It’s ok raj, the giants are raping everybody.
Just wanted to say, Hallow thanks for the laugh I haven’t witnessed that level of stupidity in a while.
[quote]aznt0rk wrote:
It’s ok raj, the giants are raping everybody.[/quote]
Dude, this all started because they started coming at me since I predicted the Rangers would win the World Series and consider them the better team. I really don’t care if the Giants (or Rangers) win the World Series.
You’re right I didn’t sort that. I’m working and attempting to multi-task. I stand corrected.
I still submit Giants are average for the regular season at worst. Not below average. And I’ll only compare to our league without the DH for that comparison. I will also submit that the analysis really shouldn’t be divided between regular season and post season but rather should be a combination of the two. A stat not available on that website though I will look for it elsewhere.
Glad you got a laugh. Us Giants fans are having a good laugh too.
[quote]Hallowed wrote:
Glad you got a laugh. Us Giants fans are having a good laugh too.[/quote]
That’s cause you smokin’ weed (video)
[quote]Hallowed wrote:
You’re right I didn’t sort that. I’m working and attempting to multi-task. I stand corrected.
I still submit Giants are average for the regular season at worst. Not below average. And I’ll only compare to our league without the DH for that comparison. I will also submit that the analysis really shouldn’t be divided between regular season and post season but rather should be a combination of the two. A stat not available on that website though I will look for it elsewhere.
Glad you got a laugh. Us Giants fans are having a good laugh too.[/quote]
That’s cool, glad you’re enjoying it, you SHOULD be. It just seems like the Giants fans in this thread are becoming hostile towards me because I picked the Rangers to win.
As for calling WC7 a bandwagon jumper, I’m really unsure what there is to be upset about. Unless you have no life it’s impossible to follow EVERY sport intently. When Canada won gold in men’s Olympic hockey at the Winter games I definitely jumped on the bandwagon when everyone was going nuts in Toronto.
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
To your second remark, sports 100% depends on getting hot at the right time. If you can’t bring it when it really counts, who cares how much talent you have? It’s idiotic to say “basically gotten hot at the right time”, THAT’S WHAT WINNING A TITLE IS ALL ABOUT.
[/quote]
Just noticed I missed responding to this.
It’s not idiotic you just don’t understand what I’m saying. I know getting hot is important but what I’m saying is almost all the teams that get hot around this time of year are the ones loaded with talent and have stacked lineups. That’s one of the reasons I picked the Rangers over the Giants. The Rockies got hot at the right time and they ended up losing it in 2007.
Look at the last 3 World Series winners:
2009 Yankees
2008 Phillies
2007 Red Sox
They all have stacked hitting lineups, while the Giants didn’t finish in the top 15 in almost every hitting stat. I think the only exception I saw was their slugging % which they were 13th.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Hallowed wrote:
You’re right I didn’t sort that. I’m working and attempting to multi-task. I stand corrected.
I still submit Giants are average for the regular season at worst. Not below average. And I’ll only compare to our league without the DH for that comparison. I will also submit that the analysis really shouldn’t be divided between regular season and post season but rather should be a combination of the two. A stat not available on that website though I will look for it elsewhere.
Glad you got a laugh. Us Giants fans are having a good laugh too.[/quote]
That’s cool, glad you’re enjoying it, you SHOULD be. It just seems like the Giants fans in this thread are becoming hostile towards me because I picked the Rangers to win.
As for calling WC7 a bandwagon jumper, I’m really unsure what there is to be upset about. Unless you have no life it’s impossible to follow EVERY sport intently. When Canada won gold in men’s Olympic hockey at the Winter games I definitely jumped on the bandwagon when everyone was going nuts in Toronto.[/quote]
I’m not a Giants fan, in fact I hate them because they are a divisional opponent. I just thought it was funny you were so sure the Rangers were going to easily score runs the rest of the games.
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Hallowed wrote:
You’re right I didn’t sort that. I’m working and attempting to multi-task. I stand corrected.
I still submit Giants are average for the regular season at worst. Not below average. And I’ll only compare to our league without the DH for that comparison. I will also submit that the analysis really shouldn’t be divided between regular season and post season but rather should be a combination of the two. A stat not available on that website though I will look for it elsewhere.
