Master Index of Archived Threads


I can't standings the standings

batmagadanleadoff Aug 29 2010 05:26 PM

The Mets pick up a game on the Cards, Dodgers and Marlins. They are a combined, or net, 25 games behind the six teams ahead of them in the race for the Wild Card. The Silver Lining: More than half of the Mets remaining 32 games are against the dregs of the NL: Four games against the Pirates, four more against the Brewers; six against the Nats and three against the Cubs. The Downside: Two out of every three won't cut it. With 32 games remaining, the Mets probably cannot lose more than six or seven games if they are to qualify. The Crucial: Six against the Phillies. Anything less than 5 out of 6 wins will probably hurt the cause more than help, given the ground that the Mets must make up in less than five weeks.

Edgy DC Aug 29 2010 06:18 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

It may be as edifying to check the division standings, where their net defecit is 18.5 games. That could change bigly one way or the other over this next series, but it's still a smaller number. What means a lot of beans in the Wild Card is to put Florida and LA behind them as soon as possible, so these teams can effectively become Mets allies.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 29 2010 07:07 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

Edgy DC wrote: It may be as edifying to check the division standings, where their net defecit is 18.5 games. That could change bigly one way or the other over this next series, but it's still a smaller number. Get back to me on Thursday ... if the Mets win their next four.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2010 12:15 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

It may be as edifying to check the division standings, where their net defecit is 18.5 games. That could change bigly one way or the other over this next series, but it's still a smaller number. Get back to me on Thursday ... if the Mets win their next four. I place a greater emphasis on the traditional way of analyzing the Mets "games behind" by focusing on the number of games the Mets trail the team at the top of the heap. Thus, for example, I think that the Mets would have a better chance of winning a Wild Card race where they trailed four different teams by five games each (20 net GB), than capturing a division crown where they were in second place in their division, but 18 games behind the leader (18 net GB). Anyway, this conversation will likely be academic in about two weeks. The damage was done. The team needed Reyes and Beltran not only to return, but to play like All-Stars. They didn't and nobody stepped up to fill in. Reyes was an all-star for about four weeks and Beltran's worse than Frenchy. Imagine that: It's bad enough that Frenchy plays almost every day, but there's now another every-day outfielder on the team who's even worse! I'd go on but what could I write that nobody here doesn't already know? OT: Anybody catch the New York Mets pennant in tonight's episode of Mad Men?

G-Fafif Aug 30 2010 01:55 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Anybody catch the New York Mets pennant in tonight's episode of Mad Men? I don't think I've ever resorted to this before, but I did, and my reaction was...SQUEE! Third Mets reference in the last three seasons. The other two were Ken Cosgrove going to games (in 1962 and 1963). I'm thinking Lane (in whose office the period-appropriate pennant hung) and Ken headed out to Shea (in 1965) to discuss Ken's coming over to the firm. They may even have hammered out the details at the Diamond Club. Best Drama indeed.

Edgy DC Aug 30 2010 05:40 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I place a greater emphasis on the traditional way of analyzing the Mets "games behind" by focusing on the number of games the Mets trail the team at the top of the heap. Thus, for example, I think that the Mets would have a better chance of winning a Wild Card race where they trailed four different teams by five games each (20 net GB), than capturing a division crown where they were in second place in their division, but 18 games behind the leader (18 net GB). I think maybe you're right, at least in the second sentence. In the first scenario you describe, the Mets' opponents have to lose 20 games and the Mets win five --- 25 positive outcomes. In the latter scenario, 36 positive outcomes are necessary to reach first.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 30 2010 08:47 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

It may be as edifying to check the division standings, where their net defecit is 18.5 games. That could change bigly one way or the other over this next series, but it's still a smaller number. Get back to me on Thursday ... if the Mets win their next four. I place a greater emphasis on the traditional way of analyzing the Mets "games behind" by focusing on the number of games the Mets trail the team at the top of the heap. Thus, for example, I think that the Mets would have a better chance of winning a Wild Card race where they trailed four different teams by five games each (20 net GB), than capturing a division crown where they were in second place in their division, but 18 games behind the leader (18 net GB). Anyway, this conversation will likely be academic in about two weeks. The damage was done. The team needed Reyes and Beltran not only to return, but to play like All-Stars. They didn't and nobody stepped up to fill in. Reyes was an all-star for about four weeks and Beltran's worse than Frenchy. Imagine that: It's bad enough that Frenchy plays almost every day, but there's now another every-day outfielder on the team who's even worse! I'd go on but what could I write that nobody here doesn't already know? OT: Anybody catch the New York Mets pennant in tonight's episode of Mad Men? According to Baseball Prospectus, and before tonight's loss to the Braves, the Mets chances of winning the NL Wild Card were almost three times better than their chances of winning their division. The odds at the start of play today were: Mets winning the NL East: 0.11% (about one in a thousand) Mets winning the NL Wild Card: 0.29%

Rockin' Doc Aug 31 2010 10:26 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

batmagadanleadoff wrote: According to Baseball Prospectus, and before tonight's loss to the Braves, the Mets chances of winning the NL Wild Card were almost three times better than their chances of winning their division. The odds at the start of play today were: Mets winning the NL East: 0.11% (about one in a thousand) Mets winning the NL Wild Card: 0.29% Also known as slim and none.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 31 2010 10:48 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

