LTA's MLB Plays

**God1** · 09-19-11, 10:35 PM

Tomorrow is looking tough. Unloaded on boston but am stumped as to where I think some of the other lines I like are going to end up

**No coincidences** · 09-19-11, 10:36 PM

Originally posted by God1

I can't even begin to count the number of times I've said this to you but I'll repeat: "you are just clueless"

If calling Casey Coleman "dominant" over the past three months because of what statistics tell you vs., you know, actually watching him pitch makes me clueless, then I guess the debate ends here.

**Redscot** · 09-19-11, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by God1

What I said was he had been dominant in the last 3 months, not that he is a dominant pitcher. Those xFIP numbers reflect that he has been dominant recently there is zero debate

You will never get anywhere above the "losing to the vig" level of betting if you stick with this mentality bud

Wow, need to throw out this three month business if we are gonna be fair. Minor league numbers shouldn't figure in this argument. His number's could qualify as "surprising" "better than expected" but they are still more pedestrian than dominant since his call up mid August.

**Love The Action** · 09-19-11, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Again, I never claimed he wasn't much better than his surface stats would indicate.

I've seen Casey Coleman pitch all year long. The day I call him a dominant pitcher is the day I turn in my card as an MLB observer of over 30 years. No offense to the number crunchers.

I hear ya. There is something to be said for "scouting" a player yourself. However, baseball is one of the few sports where statistics tell the whole story. I don't think you should get so caught up in the word "dominate" or any other labels. However, what he was trying to tell you is that 1.7 FIP and 2.8 xFIP for July is top notch, especially when he had 22% K% and BABIP over .310. His increasing BABIP of .380 for August and over .400 for September, in relation to a solid FIP and xFIP tell you all you need to know.

Think about all the Cubs games you watched...how many outs were missed when their horrible outfield defense missed the cut off guy or threw to the wrong base? What about when Soriano just couldn't get to an otherwise catchable ball? When you watched the games, was Coleman giving up a lot of line drive shots off the wall, or was he giving up some groundball singles or bloops? Was it really all Coleman for his struggles or a product of a poor team effort? Also, are you basing your opinion of him over the last three months and forgetting about the first couple months when he was total garbage?

**No coincidences** · 09-19-11, 10:40 PM

Originally posted by Love The Action

I hear ya. There is something to be said for "scouting" a player yourself. However, baseball is one of the few sports where statistics tell the whole story. I don't think you should get so caught up in the word "dominate" or any other labels. However, what he was trying to tell you is that 1.7 FIP and 2.8 xFIP for July is top notch, especially when he had 22% K% and BABIP over .310. His increasing BABIP of .380 for August and over .400 for September, in relation to a solid FIP and xFIP tell you all you need to know.

Think about all the Cubs games you watched...how many outs were missed when their horrible outfield defense missed the cut off guy or threw to the wrong base? What about when Soriano just couldn't get to an otherwise catchable ball? When you watched the games, was Coleman giving up a lot of line drive shots off the wall, or was he giving up some groundball singles or bloops? Was it really all Coleman for his struggles or a product of a poor team effort? Also, are you basing your opinion of him over the last three months and forgetting about the first couple months when he was total garbage?

I'm not denying any of this LTA. He's underrated because of his high ERA and the fact that he pitches for the Cubs. That goes without saying.

I guess my definition of "dominant" is a whole hell of a lot different than this guy's. Sorry if your numbers say otherwise.

**Redscot** · 09-19-11, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I'm not denying any of this LTA. He's underrated because of his high ERA and the fact that he pitches for the Cubs. That goes without saying.

I guess my definition of "dominant" is a whole hell of a lot different than this guy's. Sorry if your numbers say otherwise.

I got your back here man, no way Coleman has been "dominating" (tonight withstanding) in his 7 starts since being called up.

**No coincidences** · 09-19-11, 10:47 PM

Originally posted by Redscot

I got your back here man, no way Coleman has been "dominating" (tonight withstanding) in his 7 starts since being called up.

