Thought I posted this, but I don't see it on the forum.
For those of you who know nothing about MLB, it's fine. You know why? You can just bet the over in every single game. I can remember in years past where there were plenty of 3-1, 3-2, 4-2 games. Those are few and far between this year. The over yesterday was 6-3. Two of the unders barely went under. Every over went over by like 5-8 runs. Tonight? Overall are 11-2. And most aren't even close.
I think a couple things are in play. The balls are juiced. I also think the pitching is just terrible. The starters are bad. And the middle relief is even worse. Most teams can't throw 3 guys in a row without one of them getting hammered. Every game there's at least one team that seems to put up 6+ runs.
I'd like to hear the thoughts of some of the other cappers on this. Maybe just go over on the entire board every night. I'm bewildered by why I see Mets and Nats totals at 8.5 routinely. They should be at 10 or 10.5 I mean it's a joke. Even when the first 5 goes under, there will be a 7 run inning later in the game.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Thought I posted this, but I don't see it on the forum.
For those of you who know nothing about MLB, it's fine. You know why? You can just bet the over in every single game. I can remember in years past where there were plenty of 3-1, 3-2, 4-2 games. Those are few and far between this year. The over yesterday was 6-3. Two of the unders barely went under. Every over went over by like 5-8 runs. Tonight? Overall are 11-2. And most aren't even close.
I think a couple things are in play. The balls are juiced. I also think the pitching is just terrible. The starters are bad. And the middle relief is even worse. Most teams can't throw 3 guys in a row without one of them getting hammered. Every game there's at least one team that seems to put up 6+ runs.
I'd like to hear the thoughts of some of the other cappers on this. Maybe just go over on the entire board every night. I'm bewildered by why I see Mets and Nats totals at 8.5 routinely. They should be at 10 or 10.5 I mean it's a joke. Even when the first 5 goes under, there will be a 7 run inning later in the game.
I don´t play team totals but to give you in depth feedback, but Im well aware that there has been a tendency towards the over and most is due to the mid/lateish (3-8) where teams are giving up loads of runs. Home runs have increased this season so that backs up your point. However, books have been adjusting, now lets hope they over-adjust :)
0
I don´t play team totals but to give you in depth feedback, but Im well aware that there has been a tendency towards the over and most is due to the mid/lateish (3-8) where teams are giving up loads of runs. Home runs have increased this season so that backs up your point. However, books have been adjusting, now lets hope they over-adjust :)
I love how you pretentiously started your post with, "For those of you who know nothing about MLB...." then proceeded to craft a post that makes it seem like you've been living in a freakin' fallout shelter. All of the things you've mentioned, increased runs, juiced balls, poor pitching, ect. have been covered in this forum for, what, the last three years or so? You also failed to mention "launch trajectory swings" which was the "it" term a few years ago and now rarely is even mentioned because it's now just a part of baseball. Everyone is now so used to them that it doesn't even warrant mention anymore. There are other theories of factors contributing to the influx of runs that have been kicked around as well. I have a theory or two of my own but basically what i'm saying is you can't blindly call out people for not knowing the MLB and then proceed to demonstrate that you don't know today's MLB, Rip Van Winkel.
In case you have missed it, the Cubbies finally won one. Trump is now President. Tom Brady has played in 3 more Super Bowls, winning two. He's coming back for another season. Oh, Lebron James is a Laker. Las Vegas has a hockey team and their getting the Raiders. The Rams are back in LA. The Chargers are there too, except seems to keep calling them San Diego. I know I do. Duke is still good in hoops but the Red Raiders are champs. (I know, right?!) Alabama is still really good in football but so is Clemson. They've got a QB that looks even better than Deshaun Watson. You might even know who that is. Not sure how long you were down. Oh, and half the Avengers got wiped out but I guess maybe they are back again? Not sure. I'm not really crazy about the comic book movies.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
I love how you pretentiously started your post with, "For those of you who know nothing about MLB...." then proceeded to craft a post that makes it seem like you've been living in a freakin' fallout shelter. All of the things you've mentioned, increased runs, juiced balls, poor pitching, ect. have been covered in this forum for, what, the last three years or so? You also failed to mention "launch trajectory swings" which was the "it" term a few years ago and now rarely is even mentioned because it's now just a part of baseball. Everyone is now so used to them that it doesn't even warrant mention anymore. There are other theories of factors contributing to the influx of runs that have been kicked around as well. I have a theory or two of my own but basically what i'm saying is you can't blindly call out people for not knowing the MLB and then proceed to demonstrate that you don't know today's MLB, Rip Van Winkel.
