|
|
Post by Rog on Apr 29, 2014 9:56:32 GMT -5
Before last night's game they showed a graphic indicating the Giants lead the majors in hitting with two outs and Runners In Scoring Position. The Giants' .300 average was far ahead of any other team.
But here is where the small sample size comes into play. With FEWER than two outs and Runners In Scoring Position, the Giants were hitting .171 with Runners In Scoring Position -- 129 point difference!
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Apr 30, 2014 14:44:36 GMT -5
What that tells me is that unless the Giants start hitting more consistently, they're living on borrowed time.
I realize it was the Padres, but I still maintain the Giants would have done just fine with Petit as the fifth starter, while dumping Lincecum.
Also, someone here heavily touted Josh Johnson. The Pads bit. How's that working out?
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Apr 30, 2014 15:28:16 GMT -5
Allen---I realize it was the Padres, but I still maintain the Giants would have done just fine with Petit as the fifth starter, while dumping Lincecum.
--boly says--- I think I was marginally on your side when you originally made that post, Allen, and after last night, I'm totally convinced; we would be no worse off, and likely in better shape.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Apr 30, 2014 17:16:58 GMT -5
I certainly agree that Petit is as good if not better than Ryan Vogelsong, but I was hoping the Giants made a decent expenditure to get a quality starter in here to complete the rotation. And Petit in a spot start is not the same as Petit going every fifth day making five or six starts per year against other NL west teams. I'm not sure his stuff is good enough to survive the same hitters facing him multiple times.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on May 1, 2014 0:21:11 GMT -5
Is Timmy's? Hasn't looked that way for awhile now. You could have as good with Petit as with Timmy, and used the money on a very good player, hitter or pitcher.
Btw Rog, nice choke job by the Sharks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on May 2, 2014 10:40:54 GMT -5
Allen -- Is Timmy's? Hasn't looked that way for awhile now. You could have as good with Petit as with Timmy, and used the money on a very good player, hitter or pitcher. Rog -- I hope I'm not overstating the obvious when I say Tim Lincecum's stuff is plenty good enough -- it's his lack of command that is the issue. Allen -- Btw Rog, nice choke job by the Sharks. Rog -- Why do we use the word "choke" whenever a very good or well-positioned team goes on to lose? Disappointing loss despite a seemingly invulnerable position? Yes. Choke? Well, let's look at the definition: to lose one's composure and fail to perform effectively in a critical situation. Did they fail to perform effectively in a (very) criticial situation? You bet. Did they lose their composure? It didn't seem that way. If two teams are close to equal, there's a 1 in 16 chance one of the two teams will win four games in a row. I'll bet a very high percentage of Stanley Cup and World Series winners lost four games along the way somewhere in their 100-game or 180-game schedules. They simply didn't lose them to the same team in the playoffs. By the way, even when the Sharks were up 3 games to none and played exceptional (and embarrassing for the Kings) hockey in the first two games, I thought they were lucky to win the 3rd game. The Sharks were likely outplayed in each of the last five games of the series. The weird thing is that the Kings' goalie -- despite giving up, what, 13 goals in the first games --just KILLS the Sharks in the playoffs. Same thing with Jonas Hiller of the Ducks. One thing I have thought about in the past couple of days -- although not from the Sharks' loss -- is the effect of matchups on the postseason. A team can be the best against teams overall, yet face a matchup problem with one team. If they happen to face that team in the playoffs, it is quite possible they will fail to advance despite being the best (overall) team. It is clear that the best team doesn't always win. I'm not saying that because the Sharks lost. They probably were a somewhat better team than the Kings, but I didn't think they were the best team in hockey, and I didn't expect them to win the Stanley Cup. But clearly playoffs are influenced by injuries, which team is hot, matchups and luck. The team I DIDN'T expect to win (at least after Jermaine O'Neal's injury was the Warriors. They're seemingly doing it with mirrors. I would be surprised if they win the final game against the Clippers (who I heard one observer say were a dangerous enough team to have a chance to win the NBA Title), but anything can (and often does) happen. The one thing the Warriors have demonstrated is that if they can remain healthy and add a backup point guard, they can be a very dangerous team themselves. How many teams can get to the final game of a seven-game playoff series while being down to their fourth-string center? Heck, do most teams even HAVE a fourth-string center? We need to get back to baseball, so let me slide back with this question: Which major Bay Area franchise will be World Champions next? A week ago I might have guessed the Sharks, just because they had the first chance to become on. Their odds have clearly ebbed, so which team would we choose? The next two teams with a shot are the Giants and the A's. The 49ers have easily come closest in their last season. (Hint: The Raiders likely aren't the right answer -- although it certainly isn't impossible.) Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2249/ultimate-small-sample#ixzz30ZTQvhZN |
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on May 3, 2014 4:14:02 GMT -5
When you have a three game lead in a best of seven, then lose four in a row, you choked.
