Is he going to college or the minors? [/b][/quote]Hes got a full ride waiting for him at Marshall U. but I bet hell sign & go to the minors

OA - Sorry to hear your team blew it... and I like the Pirates. In fact, I was gonna go with their PS today, until I saw all the BoSox on my team

Here is your man, Damian Jackson. Never heard of him, but it's great to hear that some big leaguers still have minor league fun!

And congrats on your boy - get me a rookie card, huh?

PS Be careful, HH and BD are right up your butt!

What the f*ck happened? I get rid of Trot Nixon and he comes through with 17 points!!?

Pittsburgh - FEH!!!

Glad I picked him up

Boston... sheesh, SC... at least be a Dodgers fan if you're not gonna root for a NY team! :p

How do you think I feel? I put Manny on my roster at the beginning of the week. Would've been nice to have him all to myself yesterday...

Thursday (unofficial final)

PL 2910 Mets (-7)+(-3) 61 2971
LD 2704 Dodgers (28) 68 2772
JG 2689 Dodgers (28) 58 2747
DB 2558 Mets (-7)+(-3) 55 2613
UU 2496 Dodgers (28) 70 2566
BD 2302 Dodgers (28) 84 2386
OA 2308 Dodgers (28) 58 2366
HH 2305 Yanks (26) 55 2360
SC 2236 Dodgers (28) 54 2290
JJ 0240 Mariners (16) 46 0286

Mutts/Brewers DH today. I was too scared to pick either PS, even w/ the double-header, so I hope I'm not burned. Brown is due to get hammered, hope it's not today! I feel kinda dirty, being the bologna in the Mutts sandwhich

I've had Ramirez on my roster from Day 1, and have watched his value climb from 6.1 to 6.6, but I can't figure him out.....He's averaging only 4.0 pts per game (although its 7.0 this past week) and his value keeps rising!?

I suppose he's due to bust a stretch of some big scoring games, but his value should be tied into what he's actually producing, NOT on to his "name".

I feel ill!

So DS, looks like on Tuesday night you were talking how bad -19 from a PS was. Gee I guess after last night and your - 25, the -19 isn't so bad after all.

But you know what BDD, 10 points yesterday after the -25 is A LOT better than the goose egg you came up with after your -19! :p

With that said, I still feel ill.

Why am I not surprised that I am right in there with you? :rolleyes: Of course, I don't feel dirty though

The points spread between Pork 'N Buffy is only 15 now. How am I supposed to leave you in the dust if we keep thinking alike in our picks??

Stop it!

We both dropped Helton for Sexson? AND took the Dodgers? (And don't be jinxing my man Kevin.)

Hey, at least there are afternoon games today.

By quitting time we can see some action on this thread!

One of the things that I've always found fascinating about baseball is the symetry of its statistics. Wins equal losses, runs scored equals runs allowed, etc. Which brings me, again, to the question of the wisdom of picking offensive players who are going against your own pitching staff.

One of the problems with this ESPN game, I think, is that the staistics are not symetrical. The negative value to a pitching staff of a run scored is not the same as the positive value to the offense. A few examoles:

Bases empty home run:
positive 6 for offense
negative 4 for pitching staff

One run, as a result of three singles:
positive 5 for offense
negative 6 for pitching staff

Basesd loaded home run (assuming bases were loaded as a result of singles or walks):
positive 15 for offense
negative 16 for pitching staff

Why should a run given up because of three singles cost a pitcher more than a run given up by a solo homer?

The reason for this is that for pitchers, a hit counts the same, negative 1, whether it's a single or home run, while for a batter, he gets credit for the number of the hits total bases.

Another reason is that for a pitcher, walks and singles are negated by strikeouts. This really makes no sense, IMO, because to a pitcher, the negative impact of a walk or single is in most cases far greater than the positive value of a strikeout.

A much better way to score the pitching would be to chargew the PS with a negative 2 for every run, earned or not, a negative 1 for every total base, a negartive 1 for every walk, and no positive total for strikeouts.

Then, positive offensive totals would equal negative pitching totals.

I agree! I was discussing this very thing with a coworker just yesterday who plays fantasy on another site. He didnt seem to understand the impact of the single vs. strikeout thing because of course he was just looking at pitching "statistics" but I was trying to get him to understand the effect it could have on the outcome of the game if a pitcher lets batters on base.

But then this is the guy who always tries to get me to take the White Sox

Your analytical mind at work again Paulie...do you ever take a break?

So let me understand - this is something you actually think about in your spare time ?

We need to get you out more, my friend.

Haha Bad Daddy! At least I get out on the weekends....as proven by my decline which starts on Saturday and Monday I usually have to work at pulling it back up.

I think of walks and hits more like "mistakes." The pitcher makes one mistake, giving up a solo homer, but makes 3 mistakes giving up three singles.

I also consider K's to be positive, since it's a feel-good at-bat for the pitcher. He caused the batter to get a big fat zero.

...for pitchers, a hit counts the same, negative 1, whether it's a single or home run, while for a batter, he gets credit for the number of the hits total bases.