In case you have missed it, the Cubbies finally won one. Trump is now President. Tom Brady has played in 3 more Super Bowls, winning two. He's coming back for another season. Oh, Lebron James is a Laker. Las Vegas has a hockey team and their getting the Raiders. The Rams are back in LA. The Chargers are there too, except seems to keep calling them San Diego. I know I do. Duke is still good in hoops but the Red Raiders are champs. (I know, right?!) Alabama is still really good in football but so is Clemson. They've got a QB that looks even better than Deshaun Watson. You might even know who that is. Not sure how long you were down. Oh, and half the Avengers got wiped out but I guess maybe they are back again? Not sure. I'm not really crazy about the comic book movies.
First of all, you have no sense of humor. I was making a joke. Like you can know nothing about MLB and bet the over every game this year and win. I'm being sarcastic. Well partly sarcastic. You'd be 17-5 the last few days. And you know what, I don't think I can ever recall a time this year with that type of a stretch for unders. There are just a lot more runs in these games.
For what it's worth though, I know a lot more about MLB than you probably do. No offense. I've watched this stuff for a long time. And there are tons of fine details I think about when picking games that most people don't think about like the reversion to the mean, knowing when guys are due to get rocked or due for a good outing, knowing the makeup of a lineup and the size of the ballpark versus the type of pitcher they're up against (like the Dodgers have 4 lefties in their lineup and they are much more potent against right handed pitchers than left handed pitchers), understanding who has the better bullpen, understanding how to implement bet types like whether you should just bet a side or if it's smarter to bet over a team total or if it's smarter to go run line for the first 5 innings. I could go on and on.
But this post isn't about that. The question is there inferior pitching or superior hitting. I really have no idea. I will say this. I think the command from a lot of pitchers is just awful. They'll get strikeouts, but their misses are turning into homers way too often. Look at Gerrit Cole. On pace to break the strikeout record. Why the hell is his ERA at 3.60? It should be 2.00. Because when guys actually make contact it's very solid contact and often home runs.
Statistically everyone else other than the Dodgers and Cubs has either garbage starting pitching or garbage relievers or both. The Giants comically have 5 of the better relievers in that entire division but the rest of the team is so bad it doesn't matter because they never have a lead to hold.
If you're betting an under, you have to do it for the first 5 innings. I don't hardly ever see a total go over for the first 5 and under for the game, but vice versa happens routinely.
0
First of all, you have no sense of humor. I was making a joke. Like you can know nothing about MLB and bet the over every game this year and win. I'm being sarcastic. Well partly sarcastic. You'd be 17-5 the last few days. And you know what, I don't think I can ever recall a time this year with that type of a stretch for unders. There are just a lot more runs in these games.
For what it's worth though, I know a lot more about MLB than you probably do. No offense. I've watched this stuff for a long time. And there are tons of fine details I think about when picking games that most people don't think about like the reversion to the mean, knowing when guys are due to get rocked or due for a good outing, knowing the makeup of a lineup and the size of the ballpark versus the type of pitcher they're up against (like the Dodgers have 4 lefties in their lineup and they are much more potent against right handed pitchers than left handed pitchers), understanding who has the better bullpen, understanding how to implement bet types like whether you should just bet a side or if it's smarter to bet over a team total or if it's smarter to go run line for the first 5 innings. I could go on and on.
But this post isn't about that. The question is there inferior pitching or superior hitting. I really have no idea. I will say this. I think the command from a lot of pitchers is just awful. They'll get strikeouts, but their misses are turning into homers way too often. Look at Gerrit Cole. On pace to break the strikeout record. Why the hell is his ERA at 3.60? It should be 2.00. Because when guys actually make contact it's very solid contact and often home runs.
