Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Gonfalon Cubs > Discussion
Gonfalon Cubs
— Cubs Baseball for Thinking Fans

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:07 PM (#2966053)
I think if the Cubs force a game 4 the Dodgers go with Maddux and try to save Lowe for game 1 of the LCS. I can't see Torre going to Lowe on a short rest in a series they are dominating.

I like the Cubs chances in game 3 and then after that I like the Cubs chances in game 4 as well.

I expect the Cubs to lose this series but the doom and gloom I had last year after 0-2 is not there. There is a sliver of hope in place right now. I think the Cubs can win game 3 and if they do that then obviously they are still alive. It then comes down to game 4 which is Lilly vs somebody. If it is Maddux I think the Cubs have a good chance of winning that game as well. Which means it all comes down to game 5. Tricky one and I have no idea if the Cubs could win game 5. At that point I think Lou would go with Zambrano in that game. At that point anything could happen.

So I would say the Cubs are not dead. I would put them at say 25% of winning the series right now.
   2. SouthSideRyan Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:14 PM (#2966066)
I'd bet money if this goes to game 5, you see Zambrano out there instead of Dempster.

I'm not quite as optimistic as you McCoy, but I've said since the final out of game 1 that they get swept, or they win the series. Harden vs. Kuroda is a big advantage, so if the bats wake up tomorrow, we win the series.
   3. SouthSideRyan Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:18 PM (#2966070)
I know we're not really talking about Game 2 here, but why was DeRosa the only ####### batter that realized he should take the ball to RF? I don't think Martin left the left-handed batters box all night and there we go rolling over every damn pitch. Was Gerald Perry asleep.

Also of note, Zambrano drew his first walk in over 2 years last night.
   4. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:19 PM (#2966071)
I'd say that is vastly more optimistic then me.

If Harden vs. Kuroda is a big advantage then the Cubs are at least have 50% chance of winning that game which means you have the Cubs at a 50% chance of winning the series. If Harden vs. Kuroda is 60% then winning the series is at 60% for you.
   5. Scott Lange Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:27 PM (#2966082)
If each game was 50/50, we'd have a 1 in 8 chance. I feel 60/40 about Harden/Kuroda, 60/40 about Lilly/Maddux, and 55/45 about Zambrano/Lowe. Multiplying that out, it comes to a 19.8% chance to sweep, or 1 in 5. I'm going to arbitrarily drop that to 1 in 6 to account for our apparent tendency to have random #### happen to us. I'm assigning "6" to be a win, and rolling a d6, and... hey, we're gonna win the series! All right!
   6. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:33 PM (#2966096)
I would go 65/35 or 70/30 for Harden. I think 60/40 is about right for Lilly/Maddux bu I could see it at 65/35 if Lilly is still dialed in.
So that is anywhere from a 39% to a 46% chance of getting it to game 5. Zambrano vs Lowe is a toss-up for me. So that is about a 20% to 23% chance for the Cubs winning this series or basically my 25% eyeballing.
   7. Andere Richtingen Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:39 PM (#2966113)
I would go 65/35 or 70/30 for Harden. I think 60/40 is about right for Lilly/Maddux bu I could see it at 65/35 if Lilly is still dialed in.
So that is anywhere from a 39% to a 46% chance of getting it to game 5. Zambrano vs Lowe is a toss-up for me. So that is about a 20% to 23% chance for the Cubs winning this series or basically my 25% eyeballing.


And we should just round that off to 50%.
   8. Weeks T. Olive Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:42 PM (#2966116)
I hate that I'm so emotionally invested in this team.

On one hand, I want to say \"#### this bunch of chokers. Like last year, Z is the only one that showed up to play, while everyone else stands around with their thumbs up their asses. These ######## don't deserve fans like us."

On the other hand, like the proverbial abused spouse, I want to echo McCoy in # 1: "It's not so bad - I like their chances tomorrow and Sunday, and from there it's just one more game!"