He was terrific tonight, without question.

**Love The Action** · 09-19-11, 10:48 PM

Originally posted by Redscot

I got your back here man, no way Coleman has been "dominating" (tonight withstanding) in his 7 starts since being called up.

Did he come out of the pen at all?

I can't remember? Ahh...this is a tired debate now anyway...gotta get back to tomorrow's card

**Redscot** · 09-19-11, 10:48 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

He was terrific tonight, without question.

Still, 6 ip and 92 pitches does not a dominant pitcher make.

**God1** · 09-19-11, 10:48 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

He was terrific tonight, without question.

So then did I spot a winner where the books couldn't? Was my cubs bet a great bet just because it won?

**Redscot** · 09-19-11, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by Love The Action

Did he come out of the pen at all?

I can't remember? Ahh...this is a tired debate now anyway...gotta get back to tomorrow's card

Yeah man, I'm up too late myself. Lets put this energy towards cash money tomorrow. Have a good one all

**Love The Action** · 09-19-11, 10:50 PM

Hey Red...I hope you didn't bet that Giants/Rams under...although with all the money you've made recently it might keep you from getting cut off

**No coincidences** · 09-19-11, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by God1

So then did I spot a winner where the books couldn't? Was my cubs bet a great bet just because it won?

Where did I say it was a bad bet? In fact, in other threads, I said quite the contrary. It was a good bet for a hell of a lot of other reasons beyond Casey Coleman's reign of three-month terror through the league.

**Redscot** · 09-19-11, 10:51 PM

Originally posted by Love The Action

Hey Red...I hope you didn't bet that Giants/Rams under...although with all the money you've made recently it might keep you from getting cut off

Don't worry my Clev/Sea 1st 5 under took care of that.

**God1** · 09-19-11, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Where did I say it was a bad bet? In fact, in other threads, I said quite the contrary. It was a good bet for a hell of a lot of other reasons beyond Casey Coleman's reign of three-month terror through the league.

I was mocking your judging whether a bet was good or bad based on the outcome(see orioles against weaver). Guess what? That orioles bet was a better one than the cubs bet

And guess what else? I won twice as much today as I lost yesterday but yesterday my bets were more profitable. I had a better day yesterday, blows your mind doesn't it?

**Redscot** · 09-19-11, 10:55 PM

Originally posted by God1

I was mocking your judging whether a bet was good or bad based on the outcome(see orioles against weaver). Guess what? That orioles bet was a better one than the cubs bet

I had the O's +180 in that one.

**hawley** · 09-19-11, 10:56 PM

anyone like the Padres again tomorrow?

**No coincidences** · 09-19-11, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by God1

I was mocking your judging whether a bet was good or bad based on the outcome(see orioles against weaver). Guess what? That orioles bet was a better one than the cubs bet

Nope -- you got owned there.

Tell me: did that Cubs line ever inch back toward Milwaukee tonight at close? How about San Diego?

The fact that you still think the O's were the "best bet you made this month" when Baltimore went from +144 two hours before first pitch to +161 at close makes me wonder if you actually know what you're talking about (among many other things) or how a line works.

**God1** · 09-19-11, 11:00 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Nope -- you got owned there.

Tell me: did that Cubs line ever inch back toward Milwaukee tonight at close? How about San Diego?

The fact that you still think the O's were the "best bet you made this month" when Baltimore went from +144 two hours before first pitch to +161 at close makes me wonder if you actually know what you're talking about (among many other things) or how a line works.

I had +184

**815Sox** · 09-19-11, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by hawley

anyone like the Padres again tomorrow?

I am pretty sure that Tulo and Gomez are questionable again... Latos is pretty damn good too. I am going to look at it.

**No coincidences** · 09-19-11, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by God1

I had +184

So you obviously see nothing wrong with the 17-cent move in the other direction after it bottomed out at a stick-out-like-a-sore-thumb overly-obvious 40 cent ML drop?