Statistically everyone else other than the Dodgers and Cubs has either garbage starting pitching or garbage relievers or both. The Giants comically have 5 of the better relievers in that entire division but the rest of the team is so bad it doesn't matter because they never have a lead to hold.
If you're betting an under, you have to do it for the first 5 innings. I don't hardly ever see a total go over for the first 5 and under for the game, but vice versa happens routinely.
I actually just saw that home runs are up 12% from last year. And in the minor leagues - get this - they're up 47% in the Pacific Coast league and this is the first year they've implemented using major league baseballs. Pretty much 100% evidence right there that the ball is juiced. But the comical part is that it was juiced last year. Apparently that wasn't enough? The home run rate was like 0.85 4 years ago and 1.15 last year and 1.30 this year. It's overall a joke. I think what's probably happening is that not only is it way easier to hit home runs, but that psychologically it's getting in the heads of a lot of pitchers and they tighten up and make more mistakes. Because all this launch angle stuff came into play a few years ago and the home run rate was around 1 or lower and now it's at 1.30. In order for there to be that big a difference when stylistically things haven't changed the last 2-3 years there basically has to be a juiced ball.
I'm starting to think MLB panicked when all these guys came in throwing 97 98 mph and they thought they have to mess with the ball to make it easier to score. Batting averages are down, but more runs are being scored because any time it's put in play now it seems to go over the fence. Personally, I think it's a shame. And I find that many of these pitchers have control issues. I don't think you need to juice the balls to get runs. Look at Odorizzi, Ryu, even Morton. None of those guys throw hard. Morton can get up around 96, but that's nothing crazy. They just have good offspeed stuff and command.
Guess I just have to adjust as a bettor. It used to be easy to pinpoint low scoring games and that was something I always looked to do when looking at an MLB card. But for the time being it's pretty much you bet the over whether it's a team total or or both teams, the side, or not at all. I'm retiring from betting unders
0
I actually just saw that home runs are up 12% from last year. And in the minor leagues - get this - they're up 47% in the Pacific Coast league and this is the first year they've implemented using major league baseballs. Pretty much 100% evidence right there that the ball is juiced. But the comical part is that it was juiced last year. Apparently that wasn't enough? The home run rate was like 0.85 4 years ago and 1.15 last year and 1.30 this year. It's overall a joke. I think what's probably happening is that not only is it way easier to hit home runs, but that psychologically it's getting in the heads of a lot of pitchers and they tighten up and make more mistakes. Because all this launch angle stuff came into play a few years ago and the home run rate was around 1 or lower and now it's at 1.30. In order for there to be that big a difference when stylistically things haven't changed the last 2-3 years there basically has to be a juiced ball.
I'm starting to think MLB panicked when all these guys came in throwing 97 98 mph and they thought they have to mess with the ball to make it easier to score. Batting averages are down, but more runs are being scored because any time it's put in play now it seems to go over the fence. Personally, I think it's a shame. And I find that many of these pitchers have control issues. I don't think you need to juice the balls to get runs. Look at Odorizzi, Ryu, even Morton. None of those guys throw hard. Morton can get up around 96, but that's nothing crazy. They just have good offspeed stuff and command.
Guess I just have to adjust as a bettor. It used to be easy to pinpoint low scoring games and that was something I always looked to do when looking at an MLB card. But for the time being it's pretty much you bet the over whether it's a team total or or both teams, the side, or not at all. I'm retiring from betting unders
I actually just saw that home runs are up 12% from last year. And in the minor leagues - get this - they're up 47% in the Pacific Coast league and this is the first year they've implemented using major league baseballs. Pretty much 100% evidence right there that the ball is juiced. But the comical part is that it was juiced last year. Apparently that wasn't enough? The home run rate was like 0.85 4 years ago and 1.15 last year and 1.30 this year. It's overall a joke. I think what's probably happening is that not only is it way easier to hit home runs, but that psychologically it's getting in the heads of a lot of pitchers and they tighten up and make more mistakes. Because all this launch angle stuff came into play a few years ago and the home run rate was around 1 or lower and now it's at 1.30. In order for there to be that big a difference when stylistically things haven't changed the last 2-3 years there basically has to be a juiced ball.
