***The OFFICIAL Cardinals vs. Astros NLCS Thread*** - Page 5

Benholio · #41 10-10-2005, 04:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: And, can I suppose, that by your definition of variance, the Cardinals are just on the "positive side" of variance over the last 2 years? LOLOL.

[/ QUOTE ]

HTF do you draw that conclusion from 'my' definition of variance (taken from dictionary.com)? The Cardinals are a good team, and are expected to win more games than most other teams, and they have. An example of the effects of variance would be when clearly inferior teams won 2 of 3 or swept the Cards in a series.

A 7-game series isn't long enough to reduce the effects of variance so that the best teams wins a very high percentage of the time.

The baseball playoffs/world series is won by the most lucky of the good teams each year. It is a crapshoot.

Why am I trying so hard at this? I think I am the sucker trying to explain this crap to you while everyone else sits back and chuckles.

#42 10-10-2005, 04:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: And, can I suppose, that by your definition of variance, the Cardinals are just on the "positive side" of variance over the last 2 years? LOLOL.

[/ QUOTE ]

HTF do you draw that conclusion from 'my' definition of variance (taken from dictionary.com)? The Cardinals are a good team, and are expected to win more games than most other teams, and they have. An example of the effects of variance would be when clearly inferior teams won 2 of 3 or swept the Cards in a series.

A 7-game series isn't long enough to reduce the effects of variance so that the best teams wins a very high percentage of the time.

The baseball playoffs/world series is won by the most lucky of the good teams each year. It is a crapshoot.

Why am I trying so hard at this? I think I am the sucker trying to explain this crap to you while everyone else sits back and chuckles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sir, you simply don't understand. But good luck to whomever you are pulling for!

djj6835 · #43 10-10-2005, 05:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You keep thinking we were better last year. We weren't. Stop thinking that. We're much more well-rounded this year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol, this is the funniest thing I have read yet.

St Louis: 1st int NL in pitching 2nd in NL in runs scored = the definition of well rounded.

Houston: 2nd in NL in pitching and 11th in runs scored = the exact opposite of well rounded

When you have a pitcher with a 1.87 ERA and a 13-8 record, your team is far from well rounded.

#44 10-10-2005, 05:05 PM

Keep thinking that, then post when the series ends: "What happened? How did we lose to that team that "doesn't have Beltran anymore""??

lol. We have the best record in baseball since May 15. We can't help it that we had to let our opening-day rookies settle in for a month-and-a-half.

Clarkmeister · #45 10-10-2005, 05:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
We have the best record in baseball since May 15.

[/ QUOTE ]

Think how much better your record would've been if you hadn't kept losing games to the Cardinals!

djj6835 · #46 10-10-2005, 05:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Keep thinking that, then post when the series ends: "What happened? How did we lose to that team that "doesn't have Beltran anymore""??

lol. We have the best record in baseball since May 15. We can't help it that we had to let our opening-day rookies settle in for a month-and-a-half.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does this have to do with the fact that you stated that you had a well rounded team, when in fact you clearly do not? At least last year you guy were both repectable offensively and at pitching. This year your offense is a joke compared to last years.

djj6835 · #47 10-10-2005, 05:23 PM

I assume you are an astros fans Ksteel so I just have a slightly off topic question.

Did it piss you off as much as it pissed me off to see how much of a big deal the media made of Clemens in game 4. Lance Berkmen hits a grand slam in the 8th, Ausmus hits a game tying HR in the 9th, Brad Lidge and company pitch a great game, and yet all they talked about was CLemens and his pitching out of the pen. Granted I can't stand Roger Clemens, but I was just wondering if even astros fans felt they took a lot of the credit away from the other players.

edit: Forgot to mention Burke hitting the game winner.

Clarkmeister · #48 10-10-2005, 05:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, well too bad Carpenter can't pitch every game.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's funny, I could swear that last year we managed to win 4 playoff games against Houston without him pitching in any of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, you guys beat a guy named PETER MUNRO twice. Good job. And a guy named Rolen helped you do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this has what to do with you claiming we couldn't win 4 games without Carpenter pitching them all when we did it last year without him or Mulder pitching any?

You seem to forget that Rolen was actually a non-factor as he had a terrible postseason. OTOH without Beltran, the Stros may have well lost all 7 games.

#49 10-10-2005, 05:52 PM

Well rounded, we've got speed (Taveras, Burke, Everett).

Power (Berkman, Ensberg, Lane, Biggio)

Defense (Everett, Ensberg (yes, ensberg), Ausmus, Taveras, Lane (yes, Lane).

Pitching...Roger, Roy, Andy, Backe, Wandy, Qualls, Wheeler, Lidge

and a good bench (Vizcaino, Palmeiro, Bagwell, Bruntlett, Scott, Burke).

And a nice mix of youth and experience. That is well rounded, sir.

#50 10-10-2005, 05:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
OTOH without Beltran, the Stros may have well lost all 7 games.

[/ QUOTE ]

This comment takes the cake. Clearly, after 4 losses, they would have allowed STL to advance. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]