It's not rocket science. You got taken by sharper bettors than yourself.

**Love The Action** · 09-19-11, 11:07 PM

MLB Recap 9/19/11

2 - 0 = +2x

MLB Season 2011

396 - 360 = +32.715x

Onto Tuesday...

**pacocn** · 09-19-11, 11:09 PM

Lta, nice calls today

**blackeyeshamus** · 09-19-11, 11:09 PM

Originally posted by Love The Action

MLB Recap 9/19/11

2 - 0 = +2x

MLB Season 2011

396 - 360 = +32.715x

Onto Tuesday...

**God1** · 09-19-11, 11:10 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

So you obviously see nothing wrong with the 17-cent move in the other direction after it bottomed out at a stick-out-like-a-sore-thumb overly-obvious 40 cent ML drop?

It's not rocket science. You got taken by sharper bettors than yourself.

Make sure you keep your betting at the 20 a game hobby level bud

**brahmabull117** · 09-19-11, 11:13 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

If calling Casey Coleman "dominant" over the past three months because of what statistics tell you vs., you know, actually watching him pitch makes me clueless, then I guess the debate ends here.

LOL @ people calling casey coleman dominant

huge cubs fan here, Coleman is one of the worst pitchers in the league. High 80s fastball mixed with bad command and very average breaking ball

he had a great outing today because milwaukee was very undisciplined and they couldn't take advantage when they did actually get a good pitch to hit. Have this guy face the yankees or red sox for 10 outings and his era would be around 10-14

**No coincidences** · 09-19-11, 11:14 PM

Originally posted by God1

Make sure you keep your betting at the 20 a game hobby level bud

You want to know when a guy doesn't have a legitimate response?

When he starts taking weak, insecure shots like this.

**No coincidences** · 09-19-11, 11:14 PM

Congrats on the easy winners LTA. Excellent work as usual.

Night all.

**God1** · 09-19-11, 11:18 PM

Originally posted by hawley

anyone like the Padres again tomorrow?

The books price Latos really high, there's definitely not any value in him being underpriced. I'm not sure how to properly price Chacin however. Just not confident enough to bet either way

**God1** · 09-19-11, 11:19 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

You want to know when a guy doesn't have a legitimate response?

When he starts taking weak, insecure shots like this.

What else is there to say to someone who thinks a price that beats the closer by 20 cents is a bad bet

**hawley** · 09-19-11, 11:22 PM

Originally posted by God1

The books price Latos really high, there's definitely not any value in him being underpriced. I'm not sure how to properly price Chacin however. Just not confident enough to bet either way

Thanks God.

**God1** · 09-19-11, 11:31 PM

Boston still looks like the best bet to me at this point. I took kershaw -121 and cecil -133 but wouldn't be surprised if neither beat the close

I wish I had some research behind this but I tend to believe that with kershaw going for the cy young, the dodgers should not get the traditional "out of the playoffs" shave off their price for lesser effort or at least it should not be full which this line is pricing in. Kershaw I believe was -136/-128 against Lincecum something like 2 weeks ago

There's something materially wrong with Piniero(he said so himself a couple weeks ago) and I'm not sure that's being correctly priced

**Love The Action** · 09-19-11, 11:32 PM

Edit

**God1** · 09-19-11, 11:39 PM

Originally posted by Love The Action

Was about to bet the under in Houston/Cincy, but there is 100% chance for a T-storm according to the weather report. Better to hold off when there's weather like that....

I see 0% chance of rain. 8 -116 is really low for a cincy home game

**God1** · 09-19-11, 11:42 PM

If anyone needs proof that pinnacle weights money above all else, the boston ML sticks at -245 after the RL has moved from -118 to -122. If they were in the business of assuming positions on games these would always move in tandem. If the move on the RL was a result of "dumb money" and therefore no reason to move the ML, then the RL shouldn't be moving period...but it does because there was a big enough bet placed

This has always been a point I've tried to make that when a line moves we have no idea if it's sharp money moving it or just a big bet