Would it be too much to just ask for one god damn competitive game?
   9. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:52 PM (#2966136)
Boy does this team need a day off.
   10. Rembrandt Q Posted: October 03, 2008 at 02:58 PM (#2966152)
I've been playing around with sweep numbers for both the Brewers and Cubs. You guys are definitely in better shape than The Crew, but 70/30 or 65/35 is a little aggressive for Game 3. Vegas has it set around 55/45 or 57/43.
   11. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:01 PM (#2966155)
I'm sure if the Cubs had won one or two of these games the odds would be higher. As we all know vegas odds are not real odds they are simply odds made in an attempt to get enough bettors on side to pay the other side come victory.
   12. Rembrandt Q Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:12 PM (#2966165)
Certainly. But oftentimes the easiest way to get split action is with a fair line value. It doesn't matter, though. The games will be won/lost despite the odds. I hope both teams pull it off. I was looking forward to a potential I-94 series.
   13. Andere Richtingen Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:19 PM (#2966174)
Would it be too much to just ask for one god damn competitive game?

And make it tomorrow? Because really, if the Cubs can win tomorrow, things will look a fair bit better.
   14. Walks Clog Up the Bases Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:36 PM (#2966199)
What does this say about Lou if the Cubs come out on Saturday and still look like ass?
   15. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:41 PM (#2966208)
It says Lou can't hit a curveball at age 65.

Really, what else can Lou do here. He has put the best team out there he can. Okay Fukudome in right probably wasn't the best but we don't know how hobbled DeRosa was. It isn't like Lou is trotting Neifi and Ojeda out there and benching DeRosa and Theriot.


Should we blame Dierker because Bagwell and Biggio couldn't get a hit in the playoffs?
   16. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:43 PM (#2966211)
Before reading the remainder of my comment do remember that in my youth I was a Cubs fan.

That being said I stated early on that one of the elements of the Cubs success was the extraordinary seasons coming from ordinary players such as DeRosa, such as Dempster. It is not surprising to me then that when things get a bit rough it is those individuals that are undermining the current effort. Same with someone like Theriot who based on last night's effort seems to be reading his own press clippings about defensive "wizardry" in his attempt to "pull an Ozzie".

Um, Ryan, next time son, use your glove.

I rarely experience empathy being a cruel, callous, heartless old son of a b*tch. But I feel for ya' Cubsters.
   17. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:49 PM (#2966218)
DeRosa is not the problem. So far he has basically been the Cubs offense. .500 average with 2 doubles and a homer. Theriot hasn't been the problem either. Theriot used his bare hand because he was breaking towards second to cover the bag when the ball was hit behind him. No way he was going to get a glove on that ball. He did in the later innings throw the ball into the dirt on a throw to first. He never had full control of the ball and it was one of those throws that Lee generally saves but didn't. That wasn't Lee's fault but it happens.
   18. SouthSideRyan Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:51 PM (#2966224)
Harv, DeRosa's the only guy hitting the ball. He botched the easy grounder, but so did everyone last night. Just a nightmare.
   19. Weeks T. Olive Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:55 PM (#2966232)
Really, what else can Lou do here. He has put the best team out there he can.

I still think it was a mistake to not pitch Z in Game 1, but who knows what would have happened had Z and Dempster been flip-flopped. Maybe they'd still be down 2-0, but my guess is that we'd be looking at something better.

Z, as emotional as he is, never seems to lay an egg when there's something on the line. The emotions were even higher last night than they were Wednesday, and Z did just fine. Dempster, on the other hand, showed in multiple years as a closer that he's not terrible adept at handling high pressure situations. Wednesday was no different.

Had Z pitched Wednesday, the team may have one and taken pressure off of Dempster in Game 2. But who knows? With the way the offense is playing (and make no mistake, this isn't just a two game slump - this goes back to the NYM series), it'd be tough to win anything.

Other than that, yes, I'd have preferred Fontenot over Fukudome (and Fukudome had no business batting 2nd on Wed.), but it's tough to fault Lou much considering DeRosa's injury.

Beyond those things, you're right - there's not a whole lot left Lou can do.
   20. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:56 PM (#2966237)
I know Mark is hitting. But he also clearly botched a double play ground ball at a key moment in the game. Some could make the case THE most pivotal point of the game.

