- This topic has 230 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Alonso just hit a 3-run HR to help the Cards Division championship chances and hurt Goldy’s triple crown chances. Mets lead 3-0 in the 4th.
Goldy is so far behind Freeman in the batting title that there is basically no chance for the triple crown. I sure hope he gets things going again and puts this slump behind him. And soon too!!!
GameCard…Haha! I genuinely hope you knelt and sincerely sought forgiveness for uttering a phrase that encouraged success upon the NY team mentioned earlier in this thread. An outward expression of repentance is the key to establishing atonement. And oh, I hope little Eddie doesn’t see that remark…
I guess the big boys got tired of Gorman and all of his strikeouts. Over 100 strikeouts in a little over 300 plate appearances. Unacceptable. He better figure it out before 2023 rolls around.
That’s a big blow for Gorman…he hadn’t really had much PT of late so I guess it’s good that he’ll have a couple weeks to iron things out at Memphis.
5-0 Mets in the 6th. Back to back triples by Nimmo and Lindor and then a double by Vogelbach. Plus Scherzer has a no-hitter thru five innings.
I bet Front Row Amy isn’t too happy tonight. At least not so far.
Yep Rat, triple crown is gone.
I just looked at some numbers specifically on batting average. Assume Goldy and Freeman both get 60 more ABs. If Freeman gets 15 hits, he’ll end up with a .323 average. If Goldy gets 20 hits, he’ll end up with a .324 average.
That’s possible, but not likely. But when you add that to being 4 HRs behind Schwarber and 6 RBIs behind Alonso, it’s not happening.
And I haven’t seen Front Row Amy at the game.
And oh, I hope little Eddie doesn’t see that remark…
Last 100 plate appearances:
.365/.390/.635/1.025
Scherzer perfect through 6 innings with 9 Ks. He had that look early in the game where it appeared his competitive juices runneth over. He was pacing the mound like a caged lion.
I think Goldy may have a better chance at catching Schwarber and Alonso than Freeman. Freddie’s too good of a hitter to 0’fer more than a game or two. He’ll probably win his first batting title. I’d also say simply because he plays for a media darling team, he stands an outside chance for his second NL MVP.
EuroDandy…I’m not watching the game, but I’d have to say Matt Scherzer’s presence on the mound is the most intimidating in either league. He’s a man on a mission who almost seems as though he’s lost in some sort of hypnotic pitching trance at times. He’s no joke.
You’re mathematically barking up the right probability tree, Euro Dandy. But ponder Disjoint Events and Bayes Formula for a clearer picture.
Cardinal In France talking about upping his din-din game come playoff time? Is this even possible? I’d love to see you try, CIF.
You’re mathematically barking up the right probability tree, Euro Dandy. But ponder Disjoint Events and Bayes Formula for a clearer picture.
Yep Pugs, those are the nuances I mentioned, but didn’t go into detail about. I did a 3 disjoint event scenario where I took into account the two head-to-head games separately. The three are where the Cards: (1) win one of the games, (2) win two of the games, and (3) win neither of the games. In this approach I used a 0.5 probability of winning/losing for those two games, but I used the Cards and Brewers current winning percentages as the probabilities for all their other games (higher than 0.5). In this more complex and probably more accurate approach, the probability for the Cards to win the division comes out to 0.998 instead of 0.997. I like their chances either way, haha.
Have you ever looked in detail at the Monty Hall problem posed in the 70s? When Monty opens the door to reveal a goat, the contestant should change doors from the original selection. Bayes’ theorem helps answer that one, i.e, the probability changes given something else is known. It is very counterintuitive and most people don’t buy it when they first look at the problem. Hundreds of PhD holders refuted the solution, but eventually had to tuck their tales when all the simulation and modeling published later proved it to be correct.
In regards to magic #’s, pretty sure since from ’85 to ’11 it required 11 W’s in the post-season to be crowned world champs even after the introduction of the single WC qualifier. Then it was 12 if you snuck in via a WC berth once they allowed two WC qualifiers. I’m thinking now it still requires only 11 post-season wins if you’re a 1 or 2 seed, but the 3rd seed and the 3 WC qualifiers have to win 13 postseason games to win a world championship?
Edit; Haha…Can the Monty Hall thing help with this?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.