Chocolate Milk

Hahah Guzman's crazy.

Any info on weather (!) or not the game is going to be delayed?

Give me a break. This lineup is awful. People are batting out of place and he's playing inferior players over vastly superior players. I haven't seen anything on Jones mentioned in any publications. Please, what 'facts' are we all ingorant of? Actually, Jones is supposedly hurt... Well, I hadn't seen it. The rest of the criticsm is justified. Calling people whiners is ridiculous.

Give me a break. This lineup is awful. People are batting out of place and he's playing inferior players over vastly superior players. I haven't seen anything on Jones mentioned in any publications. Please, what 'facts' are we all ingorant of?

Are you suggesting that it's unlikely we'll score many runs today?

Yes, that was awful.

I can't beleive our roster consists of those players. Hopefully this game will get snowed out.

Fixed.

Is absurd to think an umpire would call balls all over the place strikes because of a pitchers reputation. It is absolutely not absurd to think that he would give borderline calls to a pitcher who has a reputation of being a control pitcher that he might not give to a pitcher who has a reputation of being wild. Well, not anymore absurd than thinking a manager's hissy fit is impacting the strike zone. I said it could. I didn't say it does. You really think umpires care who is pitching? I don't know. I wouldn't say that it's out of the realm of possibility. Ref's in other sports seem to care who's playing, I'm not sure why baseball would be any different. I think it's preposterous to assert with 100% certainty, like you are doing here, that they don't.

Theriot looks like he'll fit right in.

Is absurd to think an umpire would call balls all over the place strikes because of a pitchers reputation. It is absolutely not absurd to think that he would give borderline calls to a pitcher who has a reputation of being a control pitcher that he might not give to a pitcher who has a reputation of being wild. Well, not anymore absurd than thinking a manager's hissy fit is impacting the strike zone.

You think that a manager's ire can effect the strikezone but not the reputation of the pitcher? Why is one ridiculous to believe while the other you readily accept as being likely? It is pretty simple. An umpire doesn't care who is pitching or batting. They have no vested interest in the outcome of the game. And I have to assume they are professionals and have integrity. If not then the entire integrity of the game is in question. Now, if in a game the manger keeps complaining it could have an emotional effect. Unintended or not. People like to say the umpires won't call strikes on Bonds. Well that certianly didn't happen last night. And Z was alll over the place. Baseball is not basketball. Your wild speculation on the disposition of umpires isn't very convincing. What is so wild about it. That umpires have inegrity or that they are human? It's funny that you are definitively defining what emotionally effects an umpire and what doesn't. You completely dismiss one emotional factor while accepting another. It's great. It's wild speculation on both sides of the issue but for some reason you laugh at one and deem it to be ridiculous. I'm not sure how you can assume, to the extent that you do, that umpires operate like robots in one situation but become emotionally fragile in another. It really makes no sense.

Does Dusty realize that you can remove the pitcher without removing another player?

Guys, I don't think we're going to win this one.

You think that a manager's ire can effect the strikezone but not the reputation of the pitcher? Why is one ridiculous to believe while the other you readily accept as being likely? It is pretty simple. An umpire doesn't care who is pitching or batting. They have no vested interest in the outcome of the game. And I have to assume they are professionals and have integrity. If not then the entire integrity of the game is in question. Now, if in a game the manger keeps complaining it could have an emotional effect. Unintended or not. People like to say the umpires won't call strikes on Bonds. Well that certianly didn't happen last night. And Z was alll over the place. Baseball is not basketball. Your wild speculation on the disposition of umpires isn't very convincing.

Murton's not exactly setting the world on fire with his .767 OPS.

You think that a manager's ire can effect the strikezone but not the reputation of the pitcher? Why is one ridiculous to believe while the other you readily accept as being likely?

I'm really not sure how you can completely dismiss out of hand that more accurate pitchers may get the benefit of the doubt over pitchers perceived as being wild. Stars get calls in other sports (usually when the call is marginal and could go wither way) so I don't think it's really a stretch to think it happens in baseball. Of course you can't prove it using data because such data doesn't exist. It does make more sense to assume that umpires are human rather than assuming they're emotionless automatons, in my opinion.

We're bunt-o-rific!

Excuse me I may of missed something...When did Hill look good and why do you think he'll be alright? His last outing. Considering the circumstances (Bonds going for 714) he held up well. He gave up 5ER's. That's holding up well? I'm sorry he stinks! He has a great curve he can't throw for a strike and below average fastball. I'm sure you can determine this from an inning, right? :roll: I think he was talking about Hill.

So, do you think the contestant for the "back to back jacks" game on the radio would have a better chance of winning money if he just bought a lottery ticket?

We're losing!!! Oh nose!

Yes, I'm pretty sure that I read that batting order is essentially meaningless. That's overstating it just a bit. If you run today's lineup through a simulator, you'll see there's about a one-run difference between the best possible order and the worst possible order. However, no manager, not even one as inept as Dusty, will ever pencil in the worst possible batting order (ie, pitcher hitting first, etc). Are you sure it's that much? It can be as much as a 2 run differential (if I understand you right)? I really don't recall the particulars of what I read and couldn't find anything doing a quick google search. Do you have a link? If you always bat in the first three spots in the order, won't you see a lot more ABs over the course of a season? Thus, don't you want your best (or one of your best) hitter(s) in those first three slots? http://www.retrosheet.org/Research/RuaneT/lineup_art.htm

Yes, I'm pretty sure that I read that batting order is essentially meaningless. That's overstating it just a bit. If you run today's lineup through a simulator, you'll see there's about a one-run difference between the best possible order and the worst possible order. However, no manager, not even one as inept as Dusty, will ever pencil in the worst possible batting order (ie, pitcher hitting first, etc). Are you sure it's that much? It can be as much as a 2 run differential (if I understand you right)? I really don't recall the particulars of what I read and couldn't find anything doing a quick google search. Do you have a link?

Santo's cell phone just rang loudly into the microphone.