Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Yeah, I'm 0-2 trying to bet individual games on St. Louis this series, but I'm going back to the well one more time. The Mets have Oliver Perez starting Game 7 against St. Louis and I'm all over the Cardinals at +104.

I mean I could have seen Trachsel or Oliver (Darren that is), but Perez just seems like the pitcher that will give the Mets the worst chance possible here. In an inadvisable GAMBOL GAMBOL sort of move, I'm betting 5 units to go with my 4 unit series bet that's already in play and will be decided by tonight's results.

GO CARDS!

(Note: Get it while it's hot. The line moved from +106 to +104 while I was deciding how much I wanted to bet.)

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Honestly, I don't think betting this game is particularly +EV. Oliver Perez is as likely to get lit up as he is to shut down the Cardinals completely. He was a top 5 pitcher in the NL as recently as two years ago, whereas Trachsel and Oliver haven't been the top 5 of anything ever.

Because the variance on Perez is so high, I think that if you bet a side, you may as well take the run line because the game won't be close either way.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Are his results from two years ago really relevant? The fact is that he's been bad all season long, and in the start that people were praising him for (in Game 4), he gave up 5 runs in 5 2/3 innings. I really don't see Perez "shutting down the Cards completely" to be a likely result at all. I think the best chance for the Mets is to try to get a few good innings out of Perez and get to the bullpen early, then knock a few runs off of Suppan to get a 5-4 win or something.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

and can the mets trust wagner to hold a lead under 4 going into the 9th?

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

No doubt Wagner makes me nervous, but one thing to remember is that Wagner is nortorious for pitching worse when he's not in a save situation such as last night. LaRussa even mentioned that they would of seen a different Billy Wagner had the game been closer last night.

As for Perez, obiviously he will be on a short leash since Darren Oliver is well rested. I think starting Perez is the right move as D. Oliver hasn't started a game in over 2 years, and no way do I want Trachsel anywhere near the mound.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

I think the Mets at home, with their bats, with their depth, are hungrier than the Cards. Suppan > Perez, OK, but Carpenter >> Mayne. I think the Mets think this is their time and are going to find a way to win this game. And LaRussa's teams don't exactly have a history of rising to an occasion.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are his results from two years ago really relevant? The fact is that he's been bad all season long

[/ QUOTE ]
When he's on, he's ON. His horrible overall numbers are a result of getting shelled in the starts where he's not on. While I've overstating things somewhat to suggest that he's 50/50 to put together a quality start, the comment about his variance holds. Suppan is much more predictable -- 5 or 6 innings, 2-3 runs allowed.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
are hungrier than

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobodys hungrier than nobody in a game 7. A game 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 either!

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
are hungrier than

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobodys hungrier than nobody in a game 7. A game 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 either!

[/ QUOTE ]

The Cardinals have always underachieved under LaRussa. I believe that this team, like other recent Cardinal teams, does not play with any sense of urgency, even in important games.

Maybe hungry is a weird word. Obviously it's a cliche. But please tell me that the Yankees wanted to win that series as much as the Tigers did. Tell me the Tigers weren't "hungrier".

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

It's easy to assign hunger after the fact. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Fair enough. I'm assigning hunger to the Mets before this fact. Hunger, and more talent, and a home-field advantage.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the Mets think this is their time and are going to find a way to win this game.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm not sure that just because YOU think that the METS think that this is their time is a particularly strong way to attempt to handicap a game.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
other recent Cardinal teams, does not play with any sense of urgency

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow? Did you watch the playoffs the last few years? Those Cards/Astros series were all out leave everything on the field for both teams. They wanted it and wanted it bad, didn't get it last year but did the year before.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The Yankees wanted to win that series every bit as much as the Tigers did. The Tigers absolutely weren't "hungrier".

[/ QUOTE ]

And to think otherwise is silly. You've been listening to too much sports radio.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the Mets think this is their time and are going to find a way to win this game.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm not sure that just because YOU think that the METS think that this is their time is a particularly strong way to attempt to handicap a game.

