Baseball 2008, Part The Third

  • Thread starter Thread starter zeke12
  • Start date Start date
Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Damn, I was going to gloat about my prediction of the Tigers as a dissapointment... :D

But yeah, it's way too early for that.
 
Meanwhile, it seems the morons in NY were calling FAN tonight lamenting the demise of the Mets because they lost twice in Atlanta.
 
Spnited, I'm sure the morons were calling in WEEI up this way...
 
0-5, I believe. I do know that no team that started 0-4 ever made it to the World Series.

EDIT: 1974 Pirates and 1995 Reds both started 0-6 and made the playoffs. Both lost in the NLCS (Pirates to Dodgers, Reds to Braves).
 
Baseball Prospectus gives the Tigers a 16.28% chance of making the playoffs, and that was before tonight's blowout loss. Their PECOTA-adjusted standings give the Tigers a 44.25% chance.

Panic time in Detroit?
 
TheSportsPredictor said:
Baseball Prospectus gives the Tigers a 16.28% chance of making the playoffs, and that was before tonight's blowout loss. Their PECOTA-adjusted standings give the Tigers a 44.25% chance.

Panic time in Detroit?

What the hell makes Bill Pecota an expert capable of adjusting anything other than an athletic supporter?
 
Perennially Overrated said:
TheSportsPredictor said:
Baseball Prospectus gives the Tigers a 16.28% chance of making the playoffs, and that was before tonight's blowout loss. Their PECOTA-adjusted standings give the Tigers a 44.25% chance.

Panic time in Detroit?

What the hell makes Bill Pecota an expert capable of adjusting anything other than an athletic supporter?

Hey, TSP is a Tribe fan trying to cover up his own team's inadequacies.
 
TheSportsPredictor said:
Baseball Prospectus gives the Tigers a 16.28% chance of making the playoffs, and that was before tonight's blowout loss. Their PECOTA-adjusted standings give the Tigers a 44.25% chance.

Here we go again with that stuff.
 
The only time I have ever heard the phrase "quality start" seems to be a spin point with the Texas Rangers to cover up their sucky bullpen.

Rangers starters have so-called "quality starts" in 5 of 6 games so far.

That is, 3 earned runs or less in 6 innings. (That, of course, translates to a 4.50 ERA.)

But we're talking about the Rangers. The same club that recently set a major-league record for longest streak without a complete game ... and the game that ended it was a CG loss by Millwood the other day.

Does any other club use this stat or is this just a figment of Tom Hicks' imagination like plus-minus in basketball is a figment of Mark Cuban's?
 
When Don Sutton was doing Braves broadcasts, every time one of the other guys brought up a "quality start," Sutton would say something akin to "in a quality start, you have a 4.50 ERA, which sucks." I miss Don.
 
It's definitely used around the league, F_B. But Sutton was right: a quality start isn't exactly stellar. You ain't gonna win too many ballgames if that's all you're getting out of your rotation.
 
I'm in a fantasy league that uses quality starts as our sixth pitching category, but in real life, it's a pretty worthless statistical category. If anything, they should make it a little tougher to attain, like two or fewer earned runs rather than three.
 
While it's silly to talk about the demise of the Mets (or Red Sox or Tigers, for that matter) this early, it is possible to look at some positive happenings over the first week ...
*The Braves are definitely in the NL East picture, and if Hampton ever gets healthy, they should be favored.
*The Rays are looking like a legitimate team, capable of a .500 record.
*The Royals are improved enough to make better teams worry a bit when they meet them.

I've been out of action for about two weeks, but now I'm back and ready to discuss the baseball season.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top