*** Official MLB Postseason thread ***

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: drum
And here I thought the Indians had no shot to make it to the World Series this year. :|

I feel for Indians fans.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
If you look up some of my older posts from around 2003/2004 I showed that payroll pretty much ensures you'll make the playoffs*. From there, it's a flip of the coin.








*Disclaimer: Doesn't apply to the NY Mets. You will never beat the Phillies again, even if you surpass the Yankees in payroll. You may as well just start wearing Phillies gear.

Wow, you're so smart - I can't believe you figured that out all the way back in 2003! Amazing!

Considering that Billy Beane proposed the same exact theory in the same year I did means that you can suck on deeeeez nuts.

You really think that Billy Beane (and no one before him) only realized in 2003 that being able to afford more talent gives you a competitive advantage? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

My lord you are dumb.

Nobody presented the case with research and empirical evidence to prove that $ does not directly correlate to a World Series winner in a probability equation, so it contradicts your statement that $ =! champion. But then again, you can provide this baseball evidence prior to 2003 right? You can insert your foot into your mouth now. /snicker

 

[jalaram]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: jalaram
Pedro to pitch Game 2 instead of Hamels.

Cliff Lee to pitch Game 1 was a no-brainer, but this is interesting. Will Pedro pitch like he did against the Dodgers?

This is a terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible move. Pedro is not the same caliber pitcher as Hamels and his supposed decline is nothing but a bit of bad luck. His ERA jumped an entire run over last year, but that's largely due to the fact that last year he was getting lucky on batted balls and this year he has been unlucky. The true Cole Hamels is probably somewhere between this year and last.

In the playoffs he has had a few struggles, but anything can happen over a small sample size. The Phillies need to realize (and realize fast!) that Hamels is their 2nd best pitcher. Starting him in Game 2 guarantees that he will pitch again in the series. This is a very, very bad move and a prime example of a manager trying to over think things.

I disagree.

1) Hamels is much much better this year at the Home than away, look at his splits. 3.75 at home vs 4.99 on the road. Also, Hamels in 9.2 innings these playoffs = 6.52 ERA. Pedro in 7 innings on the road = 0.00.
2) Pedro has nerves of steel, has pitched in games bigger than this on the road in the postseason, has his velocity (92mph) and bite back on his pitches. The shutdown game at LA was a prime example. He's well rested since he only pitched 1/5 of a season. He's familiar with pitching at NY, Cole isn't.

He's the obvious choice IMO.

Pedro has given up a huge number of home runs. His HR/FB ratio straight up sucks. With the short porch @ Yankee Stadium, his outing will be short and he'll be knocked out to a chorus of "who's your daddy?" chants.

This is a classic case of a manager riding the hot hand, ignoring a mountain of evidence that Hamels is the better pitcher, and making a catastrophic mistake that could cost his team the World Series. Even looking at Hamels' home/away splits, at WORST he is a lefty Pedro Martinez (2009 edition) and, at best, is a dominant pitcher.

Charlie Manuel's press conference after Game 2 will go something like, "it was a gut feeling to go with Pedro over Hamels." When you need your gut to help your brain make decisions, you probably shouldn't be managing a major-league team

Based on last year and this year, his gut > the other 29 managers' brains.

 

[raystorm]

Nice that the rain has finally let up here in the Bronx. As much as I hate both teams I think this could be a very exciting series. First time in awhile that the two teams that I consider to be the best in each league will play each other. Could be the best series since the wonderful 2001 series. We'll see of course but I hope for 7 exciting games.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
If you look up some of my older posts from around 2003/2004 I showed that payroll pretty much ensures you'll make the playoffs*. From there, it's a flip of the coin.








*Disclaimer: Doesn't apply to the NY Mets. You will never beat the Phillies again, even if you surpass the Yankees in payroll. You may as well just start wearing Phillies gear.

Wow, you're so smart - I can't believe you figured that out all the way back in 2003! Amazing!

Considering that Billy Beane proposed the same exact theory in the same year I did means that you can suck on deeeeez nuts.

You really think that Billy Beane (and no one before him) only realized in 2003 that being able to afford more talent gives you a competitive advantage? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

My lord you are dumb.

