Is Arizona the easiest bet today?

[kishipp]

Under 8.....cash!

[Whippit]

You need to dig a bit deeper and understand that wins are not always equal. If you look at who he beat you will realize that he beat the Angels twice in those 3 wins and we all know (I hope) how bad the angels are. I mean come on FL just beat them. His other win was against SL more than a month ago although he did pitch well.

So your logic of he won 3 of 6 carries little to no weight and the fact that he has 8 years in the league means nothing if he sux a$$ now.

You need to understand that your betting on him NOW a game he played 8 years ago so it doesn't matter if he had a 1.58 era 8 years ago if he has over 6.00 era NOW

I cannot believe you took the time to type all that

[Lord and Master]

And While a "half point" in xFip is a big difference again francis is is going the wrong way,posting monthly xFips of 3.47/3.95/5.06 vs Kennedy's 3.39/3.85/3.25.

i'd like to add that having a pitcher getting shelled recently is very good for betting that side, it creates value. i'd much rather be betting on a pitcher that gave up 6 runs in his last 2 outings than a pitcher who gave up 0

[LGHT]

I cannot believe you took the time to type all that

Unlike most on this forum I actually make bets and use real money. So I do take the time and make the effort to look not just at the numbers in a stat, but try and determine if that stat is comparable to the game at hand.

Pay attention kid you may learn something yet.

[boeing power]

squares with a big zona win, we will bounce back

[face]

diamondbacks were pitching better, royals was a good shot though, coin flip game, but i'm glad i had diamondbacks.
squares lost on redsox and rangers but won with phillies and diamondbacks.

[Bald Bull]

diamondbacks were pitching better, royals was a good shot though, coin flip game, but i'm glad i had diamondbacks.
squares lost on redsox and rangers but won with phillies and diamondbacks.

squares caught arguably the biggest break of the year with the boston rl/over voids.