from Amazon
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Disconnect between perception and reality (number 3,192)…
I was listening to the Braves/Phillies game on the radio today. The fact that I hate Don Sutton’s commentary not withstanding (I don’t know who the play-by-play guy was), the two announcers were going on about how tough Sunday’s game was going to be because they were going against the best team in the NL (Phillies) with best pitcher in baseball (or close to it) on the mound (Halladay).
Now, I’ll refrain from arguing with the fact that the Phillies are the best team in the NL even though I think it is arguable, despite their stellar record, and I certainly don’t disagree with the notion that Doc is one of the best pitchers in baseball right now. However…
There is no one definition of a “real tough game” but surely that would have to be, what, a 25% chance of winning? 15%? 30%? Could it be 50% or 48%? If in two games, a team has a 50% chance of winning, can one game be “tougher” than the other? I don’t see how that is reasonably possible. You would really have to stretch the definition of “tough” in my opinion.
Anyway, what do all of these Sunday games have in common? Don’t forget, these guys are the “experts” about stuff like this. One is a hall of fame ex-pitcher, considered to be one of the smarter ones, and the other, I assume, has announced and been around baseball for most of his adult life. And they both think that Sunday’s game is going to be “really tough” for the Braves.
1) The Braves with their number 1 or 2 starter (Hudson) on the mound against Halladay and the Phillies.
2) Florida with Javier Vazquez against the Nationals and Jason Marquis.
3) Arizona against the Dodgers, Kennedy and Lilly.
4) Houston against the Mets, A. Rodriguez and Capuano.
Answer: Each of these teams has a 49% chance of winning, according to the current Vegas line.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date