Nobody presented the case with research and empirical evidence to prove that $ does not directly correlate to a World Series winner in a probability equation, so it contradicts your statement that $ =! champion. But then again, you can provide this baseball evidence prior to 2003 right? You can insert your foot into your mouth now. /snicker

I said $ does not give you a better chance to win? What?

And you're asking me to prove that NOBODY made the connection before? You're a bufoon.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Pedro has given up a huge number of home runs. His HR/FB ratio straight up sucks. With the short porch @ Yankee Stadium, his outing will be short and he'll be knocked out to a chorus of "who's your daddy?" chants.

This is a classic case of a manager riding the hot hand, ignoring a mountain of evidence that Hamels is the better pitcher, and making a catastrophic mistake that could cost his team the World Series. Even looking at Hamels' home/away splits, at WORST he is a lefty Pedro Martinez (2009 edition) and, at best, is a dominant pitcher.

Charlie Manuel's press conference after Game 2 will go something like, "it was a gut feeling to go with Pedro over Hamels." When you need your gut to help your brain make decisions, you probably shouldn't be managing a major-league team

Wait, are you using the age old argument that career statistics actually matter in the playoffs? Cmon, get real - Lidge vs Colorado is a perfect example of a hot hand in the playoffs. All you can look at is what they've done this past year in conjunction with the playoffs.

Pedro shut down the Dodgers and Hamels hasn't done sht in his past 2 starts (*cough* vs the same LA). Your argument is incredibly weak that Hamels is this "dominant" pitcher. Where's the beef? I watch all of his starts and he's had one good start in the last 5. He'll be cannon fodder for New York's bombers in Philly or NY, except that it's almost a lock he'll get rocked at NY because he loses his composure and especially has never pitched there.

I showed that Hamels is 1.5 runs better at home than away this year and Pedro just shut down the same team who rocked Hamels. Pedro is a seasoned vet at pitching in NY in October, and his return to form easily makes him the solid choice to start Game 2 in NY. It doesn't matter that Pedro pitched better at home than away because he just shut down the Dodgers on the road IN LA. He is the obvious choice, give Hamels a chance to try to return to form at home and not give NY extra confidence by decimating him in NY. If they decimate Pedro, who cares? Nobody expected him to do well anyway and they can start Happ in his place if it goes more than 5.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: jman19
I said $ does not give you a better chance to win? What?

And you're asking me to prove that NOBODY made the connection before? You're a bufoon.

Nobody has used statistical evidence before 2003 to prove that $ doesn't equal a ring and only a high playoff probability. Keep calling me names, it makes your childish argument even weaker.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: jman19
I said $ does not give you a better chance to win? What?

And you're asking me to prove that NOBODY made the connection before? You're a bufoon.

Nobody has used statistical evidence before 2003 to prove that $ doesn't equal a ring and only a high playoff probability. Keep calling me names, it makes your childish argument even weaker.

All I said is that you are a fool if you think you figured out some great mystery that having a higher payroll corresponds to having a greater chance of making the playoffs. You're the one making the claim that nobody realized this before 2003 without a shred of evidence. It is actually a pretty obvious argument.

 

[chalmers]

Hey I heard a rumor that if the Yanks don't win this series they're signing Albert Pujols, Carlos Pena, Adam Wainwright, Chris Carpenter, Zach Greinke and Prince Fielder all to $150+ M contracts. That true?

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: jman19
I said $ does not give you a better chance to win? What?

And you're asking me to prove that NOBODY made the connection before? You're a bufoon.

Nobody has used statistical evidence before 2003 to prove that $ doesn't equal a ring and only a high playoff probability. Keep calling me names, it makes your childish argument even weaker.

All I said is that you are a fool if you think you figured out some great mystery that having a higher payroll corresponds to having a greater chance of making the playoffs. You're the one making the claim that nobody realized this before 2003 without a shred of evidence. It is actually a pretty obvious argument.

Yankee haters said that NY should win the WS every year because they have the highest payroll. I (and Moneyball) showed that this is in fact a fallacy, there was only the assumption of a high playoff probability. It initially had nothing to do with the argument of equating $ to playoff probability, of course that was to be assumed but it wasn't statistically proven until 2003 when the Yankee hater argument was disproven.

