Week 19

[BigbadB]

Dishman's Dishmans (5-13) at Northside Baseball (12-6)

Alamo Stealth (10-8) at Quakers (10-8)

Lynx (6-12) at Fuzzy Logistics (11-7)

Severe Tooterstorms (8-10) at The Eyes of Texas (9-9)

Draconian Empire (10-8) at Harrys Budcrew (10-8)

Fire Sale (Buddiga) (5-13) at Raw Dawgs (13-5)

Galesburg Hand Sanitizers (11-7) at The Fighting Manginos (5-13)

Tootielicious (12-6) at NC Cubs (7-11)

 

It's 10-8 week for the games of the week. All 4 teams currently sitting at 10-8 are playing each other and playoffs are at stake.

 

If I was a betting man (and I am :D ), I'd drop some cash this week on Draconian Empire and Quakers winning their respective high profile matchups. They have the better pitching match ups this week, IMO.

[NCCubFan]

I need to win out just to match last year and finish .500.

[Guest]

Sigh, almost beat Tim last week and I'd have been in a 3-way tie for first place. Instead, I'm in must-win territory.

[abuck1220]

i have a bad feeling about this week...after my huge offensive week last week, i'm due for some mediocre hitting. also, i have to face four starts from billingsley and cook, who are facing some terrible offenses. thankfully, there's not a whole lot of pop in the maginos lineup.

[abuck1220]

who do i want to win the DE/HBC matchup? DE has an easy schedule the rest of the way, but i'll for sure have the tiebreaker over him. HBC's schedule to finish is just brutal.

[cbbryan]

HBC's schedule to finish is just brutal.

 

Yes, it is. If I have good pitching I'll be able to compete. If it's like it was last week I may get trounced a couple times.

[tadowdaddy]

HBC's schedule to finish is just brutal.

 

Yes, it is. If I have good pitching I'll be able to compete. If it's like it was last week I may get trounced a couple times.

 

 

You, Raw, and I pretty much have the same schedule Adam... I predict something unexpected happening in the playoff run for the East due to our schedules the last 3 weeks of the year.

[abuck1220]

but HBC has to face DE this week. his last four games are against the top four teams in the division.

 

if i go 2-2 the rest of the way (with this week's game being a must win), DE would have to go 4-0 to jump me in the standings (due to me likely having the total points tie-breaker).

 

if i go 2-2 the rest of the way with one of those wins being against HBC, HBC wouldn't be able to catch me (i think). but if i lose to HBC, i may be in trouble due to him having two wins against me.

 

by the way, i really disagree with head to head being the first tiebreaker (if it still is?). i don't think there's any doubt total points should be the first tie breaker.

[abuck1220]

that being said, i still don't know who i should be rooting for in the HBC/DE matchup.

[BigbadB]

but HBC has to face DE this week. his last four games are against the top four teams in the division.

 

if i go 2-2 the rest of the way (with this week's game being a must win), DE would have to go 4-0 to jump me in the standings (due to me likely having the total points tie-breaker).

 

if i go 2-2 the rest of the way with one of those wins being against HBC, HBC wouldn't be able to catch me (i think). but if i lose to HBC, i may be in trouble due to him having two wins against me.

 

by the way, i really disagree with head to head being the first tiebreaker (if it still is?). i don't think there's any doubt total points should be the first tie breaker.

 

I don't agree with that. If two teams tie at the end of the year, the team that won both meetings should be the tie breaker. If they are still tied after that tiebreaker, then total points should break that tie.

[abuck1220]

but HBC has to face DE this week. his last four games are against the top four teams in the division.

 

if i go 2-2 the rest of the way (with this week's game being a must win), DE would have to go 4-0 to jump me in the standings (due to me likely having the total points tie-breaker).

 

if i go 2-2 the rest of the way with one of those wins being against HBC, HBC wouldn't be able to catch me (i think). but if i lose to HBC, i may be in trouble due to him having two wins against me.

 

by the way, i really disagree with head to head being the first tiebreaker (if it still is?). i don't think there's any doubt total points should be the first tie breaker.

 

I don't agree with that. If two teams tie at the end of the year, the team that won both meetings should be the tie breaker. If they are still tied after that tiebreaker, then total points should break that tie.

 

why? because you happened to have a lower scoring week the weeks the two teams matched up? it's not like you can prevent the other team from scoring points or something.

 

total points is clearly a better indicator of which team is better. head to head matchups are completely random and don't tell you anything about what team is better.