According to Baseball Prospectus, and before tonight's loss to the Braves, the Mets chances of winning the NL Wild Card were almost three times better than their chances of winning their division. The odds at the start of play today were: Mets winning the NL East: 0.11% (about one in a thousand) Mets winning the NL Wild Card: 0.29% Also known as slim and none. I know. This conversation reminds me of the scene where the Sundance Kid is worried about jumping hundreds of feet into shallow waters mostly because he can't swim. Baseball Prospectus reduced the Mets odds of winning the East by about half, to .05% (five in ten-thousand). Their odds of winning the Wild Card are about the same as yesterday (0.2933%), despite losing to the Braves last night. (The top three teams also lost last night). According to BP, the Mets chances of winning the Wild Card are now about six times better than their chances of winning their division.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 31 2010 03:23 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

Odds: 345:1 Mets winning the 2010 NL Wild Card (BP) 563:1 Catching a ball at a major league ballgame 4,464:1 Injury from using a chain saw 11,500:1 Winning an Academy Award 22,000:1 Becoming a professional aathlete 88,000:1 Dating a supermodel 576,000:1 Getting struck by lightning 649,739:1 Drawing a Royal Flush in 5 card poker 685,000:1 Drowning in a bathtub 175,711,536:1 Winning the Mega Millions Lottery 1st Prize Jackpot

dgwphotography Sep 01 2010 09:40 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I know. This conversation reminds me of the scene where the Sundance Kid is worried about jumping hundreds of feet into shallow waters mostly because he can't swim. Are you saying that watching the Mets will probably kill us any way?

themetfairy Sep 01 2010 09:55 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

dgwphotography wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: I know. This conversation reminds me of the scene where the Sundance Kid is worried about jumping hundreds of feet into shallow waters mostly because he can't swim. Are you saying that watching the Mets will probably kill us any way? More like likely....

batmagadanleadoff Sep 01 2010 12:36 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

It's not worth the effort to frame and snip and flickr the standings so long as the Mets continue to struggle just to tread water. So, no pictures today. BP sez that the Mets chances of winning their division are about 6,250 to 1. At 714 to 1, the Wild Card is the safer bet.

Willets Point Sep 01 2010 02:26 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

batmagadanleadoff wrote: BP sez that the Mets chances of winning their division are about 6,250 to 1. At 714 to 1, the Wild Card is the safer bet. What do they know? They spilled oil all over the Gulf of Mexico after all.

batmagadanleadoff Sep 01 2010 08:58 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

A woman and a duck walk into a bar. The bartender says: "Where'd you get the pig." The woman explains: "That's not a pig, that's a duck." So the bartender replies: "I was talking to the duck."

MFS62 Sep 02 2010 09:51 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

Willets Point wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: BP sez that the Mets chances of winning their division are about 6,250 to 1. At 714 to 1, the Wild Card is the safer bet. What do they know? They spilled oil all over the Gulf of Mexico after all. And when the season is over, Derek Jeter will make whatever oil is remaining disappear. Later

batmagadanleadoff Sep 06 2010 01:42 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

If Man is Still Alive. If Woman Can Survive. With yesterday's romp win over the Cubbies, the Mets have almost quadrupled their chances of winning the division. Before yesterday: 212,766 to 1 Today: 53,763 to 1 To put the Mets chances into perspective, if we could replay the final four weeks of this season over and over continuously, each calendar year would yield 13 replays (52 weeks/4 weeks remaining). At 53,763 to 1, the Mets would win their division once every 4,135 years.

Ashie62 Sep 06 2010 04:31 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

In the year 2525 If man is still alive if woman can survive The Mets may choose to thrive for the pennant they shall strive.

G-Fafif Sep 06 2010 04:33 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

Ashie62 wrote: In the year 2525 If man is still alive if woman can survive The Mets may choose to thrive for the pennant they shall strive. 2525? Isn't that Ollie's ERA?

Ceetar Sep 07 2010 07:44 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

17-7. That's the record the Mets would need for Jerry Manuel to end his Mets tenure above .500.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 07 2010 08:08 AM Re: I can't standings the standings

That seems unlikely, but sometimes teams do surge once it's clear that the games don't matter.

Edgy DC Sep 16 2010 12:35 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

Current odds: Divison Champion: 0.00000% chance. (Not absolute zeroo, but nothing within five decimal places anyhow.) Wildcard Champion: 0.00044% chance. (The team sits half a game behind the Marlins [also in the divison] and two games behind the Cardinals. Total Playoffs Likelihood: 0.00044% Let's go, Mets!

Nymr83 Sep 16 2010 03:25 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

I haven't watched a Mets game in 2 or 3 weeks. I really didn't think this season would end that way, but here it is. I've also gotten to the point that I never got to even with Art Howe's teams where my interest almost completed ends with over a month left.

Edgy DC Sep 16 2010 05:17 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

Seriously? You know Francoeur's gone, right? You don't want to miss any of this sweet Dylan Gee action.

Nymr83 Sep 16 2010 10:31 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

yeah, i read that in the paper! but really i'm just sick of them now. i'll probably start watching again next week because i know in a month or two i'll miss baseball (and i dont know how much postseason i can stomach with the yankees and maybe phillies)

Edgy DC Sep 17 2010 12:11 PM Re: I can't standings the standings

Last night's win got us over 1/100 of a percentage point of appearing in the playoffs. All I can say is... YEAH! NL East W L PCT GB Div E# % Champs WC GB WC E# % WC % Playoffs Phillies 86 61 .585 --- --- 78.46123% --- --- 16.94013% 95.40136% Braves 83 64 .565 3 13 21.53873% --- --- 46.62544% 68.16417% Marlins 73 72 .50345 12 5 0.00003% 9.0 5 0.01617% 0.01620% Mets 74 73 .50340 12 4 0.00000% 9.0 4 0.00101% 0.00101% Nationals 62 84 .425 23.5 E 0.00000% 20.5 E 0.00000% 0.00000% Note that despite being tied with the Fish in the stnadings, having played two more games than them, the Mets have less than one tenth the playoff chances.