I have an excuse for playing like shit this season. I'm making a lot of picks based on my 'draft team', so I'm not playing against myself everyday.

That's silly, I think. I treat the two games separately. Let the chips fall where they may

What are you saying, that you didn't want to pick Buehrle or Santana today because people have them in the Yahoo game, so you picked Duke?

And I'm a little confused here. If you're making your picks based on the Yahoo game, and you're doing well in that, you should be doing well in this game too.

At least if one of them does well today, it's not a total loss for you if you picked one of them instead od Duke, but if Duke bombs, you're screwed in both games.

Or he could be saying that he has a bunch of players in the Yahoo game batting against Santana and he'd be in a no-win (or no-lose, if you're an optimist )situation.

Plaw, I bet myself on the opening 99 - 1 line. Now I want to hedge my original line bet on a game by game basis. Can you put me in touch with your Vegas connection?


Don Cardi

in fact, even I don't believe myself :p 2nd and 3rd of June, for instance, I'll be out and I still don't know what I'm gonna do about it.

Game by game is so chancey, and there's so much luck involved, that with our ten-player league if you want to bet on an individual day before the pitching choices are posted the odds usually range from only about 8-1 to maybe 12-1.

If you wait until after the pitching choices are posted, then you can get a little bit better price.

Like the other day when JL took the Giants' Cain, he was probably about 15 or 18-1 to win the day against pitchers like Schilling and Mussina, or the day you had Chacin against Willis, Peavy, and Schilling.

Anyway, unless you're really confident with one of those "unpredictable" picks (like Chacin), there's probably too much luck involved and the odds too short for it to pay to bet on a day-by-day basis.

Of course (cough) if you're looking for a little, um, "monetary" action on the side, I know of someone in the league who might be interested in accomodating you.

He's been known to offer odds, too, or perhaps even a spot....

Even though technically she didn't "play" yesterday - her team was a leftover from a few days ago - I believe that LZ set a record for futility yesterday.

Two runs scored and four walks, but only one measly single - one "total base" - in 30 ABs.

No odds. I want a money line.


Don Cardi

How about something like so much per point, and you get, say, 3-2 odds?

Like if you win you get maybe 30 cents a point, but if your opponent ( :rolleyes: ) wins he gets only 20 cents a point?

Or do you mean a straight side bet, regardless of the points differential - whoever has more points at the end is the winner - and you get, say 3-2 money odds or something?

Hey Gina - Your PM box is full... wanted to ask when your trip was...

It's just weird rooting for 1 person in one game, and against them in the other. I'm not picking exactly the same team as my Yahoo team, but it has affected my pitching and 'superstar' choices.

I hear 'ya, but with pitchers at least it's kinda like hedging your bet.

If you had taken Santana today, if he does well it hurts you in the Yahoo game because I have him, but at least you derive some benefit from him because you have him in the Salary Cap game.

And if Duke does poorly today, at least you don't get hammered in both games.

Of course if he does well - as it looks like he is - you get double the benefits.

I dunno - weird or not - I still say it's two separate games and I want to make my choices based on whatever I think is best for each game separately.

And let me throw this wrinkle into the discussion:

If we were playing for money, would that change your thinking?

You know how I feel about that - play the same way regardless.

Not counting LZ (who isn't really "playing" either game), there are 6 of us playing both games.

Anyone else with a comment?

Duke is pitching a shutout in the 8th inning.

....If I were playing for money, my picks would be different.
Right now, my picks lean on what won't hurt my Yahoo team too much.

Sounds good! But I was only joking around Plaw. The hedge that I was talking about is the bet placed to hedge the other one where that you've already locked in.

Last July, when I was in Vegas I put 100 "points" down on the NFL GIANTS to win the SuperBowl getting 60 - 1. Once they made it to the playoffs I hedged that bet by taking the other team that they were playing and would have considered doing so every week until they went into the SuperBowl. So basically I locked in some "points" by hedging that SB bet because as you know they got knocked out and although my SB bet became null and void, I made some "points" back the other way.

That's the kind of hedge I was talking about in my other post.

Ask Don T how I "scored points" during the football season playoffs by Hedging straight bets made in the early games with under and over bets/teasers in the later ones.

Anyway we are already a month into the season. If you would have proposed some kind of "friendly" wager before the season started, well then maybe I would have considered it. Keep it in mind for when Hockey and Football season rolls around.


Don Cardi

I dunno, DC....

I do my gambling for money...dollars....cash....coin of the realm....that stuff I can spend to buy things....

I don't understand this business with "points".

What are you doing? Hiding from the I.R.S. by calling money "points".

I don't get it.

Why would it make a difference if you were playing for money?

It seems to me that if I am the best player in both games - or if anyone is for that matter, not necessarily me, - then all things being equal (I'm speaking here of the "lucky breaks" evening out), that person should win both games, regardless of whether or not their picks in one game are counter to their picks in the other.