And I was speaking to the LARGER issue that when things unravel the baseball fates have a way of seeking out the weak links. Just like the PHillies managed to "find" Bill Hall and then Rickie Weeks in Game 1.

Nobody wants to read that DeRosa is like Weeks. Mostly because DeRosa is LOT better than Weeks. But on the CUBS, DeRosa's relative quality in the TRUE sense is of the same margin on the Cubs as it is for the Weeks to the Brewers. It's just that the Cubs have a higher starting point.

Meaning, Mark DeRosa is to Aramis Ramirez as Rickie Weeks is to Prince Fielder.

I know nobody will agree and everyone will attack me for suggesting that DeRosa is Rickie Weeks. Which is NOT my point.
   21. Weeks T. Olive Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:57 PM (#2966239)
Wow, I'm so upset I'm throwing out typos left and right.

"terrible adept"? "may have one"?

Ouch.
   22. Moses Taylor loves a good maim Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:59 PM (#2966243)
As others have said, Harvey, it's not DeRosa who's sinking the Cubs (although his error opened the floodgate last night). It's Soriano, Ramirez, and Soto who are sinking the Cubs offense right now. Even the 4 runs Dempster gave up shouldn't have been insurmountable.

Beyond those things, you're right - there's not a whole lot left Lou can do.

There's something to be said for the way his teams play in the playoffs. Going back to the 2001 Mariners, his teams underperform. It's impossible to know what he's doing/not doing that contributes to those struggles. But it is something that Hendry has to figure out.
   23. and Posted: October 03, 2008 at 03:59 PM (#2966244)
Is Maddux going to shut the Cubs down?

Will it make it just that much worse for Cubs fans if Greg Maddux wins the clincher?
   24. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:01 PM (#2966245)
Mark DeRosa is not the weak link on this roster. The guy has hit well in the lsst 4 playoffs he has been in. He has been able to play regardless of what position he was asked to play and has done so well.

If anybody on that infield is a weak link defensively it is Aramis. If anybody is a weak link offensively on that team (besides Fukudome) it is Soriano.
   25. Moses Taylor loves a good maim Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:05 PM (#2966249)
I posted 22 before I read 20. As for post 20, I'm not sure what you're getting at with the non-comparison. The Cubs aren't losing because their 5th or 6th best hitter isn't hitting, and I don't buy that the DeRosa DP was *the* pivotal moment. It was one of many. They wouldn't been been in that bad of a situation if Theriot didn't misplay the one earlier, and they still would have gotten out of it only giving up 2 if Lee didn't botch him. Even after the inning, 5 runs isn't insurmountable for this offense (that sounds familiar). That's also true for the Brewers in game 1 of their series.

If the top players on the Cubs and Brewers were playing up to their ability, the mistakes of Weeks and DeRosa wouldn't be gamebreakers.
   26. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:05 PM (#2966252)
Going back to the 2001 Mariners, his teams underperform. It's impossible to know what he's doing/not doing that contributes to those struggles. But it is something that Hendry has to figure out.

So how have the players on the 2001 team done in the playoffs without Lou?

Did Olerud do better? How about Mike Cameron? Carlos Guillen? So on and so on.

I mean we got a sample size of the 15 games here over 3 different playoffs in a 8 year span. This is Beautiful Mind territory right now.
   27. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:10 PM (#2966261)
Post 24 misses the point. Mark DeRosa has hit "well" in two seasons of his career setting career highs in multiple categories in 2008 part of which is attributed to greater playing time part of which is not.

2008 is not the true representation of DeRosa's abilities.

And it is also contradictory to attack people for using past playoff performance in comparisons because of limited data sample and then do the very thing with DeRosa. That is logically inconsistent.

But again, I expect another broadside missing the point completely.

Mark DeRosa is NOT the best player on the Cubs. Mark DeRosa is NOT the fifth best player on the Cubs. But because of THIS season fans THINK Mark DeRosa IS that good of a player. Just as they have an enlarged impression of Ryan Dempster.

