soccer10k

so 4 CT wed 6 CT thurs not official like he said, though That is not good. I have to work at 4 p.m. on Wednesday and 6 on Thursday which means I would have to miss the last half of both games. Can we switch the game times? Because that would work much better.

I, also unofficially, have my total at 1050 points.

I guess MLB said that they won't announce playoff times until at least Noon Eastern tomorrow.

LET'S GO CUBBIES!!! *CLAP* *CLAP* *CLAP* *CLAP* *CLAP*

this team is far superior to 98. that teams pitching was total crap, and it's offense one guy. they are also facing a much lesser opponent, than that 1998 team. I think this team is about as good as the 1989 team, but again, they will be facing a lesser team. the 'lesser' is not meant to detract from the DBacks. that 98 Braves team was incredible, and the 89 Giants were very very good. I remember going into the 1998 playoffs thinking it would be a miracle if the Cubs didn't get swept by the Braves.

Hopefully the Cubs win in 4 and win both games in Chicago because I'll be there.

The key will be not letting Z throw too many pitches in Game 1 (Dusty Baker just fainted BTW) if it's not necessary. Get him out of there with under 100 pitches if it's possible that way if we need him to go in Game 4, he won't be gassed.

So just to make sure that I understand the rotation correctly, the earliest I would be up is for Game 2 of the NLCS, right?

cuz the people who vote look at records only Plus they have a QB who throws for 500 yards a game against HS teams. same reason why Boise St. played in the Fiesta last year. Boise was good though. clearly, yeah, but they didn't play anyone till the Oklahoma game So 10-4 Oregon State who finished third in the Pac-10 and beat USC is nothing? Boise crushed them 42-14 last year.

It would be cool to start one but I wouldn't mind seeing a 3 or 4 poster rotation either like the Cubs will be using in the playoffs.

I would assume the would. All that's left to be decided is the wild card and that team is starting in Philly anyway.

Yes.

You might just get your wish. Padres are getting blown out by the Brewers. Just need Colorado to win today and then tomorrow in the playoff. Still gonna be tough for the Rockies. They still have to win today and will have to beat Jake Peavy on Monday. Where will that game be played if it's necessary?

So looks like almost everything is cleared up: Cubs-DBacks and Padres/Rockies-Phillies in the first round. Hooray for no crazy four team ties.

Phillies about to clinch the NL East.

Let's just agree to disagree and be done with this.

Yeah. Let's not look at splits at all because it's "intentionally shrinking the sample size". So when Lou makes his lineup out he should just put the best OPS guys in the lineup and not look up lefty/righty splits (based on the opponent's starting pitcher) because using the lefty/righty splits would be "intentionally shrinking the sample size". That makes sense. Where did I say to ignore splits? There's a reason why a hitter or pitcher would peform differently v. lefties or righties. There's absolutely no reason to explain why Dempster would perform differently in the 9th or 10th inning of a tie game than he would in the 9th inning with a one run lead. And you've yet to provide one. (Because, of course, there isn't one) Again, it just isn't the case that Dempster's poor performances have come in meaningless games that can be explained away by poor focus, etc. They've all come (except one) in extremely high leverage spots. It's simply nonsensical to ignore those games and focus only a subset of full performance record. Because it would be "Intentionally shrinking the sample size".

Yeah. Let's not look at splits at all because it's "intentionally shrinking the sample size". So when Lou makes his lineup out he should just put the best OPS guys in the lineup and not look up lefty/righty splits (based on the opponent's starting pitcher) because using the lefty/righty splits would be "intentionally shrinking the sample size". That makes sense.

Well, except those will be save situations which he is good in. Which are those? It seems sort of silly to me that people think there's some sort of meaningful distinction between his relative success with 1, 2, and 3 run leads and his repeated failures in tie games. Do you think he pitches differently when the game is tied in the ninth inning than he does when it's a 1, 2, or 3 run lead in the ninth inning? The distinction is utterly absurd. Also, non-save situations aren't restricted to tie games as they include any lead over 3 runs. If you don't think a pitcher pitches differently with a big lead than he does with a 1 or 2 run lead you're crazy. If the actual facts were that Dempster had pitched poorly a number of times with an 8 run lead, your argument would make sense. That's not the case. Dempster's really poor games this season: April 22 v. StL: gave up 3 runs in a tie game in the 10th inning to lose May 17 @ NyM: gave up 5 runs after coming with 5-1 lead in the 9th Jun 10 @ Atl: gave up 3 runs to blow a 4-2 lead and lose 5-4 Aug 3 v. NYM: gave up 4 runs in the 9th after coming in to a 2-2 game Sept. 6 v. LAD: gave up 4 in the 9th to blow a 4-3 and lose 7-4 Sept. 14 v. StL: gave up 2 runs in the 9th with a 5-1 lead at StL Only 2 of those games were technically "save situations." But all but the Sept. 14 game were extremely high leverage spots. The Apr 22 and Aug 3 games were tie games in the 9th and 10th inning. The May 17 didn't start as a high-leverage game, but Dempster turned it into one quickly. It's merely coincidental that only two of his really bad games have come in "save" situations. If you think a pitcher pitches differently with a 1 or 2 run lead than he does in a tie game in the 9th or 10th inning, it's you who is crazy. Coincidental or not, Dempster has been very good in save situations and bad in non-save situations. And this is over the whole year too. If a guy is very good in one situation and bad in another, why wouldn't you feel confident in him in the first situation. What are you going to tell me next, that Sean Marshall has been inconsistent this year?

