• Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

2014 World Series thread

deck Whitman said:
Nate Silver keeps writing about the Gordon triple assuming that he had a 30 percent chance of scoring.

I would say he had less than a 5 percent chance, no? Maybe less than 2.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/send-alex-gordon/

Gordon had almost no chance to score.

The usual rule of thumb is does the runner get to 3rd before at just when the outfielder gets the ball; here he just got to 3rd when Crawford got the ball, just a little beyond the infield. Crawford who has a strong arm and an accurate arm would have had to make a huge blunder to miss that throw to the plate. Even coaching 3rd in LL (majors), there's almost no chance you send the runner home when the SS gets the ball there.
 
micropolitan guy said:
Winners don't lose 3 games in the post season.

Can't tell if you forgot the blue font.

Koufax lost once in the 1959 WS. He gave up one earned run in 9 innings.

Koufax lost once in the 1965 WS. He had an 0.38 ERA. He gave up one earned run.

Koufax lost once in the 1966 WS. He had a 1.50 ERA. The game he lost, Willie Davis made three errors in F, leading to three unearned runs.

He had a career 0.95 WS ERA.

Koufax controlled the other team's offense. Unfortunately for him he could do nothing about the Dodgers' anemic offense.

His post about that is dripping in blue font. The blue man group looks like a bunch of gingers compared to that post.
 
qtlaw said:
deck Whitman said:
Nate Silver keeps writing about the Gordon triple assuming that he had a 30 percent chance of scoring.

I would say he had less than a 5 percent chance, no? Maybe less than 2.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/send-alex-gordon/

Gordon had almost no chance to score.

The usual rule of thumb is does the runner get to 3rd before at just when the outfielder gets the ball; here he just got to 3rd when Crawford got the ball, just a little beyond the infield. Crawford who has a strong arm and an accurate arm would have had to make a huge blunder to miss that throw to the plate. Even coaching 3rd in LL (majors), there's almost no chance you send the runner home when the SS gets the ball there.

I wanted to see them send him, just for the thrill of it as a neutral observer, but I fully understand that holding the runner was the correct move.

That said, I think there's an argument that could be made for sending him because humans do play this game and, after the two outfield blunders, it was entirely possible that Crawford might panic and end up making a bad throw. There is plenty that can go wrong between the transfer, the throw, the catch and the tag.

Buttholes pucker.
 
Just try to imagine some parallel universe where they send Gordon.

And try to imagine the third-base coach continuing to live in that parallel universe.
 
Oh, he'd be roasted, I have no doubt. But the Royals made a living this season by being extraordinarily aggressive on the base paths.

Again, I'm not saying that sending him would have been the right move. I'm not even saying I'd have done it. But I'd understand if they did. And I'd have enjoyed the heck out of it no matter the outcome.
 
outofplace said:
doctorquant said:
outofplace said:
doctorquant said:
outofplace said:
Sorry guys. Busy day and I am behind in my duties.

I must now point out that the World Series champions were among the top 10 in the majors in payroll. To be exact, the Giants were 7th.

Again, I apologize for making y'all wait.


:)

Huh, who woulda thunk it? A team that's not even at the 80th percentile payroll-wise wins it all. Just goes to show you, money can't buy love or World Series championship banners.

The 2009 Yankees are leading the chorus of laughter at your expense.

LOL ...

Good. You are learning to laugh at yourself. Glad you could join us.

Only in OOPlandia is a "cause" having been followed by an "effect" in one out of the last six trials evidence of that cause's power.
 
LongTimeListener said:
It's MOPlandia.

You're confused on your geography ... OOPlandia and MOPistan are neighbors which recently entered into a non-aggression pact and a free trade agreement.
 
doctorquant said:
LongTimeListener said:
It's MOPlandia.

You're confused on your geography ... OOPlandia and MOPistan are neighbors which recently entered into a non-aggression pact and a free trade agreement.

I assume both sides' main goal is to keep the Pirates out of the World Series.
 
LongTimeListener said:
doctorquant said:
LongTimeListener said:
It's MOPlandia.

You're confused on your geography ... OOPlandia and MOPistan are neighbors which recently entered into a non-aggression pact and a free trade agreement.

I assume both sides' main goal is to keep the Pirates out of the World Series.

Neither country does much in the way of economic measurement, but both maintain impressive dWAR archives.
 
micropolitan guy said:
Winners don't lose 3 games in the post season.

Can't tell if you forgot the blue font.

Koufax lost once in the 1959 WS. He gave up one earned run in 9 innings.

Koufax lost once in the 1965 WS. He had an 0.38 ERA. He gave up one earned run.

Koufax lost once in the 1966 WS. He had a 1.50 ERA. The game he lost, Willie Davis made three errors in F, leading to three unearned runs.

He had a career 0.95 WS ERA.

Koufax controlled the other team's offense. Unfortunately for him he could do nothing about the Dodgers' anemic offense.
Winners win
 
deck Whitman said:
Where has YankeeFan been? It's not like him to disappear from the board for this long, especially during the baseball playoffs.

Hasn't been seen since the mods
nuked two (more) of his political threads.

Smells like he's in the penalty box.
 
Back
Top