Just make what you think are the right moves in both games, and if you're the best player why wouldn't you win both games?

Interesting argument. I'm curious to know what DB thinks here.

DB?

And, just curious here....What made you place the Yahoo game at a higher level of importance than the Salary Cap game?

From all that you've said, it appears as though you'd prefer to win that one.

Geoff, it's clear, now - sorry about that.

The trip is the 4th through the 9th - Thursday through Tuesday.

This whole thing might be a false alarm if I don't get the chance to set lineups in advance. I'm working on it...

You know, this situation is a bit similar to fantasy football.

If you have LaDanian Tomlinson and the Denver Defense but in a particular week, San Diego is playing Denver, most people believe that you play LDT or Denver, but not both. I tend to agree with this line of reasoning but in some cases, I may go against it.

What does this all have to do with baseball?

I may be wrong here but it appears JL is placing more importance to the Yahoo game and is making his picks in the salary cap game that won't hurt his Yahoo team. If he has a bunch of Yahoo players hitting against Schilling, he won't pick Schilling or conversely, he loves his pitchers on his Yahoo team and will pick them in the Salary Cap game to "double" up. It's almost psychological.

People can play any strategy they want and JL's is one strategy in dealing with both games. My particular strategy is to look at my pitchers in the Yahoo game and NOT pick them in the salary cap game.

In any case, game theory dictates that players make choices to maximize their "returns", however they define it. Looking at it this way, if JL feels that winning the Yahoo game is more important, then his choices in the salary cap game make sense.

PL is obviously looking at things differently. He wants to win both games (equally?) and is making choices in both games independently.

I tend to agree more with PL that the games (and the choices I make) are mostly independent.

Sorry for the economics lecture!

That's what I said

I can say that one game has absolutely no effect in the other for me.

Actually our little Gina would understand why I use the term "points." Right Gina?


Don Cardi

You think too much of me. Even if I did take over, I'd never live up to your standards. This is, of course, if I'm still allowed to play fantasy again. I'm actually having to consider whether studying for an exam is more important than the Astros and BBC.

Oh, in regards to that post of yours...in the words of TM, "like you really mean the ' ' " :p

Cardi, I'd love to contribute, but I just can't quite understand why you're referring to points as a "term"...? Ain't no term. Points are points.

That's my girl!


Don Cardi

That's gonna be a classic around here, I can tell. Look what you did, TM. :p

Great day for CC yesterday with one of the highest single-game day scores of the season, moving her back into second place.

Also, with the surprise NY-Bost rainout and the "resting" ( :rolleyes: ) of Pujols and Edmonds (can someone please explain to me why a healthy 26-year old athlete at his peak - and one of the hottest hitters in baseball, besides - who makes I dunno how many millions of dollars a year - needs a day off and can't play a day game after a night game?), possibly a record number of DNPs yesterday - twenty .

Everyone on the Pedro bandwagon today, except for our non-playing player, LZ.

Tuesday's Scores & Wednesday's Probables & Standings

I was agreeing with you.

Yeah, I know....In any case, I'm wondering why JL regards the Yahoo game with more importance.

I guess maybe I should be flattered

I sorta figured that I would enjoy the Yahoo game more and would prefer to win that one as opposed to the Sal Cap game, but the BB in general seems to regard the Sal Cap game with more importance (more players - especially with the 3 "non-players" in the Yahoo game, leaving 6 active particpants, vs. 9 active participants in the Sal Cap game - more posts since the games started, the Yahoo game seems, I dunno, more "specialized"), so I think I would actually prefer to win that one if I could only win one and had a choice.

Plus, this is the first time for the Yahoo game, and I guess I really do want to prove that "last year was a fluke."

Damn... I knew I should've gone w/ Maddux... (well, we'll see I guess )

Maddux on the road.....Pedro vs. one of the worst teams in baseball so far.....

Wouldn't it be something, though, if after three mediocre seasons, Maduux (at age 40) went and put together a season or two that resembled his peak years of the early and mid-nineties?

From 1992 thru 1998, 7 seasons, Maddux was 127-53 (.706), an average season of 18-8, with an E.R.A. of around 2.20 or so.

From 1992 thru 2002, an amazing 11 year run, he was 198-88 (.692), still an average season of 18-8, with an E.R.A. of around 2.45 or so.

This year he's off to a 5-0 start with a 1.35 E.R.A..

I don't think anyone expects him to go 30-0 with an E.R.A. under 1.50, but how about a 20-5 with a 2.25 or something, which would be similar to his 1997 season (19-4, 2.20)?

Pedro and a Mets win in extra innings helps everyone to a 37 in pitching yesterday, which is great except when everyone gets the same score. :rolleyes:

At least JG is happy he didn't go with Maddux.

And another miserable day on offense for nearly everyone, too, with only DB (36) cracking 30.

It's usually been one thing or another.

In general, as a group and individually, we've rarely been able to put offense and pitching together on the same day.

Wednesday's Scores & Thursday's Probables & Standings