I'm starting to think MLB panicked when all these guys came in throwing 97 98 mph and they thought they have to mess with the ball to make it easier to score. Batting averages are down, but more runs are being scored because any time it's put in play now it seems to go over the fence. Personally, I think it's a shame. And I find that many of these pitchers have control issues. I don't think you need to juice the balls to get runs. Look at Odorizzi, Ryu, even Morton. None of those guys throw hard. Morton can get up around 96, but that's nothing crazy. They just have good offspeed stuff and command.
Guess I just have to adjust as a bettor. It used to be easy to pinpoint low scoring games and that was something I always looked to do when looking at an MLB card. But for the time being it's pretty much you bet the over whether it's a team total or or both teams, the side, or not at all. I'm retiring from betting unders
used to love betting unders. i just won't do it anymore. not even worth the hassle, man. i hadn't bet an under in months. bet seattle vs minny under last week under 10. 1-1 going into the sixth. between the 6th and 7th, seattle gave up 9 runs. this was a nice reality check to remind me not to bet unders again. i'm really beginning to believe the juiced balls only come in for the pen. maybe because they have less time to handle the balls? last year, a ton of starters were suffering blisters and finger injuries. this year, not so much. maybe they figured out the length of pitching juiced balls, or balls wound tighter, would only work for short periods of time without injury. who knows? but i do know, don't bet unders
No team is as good as it looks when winning nor are they as bad as they look when losing
0
Quote Originally Posted by fluffybucker69:
I actually just saw that home runs are up 12% from last year. And in the minor leagues - get this - they're up 47% in the Pacific Coast league and this is the first year they've implemented using major league baseballs. Pretty much 100% evidence right there that the ball is juiced. But the comical part is that it was juiced last year. Apparently that wasn't enough? The home run rate was like 0.85 4 years ago and 1.15 last year and 1.30 this year. It's overall a joke. I think what's probably happening is that not only is it way easier to hit home runs, but that psychologically it's getting in the heads of a lot of pitchers and they tighten up and make more mistakes. Because all this launch angle stuff came into play a few years ago and the home run rate was around 1 or lower and now it's at 1.30. In order for there to be that big a difference when stylistically things haven't changed the last 2-3 years there basically has to be a juiced ball.
I'm starting to think MLB panicked when all these guys came in throwing 97 98 mph and they thought they have to mess with the ball to make it easier to score. Batting averages are down, but more runs are being scored because any time it's put in play now it seems to go over the fence. Personally, I think it's a shame. And I find that many of these pitchers have control issues. I don't think you need to juice the balls to get runs. Look at Odorizzi, Ryu, even Morton. None of those guys throw hard. Morton can get up around 96, but that's nothing crazy. They just have good offspeed stuff and command.
Guess I just have to adjust as a bettor. It used to be easy to pinpoint low scoring games and that was something I always looked to do when looking at an MLB card. But for the time being it's pretty much you bet the over whether it's a team total or or both teams, the side, or not at all. I'm retiring from betting unders
used to love betting unders. i just won't do it anymore. not even worth the hassle, man. i hadn't bet an under in months. bet seattle vs minny under last week under 10. 1-1 going into the sixth. between the 6th and 7th, seattle gave up 9 runs. this was a nice reality check to remind me not to bet unders again. i'm really beginning to believe the juiced balls only come in for the pen. maybe because they have less time to handle the balls? last year, a ton of starters were suffering blisters and finger injuries. this year, not so much. maybe they figured out the length of pitching juiced balls, or balls wound tighter, would only work for short periods of time without injury. who knows? but i do know, don't bet unders
used to love betting unders. i just won't do it anymore. not even worth the hassle, man. i hadn't bet an under in months. bet seattle vs minny under last week under 10. 1-1 going into the sixth. between the 6th and 7th, seattle gave up 9 runs. this was a nice reality check to remind me not to bet unders again. i'm really beginning to believe the juiced balls only come in for the pen. maybe because they have less time to handle the balls? last year, a ton of starters were suffering blisters and finger injuries. this year, not so much. maybe they figured out the length of pitching juiced balls, or balls wound tighter, would only work for short periods of time without injury. who knows? but i do know, don't bet unders
ODB's post sums it up well. I won't bet unders any longer either.