[/ QUOTE ]

If all I had said was "I think the Mets think this is their time", you would have a valid point.

The Mets are a team on the rise. The Cardinals are, I believe, the same old Cardinals. Geez, look at that Met lineup. And at home? Suppan Schmuppan, I'm taking the Mets.

Is that rigorous enough?

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

I'm pretty damn hungry and for supper I think I'll be cashing my Mets to not win the WS bet. Tasty.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is that rigorous enough?


[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely! If it weren't for the "gut feel" contigent sports betting might get too tight and not be beatable!

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

HOWEVER, I will say this.
1) Willie Randolph seems to me to be a pretty good manager. And he definitely knows his pitching staff better than any of us.
2) Cardinal sluggers are simply not swinging the bats very well lately. Don't know if it's injuries or whatever, but they just don't look good.

The Mets ARE a better team, and playing at home IS an advantage. So I wouldn't be so quick to jump on the Cards. I'm certainly no expert baseball handicapper, but I would rate this game pretty near even with a slight edge to the Mets. I don't see value in the line.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

There's not a ton of value, but I like to GAMBOL in the playoffs (especially in a Game 7), and given that I'm doing so, I'm taking Suppan and the Cards over the worst pitcher ever to start a Game 7.

(If you don't have ESPN insider, I'll leave you with this juicy excerpt.)

[ QUOTE ]
Perez is almost certainly the worst pitcher who's ever started a Game 7. There are 94 pitchers in the study. Perez won three games this season, which places him 94th on the list. His winning percentage this season was .188, which is 94th on the list. His career winning percentage is .411, which is 94th on the list. His career ERA is 4.67, which is 93rd on the list.

Umm, did I mention there are 94 pitchers in the study?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Interesting stuff about Perez... I'm sure Randolph expects to be using the bullpen quite a bit. I, too, enjoy a bit of gamb000000l, especially on such an inherently exciting game. But I think I'll be on the home team in this one. (Mostly cuz I hate that smug prick LaRussa).

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Nice excerpt, iggymcfly. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Yet, again as others have said, not much value in the sides... someone said a 5-4 game, and personally, that's exactly what I'm guessing and it could easily be EITHER team in this spot.

If you want to GAMBOL for mere desire of action, don't blame ya, but if you --actually want a return-- and want a potential better line, why not choose StL/Suppan for 1st 5 innings? Seems like Oliver Perez will not have a long leash in this game (I'm pulling this out of my azz or influenced by other comments earlier) so if he's yanked early in 4th inning after giving up 3 runs, that ain't the game based on Mets offense, ya know...?

* CalvinTy

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

I'm adding hunger to my list of things to hate on... Along with clutchness. The jury will agree that choking is an actual happening. IE Last week we were up 5 cups to 2 in beer pong and ended up losing 0-2. That was a monumental choke. I obviously am not clutch and had no hunger (thirst was gone after as well)... It could be debated if I am a "gamer" or not.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

If you just trade your best player that would take care of the problem.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you just trade your best player that would take care of the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe if the team captain was more supportive of me. He supported the alternate when he used excessive table lean habitually now I get left on an island when I can't produce. Gay.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is that rigorous enough?


[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely! If it weren't for the "gut feel" contigent sports betting might get too tight and not be beatable!

[/ QUOTE ]

"Gut feel"? That is rich. OK, I'm done. In an argument with you guys, I guess I'll bet against the straw man.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm adding hunger to my list of things to hate on... Along with clutchness. The jury will agree that choking is an actual happening. IE Last week we were up 5 cups to 2 in beer pong and ended up losing 0-2. That was a monumental choke. I obviously am not clutch and had no hunger (thirst was gone after as well)... It could be debated if I am a "gamer" or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

better watch it, you'll end up with a big list of things to 'hate' like me


anyway....Cards pitching advantage verse Mets hitting advantage and home field

interesting situation, I cannot bet as I am far too unobjective on this one

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

I really think this is close to 50/50, so there can't possibly be much value at all given the current odds.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

If all I had said was "I think the Mets think this is their time", you would have a valid point.


