|
|
#12
10-19-2006, 12:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
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. 
|
|
#13
10-19-2006, 01:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#14
10-19-2006, 01:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#15
10-19-2006, 01:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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?
|
|
#17
10-19-2006, 01:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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!
|
|
#18
10-19-2006, 01:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#19
10-19-2006, 01:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 ]
|
|
#20
10-19-2006, 01:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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).
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