Glad you got a laugh. Us Giants fans are having a good laugh too.[/quote]
That’s cool, glad you’re enjoying it, you SHOULD be. It just seems like the Giants fans in this thread are becoming hostile towards me because I picked the Rangers to win.
As for calling WC7 a bandwagon jumper, I’m really unsure what there is to be upset about. Unless you have no life it’s impossible to follow EVERY sport intently. When Canada won gold in men’s Olympic hockey at the Winter games I definitely jumped on the bandwagon when everyone was going nuts in Toronto.[/quote]
I’m not a Giants fan, in fact I hate them because they are a divisional opponent. I just thought it was funny you were so sure the Rangers were going to easily score runs the rest of the games. [/quote]
It was a prediction, they can’t all be winners
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
[quote]scj119 wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Lincecum and the kid from Dazed and Confused are the same person [/quote]
lol! I was actually thinking of that guy from Inception when he was on 3rd Rock from the Sun.[/quote]
Aren’t you the one declaring the NL is no match for the AL?!?[/quote]
Yep. It’s only game one and even if Texas loses it doesn’t really matter seeing how the AL has won 10 out of the last 15 years. Maybe this will be one of those years (or maybe not), heck they finally won an All Star game first one since 1996.[/quote]
I think the tide is turning for the National League, regardless of how this Series plays out. 2 of the top 3 teams in the league are NL teams in SF and Philly and other than the AL playoff teams and maybe Boston, there weren’t that many good teams in the AL this year. The NL was much deeper; teams like Colorado, St Louis and San Diego would stack up well against all the AL teams except for Texas and maybe NY. And SF and Philly stack up well against all of the AL teams.
And it looks like there’s also more talent brewing in the NL with guys like the Giants young pitchers, Chapman, Strasburg when he gets back, Harper when he comes up, Posey, Heyward, Jimenez, Tulowitzki, Latos, C. Gonzalez, Votto and Josh Johnson. There’s a lot of good, young talent in the NL and I wouldn’t be surprised to see the NL take a majority of the next several All-Star Games.[/quote]
AL record in interleague play, 2007-2010: 545-460 (average over 4 years is 136-115)
Al record, 2010 alone: 134-116
I’d say the league discrepancy is about exactly the same.
Side note - you can’t reinforce your argument that the NL is “gaining” on the AL by stating a bunch of the NL’s young talent UNLESS you’re asserting the AL doesn’t have comparable young talent. I beg to differ: Longoria, Price, Crawford, Lester, Pedroia, Cano, Hughes, Cabrera (who’s still young), Mauer, Verlander, Liriano, Greinke, Hernandez, Feliz, Andrus…etc[/quote]
Who cares about interleague stats. I would say they would be worth more of a look if both leagues played with the same rules. If the NL wins the all-star game and the World Series you have to say the NL’s best team is better than the AL’s best team.
Yes the Giants bullpen is much better than the Rangers. I always thought the Giants and Padres had two of the best bullpens in the majors.[/quote]
This is, perhaps, the dumbest thing I’ve ever read, sorry.
The rule difference makes the interleague stats irrelevant but somehow doesn’t apply to the world series? I’m not being a dick but seriously how does that make any sense whatsoever?
I’ll take the 250-300 game sample size over the 4-7 one, sorry. Especially given that the “different rules” issue is EXACTLY THE SAME in a world series or a random interleague series.
Also, comparing the two leagues to each other (interleague) means a lot more than simply comparing one team from one league to one team in another (world series).
[quote]Hallowed wrote:
You’re right I didn’t sort that. I’m working and attempting to multi-task. I stand corrected.
I still submit Giants are average for the regular season at worst. Not below average. And I’ll only compare to our league without the DH for that comparison. I will also submit that the analysis really shouldn’t be divided between regular season and post season but rather should be a combination of the two. A stat not available on that website though I will look for it elsewhere.
