Jump to content

PreserveAWin

How many wins

Recommended Posts


Looking at the schedule, I see that we play the Mariners at Comerica and then go to Oakland and Anaheim. Terrible scheduling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Split the series. Anything other than a sweep will be workable.

If they got swept, it would just be setting the Sox up for the Tigers to give them a beat-down during the playoffs.

:happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Split should be expected imo. The Red Sox are starting Junichi Tazawa on Tuesday and Beckett is pitching on Wednesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sox need to make the playoffs first, the way they are playing right now that is not a definite.

Yes I know, we need to make the playoffs also.

If they got swept, it would just be setting the Sox up for the Tigers to give them a beat-down during the playoffs.

:happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't be happy with anything less than 3 of 4, but I know that probably isn't realistic. I won't be upset with a split. Losing 3 of 4 wouldn't sit well..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than talking about how many wins are necessary to make me feel good about this series, let me try something else.

1. A good performance out of Jackson. He had a few post ASB starts where he got wild and then one where he couldn't put guys away. But then he almost threw a shutout last time out. Not a huge deal, but I'd love to see him for 7 innings of 3 run or fewer ball tomorrow.

2. A good performance out of Verlander. While his start against Baltimore wasn't all bad, he still gave up 5 runs. His start against Minnesota just was not good. I wonder if he was getting overworked a little bit. He threw fewer than 90 last time out, so he should be fine as far as endurance goes.

3. Polanco, Guillen, Granderson, and Cabrera have been murdering the ball lately, and I'd love to see that continue, or at least for all four of those bats to disappear on the road.

That's all.

EDIT - One more: A good start out of Porcello. On the whole since the break, he's been a burden on the bullpen. I'd like to see him last 6 innings against Boston. No easy task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With todays loss, the Red Sox have lost 6 in a row, and I would hate to face a team that just lost more than 5 in a row. So going by that, if I was a Tigers fan I'd settle for a split.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With todays loss, the Red Sox have lost 6 in a row, and I would hate to face a team that just lost more than 5 in a row.

I don't understand this. If a team loses 5 in a row, clearly they're scuffling pretty badly. Boston couldn't score a run to save its life (or division title hopes) this weekend, and people just expect them to walk all over the Tigers, because they're at home and angry? I'd much rather face a team that lost its last 6 rather than won its last 6.

And anyway Leyland is right about momentum: it's only as good as tomorrow's starter. And ours is better than theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand this.

What I was getting at was that they just lost 6 in a row, the more games in a row they lose the lower their probability is that they lose tomorrow, so sooner or later they are going to win again and when they do, a team like the Red Sawks with an explosive offense and a decent collection of arms will probably have no problem getting back on the ball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I was getting at was that they just lost 6 in a row, the more games in a row they lose the lower their probability is that they lose tomorrow, so sooner or later they are going to win again and when they do, a team like the Red Sawks with an explosive offense and a decent collection of arms will probably have no problem getting back on the ball

Oh, so you don't understand math.

EDIT - You're right: sooner or later they are going to win again. But you're wrong: just because they've lost 6 in a row doesn't make them more likely to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, so you don't understand math.

EDIT - You're right: sooner or later they are going to win again. *** ***** ****** **** ******* ******* **** * ** * *** ***** **** ** ****** ** ***.

Whats that second part? My Internets been kicking off lately :wink:

:silly:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I was getting at was that they just lost 6 in a row, the more games in a row they lose the lower their probability is that they lose tomorrow, so sooner or later they are going to win again and when they do, a team like the Red Sawks with an explosive offense and a decent collection of arms will probably have no problem getting back on the ball

To use an analogy, just b/c I got tails 7 times in a row, it does not mean that I am more likely to get heads on my next flip. The odds would still remain the same. Just b/c they have lost 6 in a row does not automatically mean they will win. They still need to hit and pitch better than us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, we get to see Avila twice in this series and Guillen might get his first start in the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prediction of how things will actually go...

Tigers sweep -- There will be at least one thread about a game that Rodney saved, struck out his three outs but gave up a seeing-eye single to Jacoby Ellsbury. We will again debate how comfortable people feel when Fernando takes the hill.

Tigers take 3, but lose last game -- "The Tigers couldn't finish them off and really take command of this division. They're letting Chicago hang around and will pay for it in the end"

Split -- "This team is a bunch of pretenders and won't be in first place in a week" part 45

Red Sox take 3 -- "This team has not shown that they can beat the good teams. They are not true contenders"

Red Sox sweep -- anarchy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To use an analogy, just b/c I got tails 7 times in a row, it does not mean that I am more likely to get heads on my next flip. The odds would still remain the same. Just b/c they have lost 6 in a row does not automatically mean they will win. They still need to hit and pitch better than us.

Not to get all "probability theory" on you, but a coin flip is an independent event from the previous coin flip, whereas 2 consecutive baseball games featuring the same team is hardly independent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to get all "probability theory" on you, but a coin flip is an independent event from the previous coin flip, whereas 2 consecutive baseball games featuring the same team is hardly independent.

I would say the Penny v. Jackson matchup has very little to do with last night's Pettitte/Lester showdown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to get all "probability theory" on you, but a coin flip is an independent event from the previous coin flip, whereas 2 consecutive baseball games featuring the same team is hardly independent.

Right, but if anything, you'd expect the team that lost 6 in a row due to playing bad baseball to keep playing bad baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...