Good luck tomorrow....
   28. Moses Taylor loves a good maim Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:14 PM (#2966266)
My point, which you missed, is that it's Hendry's job to figure out if there's something that Lou does or doesn't do that contributes to the Cubs performance. It's one thing to get outplayed and beat, it's another to look as lifeless and unprepared as the Cubs have the past 2 seasons. We have the luxury of writing that off to sample size and hoping for the best. But Hendry's job is to put the Cubs in the best position to win. He can't just sit to the side and say, well, next year things will be different, sample size, etc. If there's something that can be done to keep this from happening again, it needs to be done. I have no idea what that can be. I'm not in the Cubs clubhouse, I don't know how things are handled internally. But it would reflect very poorly on Hendry and the Cubs organization as a whole if there isn't a serious analysis of why things went the way they did. It could turn out to be random or luck or whatever you want to call it, but there's a root cause and it should be evaluated.
   29. 1k5v3L Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:19 PM (#2966272)
Kuroda has pitched really well over his last 10 starts or so
He's also done very well in his two starts against with Cubs, allowing just 1 ER in 15 IP
Yes, Harden is the better pitcher, but I don't think the difference is that huge right now
   30. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:36 PM (#2966290)
But because of THIS season fans THINK Mark DeRosa IS that good of a player. Just as they have an enlarged impression of Ryan Dempster.

So DeRosa isn't the 5th best positional player on the Cubs?

So then is he the 8th? Does that mean Theriot, Fukudome, and Edmonds are better?

I believe your point was that DeRosa was an ordinary player who is undermining the Cubs chances in this playoff series. That isn't true at all. Mark DeRosa so far is about the only positional player giving the Cubs a chance to win in this series. Secondly I never said anything about how you can't look at other playoffs, either you are confusing me with someone else or you are creating a strawman.
   31. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:40 PM (#2966296)
Post 30:

In the "game thread" last night I understood you went after some folks pretty hard on looking at past post-season performances as not being useful data sets.

Did I read that incorrectly??
   32. CFiJ Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:46 PM (#2966307)
Will it make it just that much worse for Cubs fans if Greg Maddux wins the clincher?


Wouldn't really bother me (aside from the Cubs losing). Pretty much all of my Maddux-trauma was assuaged when he resigned with the Cubs in 2004.
   33. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 04:47 PM (#2966310)
No you didn't.

This is a different point.

You made the claim that DeRosa is an ordinary player who will/is undermining the Cubs playoff chances. Yet unlike Kyle there is absolutely no evidence that points to that in DeRosa's career. There isn't even flawed evidence that says this might be true. DeRosa has played well the last three seasons when he has basically been a full time player. His track record in the playoffs has been very good. He made one mistake last night and despite that he is resonsible in some ways for 80 of the Cubs runs so far in this series.

Again DeRosa isn't the proble,.
   34. Dag Nabbit at ExactlyAsOld.com Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:03 PM (#2966337)
Depending on my schedule, I may not be able to get an article in at THT for the next week or two. I sorely hope to get one about this Cub postseason jugger-NOT, though.

Just in case I can't get to it - one point worth making - at this year's SABR conference Indians GM Mark Shaprio was asked what qualities you need in a manager, and he noted ability to prioritize was one of the most important. There's always 50 fires that need to be put out, but the manager can only handle 3-4.

Well, Piniella for two years in a row has prioritized making sure his players are ready physically for the postseason (or their next postseason game in the case of Zambrano in Game 1 of the NLDS). It's clear their real problem is pyschological, not physical. He's prioritizing the wrong parts of preperation. More than that, his manuevers to get them physically ready are a large part (the largest, I'd argue) of why they are so ovewhelmingly ill at ease mentally for 2 consecutive postseasons. They are taken out of their rythym and made to feel extremely self-conscious. They think about what they are donig rather than doing, and when adversity strikes they are lost because they aer so out of their game.

Thus you get Lilly slamming his glove, Hill's jitters, Dempster tying a personal high in walks for one game, and little league fielding.

Losing I can accept. Choking like this team has done in inexcusable.

1984 lost 3 straight, but they played pretty hard. It took an all-world performance by Evil Incarnate to beat them.

