Tigers Vs. A's

[ajaX82]

Hate to make this thread for ya guy, but game is tonite.

Gonzalez v Jackson. This is one that Edwin should absolutely dominate. Good pitchers park and a poor hitting team set us up to do work tonite.

[TSE]

Dang, just got home and missed the Raburn homer.

I was out seeing Inglourious Basterds, what a TREMENDOUSLY good film by the way, so good that I just had to post about it for those that didn't have this one on their radar.

[TSE]

Sweet, that makes up for the 1st inning Raburn homer that i missed, did it look any different the first time?

[RustInPeace]

Ryan Roidburn imho

[TSE]

Ryan Roidburn imho

If a player were to a hit a home run every atbat, I wonder what kind of salary that would command. I'm sure it will be a movie one day, you just watch. LOL

[ajaX82]

^ Im looking forward to Inglorious Basterds fwiw

And the play Polanco made there was clutch. Threw home with 1 out and the runner on third and nailed him. Wasn't necessarily a hard play, but a very smart one. Not being a douche, just saying, dude saves runs with his glove

[TSE]

^ Im looking forward to Inglorious Basterds fwiw

And the play Polanco made there was clutch. Threw home with 1 out and the runner on third and nailed him. Wasn't necessarily a hard play, but a very smart one. Not being a douche, just saying, dude saves runs with his glove

Yeah IB is a splendid masterpiece.

And of course any time there's an argument for anything, there's a shining example of a chance event so that one can counter with an "i told you so". No doubt that saved a run and was a huge play, but you can't tell me that another 2Bman can't make that play, that should be a standard putout when playing in, it's not like Polanco is a magic man. Even if you could say there was not another man in baseball than could make that play, it still woudn't be enough to support an argument against my theory of improving upon Polanco, as a play like that that only he can make would be something that just doesn't mathematically happen enough to tilt the tables. Look at what Raburn did. What if he was playing 2B? He hit 2 dingers in 2 atabats, what's more impressive, making a decent fielding play and tossing a guy out, or just hitting a home run in general? Well let's give Raburn the same number of atbats as Polanco this season and then calculate how many extra homers he would have hit, and then tell me if Polanco makes a throw out like that to cover that difference, and keep in mind only the plays that he make that another 2Bman can't make are the ones that count, cause it's about how many runs can you steal away versus an alternative choice.

[m23uza1hem36]

Thanks for the post aja, I've been busy getting ready for my football season.

As for the game, we finally got Edwin a win.

[Bartender]

^ Im looking forward to Inglorious Basterds fwiw

And the play Polanco made there was clutch. Threw home with 1 out and the runner on third and nailed him. Wasn't necessarily a hard play, but a very smart one. Not being a douche, just saying, dude saves runs with his glove

Yeah IB is a splendid masterpiece.

And of course any time there's an argument for anything, there's a shining example of a chance event so that one can counter with an "i told you so". No doubt that saved a run and was a huge play, but you can't tell me that another 2Bman can't make that play, that should be a standard putout when playing in, it's not like Polanco is a magic man. Even if you could say there was not another man in baseball than could make that play, it still woudn't be enough to support an argument against my theory of improving upon Polanco, as a play like that that only he can make would be something that just doesn't mathematically happen enough to tilt the tables. Look at what Raburn did. What if he was playing 2B? He hit 2 dingers in 2 atabats, what's more impressive, making a decent fielding play and tossing a guy out, or just hitting a home run in general? Well let's give Raburn the same number of atbats as Polanco this season and then calculate how many extra homers he would have hit, and then tell me if Polanco makes a throw out like that to cover that difference, and keep in mind only the plays that he make that another 2Bman can't make are the ones that count, cause it's about how many runs can you steal away versus an alternative choice.