Helping Kama'aina to beat their " Local " since 1994.
0
Quote Originally Posted by OlDirtyBaztid:
used to love betting unders. i just won't do it anymore. not even worth the hassle, man. i hadn't bet an under in months. bet seattle vs minny under last week under 10. 1-1 going into the sixth. between the 6th and 7th, seattle gave up 9 runs. this was a nice reality check to remind me not to bet unders again. i'm really beginning to believe the juiced balls only come in for the pen. maybe because they have less time to handle the balls? last year, a ton of starters were suffering blisters and finger injuries. this year, not so much. maybe they figured out the length of pitching juiced balls, or balls wound tighter, would only work for short periods of time without injury. who knows? but i do know, don't bet unders
ODB's post sums it up well. I won't bet unders any longer either.
I appreciate this thread. It is a textbook example of why the books are boosting the totals, because the people (you) have no faith in unders and will literally throw money at the overs. By the end of the year overs/unders will be about 50/50, like they always are, but millions of bucks will have gone down the toilet because of public perception. Thank you, and stop whining about the two teams you had figured for 12 runs only scoring 4 or 5. The opportunity is not there on every game, but 5 inning unders are a potential gold mine. The 5 inning line is based on the full game line and those totals are based on bad bullpens and starters facing the preferred batting order 3 times.
Just don't forget, the books will raise the numbers as far as they have to in order to balance the results (money), or let the sharps make money on the under while the public (you) flush money down the toilet on overs. That's how it works, public perception, not reality.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
0
I appreciate this thread. It is a textbook example of why the books are boosting the totals, because the people (you) have no faith in unders and will literally throw money at the overs. By the end of the year overs/unders will be about 50/50, like they always are, but millions of bucks will have gone down the toilet because of public perception. Thank you, and stop whining about the two teams you had figured for 12 runs only scoring 4 or 5. The opportunity is not there on every game, but 5 inning unders are a potential gold mine. The 5 inning line is based on the full game line and those totals are based on bad bullpens and starters facing the preferred batting order 3 times.
Just don't forget, the books will raise the numbers as far as they have to in order to balance the results (money), or let the sharps make money on the under while the public (you) flush money down the toilet on overs. That's how it works, public perception, not reality.
I think the ball is juiced but that pitching has definited regressed. Most of these starters would've been long relief guys 10 years ago. There aren't really any quality long relief guys left and most of the bullpen guys would be in the minors. I think one thing that is never covered is how moving away from the PED era has affected pitching. We hear PEDs, we automatically think batters, homeruns, ect. but there were just as many pitchers using. Also, maybe there's a lack of developmenr. These guys can't seem to hit a spot no matter how hard they're throwing and when they miss, with everyone swinging for the fences, balls are finding seats. Hitters are no better. Homeruns are up but so are Ks. Averages are down. It's the movement to analytics. "Swing for the porch and you'll strike out more but score more runs". It's like the Houston Rockets shooting 3pt shots. It sucks as a fan i'd take a 2-1 game with the winning run having to be manufactured anyday. Teams aren't manufacturing runs anymore though.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
I think the ball is juiced but that pitching has definited regressed. Most of these starters would've been long relief guys 10 years ago. There aren't really any quality long relief guys left and most of the bullpen guys would be in the minors. I think one thing that is never covered is how moving away from the PED era has affected pitching. We hear PEDs, we automatically think batters, homeruns, ect. but there were just as many pitchers using. Also, maybe there's a lack of developmenr. These guys can't seem to hit a spot no matter how hard they're throwing and when they miss, with everyone swinging for the fences, balls are finding seats. Hitters are no better. Homeruns are up but so are Ks. Averages are down. It's the movement to analytics. "Swing for the porch and you'll strike out more but score more runs". It's like the Houston Rockets shooting 3pt shots. It sucks as a fan i'd take a 2-1 game with the winning run having to be manufactured anyday. Teams aren't manufacturing runs anymore though.
Books adjust every day in accordance with public perception , that's the way it is. It is a bettors job to find value if it is present at the price offered.