The Warriors have been amazing. No Bogut, and they haven't really gotten that much offensively from Curry or Thompson. Battling a team with two behemoths like Griffin and Jordan, it's amazing they're still in it. Not to mention having to overcome the officiating bias that comes with playing a team from a big media center, and the Sterling thing on top of that.
The league will be delighted if the Clippers go deep into the playoffs, or even win. I doubt they want an Indiana- Portland final.
I sure doubt the Raiders would be next. They were building, but now they'r e signing alot of has beens with name value. It's as if Al has come back to life. The A's may have as good a chance as anyone. If the Giants can get the bats going, maybe...
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on May 3, 2014 6:47:55 GMT -5
Allen, you think Mark Jackson will be fired? He's done a great job on the court, but he seems to rub everyone the wrong way. He's had to fire two assistants this year for insubordination and now you have the incident where he banned the great Jerry West from practice. I guess the ultimate test for firing a coach will be don't do it if other teams would snap him up in a minute, and from what I've heard, teams are lining up if he does get canned. My Knicks fired Mike Woodson, and you can see that he's not being mentioned by anyone as a possible replacement, the ultimate sign that he's a terrible coach.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on May 3, 2014 9:02:04 GMT -5
I think Mark has done a great job, but you don't piss off the people above you on the food chain. I hadn't heard about the West thing. It seems Jackson is building somewhat of a bunker mentality.
I think it would be a shame if they let him go. In my mind, he's a great coach, but you have to be able to work with others. Common sense says it should beout of the question, but nothing surprises me anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on May 4, 2014 3:07:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on May 4, 2014 3:12:40 GMT -5
Allen -- Not to mention having to overcome the officiating bias that comes with playing a team from a big media center, and the Sterling thing on top of that. Rog -- Yeah. I'm sure the league told the refs to favor Donald Sterling's team as much as possible. Didn't the Lakers, Knicks and Celtics each miss the playoffs this year? I presume that was the officials' fault, as well. You're just full of conspiracy theories, Allen. I have found that most people who are full of them are pretty paranoid. I don't think you're that, but in some areas I fear you are. Odd, in a way. Sort of a superiority complex and paranoia all at once it seems. Hey, I could be wrong here. But it just seems that you know it all, that you are the only one who knows it all and works competently, and yet you have all these conspiracy theories. Of course, you offset those things with your political objectivity. And yet I like you. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2249/ultimate-small-sample?page=1#scrollTo=19858#ixzz30jSebCcJ |
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on May 4, 2014 3:30:12 GMT -5
Thank you Sigmund. You don't think the league wants the Clips to go deep in the playoffs simply because the Lakers, Knicks, and Celtics aren't in it? Think the TV ratings will be big for Indiana-Portland? Think the league and TV networks might like Clips-Nets instead?
When the Clippers won tonight (with some significant help from about the middle of the third quarter on), the announcers acted as if they had been through some horrible crucible, like watching their families die in a car wreck. Think they're not going to keep playing that story up?
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on May 4, 2014 3:42:17 GMT -5
Interesting, you and Don are always castigating my politics, but neither of you seem to want to take me on about any specific issues. Where have I been wrong?
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on May 4, 2014 3:52:12 GMT -5
Two more things. One, what conspiracy theories? The NBA (specifically David Stern) has admitted the officiating is crooked, and favors star players and elite teams. I've never accused the baseball umpires of being biased, simply not very good or engaged. What else?
Two, you calling someone else a know it all borders on iincredulous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on May 4, 2014 12:26:09 GMT -5
Allen -- You don't think the league wants the Clips to go deep in the playoffs simply because the Lakers, Knicks, and Celtics aren't in it? Rog -- Of course they do -- although the Clippers might have diminished their enthusiasm a bit when they became an embarrassment. The teams the NBA wants to win though don't always do so. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2249/ultimate-small-sample#ixzz30li6wxHf |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on May 4, 2014 12:30:33 GMT -5
Allen -- Interesting, you and Don are always castigating my politics, but neither of you seem to want to take me on about any specific issues. Where have I been wrong? Rog -- I agree with your politics more than Don's, but what I see is that neither of you is willing to see what the other one says. I consider both of you to be highly biased in the political arena. I would like to see either or both of you soften their stances. Do you think each other are idiots? I certainly don't. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2249/ultimate-small-sample?page=1#scrollTo=19891#ixzz30ljW6Vbt |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on May 4, 2014 12:32:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on May 4, 2014 12:58:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on May 4, 2014 15:46:27 GMT -5
I don't see Don as really saying anything of substance. It's the same tune every time. Page one of the liberal/ Saul Allinsky songbook.
|
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on May 4, 2014 17:56:47 GMT -5
I don't see Don as really saying anything of substance. It's the same tune every time. Page one of the liberal/ Saul Allinsky songbook. dk..so speaks the obese drug runner's spokesman of the Giants forum.... |
|