Baseball isn't math, bro. It's a sport. You think to much. Raburn hit two HR, Polanco saved one. The game would of gone in extra innings if it wasn't for that play. What's your problem with Polanco? Is it that he don't hit home runs? Cuz that's the only thing he doesn't do. He is a golden glove 2b, hits for a good average every year, great 2 strike hitter, always gets on base which leads to runs if he's batted in.

[TSE]

^ Im looking forward to Inglorious Basterds fwiw

And the play Polanco made there was clutch. Threw home with 1 out and the runner on third and nailed him. Wasn't necessarily a hard play, but a very smart one. Not being a douche, just saying, dude saves runs with his glove

Yeah IB is a splendid masterpiece.

And of course any time there's an argument for anything, there's a shining example of a chance event so that one can counter with an "i told you so". No doubt that saved a run and was a huge play, but you can't tell me that another 2Bman can't make that play, that should be a standard putout when playing in, it's not like Polanco is a magic man. Even if you could say there was not another man in baseball than could make that play, it still woudn't be enough to support an argument against my theory of improving upon Polanco, as a play like that that only he can make would be something that just doesn't mathematically happen enough to tilt the tables. Look at what Raburn did. What if he was playing 2B? He hit 2 dingers in 2 atabats, what's more impressive, making a decent fielding play and tossing a guy out, or just hitting a home run in general? Well let's give Raburn the same number of atbats as Polanco this season and then calculate how many extra homers he would have hit, and then tell me if Polanco makes a throw out like that to cover that difference, and keep in mind only the plays that he make that another 2Bman can't make are the ones that count, cause it's about how many runs can you steal away versus an alternative choice.

Baseball isn't math, bro. It's a sport. You think to much. Raburn hit two HR, Polanco saved one. The game would of gone in extra innings if it wasn't for that play. What's your problem with Polanco? Is it that he don't hit home runs? Cuz that's the only thing he doesn't do. He is a golden glove 2b, hits for a good average every year, great 2 strike hitter, always gets on base which leads to runs if he's batted in.

I don't know where you are getting this idea. Every sport is a sport, but like any sport, or any game, you can use math and science to develop strategies that increase your odds for winning. It's all about making smart decisions and understanding the value of positive events versus negative events. The solutions to winning baseball are far more complex than any of the 4 major sports in terms of the strategies that can be uncovered from careful planning and analysis. It's so sad that people think baseball is such a simple game and that you can just feel your way through it. That's the Leyland way, and that's the underachieving way. It makes me sick.

And now Polanco AlWAYS gets on base? How come his OBP isn't 1.000 then? Can you explain that? According to the almighty internet it says he ONLY gets on base 31.8% of the time. That' s a lot short of always. His defense could be 100% and it still wouldn't be enough to compensate for alternative choices. There's no way for me to prove this to you if you reject MATH and SCIENCE, cause those dictate to me that I'm just as right as if I said 2 + 2 is 4. There are more steps to establishing that proof, but a proof nonetheless.

[tmorgan]

I'm not going to derail a game thread with this -- check out the Aubrey Huff thread again.

[TSE]

Another classic example of how Leyland manages us out of games. Grandy is 77% at stealing and their catcher was 18%, and we need a run, and Grandy isn't running. There's no logic to not taking advantage of the numbers, especially when you have a guy like Polanco who's going to hit a single IF he's going to get a hit. So you might as well be on 2B and get the possible game winning run, it's all or nothing on the Polanco atbat. No sense in playing for the offchance that you get a single by Polanco and another hit as a followup, the odds of getting 2 hits back to back are fairly remote at least in comparison to Grandy swiping and then getting just one hit. Leyland doesn't know how to do 6th grade math. Ughh.

[TSE]

LOL, Leyland somehow manages to process that it is strategic to run now. It's not a good move to run the first time, but it is to run the 2nd time in the same situation. And he's clearly not learning, cause he makes these mistakes every other game, he just doesn't get it. He just likes to make choices with flipping a coin it would appear. At the least we have the benefit of the opposition never knowing what the heck we are going to do, since optimal gaming strategy goes right out the window and we just randomize it.