Author Topic: Seriously? Suck it ESPN  (Read 7395 times)

Lurch

  • Pope
  • Posts: 5931
    • View Profile
Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« on: April 05, 2009, 04:25:11 pm »
2009 predictions.  Shouldn't be surprised, but not a single mention of the Astros or their players. 
I wish the first word I had said when I was born was 'quote'. Then before I die, I could say, 'unquote.' --Steven Wright

Filo

  • Roster Filler
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #1 on: April 05, 2009, 04:29:33 pm »
Not surprising at all.  SI has the Astros pegged for 5th in the division with the Pirates finishing only slightly worse.

BudGirl

  • Contributor
  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 17776
  • Brad Ausmus' Slave
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #2 on: April 05, 2009, 05:11:54 pm »
Who cares?
''I just did an interview with someone I like more than you. I used a lot of big words on him. I don't have anything left for you.'' --Brad Ausmus

Well behaved women rarely make history.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #3 on: April 05, 2009, 05:19:58 pm »
You know, it really doesn't mean anything, but why are some folks picking the St. Louis Cardinals to win the NL Central.  I've seen this pattern crop up in some people's opinions about the NL Central champion.  So I paid a little more attention the other day and said to myself "Self!  There it is, that's why they're choosing the St. Louis Cardinals".  Apparently, Chris Carpenter is said to look very strong this early in spring and the word is that as he goes, so goes the St. Louis Cardinals.  The thinking I suppose is that Pujols is Pujols and LaRussa and Duncan are also known commodities... so all they need is a very strong Carpenter and things are going to happen.

Okay, I can see the logic, but.... ahum... isn't that the same thing as saying any team with Lee, Berkman and Oswalt has a fighting chance?
« Last Edit: April 05, 2009, 07:42:00 pm by Noe in Austin »

matadorph

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #4 on: April 05, 2009, 06:10:06 pm »
You know, it really doesn't mean anything, but why are some folks picking the St. Louis Cardinals to win the NL Central.  I've seen this pattern crop up in some people's opinions about the NL Central champion.  So I paid a little more attention the other day and said to myself "Self!  There it is, that's why they're choosing the St. Louis Cardinals".  Apparently, Chris Carpenter is said to long very strong this early in spring and the word is that as he goes, so goes the St. Louis Cardinals.  The thinking I suppose is that Pujols is Pujols and LaRussa and Duncan are also known commodities... so all they need is a very strong Carpenter and things are going to happen.

Okay, I can see the logic, but.... ahum... isn't that the same thing as saying any team with Lee, Berkman and Oswalt has a fighting chance?

I've been wondering about the "don't sleep on the Cardinals!" prognostications myself.

I think the Astros are not only comparable to the Cards in the veteran lineup anchors, but the Astros also have a definite advantage at the end of games. The last time I checked the Cards roster, they don't have a Jose Valverde.

pravata

  • Guest
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #5 on: April 05, 2009, 06:19:12 pm »
Here's their OD lineup

1. Brendan Ryan, 2B
2. Rick Ankiel, CF
3. Albert Pujols, 1B
4. Khalil Greene, SS
5. Ryan Ludwick, RF
6. Yadier Molina, C
7. Chris Duncan, LF
8. Brian Barden, 3B
9. Adam Wainwright, P

Glaus is out for atleast 2 months with shoulder surgery.    Added fun, the St Louis OD forecast,

high temperature of 39 degrees on Monday, with winds in the range of 20 miles per hour and a 60 percent chance of snow showers. In the 3 p.m. CT hour (game time is scheduled for 3:15), the forecast calls for a temperature of 39, and a 50 percent chance of snow showers.

postpone? Jakes dont like that

the most likely course of action would be a split doubleheader on Tuesday. That would present a significant complication, since St. Louis does not have a day off in the season's first three weeks. Someone would need to be called up to start Saturday's game against Houston, because the Cardinals would be loath to use either Adam Wainwright or Kyle Lohse on three days' rest.

http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090405&content_id=4132700&vkey=news_stl&fext=.jsp&c_id=stl

Ron Brand

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 22329
  • Smoke 'em inside.
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #6 on: April 05, 2009, 06:19:46 pm »
Fuck 'em. The last thing I want is ESPN crawling up the Astros' collective butt about ANYTHING. Let them follow the other media darlings around all they want to.
I'm in love with rock and roll and I'll be out all night.