2003 lost 3 straight, but they only choked for 2 innings. Wood just didn't have it in Game 7.

They're choking. This is the most pitiful performance by a Cub postseason team in history. This may be the most pitiful performance by any team in postseason history.

Right now, they couldn't beat a AA team.
   35. Dr. Vaux Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:09 PM (#2966345)
Most pitiful is the 2006 Tigers in the World Series, unless getting to the World Series makes that impossible, which is a reasonable argument.

Last night's second inning was pretty bad, though. Listening in the car on the way home was painful, and I don't even care all that much who wins, though I'm pulling for the Cubs.
   36. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:12 PM (#2966351)
Post 33:

Well, I consider them one and the same. I don't know how it can be valid over "here" and not valid over "there" except if it is a matter of supporting one's argument in one situation and not in the other.

DeRosa's error contributed to the big inning of the night for the Dodgers. That is fact. I presume you witnessed it either in person or via the broadcast. To deny that DeRosa did not undermine the team's effort to win last night is a curious interpretation.

But I NEVER excluded others with GREATER culpability.

Again, I am NOT, REPEAT NOT, discussing this game in isolation.

I stated earlier this year the Cubs foundation of success was partially constructed on ordinary players having extraordinary seasons, DeRosa being a prime example. Therefore, it is not surprising to me that when things go south it is those players who are making a "contribution" if you will to the poor outcomes as the fates re-align themselves.

I am hopeful this was helpful. But if the next response is another post focusing on last night in isolation then I will understand that my point is being lost and therefore further discussion will likely be unproductive.

And I LIKE DeRosa as a player. I just find him booting a ball at a critical time to be a case of the baseball universe working to achieve "balance" after a aeason of Mark always seeming to do the right thing at the right time. Others can interpret it differently.
   37. base ball chick Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:22 PM (#2966360)
McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 11:41 AM (#2966208)

It says Lou can't hit a curveball at age 65.

Really, what else can Lou do here. He has put the best team out there he can. Okay Fukudome in right probably wasn't the best but we don't know how hobbled DeRosa was. It isn't like Lou is trotting Neifi and Ojeda out there and benching DeRosa and Theriot.


Should we blame Dierker because Bagwell and Biggio couldn't get a hit in the playoffs?


- well said
and the reason i am not raggin the cubs fans too hard is because i understand because of 97,98,99

the cubs fans got no dusty and his crappy management to blame. and it is hard to kick your players because they all decided to suck. and fukudome can't be held 100% responsible for the lousy results
   38. Cabbage Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:29 PM (#2966369)
They really need to win this. I just got NLCS tickets.
   39. Boots Day Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:31 PM (#2966370)
I see a connection between Lou's use of Dempster in Game One of this series and his pulling Zambrano early in Game One of last year's NLDS. In both instances, rather than just put his best players out there and give them a chance to win, Lou has felt the need to DO something, to manage the team, in particular the starting pitchers. And in both cases he managed to out-clever himself.
   40. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:37 PM (#2966377)
Boots:

I disagree. Lou didn't take an approach that was counter to the best interests of the team.

This is a very talented, veteran team with playoff experience. That they should wet the bed in this manner is one of the more baffling experiences I have had as a baseball fan.
   41. Walks Clog Up the Bases Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:41 PM (#2966387)
I was listening to the radio earlier and heard a report of Lou going off on Soriano in Spanish in the clubhouse last night about having more guts on the field.
   42. McCoy Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:45 PM (#2966392)
Well, I consider them one and the same. I don't know how it can be valid over "here" and not valid over "there" except if it is a matter of supporting one's argument in one situation and not in the other.

2003 Dusty Baker led and a bunch of Cub youth and long time Cubs players. They won the first series. Even won the deciding game 5. Went up 3-1 only to lose. So the Cubs are chokers but let us ignore they won game 5 in the LDS and assume the Cubs suddenly realized they were supposed to choke after game 4 in the LCS. 4 seasons later the Cubs barely get into the playoffs and only get in because the Brewers don't know how to hold a lead and lose to the team that eventually goes to the World Series. Kyle theory was that it was somehow all an organizational curse. That somehow McPhail and Hendry sign and develop players that don't know how to win. His proof was 5 games seperated by a year and oh yeah they play in Chicago and in Wrigley Field.