Those who know and understand " Value " in a wager will always be able to find it ...... if a value exists at all.
Those who don't know how to find value in a wager , will continue to complain.
Helping Kama'aina to beat their " Local " since 1994.
0
Books adjust every day in accordance with public perception , that's the way it is. It is a bettors job to find value if it is present at the price offered.
Those who know and understand " Value " in a wager will always be able to find it ...... if a value exists at all.
Those who don't know how to find value in a wager , will continue to complain.
I think the ball is juiced but that pitching has definited regressed. Most of these starters would've been long relief guys 10 years ago. There aren't really any quality long relief guys left and most of the bullpen guys would be in the minors. I think one thing that is never covered is how moving away from the PED era has affected pitching. We hear PEDs, we automatically think batters, homeruns, ect. but there were just as many pitchers using. Also, maybe there's a lack of developmenr. These guys can't seem to hit a spot no matter how hard they're throwing and when they miss, with everyone swinging for the fences, balls are finding seats. Hitters are no better. Homeruns are up but so are Ks. Averages are down. It's the movement to analytics. "Swing for the porch and you'll strike out more but score more runs". It's like the Houston Rockets shooting 3pt shots. It sucks as a fan i'd take a 2-1 game with the winning run having to be manufactured anyday. Teams aren't manufacturing runs anymore though.
Exactly. Remember when a pitcher being brought up from the minors was damn near auto fade? I don’t know if you e noticed, but the less data these guys have on pitchers, the more trouble they have to hit them. I know Chavez for the rangers wasn’t brought up but there was no data. Look what happened to the reds. How about the cubs nearly getting falling victim to a no no, at home, against that Rockies rookie, who damn near pitched a complete game shut out his first time pitching in the mlb? It’s wild. To reference wiseguy with value, it’s almost like the most value in these instances is pitchers with no history against teams
No team is as good as it looks when winning nor are they as bad as they look when losing
0
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
I think the ball is juiced but that pitching has definited regressed. Most of these starters would've been long relief guys 10 years ago. There aren't really any quality long relief guys left and most of the bullpen guys would be in the minors. I think one thing that is never covered is how moving away from the PED era has affected pitching. We hear PEDs, we automatically think batters, homeruns, ect. but there were just as many pitchers using. Also, maybe there's a lack of developmenr. These guys can't seem to hit a spot no matter how hard they're throwing and when they miss, with everyone swinging for the fences, balls are finding seats. Hitters are no better. Homeruns are up but so are Ks. Averages are down. It's the movement to analytics. "Swing for the porch and you'll strike out more but score more runs". It's like the Houston Rockets shooting 3pt shots. It sucks as a fan i'd take a 2-1 game with the winning run having to be manufactured anyday. Teams aren't manufacturing runs anymore though.
Exactly. Remember when a pitcher being brought up from the minors was damn near auto fade? I don’t know if you e noticed, but the less data these guys have on pitchers, the more trouble they have to hit them. I know Chavez for the rangers wasn’t brought up but there was no data. Look what happened to the reds. How about the cubs nearly getting falling victim to a no no, at home, against that Rockies rookie, who damn near pitched a complete game shut out his first time pitching in the mlb? It’s wild. To reference wiseguy with value, it’s almost like the most value in these instances is pitchers with no history against teams
Grand salami under anyone? Remember when I found that one a Sunday after a full week of overs obliterated the books?
A couple extra tidbits...
Last year was the first year that strikeouts exceeded hits. This year it will happen again.
In 2015 the stat cast technology was introduced.
After the 2015 all-star break, the "new ball" was introduced. Coincidence?
Lastly, but most importantly, love your pitchers. Remember that good pitching will always beat good hitting. No matter what era or how things change it will always hold true.
0
Excellent posts. Damn good ones.
Grand salami under anyone? Remember when I found that one a Sunday after a full week of overs obliterated the books?
A couple extra tidbits...
Last year was the first year that strikeouts exceeded hits. This year it will happen again.
In 2015 the stat cast technology was introduced.
After the 2015 all-star break, the "new ball" was introduced. Coincidence?
