Printable View
Hahaha... I know how that is, actually. When I lived in Los Angeles and owned a car, I used to dine exclusively at Jack in the Box, Carl's Jr. and Del Taco.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Needless to say, I've dropped about 30 lbs. (and maintained the loss) since I moved to Chicago and had to walk everywhere. Also, there's hardly any fast food anywhere.
If there were a taco bell in Stockholm I'd be in heaven. It's the only fast food that I miss
Did somebody say...more cowbell?
Ok, bottom 8. Top of the order due up. Lidge in the 9th. Now or never Rays
Guess not
Nah, Lidge is gonna blow it. Rays up, 1 game to none. Book it.Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
ofg!Quote:
Originally Posted by oldfatguy
He's alive. And hopefully full of prophecy
You know, hitters really need to learn to not swing at Brad Lidge's slider with 2 strikes.
Easier said than done
Yeah, I know.
Damn.
Whelp, that one's in the record books...
yeaQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Well, it's good to know I've still got it. :o
EDIT: Would now be a bad time to really CUSS THOSE MFIN PHILLIES OUT for beating the Dodgers?? Ok, guess it would be. I hope the Rays b......................................................... nevermind.
heh
Don't worry about it. I was hoping you were correct.
I was sort of expecting this. Hamels is nasty....The thing is, he's SO far above the rest of the Phillies starters. While Hamels is the best pitcher in the series, the Rays have 3 starters (Kazmir, Shields, Garza) that are better than every non-Hamels starter on the Phillies roster. Not only that, Myers is likely the only other Phillies starter that has a decent shot of not getting eaten alive by an AL lineup. Moyer I think will get rocked by Tampa, and Blanton, should he start which is likely, wasn't doing good in the AL when he was with Oakland. I think that Tampa will when each game that the Phillies start anybody besides Hamels, which is why I (still) think they'll win the series given that Hamels, at most, can start 2 more games.
Yea, I agree.
Yeah, I would agree about a million percent, except for the X-factor. You know, the one that statistics insist doesn't exist. "Clutch"Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
That's the X-factor. The Rays, each AND EVERY one of them, are now not just tryint to GET there, they're trying to WIN it. Every AB, every pitch, every fielded ball, every thrown ball, is just not the same as it was a month ago, or a week ago, or even last weekend. (And, to be honest, the pressure was starting to show in the Boston series).
I think the Rays are the better team, I think the Rays should win, I even think the Rays probably will win, but I ain't sure they're gonna win. Because of the X-factor. And, to a team like the Rays, that X-factor is magnified.
Sorry Baseball Prospectus, clutch does exist. And it affects different human beings differently. Usually those younger human beings have a harder time adjusting. And the Rays are the younger of the teams. They're better, but will they win. I still think so, AND I still DAMN SURE HOPE SO, but I'm not near as sure.
But hey, as I've proven above, I don't have a clue what I'm talking about. Lidge didn't blow it. (I still think he will before the post season is over) And the Rays probably won't win. But I can't think of a World Series in the last 10 that I've been so passionately AGAINST a team as I am against the Phillies right now. And the really big problem is, I'm thinking they're playing so damn possessed that it seems inevitable that they'll win.
But I'm old, my mother is older, and for the first time in many years I observed real hope and glee in her demeanor (and I'm not just talking about baseball). And the Phillies cut it short. That pisses me off (But, I'd be willing to bet there's a thousand stories just like mine on the Phillies side of the ledger). So, my bias is clear. I hope the Rays win. I hope they win convincingly. But I think the Phillies are just so hot right now that, well, it evens up the fact that the Rays might be the better team. In other words, this just might be the most interesting World Series in some time.
And I'll be watching.
And making more wrong projections.
Hey, it's all in good fun, right?
I actually thought that was creative and actually funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by phillies999
You do know that a "Phillie" is a blunt, right?