Your view is that DeRosa is an ordinary player that is/will cost the Cubs the playoffs. That isn't true, there is nothing in his track record to say he will do this. Nothing he has done this year says he will/is doing this.

I brought up DeRosa's past playoff performances not as some definitive nail in the coffin, it is simply another piece of data. You are focusing on a very minor point while ignoring the giant elephant that completely squashes your view. Which is DeRosa's record right now in this series. So far he has been the Cubs best positional player and it isn't even close. It is simply incorrect to use DeRosa as one of your points in your theory.


That is fact


Here is another fact, every single baseball player does something in a game to undermine his team. Well, I guess one can go 5-5 and they won't undermine their team. It happens but again you have singled out Theriot, DeRosa, and Dempster as proof of your theory. Yet you completely ignore the giant mastodons lying dead and stinkin on the floor. Fukudome 0-8, Soto 1-7, Soriano 1-9. You really want to hold up DeRosa as the weak link in this series so far when you can easily point the finger at Fukudome or Soriano? Hell, you can point the finger a DLee who played a mediocre at best first base last night, bounced into a DP, and can't hit when it counts. Or you can blame Aramis who bounced into DP as well, couldn't catch the ball last night and hasn't done anything special either.

DeRosa is like the 5th most important positional player on the team right now. He isn't the reason the Cubs are losing, they are losing because the 4 guys in front of him are not performing.
   43. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 03, 2008 at 05:57 PM (#2966402)
Post 42:

Your view is that DeRosa is an ordinary player that is/will cost the Cubs the playoffs.

Stating that someone is contributing to a team's inability to reach its goals is not assigning all the blame of that failure to that player.

every single baseball player does something in a game to undermine his team.

Correct. It is a group effort.

hold up DeRosa as the weak link in this series

Didn't write that. Didn't mean that.

I wrote this:

And I LIKE DeRosa as a player. I just find him booting a ball at a critical time to be a case of the baseball universe working to achieve "balance" after a aeason of Mark always seeming to do the right thing at the right time. Others can interpret it differently.

But having cut and pasted ad nauseum I am becoming that which I deplore on this and other similar sites.

Having reached this level of tedium I will accept that you will claim wildly to the heavens that you "won" even though we are now clearly talking past one another.

Again, good luck to the Cubs tomorrow evening.........
   44. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 03, 2008 at 06:01 PM (#2966408)
Yesterday's game was the most dire I have seen in my 20 years as a Cub fan. Not as bad as Game 6, naturally, but that was a sudden fall. Even in Game 7 the Cubs showed signs of life before choking. I give the Cubs a 5% chance of winning Game 3.
   45. SouthSideRyan Posted: October 03, 2008 at 06:08 PM (#2966416)
5% with Rich Harden pitching is absurd.
   46. nick swisher hygiene Posted: October 03, 2008 at 06:33 PM (#2966450)
It's a judgment call ultimately--but I don't think Harvey has demonstrated that the "overachievers" of the regular season are coming back to earth. What negatives he finds in their performance don't separate them from the Cub team as a whole which has become a vortex of suck....
   47. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 03, 2008 at 07:00 PM (#2966494)
5% with Rich Harden pitching is absurd.


The fact that Harden is pitching is the only reason the number is as high as 5%.
   48. Rafael Bellylard: The Grinch of Orlando. Posted: October 04, 2008 at 06:30 PM (#2967851)
5% is 20-1 odds.

I'll take the Cubs to win Game 3 if someone will give me 20-1 odds.
   49. Neil M Posted: October 04, 2008 at 07:44 PM (#2967887)
5% is 20-1 odds.

19-1 actually. If somebody gave me 20-1 I'd make the bet too.






























.










































.
   50. McCoy Posted: October 04, 2008 at 07:45 PM (#2967889)
Nice use of the period.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dingbat_Charlie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.7170 seconds
35 querie(s) executed