MLB 4/10

[RiverTheNuts]

I put 10 units on Oak -1.5 and 10 on the 9' under

Both look good so far, but the A's need to stop scoring [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[RiverTheNuts]

6-1 A's ... won both sides of the bet, hotness...

YTD: 2-5 (+33 units)

[mrbaseball]

It's quite obvious that we disagree [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] This is good and this is what makes a market and I gotta be honest I like it when I am almost universally disagreed with. If too many people start agreeing with me I figure I've missed something.

[ QUOTE ]
I think Santana is significantly better than Buehrle

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't. I consider "significantly" to be a very strong word. I'd say Santana is significantly better than someone like Jose Lima for example. Buehrle has a lifetime 60% winning percentage. NOBODY is significantly better than that.

[ QUOTE ]
Santana is safely in, Buehrle is not

[/ QUOTE ]

You complain about small samples yet annoint Santana as one of the best ever after really only one full year of starting. But I agree he had one hell of a year and will probably have many more barring injury.

[ QUOTE ]
The last game pitched by both these guys is a small factor of course, and Buehrle has the edge there. But it's a very small factor compared to the others

[/ QUOTE ]

I like current form a lot. As the season wears on performance over the past 3 or 4 starts is the mainstay of my handicapping technique. Current form outweighs a lot of factors in my analysis.

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree with 4 starts being even "sorta significant" - you probably need at least 8 starts to even reach that territory

[/ QUOTE ]

4 was just last season, as I stated earlier he has 8 total starts against Chicago where Twins go 4-4 (ie coinflip territory)

[ QUOTE ]
Even a full year's worth of stats can be greatly influenced by luck,

[/ QUOTE ]

Like Santana's big breakout last season? Okay I don't think it was luck [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] He is a true pitching talent and I was all over this guy years before many really realized how good he was going to be.

But now he has the big name recognition and the big favorite lines that go with it. Based on past performances by both teams and pitchers there is nothing in the history to make Twins -160 favorites tonight. It's a simple too much/too little respect play which happens all the time.

I hope we can learn from each other as the season wears on as we obviously have different approaches. I concentrate on past performance, specific matchup and current form primarily. Oh and most importantly arithmetic [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] While you seem to know a lot about this projection stuff and look at a more abstract type of thing. I'd like to learn more about the sabermetrics or whatever the heck they are called but I could never firgure out how that stuff helped determine how often team A should beat team B.

[craig r]

[ QUOTE ]
Buehrle has a lifetime 60% winning percentage. NOBODY is significantly better than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that winning % is the biggest factor on what makes a good picther, but Pedro is at 70%. I would say that is significantly better than 60%.

And if you do think winning % is a real big deal, if we put Santana on NYY or BOS, do you think he would have a higher than 60% win rate?

craig

[mrbaseball]

I'll give you Pedro. And if you looked Santana does have a greater than 60% winning percentage. Just not the body of work yet.

I've grown tired of this since no one has tried to refute the past history here other than calling it a small sample. I'll just say this, you won't get much edge betting 60% winners lose over 60% of the time. It just doesn't add up, especially since the batter vs pitcher charts for both teams are practically identical and the past performances actually skew to the underdog side.

[TheRover]

Pitcher win totals and winning% are a great way to predict what has already happened.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll give you Pedro. And if you looked Santana does have a greater than 60% winning percentage. Just not the body of work yet.

I've grown tired of this since no one has tried to refute the past history here other than calling it a small sample. I'll just say this, you won't get much edge betting 60% winners lose over 60% of the time. It just doesn't add up, especially since the batter vs pitcher charts for both teams are practically identical and the past performances actually skew to the underdog side.

[/ QUOTE ]

my view is that they are giving a little too much santana credit on the line, but he is a better pitcher than buerhle. He's a good finesse lefty, but santana is power lefty...and I'll take the dominating power guy each time.

[RiverTheNuts]

What do you guys think of over 6.5 K's at -130 by santana??

[Hombre]

With regard to talent I agree with Doug. Johan is far superior. K/9, BB/9, HR/9. I do think that the moneyline on the Sox could be a +EV play and the ml on Johan is more than likely too high. Interesting stat from ESPN.com's fantasy baseball leagues.

Average Draft Position

Johan Santana 7.9
Mark Buehrle 113

I know it's not a great argument but tens of thousands of fans and experts see a huge talent discrepancy.

Hombre

[craig r]

Oh, I would never advocate taking overvalued favorites. In fact, most of my plays are on undervalued underdogs (maybe 5-8% of plays being on favorites...and rarely at -160).

I was arguing that Santana is a better pitcher than Buerhle, not that one or the other was a better bet.