A hit and a homer don't count the same. A hit (and a walk) can be harmless, but a homer is never harmless.

Extra-base hits can be harmless as well (e.g., a 2-out double then a K), and the point-per-base rewards the base runner (+2). Notice the extra bases don't impact the pitcher (-1).

A much better way to score the pitching would be to chargew the PS with a negative 2 for every run, earned or not, a negative 1 for every total base, a negartive 1 for every walk, and no positive total for strikeouts.

I don't know... I don't think a PS should be penalized for a fielding error leading to an unearned run. I don't think unearned runs should be considered at all in the scoring. If anything, I'd say -2 subtracted from the FIELDER for each error.

Why not add more possibilities for the BATTER? -2 for an error, +1 for a double-play, etc. Batters/fielders should be able to get negative numbers, too.

What I also hate is there's no point (positive or negative) for a hit batsman. I don't know how many times I've watched the Yanks and seen by guy get hit. No at-bat, no points, no punishment. Sure, he could eventually score a run, but I'd like the chance of the batter hitting or walking. -1 for the PS for a hit batsman, I say, and +1 for the hitter, who's gotten on base. +1 for getting on base, regardless how, should be the deal.

We could probably go on for hours like this

BTW, the PS scores are fairly new. Before a year or two ago, PS wasn't an issue - you only picked offense and that was that. I really like the addition of the PS!

I was actually replying to PL - I didn't see your message till later. After reading your's though - you are a sad soul also. So that is what you talk about in work huh. I guess in Mayberry it is either that or how the crops on the farm are doing - or the big news going on at the 'filling station'

I, too, think about this stuff. Hmm, that makes PL, LDV, and myself. I guess thinking about this stuff pays off, huh? :p

Of course you were talking about PL.

But still, all I gotta say to you is Mayberry indeed. If you ever come over for a visit, I can show you my fine city by way of hayride. You're not allergic to chickens are ya?

Good points, JG. But I still feel that the positive total of the offense should equal the negative total of the PS.

So then you'll agree that the unearned runs should be subtracted by the fielders causing the error... good.

I, too, think about this stuff. Hmm, that makes PL, LDV, and myself. I guess thinking about this stuff pays off, huh? :p [/b][/quote]Since I don't think about this stuff, does that mean I'm in first place of the people who are trying to win this game on pure talent (w/o thinking about things like strategy)?!

Just kidding. I actually think about this stuff also. Being a numbers person will do that to you- as the three ahead of me can attest to.

I agree with PL. The symmetry in the game should be mirrored in the fantasy game.

Besides OA - does anyone have any plans to go to a game this year?

I have plans for probably only 3. First one is July 12 at Coors - Dodgers vs. Rockies. You've been warned, not that anyone would take any of those teams but I don't want to be called a jinx.

I have a friend in Phoenix who has season tickets every year to Bank One Ballpark (and never uses them ) so I usually contact him when I want to see the Dodgers play (and for FREE!). LA plays there July 26 and then the Giants are there over Labor Day Weekend which I have all 3 day's tickets - Saturday, Sunday and Monday. I'll probably just end up going to the Saturday game. Depends. Phoenix is a fun town.

Of course all this traveling and stadium stalking depends on my ability to acquire a laptop to keep my 2nd place or better perch

Pretty confident that you'll still be in the Top 2, huh? :p

Have you ever read anything by Bill James? He's the guy who developed "game scores" for pitchers. I forgot the exact formula...something like "start with 50, add 1 point for each out recorded, 4 points for each inning pitched after the 5th, 1 point for a strikeout, subtract 1 for a walk, 2 for a hit, 2 for an unearned run, 4 for an earned run". Something like that.

The idea was for a complete game 2 or 3 hit shutout with about 9 K's and no walks should score out to close to 100.

He counted earned runs for twice the negative value of an unearned run.

I never liked the way unearned runs were figured anyway. Correct me if I'm wrong, 'cause I'm not 100% sure here, but if there are two outs and no one on, and the next batter reaches on an error, if the next guy hits a homer, then both runs are unearned.

I have no problem with the run that scored on the error being unearned, but the pitcher did give up a homer. Seems to me that should be an earned run.

Same scenario: After the error, the pitcher gets tatooed. Gives up homers, doubles, walks, and 6 runs. All unearned? Makes no sense.

I believe you're right Plaw. All runs allowed by a pitcher after a two-out error are unearned. It makes no sense to me either, although in this game, it helps us (other than slimming our chances for the win, of course).

It only helps if it's your PS. That doesn't help me.

Hmmm... For some reason, I recall this unearned run issue helping you out more than anyone... Where did I see that? It's on the tip of my tongue... :p

Wow, you guys bring up some good points to ponder. I am trying to remember how they did it in the other league I was in a few years ago. I always said I liked this one better - there are vast differences in tallying though.

Psssst, PL - was it your intention to get voyeurs like BethE and others off this thread? I am sure with your wordy musings it is probably a safe bet that only obsessed types like myself and a few others would bother reading every word - but then again, since you said your upcoming book was FREE - you know we will read that as well.