• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ukyah

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
    san diego

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. you, quite literally, have no idea what my posting history is and therefore no sense of me whatsoever. the upshot for you is the same is true for me. i was talking about win expectancy and you started talking some bullshit and lobbing hand grenades.
  2. wtf is this shit? he and i were having a perfectly reasonable conversation. obtuse and willfully ignorant? get outta here with that nonsense. ya fake news mothafucker.
  3. i don't know what the meow reaction emoji is supposed to mean exactly, but i say meow to you, sir.
  4. how are they at 88-90 wins now? i get it, if you're just saying that's what you think, but that's not based off any model with any validity. the vegas over/under is based on betting action not actual win expectency, but that's still a far more mathematical conclusion than yours. can you point to any other models that are predicting the angels win expectancy as +/- 90 wins?
  5. i'm cool with you, so let's start from that point. having said that, any post that says houston and the yankees aren't flat out great teams is a conversation killer. you're starting from a perspective that's just patently ridiculous. houston and the yankees are elite teams. i'm aware the astros cheated, but that does not negate their massive talent. i don't give much of a shit what merlingcat says, he's just another poster from my perspective, but 86 wins isn't getting a team into the playoffs, especially when acknowledging that you are correct in that we are in the "tanking" era. however, that doesn't lower the wins needed to get in, it raises the number. the wins aren't dispersed around the league, they are stockpiled by the better teams and horded by the elite. the top and bottom heavy comment doesn't play out the way you suggest. to be fair, perhaps i'll be wrong and mid 80's does put a team into the wild card. i'd bet against it. i feel playing for the wildcard, as your win goal, is a failure. that's the type of shit small market teams play for, and it's not the type of product i'd like to pin my hopes to. i went into this offseason thinking the angels were on the same page, but it appears they were not. i'd be fascinated to see their internal projection models, but that ain't happenin'.
  6. my only contribution to this back and forth will be, i feel like you're making merlingcat's argument for him. i don't think posting the vegas total of 85.5 wins projected is an argument for the angels making the playoffs. if the angels win 86 games next year, then i think they're almost certainly watching the playoffs from their living room couches. 86 wins kind of proves his point that they didn't do enough.
  7. and the opt out was pushed by brdich not arenado, which is weird as shit. someone explain that to me.
  8. c'mon lou that's some semantic political double speak. the rockies are actively engaged in discussions with the cardinals, this has been widely reported. all of a sudden you have a stricter definition?
  9. some of you guys want to put together an mlb the show roster. betts isn't coming here, and he's 100% not signing an extension anywhere. i don't know how the dude can make that more clear. the angels trading for him would be monumentally stupid.
  10. man, some of you guys are just itching to turn on a player. arenado has always been a stand up player. the rockies don't have quite that reputation. the same gm alienated their last great player, troy tulo. i side on giving arenado the benefit of the doubt on this one, if i'm choosing the side of the least likely asshole.
  11. is there any franchise better at taking all star players from organizations who for some strange reason are pushing them out the door? i feel like the cardinals last 30 years are built on that foundation.
  12. that's not how i read that at all. i think they want to shed the money and obtain quality prospects. david price has no value prospectwise. betts has minimal value as a highly paid one year rental. so they want you to pay all of price's contract and give them to frontline prospects for the ability to pay betts 27 million this year and offer him a QO. that's a shit deal by anybody's standards. i wouldn't give two frontiline prospects for betts alone just this year.
  13. i don't get in on hating on other teams, never really fueled my yacht. but i can't stand a cheater, so it's astros with a bullet. i know they're not going to tank, but i'd really like to see some cheaters eat shit and die.