tomsred

I tried but the formatting makes me dizzy. Plus there are too many paragraphs.

That's okay, you can learn by trial and error.  We are not doing brain surgery here, and it's not worth getting dizzy over.  Maybe we should have used illustrations to cut down the number of paragraphs, but I'm a terrible artist, LOL. 

I think you are way too focused on the importance of managerial moves in the course of a game.  If the process is expected to reveal whether a managerial change should be made or not, that will depend on far more factors than game strategy.  Unfortunately a lot of Mike's effectiveness will be judged on factors the public does not necessarily see.  Examples like how he works with DiPoto, and his communication and clubhouse leadership with his players.  Another example is how he works with the front office in moving players on and off the 25 man roster, and how he works effectively or ineffectively with his coaches.  I doubt that DiPoto or anyone else in the organization keeps a little "book" on the in game moves that Mike makes each game.  That's something that fits the style in Oakland, but not many other teams.  In the corporate world that's called "micro-managing."  And it usually creates more problems than providing positive results.  But hey, this is a game, anything that falls into being fun I'd be all for, but this just does not seem fun to me.

Does anybody know if Frieri used his change up? I didn't catch the last inning.

He did throw one change as I remember (according to Rojas).

This might qualify for "silly thread of the year."  LOL

Downs 1.0 IP, 1 K.

I see you've decided to play Lawyer ball with us 

No I haven't decided to play "Lawyer Ball."  The rules are not perfect, they are what they are.  Probably everyone has a different conception of what should be in the rules and what should not be in the rules.  My job is to score according to what we have, and make it fair for everyone who plays.  Anyone can predict anything they like in this thread, but we can't have posters scoring points for things that are not in the rules and maintain a fair and equitable scoring system. 

Why is SB valid but CS isn't?

It's a test to see if you can read the rules, if you can then you are qualified to earn points.  If you can't read then only divine intervention can help you.

Post your predictions here for season game #2 (Angels vs. Cincinnati).  Game time is set for 4:10 pm on 4/3/13.

Winners from Game #1 on 4/1/13 are shown below.  77 total predictions were made, 13 total points were scored.

4 Points

None

3 Points

Mark 68 (Weaver 6 IP, 4 K's)

GoodTimesGoneBad  (Weaver 6 IP, 1 ER)

2 Points

Eric  (Frieri 1 IP, 0 ER's)

1 Point

AngelsAndRamsFan (Weaver 6 IP)

RallyTime  (Pujols 1 BB)

George  (Hamilton 2 BB's)

Angels N Skins  (Weaver 1 ER)

HaloFromVegas  (Weaver 6 IP)

Should you feel that an error in scoring has been made, please PM me and I will investigate and get back to you.

In game #1 a number of prediction errors were made.  These included predicting hitters going zero for something; using incorrect prediction stats such as strikeouts for hitters, caught stealing, fly outs, sac bunts, etc. (just because something is in the box score doesn't mean it is a valid prediction stat - see the rules); or predicting too many different stats (each prediction contains two elements only - see the rules).  Should you not understand something in the 2013 rules please PM me and I will be glad to clarify it for you.  Reminder:  if any portion of a prediction is invalid then the entire prediction is invalid and it earns zero points (same as in 2012).

The first standings update will occur after the final game of this series on 4/4/13.

Hope our bp can do it for another inning

You mean at least two innings.

Pretty soon it's going to be the second day of the season, and we will still be playing the first day of the season.

Watch the Marlins and Yankees win their opener today, LOL.

Just so everyone knows, zero for something was not valid last year, and it continues to not be a valid prediction this year.  See the rules under "Angel Hitters."

Nice summary Brian!

The category is in every box score. Was it too negative for the feel good crowd?

No, they are far too easy to predict for hitters.  There are many stats in a box score.  When we have well over 100 participants in this game, and 162 eligible games to predict, that's a lot of scoring.  Most people are very baseball smart on this website, I think they are ready for the challenge of predicting stats that take a little more thought.  Considerable thought was put into the 2013 rule changes to make it more interesting and challenging;  example, adding in relief pitching.  Failure is rampant in baseball and easier to predict, especially strikeouts for hitters.

Are Walks permitted? If not then use: Ianetta 1-3 1 RBI

Yes, walks are permitted.

Trout 2-3 fly out

Prediction not valid, fly outs are not a prediction category for hitters.  Want to try again?

Richards is in!

Reminder:  K's for hitters are not valid this year.  See the rules.

Also, sacrifices are also not valid.

Pujols 1-4, 1 double.

Post your predictions here for regular season game number 1 on 4/1/13.  The Angels will play Cincinnati at 1:10 PM PST.

Significant changes have occurred in the rules since last year, please read the complete set of rules above and/or the thread entitled "Game Day Prediction Game - 2013 Important Information."

Winner receives a $100 gift card to the Angels team store. This is our 4th year running this contest. Good luck to you all! 

Bump.

You got that right Chuck!

804

Don't give up on Conger just yet ... It's only temporary if he doesn't t make the team.

I didn't hear any statements to the effect that they are giving up on Conger.  My opinion is that they think Conger can get his throwing straightened out best at AAA where he can play everyday.  If he can do that, then so long to Snyder and Hester.

AD, it's like a one way street with you.  Someone says something positive about the team or a player, and you come up with how they are a homer (in the negative use of the word).  If we don't get critical like you, then that's all wrong in your eyes.  I personally find so far fewer issues with this team relative to all other MLB teams that playing review critic with them is kind of silly.  The Angels are a high achievement organization; can they get better - sure.  Does the performance to date deserve to be continually dissected and torn apart - no.  I'm sorry, but I can't partake in your constant grumbling.