Mr. Happy

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 23232
  • It's a beautiful day; let's play two
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #7 on: April 05, 2009, 06:23:10 pm »
Consider. The. Source.
People who cannot recognize a palpable absurdity are very much in the way of civilization. Agnes Rupellier

Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius

JaneDoe

  • Contributor
  • Pope
  • Posts: 8603
  • Missing in Action
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #8 on: April 05, 2009, 06:38:04 pm »
Consider. The. Source.

Ever Spouting Pooh Network

Eastern Slong-gorvelling Personified Network

Exceedingly Self Promoting Network



"My hammy is a little tight. I wish I was like Ausmus. He's Jewish and isn't allowed to have a pulled hamstring."

matadorph

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #9 on: April 05, 2009, 06:39:01 pm »
Quote
“I think a lot of people want to point to our question marks, and they don’t want to point to our exclamation points,” Astros general manager Ed Wade said. “The question marks being: Well, beyond Roy, are the other four starters capable of going deep into games? Is this going to be a breakout year for Michael Bourn? And I think the answer to both of those questions is yes.

“But I think a lot of people want to dwell on those things and view them as potential shortcomings and they walk by the fact that we’ve got some very established star-quality players that have proven themselves, track-record guys. Not just from the standpoint of the everyday lineup, but Valverde and even the experienced guys off the bench that we have.”

Inzactly!

I'm not gonna lose any sleep over the predictably pessimistic forecast of the upcoming Astros season because we've heard it all before. The Astros could win a hundred games and they'd still get little credit nationally. What I don't understand is why so many internet jackoffs are in complete agreement about the Astros when the Astros always defy the conventional wisdom. Can any of them think beyond the BP/BA/BBTF cw arrows?

DVauthrin

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2929
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #10 on: April 05, 2009, 06:48:21 pm »
I don't care what ESPN or anyone else says, this is a solid, competitive club.    Just looking at the team compared to the second half of last year, a healthy Lee replaces Wigginton, and you potentially get mike hampton for a full year(knock on wood) rather than 1/2 a season of randy wolf.   Not to mention pudge is an upgrade offensively over the 2008 catchers, hawkins is here all year, and bourn has nowhere to go but up.   


Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted.

matadorph

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2009, 06:48:32 pm »

high temperature of 39 degrees on Monday, with winds in the range of 20 miles per hour and a 60 percent chance of snow showers. In the 3 p.m. CT hour (game time is scheduled for 3:15), the forecast calls for a temperature of 39, and a 50 percent chance of snow showers.

postpone? Jakes dont like that

the most likely course of action would be a split doubleheader on Tuesday. That would present a significant complication, since St. Louis does not have a day off in the season's first three weeks. Someone would need to be called up to start Saturday's game against Houston, because the Cardinals would be loath to use either Adam Wainwright or Kyle Lohse on three days' rest.

http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090405&content_id=4132700&vkey=news_stl&fext=.jsp&c_id=stl

White Sox/Royals game in Chicago has already been called due to snow.

DVauthrin

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 2929
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #12 on: April 05, 2009, 06:52:22 pm »
Here's their OD lineup

1. Brendan Ryan, 2B
2. Rick Ankiel, CF
3. Albert Pujols, 1B
4. Khalil Greene, SS
5. Ryan Ludwick, RF
6. Yadier Molina, C
7. Chris Duncan, LF
8. Brian Barden, 3B
9. Adam Wainwright, P

Shouldn't that lineup have Wainwright batting 8th?   It is an .091 lineup after all.
Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted.