 

[raystorm]

Originally posted by: chalmers
Hey I heard a rumor that if the Yanks don't win this series they're signing Albert Pujols, Carlos Pena, Adam Wainwright, Chris Carpenter, Zach Greinke and Prince Fielder all to $150+ M contracts. That true?

No but the Mets will and they'll still find a way to break my heart.

 

[chalmers]

I have no reason to hate, and I don't hate at all. The Yankees just make baseball un fun for me. I watch sports to be entertained and to watch even and exciting competition. Buying all the players when you can't make the playoffs and suddenly being excited that you're in the playoffs isn't exciting, fun, or interesting to me at all.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: jman19
I said $ does not give you a better chance to win? What?

And you're asking me to prove that NOBODY made the connection before? You're a bufoon.

Nobody has used statistical evidence before 2003 to prove that $ doesn't equal a ring and only a high playoff probability. Keep calling me names, it makes your childish argument even weaker.

All I said is that you are a fool if you think you figured out some great mystery that having a higher payroll corresponds to having a greater chance of making the playoffs. You're the one making the claim that nobody realized this before 2003 without a shred of evidence. It is actually a pretty obvious argument.

Yankee haters said that NY should win the WS every year because they have the highest payroll. I (and Moneyball) showed that this is in fact a fallacy, there was only the assumption of a high playoff probability. It initially had nothing to do with the argument of equating $ to playoff probability, of course that was to be assumed but it wasn't statistically proven until 2003 when the Yankee hater argument was disproven.

Ugh I had a long post here and then I got a timeout error.

Anyway, I never said a team with the most money should win every year. Not sure how you're gleaning that from what I wrote. I mearly was pointing out the fact that more money generally = more success is not a surprise at all; it is quite obvious in fact. As is the fact that the playoffs have a bit of randomness involved - thanks to the short DS and small sample size. If you think this was news in 2003 just because of the success of Moneyball you are incorrect.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: drum
And here I thought the Indians had no shot to make it to the World Series this year. :|

Lol, Lee vs Sabbathia, maybe even three times! Hell, the Phillies are still paying Jim Thome, and he hasn't even been a Phillie for years, let alone an Indian.

And thank-you for Cholly Manuel, whom I'm first thought was a mouth-breather brought in as the anti Larry Bowa and Thome's buddy; I know think the guy has an elite baseball mind.

As a long suffering Phillies fan, I mean it when I say I feel for you.

I've had a place in my baseball world for the Indians since the days of Rocky Colavito. I well remember Sudden Sam McDowell. And not too many know or remember that Luis Tiant was an Indian long before he on the BoSox . . . or that the Yankees picked up Craig Nettles for $40,000 or so on waivers from the Tribe.

And yeah, I also remember their gargantuan old stadium, which sat something like 80,000 or so: The Mistake By the Lake!

Baseball, brother. It'll break your heart. :heart:

 

[evident]

wtf, shouldn't they be playing the evil empire theme song for the yankees?

 

[xanis]

Originally posted by: evident
wtf, shouldn't they be playing the evil empire theme song for the yankees?

text?

 

[TheVrolok]

Not my preferred way to start a game.

 

[TheVrolok]

That was a pretty lucky bounce off the wall to be honest.

 

[iamwiz82]

What is up with the Fox TV crew? There have been a ton of issues with the HD feed so far. Black screens, green screens, jumping back to SD. Weird.

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
What is up with the Fox TV crew? There have been a ton of issues with the HD feed so far. Black screens, green screens, jumping back to SD. Weird.

I haven't had a problem yet.

 

[TheVrolok]

Damn.. stranding 3.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
Good... stranding 3.

Fixed.

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
Good... stranding 3.

Fixed.

I will take the what, 25ish pitch, 1st inning from CC though.

 

[TheVrolok]

Anyone in NY wanna say what the rain is really like? Looks like a misting on TV, but I really can't tell.

 

[TheVrolok]

3 up, 3 down, with 2 K's for Lee. Mmmm that's a purty start.