Glad you got a laugh. Us Giants fans are having a good laugh too.[/quote]
For posterity’s sake: Giants were 17th in majors in runs scored, 9th in NL - so about average. Actually better than I would’ve guessed. You can bump them up a couple spots because they only had half a year of Burrell.
However, the defense argument, I’d say they’re weak down the third base line when Sandoval and Burrell are in at the same time. As a team though they certainly aren’t below average. Torres is lockdown in center. Frankly, no matter how good your pitchers are, you can’t really have 4-5 pitchers with sub-4 ERAs unless your defense is at least solid.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
To your second remark, sports 100% depends on getting hot at the right time. If you can’t bring it when it really counts, who cares how much talent you have? It’s idiotic to say “basically gotten hot at the right time”, THAT’S WHAT WINNING A TITLE IS ALL ABOUT.
[/quote]
Just noticed I missed responding to this.
It’s not idiotic you just don’t understand what I’m saying. I know getting hot is important but what I’m saying is almost all the teams that get hot around this time of year are the ones loaded with talent and have stacked lineups. That’s one of the reasons I picked the Rangers over the Giants. The Rockies got hot at the right time and they ended up losing it in 2007.
Look at the last 3 World Series winners:
2009 Yankees
2008 Phillies
2007 Red Sox
They all have stacked hitting lineups, while the Giants didn’t finish in the top 15 in almost every hitting stat. I think the only exception I saw was their slugging % which they were 13th.
[/quote]
The 3 teams you mentioned have better hitters than the Giants. But all three of those teams have extreme hitter friendly ball parks and teams built for success in their particular stadium. Swisher doesnt hit 30 homers in 75% of the stadiums in MLB.
The giants have a team built to succeed in their stadium. No need for a lefty bopper when the power alley is 400+
In a small park its better to have an explosive offense that relies on the 3 run homer and adequate pitching. In a big ballpark its better to have dominant pitching to negate the other teams chance for a 3 run homer and force them to string togeth hits. Which Texas certainly hasnt done.
I said that there was a chance texas would be held to less than 10 runs for the series. THey got a few junk runs in game 1 that destroyed any chance of that but theres no reason to beleive that they will hit for enough power in San Fran.
I see texas winning 2 games in arlington.
Wow, check out this article by JOE BLOW…
Rangers’ Regular Joes deserve to topple San Francisco’s Giants in World Series
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/localnews/columnists/sblow/stories/102710dnmetblow.1cb651576.html
“I’m surprised they still play baseball in San Francisco.”
“San Francisco doesn’t deserve to win the World Series.”
“It’s obvious who should win this thing. Bring on the Giant killers.”
[quote]aznt0rk wrote:
Wow, check out this article by JOE BLOW…
Rangers’ Regular Joes deserve to topple San Francisco’s Giants in World Series
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/localnews/columnists/sblow/stories/102710dnmetblow.1cb651576.html
“I’m surprised they still play baseball in San Francisco.”
“San Francisco doesn’t deserve to win the World Series.”
“It’s obvious who should win this thing. Bring on the Giant killers.”[/quote]
Now THAT was a laugh! The Giants don’t “deserve” to win (deserve?) because the mayor of San Francisco is handsome. L Oh Fucking ELLLLL!
hehe
EDIT: Oh gosh more LOLs did you read the comments?
[quote]Hallowed wrote:
EDIT: Oh gosh more LOLs did you read the comments?[/quote]
Some of the comments are fuckn hilarious!
How about them Giants?!!
[quote]therajraj wrote:
To me you sound like a guy whose panties get wet from a team winning in your area.[/quote]
I do, I love sports and there’s nothing wrong with that.
You might just want to keep your mouth shut, your definitely just digging a deeper hole with your recent posts.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
To your second remark, sports 100% depends on getting hot at the right time. If you can’t bring it when it really counts, who cares how much talent you have? It’s idiotic to say “basically gotten hot at the right time”, THAT’S WHAT WINNING A TITLE IS ALL ABOUT.
[/quote]
Just noticed I missed responding to this.
It’s not idiotic you just don’t understand what I’m saying. I know getting hot is important but what I’m saying is almost all the teams that get hot around this time of year are the ones loaded with talent and have stacked lineups. That’s one of the reasons I picked the Rangers over the Giants. The Rockies got hot at the right time and they ended up losing it in 2007.
