End of the Road? I think so
John Gregory
posting before the end of the KC game tonight but it looks pretty certain
what the outcome will be), 50 to go. Let's suppose 86 wins is enough to
take the division - that happens to be the modest pace the Tigers are on
right now. The Twins are at 54-58 tonight. To achieve 86 wins, then,
they need to play 32-18 the rest of the way. A .640 clip. Any reason
to think this team is capable of doing that? Anything's possible and
more power to 'em, but I say no.
What if 90 wins turns out to be needed? That's 36-14, a .720 pace.
Unless they start, *right now*, winning two for every one they lose
the rest of the way, it's over. Every time they fail to follow up
a loss with another *two* wins, the road the rest of the way gets
that much steeper. It's not that they're currently on a bad streak
the past few weeks, it's that there's now too much ground to make up.
I don't care that the standings say they're only 5 or 6 behind. I
don't even really care that 7 head to head games remain with Detroit.
It's over, I'm sorry to say.
--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
Everything put together falls apart sooner or later. -- Simon
powrwrap
.
> I don't care that the standings say they're only 5 or 6 behind. I
> don't even really care that 7 head to head games remain with Detroit.
>
> It's over, I'm sorry to say.
Not so fast. You are probably correct, but I've not given up hope.
Here's why:
1. The Twins have yet to get on a hot streak. Their longest win streak
this year is 4 games. Even the Royals (6), Pirates (5), and Nationals
(8), have had longer win streaks. Their best stretch has been a 6-1
record (end of May.)
2. Of the Twins, Tigers, and White Sox, the Twins have the easier
schedule.
3. Twenty-six of the remaining fifty games are at home.
4. The last week of the season sees the Twins with 4 games vs. Detroit
(away) and 3 vs. K.C. (home). Detroit hosts the White Sox in their
final 3 games of the season. This is when I figure the division will
be decided.
Matt
>
> Not so fast. You are probably correct, but I've not given up hope.
> Here's why:
>
> 1. The Twins have yet to get on a hot streak.
How is this a plus? You're telling us that this team hasn't ever put
together a good, consistant stretch of baseball. This is not an
argument for why they can win the division, near as I can tell.
> 2. Of the Twins, Tigers, and White Sox, the Twins have the easier
> schedule.
This helps, but only if they stop losing to the Clevelands of the
league.
>
> 3. Twenty-six of the remaining fifty games are at home.
So 26 home, 24 road. Ehhh.
>
> 4. The last week of the season sees the Twins with 4 games vs. Detroit
> (away) and 3 vs. K.C. (home). Detroit hosts the White Sox in their
> final 3 games of the season. This is when I figure the division will
> be decided.
If the Twins are still around. And I seem to remember KC being a bit
of a problem last season.
Matt
powrwrap
> > On Aug 12, 10:42 am, powrwrap <powrw...@aol.com> wrote:
> > 1. The Twins have yet to get on a hot streak.
> How is this a plus? You're telling us that this team hasn't ever put
> together a good, consistant stretch of baseball. This is not an
> argument for why they can win the division, near as I can tell.
It seems that every team gets on a hot streak at least once per
season. The fact that the Twins haven't yet means perhaps they are
due? And if so, it would come at the best possible time.
Matt
>
> It seems that every team gets on a hot streak at least once per
> season. The fact that the Twins haven't yet means perhaps they are
> due? And if so, it would come at the best possible time.
Oh Alan, tell me you're not on the "we're due" train.
powrwrap
>
> Oh Alan, tell me you're not on the "we're due" train.
No, I wouldn't use the words "we're due". I would say that it's likely
to happen.
John Gregory
I offered my analysis a little early, partly to stimulate discussion,
partly to not be a second guesser by waiting until they are almost
mathematically eliminated. The point is that we're at the time of
the season where excuses about current performance can no longer be
waved away. They lost on Tuesday, they won on Wednesday; now they
need to follow that up with another win *today*, or else they're
extending the same pattern of "we'll get'em tomorrow" they've been
in since the All Star break. That urgency doesn't exist earlier in
the season, or if they were in Detroit's position now, or in Kansas
City's.Closer to the end, the urgency is tactical. Right now, it's
"win at least twice after every loss."
Today, a hot streak only is enough to put them back into contention,
where they'd still need to continue a pattern with more wins than
losses. To get to 86 wins, or to any level above 80, it has to start
happening now, or else we're back to wishing for 10-game-winning-streak
ponies the last weeks of September.
--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
The daily phrase of the day from the the Department of Redundancy Dept.:
Illegal crime
Matt
> On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Matt wrote:
> > On Aug 13, 10:38 am, powrwrap <powrw...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> It seems that every team gets on a hot streak at least once per
> >> season. The fact that the Twins haven't yet means perhaps they are
> >> due? And if so, it would come at the best possible time.
>
> > Oh Alan, tell me you're not on the "we're due" train.
>
> I offered my analysis a little early, partly to stimulate discussion,
> partly to not be a second guesser by waiting until they are almost
> mathematically eliminated. The point is that we're at the time of
> the season where excuses about current performance can no longer be
> waved away. They lost on Tuesday, they won on Wednesday; now they
> need to follow that up with another win *today*, or else they're
> extending the same pattern of "we'll get'em tomorrow" they've been
> in since the All Star break. That urgency doesn't exist earlier in
> the season, or if they were in Detroit's position now, or in Kansas
> City's.Closer to the end, the urgency is tactical. Right now, it's
> "win at least twice after every loss."
If it wasn't over before, it's over now. Not only are they getting out
of touch with the division lead, they're playing just god-awful
baseball, especially the pitching.
Go Vikings....
