, but around things like his “CORSI” and how he “drives possession”. These are good tools, but they aren’t complete substitutes for actual results and eyeball tests.
For example, in breaking down a 1-vs-8 first round playoff series, a couple of guys I know were convinced the 8 seed was going to win in a walk simply because they had “better possession numbers”. Sure, OK, which explains why one team finished with the best record in the conference and your “better possession” team finished 8th.
And guess what: the 1-seed won the series.
At some point, actual results matter, and there is no short list of teams that have shown that things like “chemistry” and “character” MATTER.
And for me, re: Robin Williams, it was One Hour Photo that spoke to me the most. It showed me that he had chops. There is not one ounce of intended humor in the character of Sy the Photo Guy, and Williams’ channeling of all of Sy’s inner turmoil into the vessel of developing pictures is nothing short of amazing to watch. As good as he was in Good Will Hunting, his performance in One Hour Photo will always be the one that convinced me that he was supremely talented, because he completely constructed a simultaneously sympathetic and also completely detestable and creepy character from the skeleton of a simple photo-development guy at a drug store chain.
i echo your sentiment. Baseball is, effectively, a one-v-one sport. Certain analytics matter a lot in baseball. But there are too many moving parts in other sports to only rely on these analytics. I don’t care what the quantitatives say, if you score 60 goals you can play on my team any day, regardless of what your CORSI is.
when you said,
” but how bad was his life, really.”
were you making a statement or asking a question? I’m confused. You see, usually people use the squiggly line with a dot when they are asking a question.
And the other thing about basebal analytics – the sport provides a HUGE sample size. Just huge. Every player has 100’s of ABs a year. Plus we have a fairly detailed record dating back over 100 years in what was mostly a pretty static game. So it’s a lot more fruitful to take all that and find some patterns.
Meanwhile, every other sport involves a multitude of moving parts, small sample sizes, constantly changing rules (especially in the NFL), much more arbitrary officiating, etc….
As much as I like advanced stats in baseball, I have not taken to them in any other sport. Not to say they don’t have value. I just don’t think they have as much as the numbers in baseball.
and, this particular writer turned the study around on them in a way. just went to “liking” everything that facebook sent him and apparently, rather quickly, you will be inundated with brand messaging. then, the brand messaging is loaded with baiting tactics to try to see if you will interact.
of course, if you do, then it will also inundate your friends lists with the same.
it’s really sort of nauseating and intriguing at the same time.
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/i-liked-everything-i-saw-on-facebook-for-2-days-heres-94435047974.html
—————————-
and this tidbit at the end was funny as well (realize, the writer only did this for 2 days):
I would hear from someone who worked at Facebook, who had noticed my activity and wanted to connect me with the company’s PR department.
situational statistics are also less prevalent in baseball.
in football, a 5 yard pass can be great (touchdown), good (1st down), positive (1st or 2nd down), or bad (3rd/4th and more than 5 yards to go). a 3-and-out series can be bad (most of the time) or good (chewing up the last 2 minutes of a game where you have the lead).
and while there are some good tools out there (DVOA, etc.), none really get to the full scope because it is really too daunting a task. and then, even if they somehow did, the sample size is too small.
Facebook is the devil.
We are not alone.
and people wonder why I avoid FB & twitter and such things : )