Col. Sphinx Drummond

  • Fantasy Team Owner
  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 16760
  • art is a bulwark against the irrationality of man
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #13 on: April 05, 2009, 06:53:14 pm »
What I don't understand is why so many internet jackoffs are in complete agreement about the Astros when the Astros always defy the conventional wisdom. Can any of them think beyond the BP/BA/BBTF cw arrows?

They think the Astros should have won 77 games last year. That's what they think.
Everyone's talking, few of them know
The rest are pretending, they put on a show
And if there's a message I guess this is it
Truth isn't easy, the easy part's shit

homer

  • Pope
  • Posts: 6509
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #14 on: April 05, 2009, 07:14:48 pm »
White Sox/Royals game in Chicago has already been called due to snow.

Thanks Kate.
Oye. Vamos, vamos.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2009, 07:56:04 pm »
Quote
“I think a lot of people want to point to our question marks, and they don’t want to point to our exclamation points,” Astros general manager Ed Wade said. “The question marks being: Well, beyond Roy, are the other four starters capable of going deep into games? Is this going to be a breakout year for Michael Bourn? And I think the answer to both of those questions is yes.

The two things Ed Wade is talking about are eggszactly the things that could turn this team of suspicion into a team of contention.  But Ed ain't gonna fool hisself either, one or two of those guys behind Roy and perhaps even Roy himself could turn south easily not because of lack of talent (that is not the problem in Houston. At. All.).  The thing that precludes the Astros from being given credit is the age and injury possibilities that could bite this team.  So while his team works their way through to Memorial Day, WadeSmith will indeed monitor who he has in reserve.  It will be the reserves who will help him sleep at night.  If Bud Norris is doing well in AAA, he'll sleep well.  Same with Capellan and of course this year I doubt WadeSmith can honestly say one of his starters is going to go MMA on him either (that is a huge plus).

Last year, Wade dealt with this early: Valverde was shaky, Roy was missing his curve (and because he was a bit gimpy) and Chacon was looney.  He rectified it by promoting Moehler, getting Wolf and then seeing Roy become the premiere Ace in the NL that he's capable of.  Roy went from pedestrian to All-Star performer and that was HUGE!  This year?  Wade needs Capellan and Norris to provide insurance so those two should have their head screwed on right down in AAA so that is a concern put to rest early.  Else it's time to monitor the trade rumors in and around the league.  In a minor way (pun intended) Alberto Arias should keep his chin up as well... one of the bullpen guys might struggle not due to lack veteran savvy but lack of gas left in the tank, so he needs to be the insurance they can turn to.

So that leaves Michael Bourn.

Whaaaa?

Ed Wade has now put it out there for everyone to read: He expects Michael Bourn to have a breakout year!  Well, he better tell that to Cecil Cooper, like soon maybe.  Batting 8th, the best one can expect is nominal expectations out of a guy whose primary task is to try and avoid having the pitcher lead off the next inning.  How can that lead to a breakout year?
« Last Edit: April 05, 2009, 08:12:26 pm by Noe in Austin »

kevwun

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 940
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #16 on: April 05, 2009, 08:04:59 pm »
Best one I ever saw was:

Eastern
Seaboard
Propaganda
Network
Crazy Joe McCluskey was fucking nuts.  It's why they called him Crazy Joe.

billemite

  • Disappointing Rookie
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #17 on: April 05, 2009, 10:57:18 pm »
Footer's take (from her blog):

Quote
* I cannot, for the life of me, understand why fans get so riled up when the ESPNs of the world don't give their team any love while making their season predictions. Who cares? I mean, really, truly, who cares?


BudGirl

  • Contributor
  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 17776
  • Brad Ausmus' Slave
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #18 on: April 05, 2009, 11:10:42 pm »
Footer's take (from her blog):



Wow, I agreed with Footer.
''I just did an interview with someone I like more than you. I used a lot of big words on him. I don't have anything left for you.'' --Brad Ausmus

Well behaved women rarely make history.