It all depends if the team wants to go with 4 starters or not. If there's only 3, they won't put Marquis on as a reliever. If 4, he'll be the 4th guy. Remember also that the roster can change from round to round so if the Cubs want to use 4 starters in one round and then 3 the next, they always could bring Marquis for one series and leave him off of another. I was going to say the same thing. If Lou chooses to us a four man rotation, who do you start for Game 4 if it's not Marquis? Steve Traschel? Basically what the decision is going to come down to for Lou is who he thinks will be more effective in Game 4: Z on 3 days rest or Marquis/Traschel/?. Why does everyone forget about Sean Marshall? I would definitely choose him over Marquis or Trachsel. I would too but they aren't even throwing him down the stretch here but he's only pitched three times this month and only once since Sept 15. He's currently logged a whopping 6 innings this month in 2 relief appearances and one start. I would think that if the Cubs wanted him to pitch in the posteason as a starter they would have used him as such down the stretch here.

It all depends if the team wants to go with 4 starters or not. If there's only 3, they won't put Marquis on as a reliever. If 4, he'll be the 4th guy. Remember also that the roster can change from round to round so if the Cubs want to use 4 starters in one round and then 3 the next, they always could bring Marquis for one series and leave him off of another. I was going to say the same thing. If Lou chooses to us a four man rotation, who do you start for Game 4 if it's not Marquis? Steve Traschel? Basically what the decision is going to come down to for Lou is who he thinks will be more effective in Game 4: Z on 3 days rest or Marquis/Traschel/?.

That's a signal that some of the AP people didn't really watch some of the games either. To have 20 voters change their mind on LSU-USC based on yesterday's games? I don't see it. I watched USC look really bad, but LSU looked pretty bad themselves yesterday. I really like the jump to #6 for South Florida though. For what they've done so far, they deserve that ranking for now. Who knows how close those voters had them in the first place. I mean, if those voters had it basically as a coinflip, yesterday could have been enough to push them the other direction. Plus, it is tough to watch all the games and I'm sure the AP voters make a much better attempt than the coaches do. And with so many other good games and upsets yesterday, I can't really fault them for not watching LSU-Tulane and just looking at the box score. Obviously you are going to get some AP voters who don't really do their homework but I still put way more stock in that poll.

Well, except those will be save situations which he is good in. Which are those? It seems sort of silly to me that people think there's some sort of meaningful distinction between his relative success with 1, 2, and 3 run leads and his repeated failures in tie games. Do you think he pitches differently when the game is tied in the ninth inning than he does when it's a 1, 2, or 3 run lead in the ninth inning? The distinction is utterly absurd. The role of the closer, right or wrong, is to come into the game in the ninth with a 1-3 run lead. When Dempster does that, he is a very good pitcher and the numbers back this up. When he comes in when the game is tied or with a 4+ run lead, he isn't very good. I have total faith in Dempster to pick up the save if he's brought in with a 1 to 3 run lead. However, if he's brought in with a 4+ run lead or a tie game, I have faith in him to give up runs. Also, non-save situations aren't restricted to tie games as they include any lead over 3 runs. If you don't think a pitcher pitches differently with a big lead than he does with a 1 or 2 run lead you're crazy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex New polls out and LSU has jumped USC for the top spot although it's only by 2 points in the AP Poll. Top 5 is the same for both with LSU, USC, Cal, OSU, Wisc as the top 5. Reason #293847 why nobody should ever look at the coaches poll: Florida is still ranked #7 ahead of Kentucky and South Florida. AP Poll, on the other hand, has South Florida, BC, Kentucky 6 through 8 with Florida 9th.

We're going to get killed in the Fargo Dome.