Look at the last 3 World Series winners:
2009 Yankees
2008 Phillies
2007 Red Sox
They all have stacked hitting lineups, while the Giants didn’t finish in the top 15 in almost every hitting stat. I think the only exception I saw was their slugging % which they were 13th.
[/quote]
The 3 teams you mentioned have better hitters than the Giants. But all three of those teams have extreme hitter friendly ball parks and teams built for success in their particular stadium. Swisher doesnt hit 30 homers in 75% of the stadiums in MLB.
The giants have a team built to succeed in their stadium. No need for a lefty bopper when the power alley is 400+
In a small park its better to have an explosive offense that relies on the 3 run homer and adequate pitching. In a big ballpark its better to have dominant pitching to negate the other teams chance for a 3 run homer and force them to string togeth hits. Which Texas certainly hasnt done.
I said that there was a chance texas would be held to less than 10 runs for the series. THey got a few junk runs in game 1 that destroyed any chance of that but theres no reason to beleive that they will hit for enough power in San Fran.
I see texas winning 2 games in arlington. [/quote]
Great point, it will be interesting to see how it plays out down there, especially since they get a DH spot back and won’t be forced to either keep Vlad on the bench or let him putter around in the outfield.
I also want to see what the Rangers end up doing with their rotation, because they are kind of in a sticky spot.
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
To your second remark, sports 100% depends on getting hot at the right time. If you can’t bring it when it really counts, who cares how much talent you have? It’s idiotic to say “basically gotten hot at the right time”, THAT’S WHAT WINNING A TITLE IS ALL ABOUT.
[/quote]
Just noticed I missed responding to this.
It’s not idiotic you just don’t understand what I’m saying. I know getting hot is important but what I’m saying is almost all the teams that get hot around this time of year are the ones loaded with talent and have stacked lineups. That’s one of the reasons I picked the Rangers over the Giants. The Rockies got hot at the right time and they ended up losing it in 2007.
Look at the last 3 World Series winners:
2009 Yankees
2008 Phillies
2007 Red Sox
They all have stacked hitting lineups, while the Giants didn’t finish in the top 15 in almost every hitting stat. I think the only exception I saw was their slugging % which they were 13th.
[/quote]
The 3 teams you mentioned have better hitters than the Giants. But all three of those teams have extreme hitter friendly ball parks and teams built for success in their particular stadium. Swisher doesnt hit 30 homers in 75% of the stadiums in MLB.
The giants have a team built to succeed in their stadium. No need for a lefty bopper when the power alley is 400+
In a small park its better to have an explosive offense that relies on the 3 run homer and adequate pitching. In a big ballpark its better to have dominant pitching to negate the other teams chance for a 3 run homer and force them to string togeth hits. Which Texas certainly hasnt done.
I said that there was a chance texas would be held to less than 10 runs for the series. THey got a few junk runs in game 1 that destroyed any chance of that but theres no reason to beleive that they will hit for enough power in San Fran.
I see texas winning 2 games in arlington. [/quote]
Great point, it will be interesting to see how it plays out down there, especially since they get a DH spot back and won’t be forced to either keep Vlad on the bench or let him putter around in the outfield.
I also want to see what the Rangers end up doing with their rotation, because they are kind of in a sticky spot.
[/quote]
Another reason many batting stats are slightly skewed against teams who play in pitcher’s parks. Cannot WAIT to see what happens tomorrow. The Rangers are a good team and I’ve considered it a good match up wanna see if it plays out that way.
I’m a glass half-empty fan when it comes to the Giants being up 2-0. Texas is their park facing a pitcher who was doing great the last month of the season until that last Philly series.
Which Jonathan Sanchez will show up? The one who gave up 1 run vs Atlanta for 7 innings, or the one who lost his composure against Philly?
By the way, I know Colby Lewis won 2 games vs NYY (game 2, to tie the series, and game 6, to win the series), but how much pressure is on him to go at least 7 innings and not lose or they go down 0-3?