Noe

  • Guest
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #19 on: April 05, 2009, 11:12:35 pm »
Footer's take (from her blog):



Don't disagree with Footer about "caring", it is more about being perplexed at the reasoning.  It's like saying "I don't understand why people wear underwear on their head"... I don't really care, but I certainly don't understand.

matadorph

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #20 on: April 05, 2009, 11:14:53 pm »
Is it really that hard to understand?

Sure, I get the point about the pointlessness of caring about what John Kruk or Keith Law thinks, but I understand why Astros fans get pissed about it.

r-e-s-p-e-c-t

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #21 on: April 06, 2009, 08:27:49 am »
Here's their OD lineup

1. Brendan Ryan, 2B
2. Rick Ankiel, CF
3. Albert Pujols, 1B
4. Khalil Greene, SS
5. Ryan Ludwick, RF
6. Yadier Molina, C
7. Chris Duncan, LF
8. Brian Barden, 3B
9. Adam Wainwright, P

Somebody PLEASE tell me how this is supposedly a better lineup than ours.

Quote
the most likely course of action would be a split doubleheader on Tuesday. That would present a significant complication, since St. Louis does not have a day off in the season's first three weeks. Someone would need to be called up to start Saturday's game against Houston, because the Cardinals would be loath to use either Adam Wainwright or Kyle Lohse on three days' rest.

.091 would just turn on the sprinklers Friday night.  It's not like he hasn't done it before.
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

Andyzipp

  • Guest
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #22 on: April 06, 2009, 08:54:17 am »
Somebody PLEASE tell me how this is supposedly a better lineup than ours.

.091 would just turn on the sprinklers Friday night.  It's not like he hasn't done it before.

Albert Pooholes all by himself is better than the Astros.  Just ask his girlfriend.

geezerdonk

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3342
  • a long tradition of existence
    • View Profile
Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #23 on: April 06, 2009, 09:19:00 am »
Albert Pooholes all by himself is better than the Astros.  Just ask his girlfriend.

Tony
E come vivo? Vivo.

Limey

  • Contributor
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 32079
  • Tally Ho!
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #24 on: April 06, 2009, 09:39:31 am »
Don't disagree with Footer about "caring", it is more about being perplexed at the reasoning.  It's like saying "I don't understand why people wear underwear on their head"... I don't really care, but I certainly don't understand.

I am not perplexed about the reasoning of the blowhards at ESPN.  I am perplexed at the reasoning of people who watch that shit.

Two weeks ago ESPN was on the locker room TV after golf, and they were showing a College football preview.  Seriously.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.

Gizzmonic

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 4588
  • Space City Carbohydrate
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #25 on: April 06, 2009, 10:14:01 am »
I am not perplexed about the reasoning of the blowhards at ESPN.  I am perplexed at the reasoning of people who watch that shit.

Two weeks ago ESPN was on the locker room TV after golf, and they were showing a College football preview.  Seriously.

They were really plugging that ratings juggernaut known as Women's College Basketball as well.  They even put it on ESPN whilst relegating the first game of the MLB season to ESPN2.  That's just stupid!
Grab another Coke and let's die

BlownRanger

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #26 on: April 06, 2009, 10:38:53 am »
Inzactly!

I'm not gonna lose any sleep over the predictably pessimistic forecast of the upcoming Astros season because we've heard it all before. The Astros could win a hundred games and they'd still get little credit nationally. What I don't understand is why so many internet jackoffs are in complete agreement about the Astros when the Astros always defy the conventional wisdom. Can any of them think beyond the BP/BA/BBTF cw arrows?

About a week ago I made the statement that, for the most part, the national media hates the Astros.  Many of you replied "no, they don't hate the Astros.  They just don't care".  Well, I stand by my statement.  And that leads to the two things you should keep in mind about folks who make predictions:

1.  Everybody is biased
2.  Everybody is extremely good at convincing themselves that what they WANT to happen is also what they THINK will happen.

