|
Post by aztecryan on Sept 19, 2024 18:41:14 GMT -8
Yeah, I'm going to focus on what's real and not imaginary things, personally. To further refute this silliness: Arizona has scored 277 runs since August 1st, the Dodgers have scored 234, the Padres have scored 215. Acting like LA is invincible is like a decade behind the curve. The Padres would be favored in a series against them. Lifetime against the Padres, Ohtani is hitting .188 with two home runs in 21 games. I realize clichés are all you can have sometimes, but come on. There you go again, embellishing what I said. You're soooo predictable. I never said, nor do I think that LA is invincible. I said that I feel like their offense can carry their pitching if it falters. That doesn't mean their going to win the WS. Sheesh. You live to argue, just for the sake of arguing it seems, with some of the ridiculous stuff you post and try to tag on people. Get a grip, please. Yeah, I actually think the D'Backs are more dangerous than the Dodgers, and I also think the NL is up for grabs. Too many good teams on there. Let's look at the most runs scored in the NL in the last 30 days, which is what I like to go by. Well looky here, it's Arizona, and then the Dodgers. The Padres are a ways down there, unfortunately. How about the most runs scored per game in MLB this year? Well look here, the Dodgers are 2nd behind the Yankees. You see, you can manipulate anything you want to fit your narrative/opinion, and you do that A LOT, unfortunately, but it's really easy to diffuse. Not into manipulating anything, which is why I used the entire season. Sample size.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Sept 19, 2024 18:41:18 GMT -8
Padres are a good hitting road team--especially in Chase Field (admittedly only 3 games this season). Just not a team I want any part of with the way that park is playing. I agree with this.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Sept 19, 2024 18:42:16 GMT -8
And somehow allowed more than six runs a game to a lineup filled with minor leaguers. And, their offense over came it. Hopefully, they won't be able to do that against the tougher teams, but their lineup is absolutely loaded. It's absolutely not loaded. It's incredible top heavy. They won't play the Marlins in the playoffs. This is why recency bias is a foolish errand.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 19, 2024 18:48:26 GMT -8
D-backs, Mets and Braves all win. That sucks.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Sept 19, 2024 18:53:28 GMT -8
And, their offense over came it. Hopefully, they won't be able to do that against the tougher teams, but their lineup is absolutely loaded. It's absolutely not loaded. It's incredible top heavy. They won't play the Marlins in the playoffs. This is why recency bias is a foolish errand. Cherry picking is a foolish errand by you. You don't want me to post what the Dodgers scored in the series against the Braves, D'Backs and Orioles, and even the Indians in the last 30 days, right? Because it blows what you're trying to sell, right out of the water. Come on now.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Sept 19, 2024 19:04:42 GMT -8
And, their offense over came it. Hopefully, they won't be able to do that against the tougher teams, but their lineup is absolutely loaded. It's absolutely not loaded. It's incredible top heavy. They won't play the Marlins in the playoffs. This is why recency bias is a foolish errand. After the top three you have T Hernandez, Smith and Muncy. Edmans not bad either. No slouches.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Sept 19, 2024 19:13:17 GMT -8
D-backs, Mets and Braves all win. That sucks. Go Brewers. That's the only scoreboard watching I'll do. Realistically, there's not a ton to play for since the wild card top two play each other.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Sept 19, 2024 19:15:42 GMT -8
It's absolutely not loaded. It's incredible top heavy. They won't play the Marlins in the playoffs. This is why recency bias is a foolish errand. Cherry picking is a foolish errand by you. You don't want me to post what the Dodgers scored in the series against the Braves, D'Backs and Orioles, and even the Indians in the last 30 days, right? Because it blows what you're trying to sell, right out of the water. Come on now. 906 runs last year, less than 800 this year. All you need to know.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Sept 19, 2024 19:23:47 GMT -8
Cherry picking is a foolish errand by you. You don't want me to post what the Dodgers scored in the series against the Braves, D'Backs and Orioles, and even the Indians in the last 30 days, right? Because it blows what you're trying to sell, right out of the water. Come on now. 906 runs last year, less than 800 this year. All you need to know. Not even close. You're really reaching now. You sound like a novice when you say that you go by the whole year. Many things happen throughout the year. You know better. You need to be looking at the last 30 days, at least. Why didn't you mention the Braves, D'Backs and the Orioles, or even the Indians when assessing what the Dodgers have done in terms of runs scored? I know why, but that's disingenuous, cherry picking. Be better.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Sept 19, 2024 19:33:32 GMT -8
906 runs last year, less than 800 this year. All you need to know. Not even close. You need to be looking at the last 30 days, at least. Why didn't you mention the Braves, D'Backs and the Orioles, or even the Indians when assessing what the Dodgers have done in terms of runs scored? I know why, but that's disingenuous. Be better. I mentioned the Guardians already, twice. The Dodgers scored 12 runs in that series, more than half that in one game. If you want to mention Baltimore, the middle game of that series saw Baltimore commit three errors, leading to five unearned runs. The game after, they beat up the Orioles worst starter in the rotation. The last thirty days don't outweigh an entire season. A longer sample size is almost always more indicative of a trend and more beneficial to a genuine point. As I've already said, the expanded playoff model has shown the bye to not be helpful, 5 of the 8 teams have lost immediately. I'd love for them to get a bye, kill their momentum and then face Landon Knack, Walker Buehler or Jack Flaherty. Sign me up.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Sept 19, 2024 20:12:51 GMT -8
Not even close. You need to be looking at the last 30 days, at least. Why didn't you mention the Braves, D'Backs and the Orioles, or even the Indians when assessing what the Dodgers have done in terms of runs scored? I know why, but that's disingenuous. Be better. I mentioned the Guardians already, twice. The Dodgers scored 12 runs in that series, more than half that in one game. If you want to mention Baltimore, the middle game of that series saw Baltimore commit three errors, leading to five unearned runs. The game after, they beat up the Orioles worst starter in the rotation. The last thirty days don't outweigh an entire season. A longer sample size is almost always more indicative of a trend and more beneficial to a genuine point. As I've already said, the expanded playoff model has shown the bye to not be helpful, 5 of the 8 teams have lost immediately. I'd love for them to get a bye, kill their momentum and then face Landon Knack, Walker Buehler or Jack Flaherty. Sign me up. You glossed, and blatantly cherry picked right over what they did against the D'Backs, and the Braves. Par for the course. It was too obvious, Ryan. And, there you go again, trying to find yourself an out with your analysis of them against the Orioles. Good teams take advantage of errors, and dispose of bad teams in a dominating fashion, etc, so there's that. Moving on, I think it's up for grabs between the three teams. I like our chances, and I'm hoping the Dodgers flame out as you predict they will. I'm actually more concerned about the D'backs, actually.
|
|