I'm not buying this line of reasoning. Game 7 of the ALCS vs. the defending World Series champs is damn packed with pressure. I don't see the World Series itself as being "extra pressurized" enough for it to matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldFatGuy
The whole deal with the "younger" team stuff, history has shown that it's really irrelevant in the playoffs. 2003 Florida Marlins were about 27 years old on average, against the Yankees, who were about 5 years older. 2002 Angels were 29, vs. the Giants who were 31. Age and playoff experience have proven to mean little, if not nothing, when it comes to the outcome of a playoff series.
No amount of "clutch" can outweigh the fact that Jamie Moyer maxes out in the low-80s, and that just doesn't fly in the American League like it can in the National League, and that Joe Blanton is basically the same except right-handed with some extra oomph on his ball.
True enough, and good points. And I hope you're right. Because in theory, "no amount of clutch can outweigh the fact that Jamie Moyer maxes out in the low-80's" so therefore, it's a done deal. Once the Phillies get beyond Hamels, the Rays should win em all. Problem is, that exact same philosophy could have been applied to the Dodgers series.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
It didn't work there either. The thing that SABR lovers never, EVER, want to admit is that instead of random number generators, real people play out the games. Stats don't, and never will, explain everything. If they did, the world's best statisticians would've already been hired as MLB GM's. Or managers. It just doesn't work that way.
The best statistical pitcher in the MLB could come accross the worst statistical hitter in the MLB and depending on all of the millions of other variances, it might end up that the best pitcher would totally dominate the worst hitter, OR MAYBE, the worst statistical hitter might dominate the best statistical pitcher. WHY???? I mean, of course, that's not possible, right??? (Do you want me to post real stats here??????)
I agree HGM, the Rays SHOULD win. And I HOPE that they will win. But I'm just not sure that they WILL win.
But I'm gonna watch till it's over either way. IMO, this is one of the very best series at least since the Mets/Orioles. In fact, in my own personal situation, I haven't been this interested since then.
Well, no, it's not a "done deal", and I never said it was. In baseball, ANYTHING can happen. Also, like I said, Moyer's stuff is very unlikely to work well against an AMERICAN LEAGUE lineup. There's a large difference between the leagues, so the same can't be applied to the Dodger series.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldFatGuy
Not true. That's something that "SABR haters" like to say about "SABR lovers" which no "SABR lover" actually thinks. As I've said in other threads, this person that believes that baseball is played by computers that generate numbers does not exist. It's a mythical thing used by people that don't understand statistical analysis in an effort to make "statheads" seem silly. It's a strawman.Quote:
It didn't work there either. The thing that SABR lovers never, EVER, want to admit is that instead of random number generators, real people play out the games.
Uh, what? There is no person in the world that thinks that situation is "not possible." It's a thing called sample size. In one at bat, between any hitter and pitcher anything can happen. It's just that the pitcher has a better CHANCE to "dominate the hitter" than the batter does the pitcher.Quote:
The best statistical pitcher in the MLB could come accross the worst statistical hitter in the MLB and depending on all of the millions of other variances, it might end up that the best pitcher would totally dominate the worst hitter, OR MAYBE, the worst statistical hitter might dominate the best statistical pitcher. WHY???? I mean, of course, that's not possible, right??? (Do you want me to post real stats here??????)
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.
Nobody can be SURE that they will win. That's why they play the games. The only thing people can do is look at the facts at hand and make a choice about who they think has the best chance of winning.Quote:
I agree HGM, the Rays SHOULD win. And I HOPE that they will win. But I'm just not sure that they WILL win.
That's what I'm doing above. I'm analyzing the rosters of the two teams. Up and down, the Rays have a better team. The Rays easily have a much better starting rotation. Two of the Phillies starters (Moyer and Blanton) feature repertoires that are likely to get hit hard by an American League lineup. I am not saying that it's a done deal that the Rays will beat the Phillies in all the non-Hamels games. I'm not saying that it's a done deal that the Rays will beat Moyer or Blanton at all. I'm just looking at the facts at hand and making an educated "guess", for lack of a better term, of who has the better CHANCE to win, and that is all ANYBODY, stathead or otherwise, does.