The talking heads love the Cardinals (especially their skipper), so they have no problem thinking "Carpenter's back.  LaGenius is running the show.  They'll surprise folks".  They hate the Astros, so they are equally quick to figure "only one pitcher.  They'll suck".

The folks establishing betting lines are also playing an interesting game this season.  The Astros exceeded their over/under win total by ten games last season when they won 86 games.  So where is this year's over/under set at?  72 wins.  Amazing.
"He hit that one right up the poop chute, Bill" - Enos Cabell

Bench

  • Illuminati
  • Posts: 16476
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #27 on: April 06, 2009, 10:42:13 am »

The folks establishing betting lines are also playing an interesting game this season.  The Astros exceeded their over/under win total by ten games last season when they won 86 games.  So where is this year's over/under set at?  72 wins.  Amazing.


That's not a prediction on how many games the Astros will win, but rather a prediction on how many people will bet on how many games the Astros will win.  It's derivative of, and not alternative to, the national media's predictions, because that is what informs most gamblers.
"Holy shit, Mozart. Get me off this fucking thing."

MusicMan

  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 25931
  • Thanks for 2015
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #28 on: April 06, 2009, 10:43:31 am »
Also - gambling lines are always tilted towards LA (b/c so many make the weekend trip to Vegas) and bandwagon clubs like NY/BOS/CHI (due to the "hey, you're going' to Vegas?  put $20 down for me" effect.)
I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing AstroTurf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, torture of Bud Selig.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #29 on: April 06, 2009, 12:30:02 pm »
That's not a prediction on how many games the Astros will win, but rather a prediction on how many people will bet on how many games the Astros will win.  It's derivative of, and not alternative to, the national media's predictions, because that is what informs most gamblers.


I'm always amazed at people who don't understand betting odds.  They have absolutely zero to do with who the oddsmakers think will win. 
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

Duke

  • Should Have Quit 500 Posts Ago
  • Posts: 1247
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #30 on: April 06, 2009, 12:36:43 pm »
They are predicting the Cubs will win it all.  How seriously can you possibly take this crap?

BizidyDizidy

  • Pope
  • Posts: 8836
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #31 on: April 06, 2009, 12:39:41 pm »

I'm always amazed at people who don't understand betting odds.  They have absolutely zero to do with who the oddsmakers think will win. 

This is 100% true. It's also true that betting odds usually end up being the best available predictor of outcomes (beating out "expert" picks and systems). Some systems have consistently beat them, but not enough to make money given transaction friction (aka "the vig").

Despite what is commonly believed about biases because people like the Cubs, etc. sports betting is a big business and smart money sets the odds.

"My doctor told me to stop having intimate dinners for four. Unless there are three other people."
  -  Orson Welles

BlownRanger

  • Prime Time Player
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #32 on: April 06, 2009, 04:29:02 pm »

I'm always amazed at people who don't understand betting odds.  They have absolutely zero to do with who the oddsmakers think will win. 

I know exactly how betting odds work, and I suspect Bizidy knows more than most of you, because he's correct: if oddsmakers stray too far off reality in an attempt to equalize the amount bet on both sides, they risk taking a bath at the hands of serious gamblers.

Now, maybe they know that the over/under on baseball team victories is historically only attractive to casual fans.  But whatever the reason, setting the Astros o/u at 72 wins appears to me to be a major opportunity.

"He hit that one right up the poop chute, Bill" - Enos Cabell

Gizzmonic

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 4588
  • Space City Carbohydrate
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #33 on: April 06, 2009, 05:03:50 pm »
I dunno much about betting but I heard that Las Vegas took a bath last year paying out long-odds Tampa Bay bettors...tough to anticipate that kind of change though, even for professional bookies.
Grab another Coke and let's die

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #34 on: April 07, 2009, 12:25:20 am »
I don't care what ESPN or anyone else says, this is a solid, competitive club.    Just looking at the team compared to the second half of last year, a healthy Lee replaces Wigginton, and you potentially get mike hampton for a full year(knock on wood) rather than 1/2 a season of randy wolf.   Not to mention pudge is an upgrade offensively over the 2008 catchers, hawkins is here all year, and bourn has nowhere to go but up.