Lastly, but most importantly, love your pitchers. Remember that good pitching will always beat good hitting. No matter what era or how things change it will always hold true.
I think the ball is juiced but that pitching has definited regressed. Most of these starters would've been long relief guys 10 years ago. There aren't really any quality long relief guys left and most of the bullpen guys would be in the minors. I think one thing that is never covered is how moving away from the PED era has affected pitching. We hear PEDs, we automatically think batters, homeruns, ect. but there were just as many pitchers using. Also, maybe there's a lack of developmenr. These guys can't seem to hit a spot no matter how hard they're throwing and when they miss, with everyone swinging for the fences, balls are finding seats. Hitters are no better. Homeruns are up but so are Ks. Averages are down. It's the movement to analytics. "Swing for the porch and you'll strike out more but score more runs". It's like the Houston Rockets shooting 3pt shots. It sucks as a fan i'd take a 2-1 game with the winning run having to be manufactured anyday. Teams aren't manufacturing runs anymore though.
Exactly. Remember when a pitcher being brought up from the minors was damn near auto fade? I don’t know if you e noticed, but the less data these guys have on pitchers, the more trouble they have to hit them. I know Chavez for the rangers wasn’t brought up but there was no data. Look what happened to the reds. How about the cubs nearly getting falling victim to a no no, at home, against that Rockies rookie, who damn near pitched a complete game shut out his first time pitching in the mlb? It’s wild. To reference wiseguy with value, it’s almost like the most value in these instances is pitchers with no history against teams
Chaves has been around forever. We had season tickets when he was in Oakland. Has always shown flashes but that flash usually remains in the pan. There's no rhyme or reason anymore to any of it. You have to really delve into it and find the advantages in each individual situation.
"Love, love will tear us apart again."
0
Quote Originally Posted by OlDirtyBaztid:
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
I think the ball is juiced but that pitching has definited regressed. Most of these starters would've been long relief guys 10 years ago. There aren't really any quality long relief guys left and most of the bullpen guys would be in the minors. I think one thing that is never covered is how moving away from the PED era has affected pitching. We hear PEDs, we automatically think batters, homeruns, ect. but there were just as many pitchers using. Also, maybe there's a lack of developmenr. These guys can't seem to hit a spot no matter how hard they're throwing and when they miss, with everyone swinging for the fences, balls are finding seats. Hitters are no better. Homeruns are up but so are Ks. Averages are down. It's the movement to analytics. "Swing for the porch and you'll strike out more but score more runs". It's like the Houston Rockets shooting 3pt shots. It sucks as a fan i'd take a 2-1 game with the winning run having to be manufactured anyday. Teams aren't manufacturing runs anymore though.
Exactly. Remember when a pitcher being brought up from the minors was damn near auto fade? I don’t know if you e noticed, but the less data these guys have on pitchers, the more trouble they have to hit them. I know Chavez for the rangers wasn’t brought up but there was no data. Look what happened to the reds. How about the cubs nearly getting falling victim to a no no, at home, against that Rockies rookie, who damn near pitched a complete game shut out his first time pitching in the mlb? It’s wild. To reference wiseguy with value, it’s almost like the most value in these instances is pitchers with no history against teams
Chaves has been around forever. We had season tickets when he was in Oakland. Has always shown flashes but that flash usually remains in the pan. There's no rhyme or reason anymore to any of it. You have to really delve into it and find the advantages in each individual situation.
Exactly. Remember when a pitcher being brought up from the minors was damn near auto fade? I don’t know if you e noticed, but the less data these guys have on pitchers, the more trouble they have to hit them. I know Chavez for the rangers wasn’t brought up but there was no data. Look what happened to the reds. How about the cubs nearly getting falling victim to a no no, at home, against that Rockies rookie, who damn near pitched a complete game shut out his first time pitching in the mlb? It’s wild. To reference wiseguy with value, it’s almost like the most value in these instances is pitchers with no history against teams
Chaves has been around forever. We had season tickets when he was in Oakland. Has always shown flashes but that flash usually remains in the pan. There's no rhyme or reason anymore to any of it. You have to really delve into it and find the advantages in each individual situation.
This is directly to my point . Thanks
Helping Kama'aina to beat their " Local " since 1994.