- I have a valid point either way. "I think The Mets will find a way to win this game" is just ridiculous.



Geez, look at that Met lineup. And at home? Suppan Schmuppan, I'm taking the Mets.

Is that rigorous enough?


- Not really.


Indeed, the Mets may win this game. It might even be in a situation where they 'find a way' to win it at the end.
But the sports-radioness of your logic does not lead to +EV handicapping.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I really think this is close to 50/50, so there can't possibly be much value at all given the current odds.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think it's close to 50/50 as well with perhaps a very slight edge to StL.
Thus, I couldn't resist taking STL at +111.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's close to 50/50 as well with perhaps a very slight edge to StL.
Thus, I couldn't resist taking STL at +111.


[/ QUOTE ]

I have it pretty even myself. Not betting it but do have an interest in a decent sized NLCS bet on the Cards. Not hedging it either.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Up to +113 now and climbing... I guess action must be pouring in on the Mets? Almost feels like they're daring me to take the Cardinals (lol). I had it all figured out to take the Mets when the line came down a bit... Now what??? How big is the NY factor? I know many believe opposing Yankees is always +EV because of all the NY money that always goes in on them at any price. Is the same happening with the Mets?

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

After much back and forth I decided to put all my eggs in one basket:

Mets Moneyline (-126)
Mets -1.5 (+165)

Will be flipping between this and the UNC Virginia game tonight. Come on Tarheels!

Edit: As in Come on... Beat the 7 point spread. I'm not that much of a gambling man

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Cardinals +116 now at Bodog

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If all I had said was "I think the Mets think this is their time", you would have a valid point.


- I have a valid point either way. "I think The Mets will find a way to win this game" is just ridiculous.



Geez, look at that Met lineup. And at home? Suppan Schmuppan, I'm taking the Mets.

Is that rigorous enough?


- Not really.


Indeed, the Mets may win this game. It might even be in a situation where they 'find a way' to win it at the end.
But the sports-radioness of your logic does not lead to +EV handicapping.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Mets dominated the NL. The Cards squeaked into the playoffs. The Mets proved all year long that they are a better team than the Cardinals. This isn't a coin-flip. Maybe I don't express my opinions in internetsportsforum-approved fashion, but betting on the Mets tonight is +EV.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
There's not a ton of value, but I like to GAMBOL in the playoffs (especially in a Game 7), and given that I'm doing so, I'm taking Suppan and the Cards over the worst pitcher ever to start a Game 7.

(If you don't have ESPN insider, I'll leave you with this juicy excerpt.)

[ QUOTE ]
Perez is almost certainly the worst pitcher who's ever started a Game 7. There are 94 pitchers in the study. Perez won three games this season, which places him 94th on the list. His winning percentage this season was .188, which is 94th on the list. His career winning percentage is .411, which is 94th on the list. His career ERA is 4.67, which is 93rd on the list.

Umm, did I mention there are 94 pitchers in the study?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

this has to be the most biased excerpt ever.

from the exact same article:

[ QUOTE ]
If you're a Mets fan, I hope you're still reading, because I do have one shiny ray of hope. Remember Perez's 4.67 career ERA, 93rd on the list? Well, Nos. 92 and 94 happen to be occupied by the same pitcher … and that same pitcher happens to be starting for the St. Louis Cardinals tonight. That's right, folks: No. 92 is Jeff Suppan's 4.60 career ERA (through 2006), and No. 94 is Suppan's 4.80 career ERA (through 2004).

[/ QUOTE ]

suppan's career winning percentage was around .450 before he joined the cardinals, if you believe in that sort of thing.

i think the mets aren't going to let perez go out there more than four innings unless he is dominating, and they will pull him at the first sign of trouble, so the damage of a costly blowup will be largely restricted.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

I already have a prop bet from back in late April that the Mets would go further this season than the Cardinals, so I'm just sticking with that.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's not a ton of value, but I like to GAMBOL in the playoffs (especially in a Game 7), and given that I'm doing so, I'm taking Suppan and the Cards over the worst pitcher ever to start a Game 7.