Wow. I'm all for rooting for the home team, but this seems a bit panglossian.

matadorph

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #35 on: April 07, 2009, 09:34:00 am »
Wow. I'm all for rooting for the home team, but this seems a bit panglossian.

I wouldn't go that far. I agree with DVauthrin because this year's starting rotation looks better on paper than the rotation we saw start the 2008 season. The nucleus of the club is the same and the bullpen is a proven strength. *IF* the starters give Coop consistent innings, there is no reason for anything but optimism given the speed and power in the lineup and the arms in the pen.

Arky Vaughan

  • Administrator
  • Pope
  • Posts: 6335
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #36 on: April 07, 2009, 09:55:34 am »
I wouldn't go that far. I agree with DVauthrin because this year's starting rotation looks better on paper than the rotation we saw start the 2008 season. The nucleus of the club is the same and the bullpen is a proven strength. *IF* the starters give Coop consistent innings, there is no reason for anything but optimism given the speed and power in the lineup and the arms in the pen.

Last year their offense was 11th in runs scored and their defense was ninth in runs allowed. So even if you assume they are the same or slightly better than last year, they're a middle-of-the-pack team. I'm not saying they're incapable of surprises, but "no reason for anything but optimism" seems a bit on the strong side, don't you think?

matadorph

  • Key Member of the Conspiracy
  • Posts: 3576
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #37 on: April 07, 2009, 10:07:51 am »


What I think is a bit on the strong side is labeling Dvauthrin's optimism as "panglossian." It's not as if it's without merit. Sure, this is baseball and juneberno and all that, so it's certainly possible that we could see this team lose 90 games, but I think it's more likely they'll be average-to-good than suck outright.

I see this year's club as an 83-88 win team with the potential for a 90+ win season.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #38 on: April 07, 2009, 10:20:39 am »
I know exactly how betting odds work, and I suspect Bizidy knows more than most of you, because he's correct: if oddsmakers stray too far off reality in an attempt to equalize the amount bet on both sides, they risk taking a bath at the hands of serious gamblers.

If you think oddsmakers ever take a bath, then you know exactly squat about betting lines.  Bookies don't lose money.  That's simply not how it works.

The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

HudsonHawk

  • Administrator
  • High Order of the Ferret
  • *****
  • Posts: 42689
  • Gentleman About Town
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #39 on: April 07, 2009, 10:24:23 am »
I dunno much about betting but I heard that Las Vegas took a bath last year paying out long-odds Tampa Bay bettors...tough to anticipate that kind of change though, even for professional bookies.

Vegas didn't take a bath because for every long-shot payout they had to pay for Rays, they raked in 100 times that much by people betting on the Red Sox and Yankees.  If the payout on the winner is huge due to long odds, then there simply aren't very many people who bet on the winner.  Few people have bet on the long shots and many people have bet on the favorites.  That's what betting odds are.
The rules of distinction were thrown out with the baseball cap.  It does not lend itself to protocol.  It is found today on youth in homes, classrooms, even in fine restaurants.  Regardless of its other consequences, this is a breach against civility.  A civilized man should avoid this mania.

subnuclear

  • Pope
  • Posts: 6116
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously? Suck it ESPN
« Reply #40 on: April 07, 2009, 11:37:50 am »
I wouldn't go that far. I agree with DVauthrin because this year's starting rotation looks better on paper than the rotation we saw start the 2008 season. The nucleus of the club is the same and the bullpen is a proven strength. *IF* the starters give Coop consistent innings, there is no reason for anything but optimism given the speed and power in the lineup and the arms in the pen.

Its also relative to other teams in the league and in particular the NL central since they play those teams more.    If the Astros improve a little, but the Cubs and Cards or whoever improve more then it won't matter.         Its seems to me last season's run was just as much about a lot of NL teams running out of gas at the end of the season as much as the Astros getting their act together.