0
Quote Originally Posted by StumpTownStu:
Exactly. Remember when a pitcher being brought up from the minors was damn near auto fade? I don’t know if you e noticed, but the less data these guys have on pitchers, the more trouble they have to hit them. I know Chavez for the rangers wasn’t brought up but there was no data. Look what happened to the reds. How about the cubs nearly getting falling victim to a no no, at home, against that Rockies rookie, who damn near pitched a complete game shut out his first time pitching in the mlb? It’s wild. To reference wiseguy with value, it’s almost like the most value in these instances is pitchers with no history against teams
Chaves has been around forever. We had season tickets when he was in Oakland. Has always shown flashes but that flash usually remains in the pan. There's no rhyme or reason anymore to any of it. You have to really delve into it and find the advantages in each individual situation.
Wondering if wind & temperature have influence on totalsone would have to think wind definitely makes impact !
I would have to rebuttal with the type of pitcher. If you got a guy like hamels who is a ground ball pitcher, you could set the line to 7 with wind blowing out and it still wouldn’t matter... until that bullpen comes in. Archer? Absolutely matters
No team is as good as it looks when winning nor are they as bad as they look when losing
0
Quote Originally Posted by Wizz_KIDD35:
Wondering if wind & temperature have influence on totalsone would have to think wind definitely makes impact !
I would have to rebuttal with the type of pitcher. If you got a guy like hamels who is a ground ball pitcher, you could set the line to 7 with wind blowing out and it still wouldn’t matter... until that bullpen comes in. Archer? Absolutely matters
Yes, and with all the talk about the new ball. I won’t say juiced, It is less wind resistant, meaning a flatter surface. It is easy to understand, for a pitcher. Today’s ball feels like a lacrosse ball to me. Smooth flat and tight. Less wind resistance is why upper 90’s fastballs are moving less, subsequent getting hit more and traveling further. Interesting that those pitchers, who are not throwing hard, but changing speeds, locating and utilizing finger pressure for movement are the ones showing more success. How else would one explain Vargas for the Mets. Completely different pitcher from a year ago. This guy may never break 87, but look at his ERA over the last 3, 4 , 5 starts. Can’t not for the life of me understand how he has produced the starts he has, but maybe I just explained that above.
Earning that second highest salary behind de grom, baby!! When familia gonna play up to his pay grade?
No team is as good as it looks when winning nor are they as bad as they look when losing
0
Quote Originally Posted by Unclebenelli:
Yes, and with all the talk about the new ball. I won’t say juiced, It is less wind resistant, meaning a flatter surface. It is easy to understand, for a pitcher. Today’s ball feels like a lacrosse ball to me. Smooth flat and tight. Less wind resistance is why upper 90’s fastballs are moving less, subsequent getting hit more and traveling further. Interesting that those pitchers, who are not throwing hard, but changing speeds, locating and utilizing finger pressure for movement are the ones showing more success. How else would one explain Vargas for the Mets. Completely different pitcher from a year ago. This guy may never break 87, but look at his ERA over the last 3, 4 , 5 starts. Can’t not for the life of me understand how he has produced the starts he has, but maybe I just explained that above.
Earning that second highest salary behind de grom, baby!! When familia gonna play up to his pay grade?
There are still some nice spots to find some Unders. I've been riding the Cincinnati Reds Unders for a week or so now - 10 in a row Under and they are 23-42-2 Under Overall.
0
There are still some nice spots to find some Unders. I've been riding the Cincinnati Reds Unders for a week or so now - 10 in a row Under and they are 23-42-2 Under Overall.
David Price came out this year and said there is no doubt the balls are juiced for views. He said that swings and contact he saw years prior was flyball. Now the those same swings and contact are going over the fence. And opposite field on top of that. There is way to many Homeruns this year that's why a lot of games are going over.
0
David Price came out this year and said there is no doubt the balls are juiced for views. He said that swings and contact he saw years prior was flyball. Now the those same swings and contact are going over the fence. And opposite field on top of that. There is way to many Homeruns this year that's why a lot of games are going over.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
one would have to think wind definitely makes impact 
!
Hot Forum Topics