(If you don't have ESPN insider, I'll leave you with this juicy excerpt.)

[ QUOTE ]
Perez is almost certainly the worst pitcher who's ever started a Game 7. There are 94 pitchers in the study. Perez won three games this season, which places him 94th on the list. His winning percentage this season was .188, which is 94th on the list. His career winning percentage is .411, which is 94th on the list. His career ERA is 4.67, which is 93rd on the list.

Umm, did I mention there are 94 pitchers in the study?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

this has to be the most biased excerpt ever.

from the exact same article:

[ QUOTE ]
If you're a Mets fan, I hope you're still reading, because I do have one shiny ray of hope. Remember Perez's 4.67 career ERA, 93rd on the list? Well, Nos. 92 and 94 happen to be occupied by the same pitcher … and that same pitcher happens to be starting for the St. Louis Cardinals tonight. That's right, folks: No. 92 is Jeff Suppan's 4.60 career ERA (through 2006), and No. 94 is Suppan's 4.80 career ERA (through 2004).

[/ QUOTE ]

suppan's career winning percentage was around .450 before he joined the cardinals, if you believe in that sort of thing.

i think the mets aren't going to let perez go out there more than four innings unless he is dominating, and they will pull him at the first sign of trouble, so the damage of a costly blowup will be largely restricted.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wait, so this game has the two worst pitchers ever to start a game seven? OVER!!! [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

Jokes aside thats actually a good point. And regardless of who we all think is going to win, how do you guys feel about the O/U on this one. I was leaning towards U, but now I'm back in the middle

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's not a ton of value, but I like to GAMBOL in the playoffs (especially in a Game 7), and given that I'm doing so, I'm taking Suppan and the Cards over the worst pitcher ever to start a Game 7.

(If you don't have ESPN insider, I'll leave you with this juicy excerpt.)

[ QUOTE ]
Perez is almost certainly the worst pitcher who's ever started a Game 7. There are 94 pitchers in the study. Perez won three games this season, which places him 94th on the list. His winning percentage this season was .188, which is 94th on the list. His career winning percentage is .411, which is 94th on the list. His career ERA is 4.67, which is 93rd on the list.

Umm, did I mention there are 94 pitchers in the study?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

this has to be the most biased excerpt ever.

from the exact same article:

[ QUOTE ]
If you're a Mets fan, I hope you're still reading, because I do have one shiny ray of hope. Remember Perez's 4.67 career ERA, 93rd on the list? Well, Nos. 92 and 94 happen to be occupied by the same pitcher … and that same pitcher happens to be starting for the St. Louis Cardinals tonight. That's right, folks: No. 92 is Jeff Suppan's 4.60 career ERA (through 2006), and No. 94 is Suppan's 4.80 career ERA (through 2004).

[/ QUOTE ]

suppan's career winning percentage was around .450 before he joined the cardinals, if you believe in that sort of thing.

i think the mets aren't going to let perez go out there more than four innings unless he is dominating, and they will pull him at the first sign of trouble, so the damage of a costly blowup will be largely restricted.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wait, so this game has the two worst pitchers ever to start a game seven? OVER!!! [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


Suppan does have game 7 NLCS experience however and it was good. He outdueled Clemens.

Re: Oliver Perez? Are you joking?
 

[ QUOTE ]
i think the mets aren't going to let perez go out there more than four innings unless he is dominating, and they will pull him at the first sign of trouble, so the damage of a costly blowup will be largely restricted.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like under's on Perez's prop bets because of this. Props seemed to be based on a 5-7 inning appearance where I feel he will put in possibly 4 since the entire staff is avail tonight and Traschel will probably get in there.

I don't expect 2 at bats from Perez and only an offensive explosion might have him get 2.