Matt
AnnE
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oh, Matt.....of so little faith. lol And it isn't even Sept.
Yep, I was at the ballgame yesterday, did you see me on the
jumbotran? Or whatever it's called. Of all the people in that place,
I was chosen with 2 guys to throw a little rubber T-Ball ball into
that Blue Bunny Ice Cream Bucket waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down
from the 2nd story to the playing field. Sheesh, and me afraid of
heights. I never would have agreed to something like this if I had
known. I could barely look out into the field from the 212-213 spot
and to look down at that little Barbie Doll sized plastic pool was
almost too much. I nearly hurled right there on the spot but instead
threw the ball with my eyes closed. The PR guy told me ahead of time
to let it bouce at about 10 feet from the inner of the basket/pool.
Ha, what is 10' when you're that far UP???? I missed by a mile. I
did have to laff as the guy who threw at #1 said he just hoped that no
one would laff at him. He landed it perfectly. And I had to follow?
heh, heh Now, I must tell you that if one did land it as he did, one
would win a years supply for Blue Bunny Ice Cream. I love ice cream
but after a years supply I would end up needing to be tossed off that
"balcony" and believe me, then you'd see ME bounce.
And then we lost the game. Drat.
Where's Justin when you need him? He needs a good swift
kick in the rear to get him started once again.
AnnE Come On, TWINS just get er done!
powrwrap
> Yep, I was at the ballgame yesterday, did you see me on the
> jumbotran? �Or whatever it's called. �Of all the people in that place,
> I was chosen with 2 guys to throw a little rubber T-Ball ball into
> that Blue Bunny Ice Cream Bucket waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down
> from the 2nd story to the playing field. �
NO WAY!
I was sitting about 10 feet away from you when you were throwing that
ball. I probably saw you, but didn't know you. I did see the guy make
the throw--right in there--and then there was a delay--did you
hesitate to go up there and throw? I seem to remember a guy prodding a
woman to step up and throw. But then I got distracted and looked away.
Was that you?
AnnE
Yep, that was me. Delay is right. I thought I was gonna hurl.
Actually, the PR guy got it all wrong. He had given me #2 and then
when it came to start it, he thought I had #1 and was s'posed to be
first. Typical male! <G> I could send you the pic I got from the
jumbotron....tran? lol
You got distracted???? Well, there were some mighty pretty ladies
sitting around that exit! No wonder you got distracted. The usher
was s'posed to catch me if I fell backwards so that I wouldn't fall
and break my neck. I noticed in the pic I got from the daughter that
he was standing up the stairway. Sheesh, did he really think he could
catch me from waaaaaaaaaaaay up there? I did come home with a
baseball that said Blue Bunny on it which was much better than the ice
cream, I do believe. I like Blue Bunny but thinking about a years
supply was just toooooooo much.
AnnE
John Gregory
> It's that time of the season for some quick math. 112 games in (I'm
> posting before the end of the KC game tonight but it looks pretty certain
> what the outcome will be), 50 to go. Let's suppose 86 wins is enough to
> take the division - that happens to be the modest pace the Tigers are on
> right now. The Twins are at 54-58 tonight. To achieve 86 wins, then,
> they need to play 32-18 the rest of the way. A .640 clip. Any reason
> to think this team is capable of doing that? Anything's possible and
> more power to 'em, but I say no.
>
> What if 90 wins turns out to be needed? That's 36-14, a .720 pace.
>
> Unless they start, *right now*, winning two for every one they lose
> the rest of the way, it's over. Every time they fail to follow up
> a loss with another *two* wins, the road the rest of the way gets
> that much steeper. It's not that they're currently on a bad streak
> the past few weeks, it's that there's now too much ground to make up.
> I don't care that the standings say they're only 5 or 6 behind. I
> don't even really care that 7 head to head games remain with Detroit.
>
> It's over, I'm sorry to say.
Nobody cares about the above post but me of course. But I'm here to
stand up and acknowledge I was wrong.
True, during the extra innings of Game 163, I was mulling the humorous
take I would apply here to my prediction, in case the Tigers pulled it
out.
I'm also a little amused to reread the reference to 86 wins, which is
the total both teams had after 162 games. I guess it's fair to say I
was off by one on that.
In reference to those 86 wins, it makes me wonder just how much of a
choke the Tigers really displayed in the very final weeks. They finished
at exactly the pace established in early August. It's just as easy to
say they played a little above their heads for a few weeks and then
below that for a few more. Over the season, they maintained more of
a steady pace than the Twins did, I think.
Now, I considered speaking up about this several weeks ago. In most
phases of life I'm not very superstitious, but part of the fun of
Baseball is in fact the various superstitions. So I was not inclined
to risk a jinx by admitting I was wrong when they pulled to within
two or so, nor even after they won and went on to the playoffs.
Not until after the fat lady really sang her last note.
Bottom line, I did not see the Twins as having it in them to finish
32-18, and that's exactly what they did, plus one more. As a Twins
fan I'm delighted to have been so wrong.
I'd like to go on record now and state that the Twins are not capable
of winning the World Series in 2010. I don't care that the standings
for next year say they are 0-0; there's now too much ground to make
up. It's over, I'm sorry to say.
--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
No guts, no glory, no brains, same story.
kap...@example.com
Well I would have agreed with you on August 11 (or even later). But
winning 16 of 20 within the division in retrospect should not have
been such a big surprise. The Twins have won or been in contention
almost every year since 2002 by dominating their division. By the
same token, ending the season 16-4 in the division didn't mean crap
for the playoffs against a strong non-division team and we all
(mostly) probably knew that as soon as they beat the Tigers in game
163.