Jump to content

//< 2008 Mlb Playoff Thread >\\


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I like Tampa/LAA/Phil/LADso how about I'll take the Phillies win the series for $10 and I'd prefer to transfer through FT if I lose.
sure.Moneyball I'll take LAD at 2 to 1 for $20 since Dodgers are at +200?
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Moneyball in regards to the quality of team the Angels field. This is reinforced by some digging done by Eric Van at SoSH. Conclusion: the National League really sucks (and the Angels aren't that good).That said, I can't say that I'm feeling super confident about the postseason. I'd rather have home field advantage and I'd really like to have a healthy Drew, Beckett, and Lowell. Not going to get bent out of shape about it. Things are really good and I have some teams I'll be rooting for if things don't pan out. Still, number one on my wishlist is a Sox-Dodgers series. It'd be absolutely nuts with Manny, Torre, Nomar, Lowe, and no Grady Little. It'd be so much fun. Manny will hit like 1.5x home runs where x is the number of games that are played...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Moneyball I'll take LAD at 2 to 1 for $20 since Dodgers are at +200?
Im probably not going to take this since im looking for action on the Dodgers at +206.For Wednesdays games does anybody want to give me action with me taking the Dodgers at +153 and then Red Sox at +114 for whatever amount? These prices are from pinnacle without the juice FWIW so they seem fair to me.Edit. I will also take the Brewers at +185 for game 1. Heres all the odds for wednesday http://www.pinnaclesports.com/League/Baseb...LB/1/Lines.aspx and for the series http://www.pinnaclesports.com/ContestCateg...ices/Lines.aspx.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with Moneyball in regards to the quality of team the Angels field. This is reinforced by some digging done by Eric Van at SoSH. Conclusion: the National League really sucks (and the Angels aren't that good).
Seems to me the fact that Angels should have won only 84 is evidence that they are the best team. There's 16 games in the win column that shouldn't be there.Why not?Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda, it's all about the scoreboard, right? No?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems to me the fact that Angels should have won only 84 is evidence that they are the best team. There's 16 games in the win column that shouldn't be there.Why not?Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda, it's all about the scoreboard, right? No?
Stuff like run differential and run differential adjusted for level of competition have shown to be much better indicators of a teams skill. Some of this can be offset by having a great closer which gives the team with the great closer an advantage in close games which can make up for some of the difference in run differential. And yes the Angels have a great closer but when you objectively compare K-Rod to Papelbon most everybody that understands that saves are a poor indicator of a closers worth are going to say that Papelbon is a better closer and that even in close games the Red Sox also would have an edge.Saying stuff like scoreboard in this case would be akin to 2 poker players playing a headsup match where player A runs like god when allin and ends up winning 5 buyins even though according to the chip equity when allin he should be down 2 buyins. Does this mean that player A is the better player? Of course not. Does this mean that if they play again that player A will win again? Probably not.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems to me the fact that Angels should have won only 84 is evidence that they are the best team. There's 16 games in the win column that shouldn't be there.Why not?Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda, it's all about the scoreboard, right? No?
KQ beat AJ 10 times out of 16, that proves it's the better hand. Right?It's unlikely the the +16 is wholly attributable to luck. KRod alone is probably worth 2-4 by himself and there may be some specific team attributes that caused them to outperform, but at the end of the day, I'll take the team that's better at scoring more runs than the opponent. Either way it should be a fun series. Because of home field and the injury situation, I'll give a slight (like 52-48) edge to the Angels.EDIT: Or what Moneyball said. Heh, take your pick.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Im probably not going to take this since im looking for action on the Dodgers at +206.For Wednesdays games does anybody want to give me action with me taking the Dodgers at +153 and then Red Sox at +114 for whatever amount? These prices are from pinnacle without the juice FWIW so they seem fair to me.Edit. I will also take the Brewers at +185 for game 1. Heres all the odds for wednesday http://www.pinnaclesports.com/League/Baseb...LB/1/Lines.aspx and for the series http://www.pinnaclesports.com/ContestCateg...ices/Lines.aspx.
Sorry I read it wrong I thought you wanted to take the cubs
Link to post
Share on other sites
why is that so funny? Just curious.Ill take the dodgers +200 for for up to 100. Let me know by 3 pacific time tomorrow. Thanks :club:
Because the Cubs have dominated the NL all year long, that's why.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Because the Cubs have dominated the NL all year long, that's why.
yes they did, i really wish man ram was a dodgers all year. You going to either of the games? Im going saturday and hopefully sunday.gl cubbies
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a good article that states that the Dodgers may have the best offense in the NL. http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_art...l-playoff-team/ Im not quite as optimistic about the Dodgers offense due to the fact that Furcal wont be 100% and the fact that Torre might get desparate and do something dumb like start Juan Pierre, but I think the author makes a point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
yes they did, i really wish man ram was a dodgers all year. You going to either of the games? Im going saturday and hopefully sunday.gl cubbies
I wish, we got denied for the tickets though. It was some sort of random draw thing, and we didn't make it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I wish, we got denied for the tickets though. It was some sort of random draw thing, and we didn't make it.
I wish I knew the Sox were doing the random drawing thing a few weeks ago. I had no clue they did it so early, but oh well. I'm still in disbelief that the Sox made it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a good article that states that the Dodgers may have the best offense in the NL. http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_art...l-playoff-team/ Im not quite as optimistic about the Dodgers offense due to the fact that Furcal wont be 100% and the fact that Torre might get desparate and do something dumb like start Juan Pierre, but I think the author makes a point.
Well if there is an article about it it must be true.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who was the starting SS for the past six weeks? I have NO idea why Torre is starting Furcal. Over his whole Dodger career he has been injured and inconsistent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Who was the starting SS for the past six weeks? I have NO idea why Torre is starting Furcal. Over his whole Dodger career he has been injured and inconsistent.
To answer your first question, Angel Berroa. If Furcal can play at the same level defensively as Berroa, then he should play. If he can't, especially with Lowe on the mound, Berroa should play.Torre is starting Furcal because he seems to be healthy and he is probably 3 times the offensive player that Berroa is, even after sitting out 100+ games. AS for his career with the Dodgers, he had one healthy/good season his first year, was hurt all of last year, and then this year was on pace to lead us in almost every offensive category when he got hurt. It took until like August for any to pass him in runs scored on the team, and he only played 30 something games.Also, Raffy is a free agent, and I'm sure he knows that having a great post season will give him a lot more leverage in the off season. Same goes for Lowe, Manny, etc. It nalso could be Kent's last year, and he is desperate for a title.All I want is one win in Chicago, whether it be Lowe or Bills, I don't care.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok a few things.Can someone explain the scoring line of +200, -150, etc...? I don't get it since I don't really gamble.Also, post-season for the most part comes down to pitching and defense, not necessarily hitting.Goooooooo Sox!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok a few things.Can someone explain the scoring line of +200, -150, etc...? I don't get it since I don't really gamble.Also, post-season for the most part comes down to pitching and defense, not necessarily hitting.Goooooooo Sox!!!
+200: you would bet 100 to win 200-150: you would bet 150 to win 100minus is favorite, + is the dog.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok a few things.Can someone explain the scoring line of +200, -150, etc...? I don't get it since I don't really gamble.Also, post-season for the most part comes down to pitching and defense, not necessarily hitting.Goooooooo Sox!!!
That's not very good for the Sox, lol.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...