2015 NLDS Games Thread: Eat Shit, St. Louis

[Tonker]

By the way, the Fangraphs playoff odds now have the Cubs as 54.5-45.5 favourites over the Tards for the upcoming series, with their chances of winning it all at 12.5% and 9.5% respectively.  They have the Mutts at 38.8%/9.4% for the same thing and then have the Dodgers as the hot favourites to win it all at 61.2%/23.3%.

What the actual fuck?  I'm sure there's some statfhagghotry behind it but why on Earth would the Dodgers be more likely to take home the trophy than either TEX (10.4%) or HOU (17.3%), both of whom are already one game to the good in the ALDS?  And why would be already be nearly fucking TWICE as likely to win as their nearest competition in the NL, before anybody has played a game?  They won 92 games in a shitty division.  This makes no sense to me.

Kershaw and Greinke, one or both of whom going multiple times in a playoff series, seems like a pretty compelling argument, plus they'd have homefield advantage in an NLCS vs the Cubs, whereas Houston would have to go on the road in an ALCS?

I had the same thought, but then that would mean that Arrieta and Lester are only half as compelling, and that doesn't seem right.  Home advantage doesn't make that much difference either, I wouldn't have thought.

There's only one possible explanation for it: the boffins have fucked up.  I'll fight anybody who says otherwise.

[Canadouche]

Huey's doing a bit now... right?

Either that or this is the longest stroke on record.

Or Huey is drunk posting, a lot.

[Tony]

By the way, the Fangraphs playoff odds now have the Cubs as 54.5-45.5 favourites over the Tards for the upcoming series, with their chances of winning it all at 12.5% and 9.5% respectively.  They have the Mutts at 38.8%/9.4% for the same thing and then have the Dodgers as the hot favourites to win it all at 61.2%/23.3%.

What the actual fuck?  I'm sure there's some statfhagghotry behind it but why on Earth would the Dodgers be more likely to take home the trophy than either TEX (10.4%) or HOU (17.3%), both of whom are already one game to the good in the ALDS?  And why would be already be nearly fucking TWICE as likely to win as their nearest competition in the NL, before anybody has played a game?  They won 92 games in a shitty division.  This makes no sense to me.

Kershaw and Greinke, one or both of whom going multiple times in a playoff series, seems like a pretty compelling argument, plus they'd have homefield advantage in an NLCS vs the Cubs, whereas Houston would have to go on the road in an ALCS?

I had the same thought, but then that would mean that Arrieta and Lester are only half as compelling, and that doesn't seem right.  Home advantage doesn't make that much difference either, I wouldn't have thought.

There's only one possible explanation for it: the boffins have fucked up.  I'll fight anybody who says otherwise.

Is it because the Dodgers have an easier path through the Mets, and the two better teams have to play each other? I assume the numbers would change at the start of the NLCS.

[Tonker]

By the way, the Fangraphs playoff odds now have the Cubs as 54.5-45.5 favourites over the Tards for the upcoming series, with their chances of winning it all at 12.5% and 9.5% respectively.  They have the Mutts at 38.8%/9.4% for the same thing and then have the Dodgers as the hot favourites to win it all at 61.2%/23.3%.

What the actual fuck?  I'm sure there's some statfhagghotry behind it but why on Earth would the Dodgers be more likely to take home the trophy than either TEX (10.4%) or HOU (17.3%), both of whom are already one game to the good in the ALDS?  And why would be already be nearly fucking TWICE as likely to win as their nearest competition in the NL, before anybody has played a game?  They won 92 games in a shitty division.  This makes no sense to me.

Kershaw and Greinke, one or both of whom going multiple times in a playoff series, seems like a pretty compelling argument, plus they'd have homefield advantage in an NLCS vs the Cubs, whereas Houston would have to go on the road in an ALCS?

I had the same thought, but then that would mean that Arrieta and Lester are only half as compelling, and that doesn't seem right.  Home advantage doesn't make that much difference either, I wouldn't have thought.

There's only one possible explanation for it: the boffins have fucked up.  I'll fight anybody who says otherwise.

Is it because the Dodgers have an easier path through the Mets, and the two better teams have to play each other? I assume the numbers would change at the start of the NLCS.

THEY'D FUCKING BETTER.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

They won 92 games in a shitty division.  This makes no sense to me.

BR's 3rd order adjusted win percentage (Pythagorean win percentage based on expected runs scored and allowed—per underlying statistics—and adjusted for strength of opponents) have LA as the third best team in the majors this season, with an adjusted W% 5 games better than actual:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/index.php?dispgroup=all

Note that the Cards were the "luckiest" team in baseball by this measure (see the column labelled "D3"), with an adjusted W% 11 games below their actual finish. And I think that pretty much comports with what our eyes have told us about them.

[Eli]

They won 92 games in a shitty division.  This makes no sense to me.

BR's 3rd order adjusted win percentage (Pythagorean win percentage based on expected runs scored and allowed—per underlying statistics—and adjusted for strength of opponents) have LA as the third best team in the majors this season, with an adjusted W% 5 games better than actual:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/index.php?dispgroup=all

Note that the Cards were the "luckiest" team in baseball by this measure (see the column labelled "D3"), with an adjusted W% 11 games below their actual finish. And I think that pretty much comports with what our eyes have told us about them.

And some of the Dodgers' flaws (mainly, the back end of their rotation) are washed away in a playoff series.

[Brownie]

I want the Mets. After beating the Cardinals, nothing better than beating the Mets. Then bring on the Astros, unless you can decree 14 AL team ineligible and bring in the White Sox and make it a Best of 200 series, so the Cubs can sweep the Sox in 101 games, just in time for Spring Training to begin again.

[SKO]

They won 92 games in a shitty division.  This makes no sense to me.

BR's 3rd order adjusted win percentage (Pythagorean win percentage based on expected runs scored and allowed—per underlying statistics—and adjusted for strength of opponents) have LA as the third best team in the majors this season, with an adjusted W% 5 games better than actual:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/index.php?dispgroup=all

Note that the Cards were the "luckiest" team in baseball by this measure (see the column labelled "D3"), with an adjusted W% 11 games below their actual finish. And I think that pretty much comports with what our eyes have told us about them.

FanGraphs baseruns also had the Dodgers as the best team in the NL with a base runs expected W-L of 95-67 (Cubs were second at 94-68, the Cardinals, naturally, outperformed their 89-73 projection by 11 games).

[Tony]

No Berry on the NLDS roster. I thought they'd keep him with the open spot from the 5th starter.

[Armchair_QB]

FUCK THESE MOTHERFUCKERS!!!! LETS FUCKING GO!!!!

Ok, I feel better now.

[Saul Goodman]

John Lackey is not this good. Time to bust out.

[Wheezer]

WTF is this game doing not having started at 7 CDT?

[WTB...A RING FFS!!]

John Lackey is not this good. Time to bust out.

Well, it'll have to wait til at least the fucking 7th since Russell's followed by 2 auto outs...

[Armchair_QB]

Phil Cuzzi either has an early dinner reservation or he's behind on his mortgage.

Fucking piece of shit.

[SKO]

Why the fuck was David Ross allowed to take a fucking at bat with a runner on in the 5th inning of a fucking playoff game.