[tadowdaddy]

I'll tell you that I'm rooting for Chuck, because I lost to DE twice this year. That is, should I put myself in a position to have to go to a tiebreaker. That better not freaking happen. I beat Chuck once already, so I'd get him in points if it came down to it.

[Guest]

but HBC has to face DE this week. his last four games are against the top four teams in the division.

 

if i go 2-2 the rest of the way (with this week's game being a must win), DE would have to go 4-0 to jump me in the standings (due to me likely having the total points tie-breaker).

 

if i go 2-2 the rest of the way with one of those wins being against HBC, HBC wouldn't be able to catch me (i think). but if i lose to HBC, i may be in trouble due to him having two wins against me.

 

by the way, i really disagree with head to head being the first tiebreaker (if it still is?). i don't think there's any doubt total points should be the first tie breaker.

 

I don't agree with that. If two teams tie at the end of the year, the team that won both meetings should be the tie breaker. If they are still tied after that tiebreaker, then total points should break that tie.

 

why? because you happened to have a lower scoring week the weeks the two teams matched up? it's not like you can prevent the other team from scoring points or something.

 

total points is clearly a better indicator of which team is better. head to head matchups are completely random and don't tell you anything about what team is better.

 

 

because it makes it more interesting.

[BigbadB]

why? because you happened to have a lower scoring week the weeks the two teams matched up? it's not like you can prevent the other team from scoring points or something.

 

total points is clearly a better indicator of which team is better. head to head matchups are completely random and don't tell you anything about what team is better.

 

It's a head to head league. Head to head match up for a tie breaker makes perfect sense.

[abuck1220]

i'll buy the "it makes it more interesting" theory, but not the "it makes perfect sense" one.

 

 

i just realized i beat tootielicious in our first matchup and that i'm only one game back of him. if i can beat him in our second matchup, that could be big.

[Guest]

i'll buy the "it makes it more interesting" theory, but not the "it makes perfect sense" one.

 

 

i just realized i beat tootielicious in our first matchup and that i'm only one game back of him. if i can beat him in our second matchup, that could be big.

 

 

its kind of the same argument though - following your logic, we could just abandon the head to head format and go on points alone. to me, this would be less interesting.

[Quakers]

It is not looking good for the Quakers :cry:

[Guest]

God damnit, Carlos Lee out 6-8 weeks. :(

[BigbadB]

God damnit, Carlos Lee out 6-8 weeks. :(

 

Meanwhile, Fuzzy is about to get Vernon Wells and Milton Bradley back. :stickman:

 

Now if I can just get Javier Vasquez to get the stick out of his ass.

[Guest]

God damnit, Carlos Lee out 6-8 weeks. :(

 

Meanwhile, Fuzzy is about to get Vernon Wells and Milton Bradley back. :stickman:

 

Now if I can just get Javier Vasquez to get the stick out of his ass.

 

Well, I had a dominating win over Quakers this week so at least I'm looking better for the playoffs. Hopefully by then, Lee is back (I've heard reports he's done for the season too).

 

:|

[BigbadB]

God damnit, Carlos Lee out 6-8 weeks. :(

 

Meanwhile, Fuzzy is about to get Vernon Wells and Milton Bradley back. :stickman:

 

Now if I can just get Javier Vasquez to get the stick out of his ass.

 

Well, I had a dominating win over Quakers this week so at least I'm looking better for the playoffs. Hopefully by then, Lee is back (I've heard reports he's done for the season too).

 

:|

 

My team has been dominant over these past 3 weeks without 2/3 of my outfield.

 

I will have a tough decision to make when Wells comes off the DL. I'm afraid one of the kids will have to be cut. I really like Carlos Gonzalez and Alexei Ramirez, and Ellsbury is finally turning the corner on a horrendous slump. Mr. "I like to give up at least 2 home runs a game" Cueto is also being considered for DFA.

 

But, looking at my keeper list for '09, I can't keep all of those guys and Ian Stewart anyway. Just would have been nice to keep them all and trade one of them at season's end for something of value.

 

How exactly does this waiver thingy work?

[tadowdaddy]

Should be an interesting last 3 weeks in the East. HBC is going to be 3 games back still, and has a ROUGH schedule the rest of the way. He has Beckett and AJB going for 2 starts each next week against me, while my only 2 start pitcher (I won't be using Volstad for 2) will be Kazmir. I'll still get my 7 starts though.