Simply put, statistics do two things. 1) They tell you what has happened and 2) They can be used to help you make educated decisions about the chances of what will happen. They CANNOT tell you what will happen, and NOBODY claims that.
Yea, that's the thing. Variation certainly exists in baseball. Players speak about it all the time. There's even a term used by very many fans and commentators: "It's a game of inches".
The best players ever generally have a successful plate appearance about 1/3 of the time. They have the success that they do have due to their skill, but the fact is that the worst hitters can get a hit off of the best pitchers and vice versa. There's simply no way for the human body to be perfect enough to put bat to ball more often then that. That's what created the "variation" that we observe, not some mythical random number generator.
ps.: if the "best team" should be winning, then this world series match up probably shouldn't be occurring right now...
More like 3/8 of the time ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
eh... give or take. Kind of depends on the definition of "successful", of course.
I'll use the definition as "not making an out."Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
Of course, there's always exceptions.
I was just nitpicking for fun :)
We have a winner.Quote:
Originally Posted by ohms_law
no comments about the NON balk call... I think that may be what cost the Rays
HOWEVER...
GREAT teams overcome bad calls... and it was certainlyearlyenough in the game the should have recovered
What balk? Terry Mulholland had the same move and he perfected what looked like a pitch to the plate and would absolutely pick a guy off with no problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
But, that doesn't matter. A win is win and in the World Series, it doesn't matter if it is ugly or a beautiful portrait.
Oh, and Kazmir didn't look all that great last night.
And if you think of it realistically, the Rays have LOST 3 out of their last 4 games.
Phils up 1-0 baby! :D
Which doesn't matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by phightinphils
Um ok... and that makes it legal how??? Kenny rodger put pine tar on his hand for 2 innings... taht doesn make it legal Different circumstance but the point being people get away with illegal stuff all the time... and that was an illegal move to 1st... LIKE I SAID HOWEVER... A Great team can get past that.Quote:
Originally Posted by phightinphils
100% agreeQuote:
But, that doesn't matter. A win is win and in the World Series, it doesn't matter if it is ugly or a beautiful portrait.
I personaly think kazmir is their 3rd best starter but tahts my opinion... I'd put shields and garza ahead of him.Quote:
Oh, and Kazmir didn't look all that great last night.
And if you think of it realistically, the Rays have LOST 3 out of their last 4 games.
Phils up 1-0 baby! :D
as for the 3 out of 4??? wtf are u talking about... thats 3, different series?!?!?!
No, just 2. The last 3 games of the ALCS and the first game of the World Series.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
But, like I said, that means nothing.
no they lost game 5 also remmeber.. he was right 3 out of 4and I agree it means nothingQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Yes, they lost Game 5 and 6 of the ALCS, won game 7, and lost game 1 of the World Series. 3 out of 4 games is right, but you said "3 series", and it's only 2. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
Unrelated issue: does anyone here know anyone that went to the game?
My Phillies fan buddy from Orlando bought 4 tickets, and it cost him around $1500 total. $1500!!! For tickets to the TROP!
I know World Series tickets are hiked; are the prices set by MLB? Because to go from $10 tickets in the upper deck that are not sold and typically covered with tarp during the season, to charging $338 per before taxes and WalletBlaster fees, is rather incredible. 3300% markup?
should have had a comma there sorry i fixed lolQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Still the FACT remains, the Rays have lost 3 out of their last 4 games and the Phils have won 3 out of their last four.
Sure, but...that means nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by phightinphils
Sure it does, if the Phillies lose games 4 & 5 against the Dodgers, it is a different series. The Dodgers may have been able to win the LCS.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
So how does winning and losing consecutive games or in groups in the playoffs mean nothing?
Who knows - maybe it does mean something? Maybe the Rays are in the beginning stages of a return to the 60 win team they have been since their inception. They had a nice run that ended just a few games early and now must return to their rightful spot at the bottom of the AL East.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM