Part of

« Game chat: Phils go back under the lights tonight | Main | Beer nuts: Howard should be a better defender »

Wednesday, September 03, 2008


Spot-on, Jason. I was listening to WIP this morning (not a good idea, I know), and was stunned to hear folks ripping him.

Frankly, the "he has to face the Mets!" talk bothered me earlier in the year, when Manuel should be credited for sticking to his guys and letting the rotation stay intact.

But now, we're in crunch time, the rest works out perfectly, and it gives Kendrick a little time to get his head on straight, as we'll need at least two more quality starts from the guy down the stretch. Unless Hamels is feeling something we don't know about, he has to pitch Sunday.

Also, I'm not sure who updates the probable pitchers, so this may or may not be worth anything: Hamels is listed as Sunday's starter.

I like the way the series has shaped up, in terms of our starting pitching. Those are the guys I want out there.

Why were people ripping him?

I agree, Jason, Sunday's starter should be an easy decision. I don't blame anyone (Hamels, Cholly, FO) for not pushing the issue with him thusfar, but it's getting to the point where we NEED him to start. I don't trust Kendrick and Happ to deliver in a big game on the road against our division rivals, battling for first place in September. Hamels needs to start Sunday.

We're starting to see why it's a lot better to have a 2 game lead than to be chasing. The Phillies can win games all they want, but the Mets have to lose to make it matter. (pointing out the obvious I know)

Reposted from the end of last thread (where my posts always seem to wind up):

A couple people have mentioned the WC. The Brewers have a 4.5 game lead with 23/24 games left to play. With that kind of lead, the WC feels like a pipe dream. But the one thing that keeps hope alive is that we have a 4-game home series with the Brewers next week. At the very least, we'd have to win 3 of those 4 games. As I wrote about a week or so ago, I'm not holding my breath over the WC, but there's certainly no harm in rooting against the Brewers and Cardinals. And while we're at it, we should root against the Astros too. They have played great lately & are only 3 games behind us right now. The Astros as the WC team would be my worst case scenario, as it would make Ed Wade look like a genius for being a buyer, rather than a seller, at the trade deadline. Just the fact that they've gotten within striking distance undoubtedly validates the decision in Ed Wade's own mind. After all, we know that he takes great pride in building teams that are just good enough to miss the playoffs.

Jason: Good write up. But Hamels wouldn't be on short rest. He'd have a normal 4 days.

Jason: They were ripping him for his comments after last night's game, where he didn't commit to starting Sunday. Some people are still annoyed that he left his last start as well.

Even Mitch Williams, who I've come to enjoy as an analyst, was pitching in, although his criticism was at least tempered a bit.

Oh ... So what's the big dang deal? Thanks Brian; for some reason, I was thinking short rest all along. Start Hamels without batting an eye! No brainer.

I agree, BAP. The Wild Card is the tougher route, but with series against the Mets and Brewers looming, I almost don't care who wins that game between the two tonight, as long as the Phils get a win. If we enter the weekend within 2 of the division and 3.5 of the wild card with 3 and 4 to play against each, I'll take it.

Of course, I won't complain if we enter the Mets series back one either.

Good stroking there, Jason. Maybe the positive reinforcement will encourage Cole to step up and ask for the ball for Sunday night, because if you read his quotes in the paper, sure doesn't seem like he's on fire to take the hill for the biggest game of the year.

Hamels was asked the other day about being moved up to pitch against the Mets on Sunday. 99% of the pitchers in the major leagues would either relish the idea or would at least say, "I'll do whatever the team needs me to do." Hamels, on the other hand, did not exactly endorse the idea.

If the Phillies choose to move Hamels up, and he opts out, it would be a far, far more egregious offense than anything Jimmy Rollins ever did or said.

BAP - the Astros are - what? - 7 games behind the Brewers? Seems very unlikely that they could make up those 7 games and get passed the Cards, Phils/Mets.

Hamels would be on 4 days rest this weekend. The majority of his starts have been on 4 days rest this year. I believe his ERA is under 3 in such situations and his WL is 8-2. Would have to double-check that though.

I don't understand why the Phils wouldn't start Hamels on normal rest on Sunday. It is the last time they play the Mets this season and arguably one of their most important games all year.

One thing I don't understand is if the Phils are so concerned about Hamels' IP - then why did Cholly bring him out for the 8th inning? Wouldn't it have made more sense to mix-and-match in the 8th and bring out Seanez or Condrey to mop-up the 9th?

bay: you mean Hamels would have a choice in the matter? That is riddiculous. I'm getting angry about it and i'm a g-d damn Met fan!!! lol

With his injury history, I can understand a certain degree of paranoia about how his body will hold up the rest of the month. But I don't worry about the quotes. Schedule him for Sunday and he'll be ready to compete.

JW - One of best posts in a while. Hamels has been the most consistent Phils' player by far this year. Really only had two back-to-back below average starts all year. Otherwise, he has been almost money every time out. If the offense game him adequate support, he would be around 15-16 wins right now and in the Cy Young talk.

Plus I don't understand why people complain about Hamels "toughness?" The man is among the league leaders in IP and has finally learned this season how to become more economical with his pitches. I will take a "smart/savvy" pitcher over a "tough" pitcher almost any day of the week.

He's a 23/24 year old starting pitcher. An emphasis on toughness is probably a vice.

WIP has been bashing Cole ever since he took himself out of that game. Most of the criticisms are by some guy claiming to be "old school", who talks about how Lefty used to "throw 300 easy". These criticisms are ridiculous, but there's no denying that Cole realizes how important he is to this team, and knows his word carries more weight than Cholly's. I don't understand why anyone would want to push a 24 year old, oft-injured ace past his limit, but there's nothing rational about the criticism of him. I do think Cole's attitude rubs some people the wrong way, as might be reflected in his poor run support, but he deserves more than a little leeway.

sophist: Yeah, it's pretty unrealistic to think the Astros could make up 7 games, and pass up 3 teams in the process. But I was looking at the WC standings and I just happened to notice that they're suddenly only a few games behind the Phillies. After what the Rockies did last year, maybe I'm just a little paranoid.

Also, I'm sure you, of all people, picked up on my double standard. The Astros are 7 games out of the WC and they're still in it. The Phillies are 2 games out of the division lead and all hope is lost.

JW- I'm not too concerned about last night's quotes from Hamels either. I think a player's focus is game to game. Not ready to think about Sunday on Tuesday right after a game.
Just because he doesn't give the usual cliche answers to a reporter's questions doesn't mean a thing.

Apparently, some posters here think pitchers make the decision about when they pitch. Actually, it's up to the manager. Hamels' non-commital answer was him simply being politic by neither usurping Charlie's decision nor insulting teammate Kendricks, whose turn would be skipped. People criticizing him for that are ignorant.

However, if Charlie were to ask him to take the ball Sunday and he begged off, that would be quite a different story.

Yeah, BAP, considering the Phils are only 2 games out after the toughest part of their remaining schedule, and have 7 games left against the two leading teams, I'd say they have a good shot.

This time last year the Rockies were 5 games out of the division race and 4 out of the WC race. Houston is 7.5 out of the WC race and 12 out of the division race. The Rockies played April at a 20-8 pace and still had to win a 1-game playoff to keep going.

bap:Also, I'm sure you, of all people, picked up on my double standard. The Astros are 7 games out of the WC and they're still in it. The Phillies are 2 games out of the division lead and all hope is lost.

exactly because to some the season has been over since may and that the phillies don't win games, other teams lose them.

Hamels is a great pitcher. I'm thrilled to have him on the Phillies. But there's little relationship between being a great pitcher and being a great teammate, and those who are rationalizing his past actions are being way too easy on him.

Cole has definitely shown a predisposition for putting himself far ahead of the team. This is September. When a team is in the playoff race, it's the norm that you ask certain players to do things they wouldn't normally do. The Phillies wouldn't even be asking Hamels to pitch on shortened rest. He'd be pitching on the same rest as usual; he'd just be taking someone else's turn in the rotation. If he won't do that, then he's a self-centered pr**k. It's really that simple. Surely Cole has to realize that, which is why I think he'll agree to pitch -- even though, privately, maybe he won't be happy about it.

Hamels 2008

4 days rest: 16 starts, 113 IP, 2.47 ERA, 8-2
5 days rest: 11 starts, 74 IP, 4.14 ERA, 4-5
6 days rest: 2 starts, 16 IP, 1.69 ERA, 0-1

Clout, it will never reach the point where we learn that Charlie has asked him to take the ball and he doesn't because this will all be negotiated behind the scenes ahead of time. And if Hamels decides it's not right for him, Charlie will say team decided they need him strong for the stretch drive. You may be right about Hamels not wanting to embarrass Kendrick publicly, but I would have liked to see more of a "whatever the team needs me to do" cliche coming out of his mouth

sophist: Not sure what you're talking about when you say "good shot." Good shot for the division or good shot for the Wild Card? I'd argue that their shot at the WC (4.5 games back) isn't good at all unless you're betting on a Brewer collapse.

Clout: I believe the "uproar" happened because Manuel was asked about Hamels starting Sunday during the postgame conference, and Manuel was in favor of doing it. I believe -- emphasis on I believe, as I'm just gathering from what I heard this morning -- that quote was then brought to Cole, who didn't have the enthusiastic response one would expect.

But you may be right, even if they did bring him Charlie's quote -- he may have just wanted to wait until hearing it from Charlie himself.

I bet this will all be forgotten, as I can't imagine he'll turn the ball down on Sunday.

clay: Dubee & Cholly have pretty much given every indication that they intend to move Cole up to pitch on Sunday. If it doesn't happen, I think you'll be able to infer why. Besides, if Cole were to veto the idea, you can be sure that his teammates would be infuriated. One of them would surely leak the news to the media, anonymously.

John: Actually, Manuel said nothing of the sort (and it was Monday, not Sunday). According to Hagen in Tuesday's DN, when asked about skipping KK's turn to pitch Hamels vs. the Mets, Manual said, "It's something we've definitely got to discuss." When asked if Happ was a possible replacement he said, "He's down there, isn't he?"

At no time in that post-game conference did Manuel directly say he favored pitching Hamels on Sunday.

clout - I meant the combined probability of a division or WC berth. 4.5 back with a month to play (although 4 head-to-head against the Brewers) is a tough climb. It looks like's various odd reports give them no more than a 5% chance of winning the WC. Obviously those numbers change wildly from week to week. I wouldn't say the chances are any more than 10%.'s odds for a division title range from 25%-35%.

I'd day the odds of some kind of playoff berth are just under 50-50. Those could change drastically as soon as Sunday/Monday, however. The Mets play the Brewers/Phils 4 times before Sunday. The Brewers have 4 games against the Padres this weekend. All three teams have very good records in their last ~15 games.'s PECOTA adjusted playoff odds give the Astros a .73% chance of making the playoffs.

As I said, these things change wildly in a matter of days, so I don't put much stock in them. But they're a good reference point.

bap: Would you rather have a great pitcher or a great teammate? By all accounts, Steve Carlton was a loner who didn't interact much with his teammates. That seemed to work out OK for the franchise.

Hamels certainly wouldn't be the first self-centered great athlete, now would he? If he refuses to take the ball, then that's a big issue. If he's asked about 5 days prior, and is non-committal, but then takes the ball, who really cares? I'll take a non-committal Hamels on the mound over Kendrick any day. Anyone disagree?

sophist: I think BP's odds of the Wild Card are probably high and odds of division are probably low. I'd put the WC chances at about 5% and the division at about 50-50. This is based on my belief that Delgado won't continue the 1.000+ OPS of the past 2 weeks for the rest of the season. If he does, then the Phillies have no hope.

Just to be clear, my earlier post was intended to correct John on the time element of Manuel's pronouncement. It was not Sunday and not Monday. Last night was the first time that Manuel said he favored throwing Hamels. And I'm pretty sure we'll find out if Hamels doesn't want to take the ball.

Over 29 starts this season you have logged 203 innings, for an average of 7 innings per start, and have hurled an average 103.1 pitches per start. You truly are the staff ace and your 4-5 more starts here in September will be a big determinant if the Phillies make the playoffs or not.

Both ESPN and list Hamels as the probable starter on Sunday.

clout - just to be clear, the highest lists the WC odds at is their PECOTA-adjusted report which lists it at ~5%. All their other forecasts list it lower (~3%.)

Their highest division odd is ~36%, which I agree is a little low.

hamels has to start sunday. and clean up his grass clippings already!!

About all I can criticize Hamels for is not having pat, generic answers ready for reporters. He's said his body feels great but, he gives every indication that he gives a good deal of attention to his pitch counts and his IP. I think you can't put any stock in his comments - wait to hear it from Manuel. Remember, a big reason Hamels has missed the Mets in teh 2d half is that Manuel didn't shuffle the rotation to give Hamels the first start after the break. He opted to give Hamels an extra two days rest - Hamels' response was that he felt stiff, or something, indicating that he didn't appreciate the longer rest either. The smart money is on him taking the hill Sunday, assuming teh weather doesn't intercede.

sophist: "after the toughest part of their schedule"? I'd say they're still in it. Games against Mets, Marlins and Brewers look pretty tough to me. The Phils will be done with the toughest part of their schedule on 9/14, the day of their final game with the Brewers.

Jack: Agreed entirely. But if Cholly asks Cole to start and he says no, that would be a different story. That was really the situation I was hypothesizing.

I think the uproar is because Cole gave a fairly impolitic answer when asked if he would be willing to start on Sunday. All he had to say was: "I'll do whatever the team needs me to do." That's what 99% of the players in the major leagues would say. Given Cole's non-committal answer, plus his history of taking himself out of games & announcing his unwillingness to pitch on shortened rest, I don't think it's wildly speculative to imagine that he could veto the idea of pitching on Sunday.

clout - yeah. I guess I was considering the stretch of 10 games against the Dodgers, Mets, and Cubs as the toughest part left a little over a week ago. It's pretty easy to extend that stretch to include the following week including 3 against the Mets, 4 against MIL, and 3 against the Marlins.

BAP - You're posts re: Hamels are very Parker-like this morning.

This all seems silly now, when at the beginning of the season, BLers were arguing about Myers being the team's ace, not Hamels. I'm getting a little tired of reading about how frail Hamels is supposed to be. I guess Zambrano is not "fragile", I think he's shot for the year.

clout: 50-50 for the division? That's pretty optimistic, considering they're 2 games back with 29 to play. That alone reduces the odds to about 45%. Reducing it further is the fact that the Mets have owned the Phillies in head-to-head play this year & get to play that last head-to-head series at home.

The two teams' remaining schedules are even at best. The Phillies still have a 4-game series with the Brewers, while the Mets have a 4-game series with the Cubs. But there's a good chance the Cubs will have clinched the division by that time (or sometime during the series). If that happens, the Mets will be playing the Cubs' Triple A squad in the remaining games.

I'd put the odds of a division title at around 40%, and the odds of a playoff appearance around 45%.

BAP: That means you think the Phils have a better chance of winning the WC than the division. You must be predicting a Brewers collapse.

sophist: It's funny. I had the same thought (about my own posts). That means maybe it's time for me to say nothing further on the subject. Let's just put it this way: I was a bit put off by Hamels' non-committal response to a soft-ball question about pitching on Sunday. But it's probably nothing more than what Hugh says: a case of not giving the politically correct answer to a reporter's question. I do expect Hamels to take the ball on Sunday.

b-a-p: If only we were 7 games back with 17 to play. THEN we'd have a fightin' chance!

clout: No. It means I think the combined odds of getting into the playoffs via either the division title or the WC are better than the odds of just winning the division.

clout: No, I think he means the division is 40% and the WC is %5. Not that the chance at the wild card is 45%.

I don't care what Cole says or does; I am gonna do whatever it takes to help the team win.

In my case that would be:

a) Not volunteering to be Ryan Howard's platoon partner.

b) Not making any positive predictions regarding game outcomes.

c) Not ever EVER booing J-Roll (cause we know it hurts his play)

d) Not criticing Golson, either, because (even though Chollie will only stick him in a game if Jimy Williams puts a gun to his head) that would cause anguish to his family

e) Shout out for Bruceg to start, and then stop posting

f) Antagonize Mets' trolls (Okay. That won't help the team, but it will make me feel better.)

g) Come up with some outlandish thing to post on "Cole Hamels Facts" if he wins five more games.

h) ummmm....guess that's it.

Mets game is about to start... in case anyone is interested.

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Hamels' begging out of the eighth inning against the Cubs - the same eighth inning in which the game was lost. That combined with last nights comments put me off as well.

Andy - Not so fast on your point a)

If you're a right-handed stick with gaps power; and can knock down Dobbs' and Utley's errant throws, then I would want you to be Howard's platoon partner.

ftd - I didn't hear about Hamels asking out of the Cubs game.

I think a lot of Philadelphia fans wish their athletes would be more outspoken and truthful (especially with deceptive managements like the Eagles and Phillies), but when guys like Rollins and Hamels don't give the pre-packaged, rah-rah answers, people get upset. I'm not saying that what they've said and done is right, but they're speaking their minds. Cole doesn't think he can go another inning, Rollins thinks the fans aren't helping the team, and in the grand scheme of things, I'm glad we have players who aren't boring like Tom Brady or overall jerks like Barry Bonds.

Hamels said he had nothing left after the 7th inning of the Cubs game and that's why he was taken out.

Plus, it's not like it's nobodies talking. Cole should be a legit Cy Young candidate, and Rollins is a year off an MVP. Like clout said, he'll take the ball if Charlie tells him to. But, when the question is posed to him suddenly and he's possibly trying to display a little tact, like someone suggested, I don't mind him being noncommital.

God forbid a pitcher with nothing left tells his manager he has nothing left. I'd much rather he go out and give up a couple of hits before it becomes clear to everyone that he has nothing left.

I'm right-handed snook with a "gap" in power; and can knock down Slobs and Uthers (sic) in the front row with my errant throws.

Could someone, anyone, PLEASE get Delgado out?

Delgado RBI single. 1-0 Mets, top 1

Hamels is in his 3rd year, 24 years old, and leading the league in innings pitched. Yet somehow he is a wuss bc he asked out of one game where he was at 108 pitches, had pitched 7 innings, had a 4-1 lead, and his arm didn't feel right.
If only he were a bulldog like Mark Prior, then we could really get behind him.

1-0 Mets already... 1st and 3rd one out.

All this talk about the chances at the postseason via WC or division are moot. Don't you guys understand that Jimmy freakin' Rollins predicted 100 wins for this team. That should be more than enough to get this team into the playoffs, regardless of the means.

Let's see, 100 wins, minus the 76 they have already won, means that they just need to go 24-0 in their last 23 games. Hang on a minute...........

I better see some IBBs for Delgado this weekend!

"Hamels is in his 3rd year, 24 years old, and leading the league in innings pitched. Yet somehow he is a wuss bc he asked out of one game where he was at 108 pitches, had pitched 7 innings, had a 4-1 lead, and his arm didn't feel right."

And people wonder why Rollins had less than flattering things to say about Phillies fans.

CJ: I think that's right, although now that I think about it, I'd say the 5% WC odds are a bit low.

To win the WC, the Phillies need to end up with a better record than the Brewers and Cardinals (and Astros), but a worse record than the Mets. If they end up with a better record than the Brewers, despite being 4.5 games out right now, there's a very strong probability that they wouldn't need the WC because they would just win the division outright. Still, given the 4 head-to-head games with Milwaukee, the odds of this scenario are probably a little better than 5%. Let's call them 10%. That, plus a 40% chance of winning the division, gives the Phillies about a 50-50 shot at making the playoffs.

Preacher - He was counting the playoff game they'll win this year, too.

Well, the Brewers certainly aren't doing us any favors. They look poised to get swept.

I'm hearing the issue of Hamel's start on Sunday differently than most posters here. Somewhere I read that Dubee and Manuel are looking not just at his between-starts rest this week, but at how many 4 day rests he gets in a row. The concern is that when he gets only the 4 days too many times in a row, he struggles.

Anybody got stats?

Church grand slam.

Well, not much reason to watch the rest of this game...

Thanks, Brewers. Way to lay down. 5-0.

GS for Church. Let's hope this is the beginning of a Brewer collapse, I suppose.

Anyone get the awful feeling that the Mets aren't going to let up this year? It keeps me up at night.

Well, make that a 39% chance at the division title and a 12% chance at the WC.

the mets won their first 8 out 9 games in september last year. I know what you mean about last year, but they won't keep winning.

Well, it looks like Ollie is a little wild so far today. Lead-off walk, got behind in the count and Hardy singled to left. 7 balls, two strikes.


The Phillies don't exactly control their own destiny, but it's silly to pretend like last year could happen again. That was a monumental collapse. If the Phillies win consistently in September, especially taking 2 of 3 from the Mets, they'll probably make the playoffs. If they don't, they won't.

Somewhere in all of these odds calculations, one needs to take into consideration that the Mets are playing great ball and the Phillies aren't. The Mets have won 16 of 22 -- soon to be 17 of 23 (.739) -- and have beaten every team that came their way, including a very hot Brewers team. The Phillies have won 13 of their last 23 (.565). But those 4 wins over the Dogers don't look so impressive, considering the Dodgers were in the midst of a horrific losing streak. And there have been at least 3 other games during this 23-game stretch which the Phillies flat-out blew. The Mets are playing like a team that is going to win the division. The Phillies are playing like a team that is going to be spectators in October. That could change but, if you're projecting odds, it's certainly a factor in the Mets' favor.

wilson: One rather big difference between the 2007 Mets and the 2008 Mets: Johann Santana.

That's true. The Mets swept 3 from Atlanta, took 2 of 3 in Cincy and swept 3 from the Astros at home before taking 2 of 3 from the Braves. So they went 10-2 in between the Phillies' series. But, they got swept by the Phils at Shea and lost 2 of 3 in Washington. They righted the ship a bit by taking 3 of 4 in Florida. But then it all caved in, losing 6 of 7 at home against Washington, St. Louis and Florida. But they were white hot in the beginning of September for sure.

Time and time again, BL'ers have cried that Manuel (or Dubee) do not recognize when a pitcher doesn't have it.

I'm okay with Hamels giving Cholly some help.

@bap -- it all depends on when you want to part the marker.

You blast the phillies wins against teh Dodgers, but then include the losses.

If you consider the 4 game sweep by the Dodgers was our low point. Since then the Phillies are 12-6.

The Mets are 13-5.

Sounds like they are playing about the same right now.

Last year, the Brewers had an 8.5 game lead in the NL Central, and were still leading the division as late as September 12. If they blow their WC lead this year, they are going to have some seriously irate fans. But I doubt they will. They were playing very well before this series and this will probably just end up being a small blemish on their way to the WC.

"Let's call them 10%. That, plus a 40% chance of winning the division, gives the Phillies about a 50-50 shot at making the playoffs."

It is invalid to add percentages.
If they Phils had a 50% chance of winning the division and a 50% chance of getting the WC, then you can't say they have a 100% chance at the playoffs.

Hey Sophist, got any stats on what percentage of posts in this thread contain the word "if?"

Just wonderin'.

Hey guys, If you like Bball, Check out my site

its easy. Hamels is our ace, we have the best chance to win with him on the mound. He needs to start agianst Santana.He needs to realize this time of the year is critical every game counts ever game needs to be looked at as a playoff game. With the Mets getting hot the Phils cant afford to loose at all. And they shouldnt not with a powerhouse offence like they have. Chuck needs to get in the ass. Its crunch time philly. lets play ball. 2008 AND 2009 NL EAST CHAMPS! LETS GO PHILS !!!!

Ollie has thrown half his pitches for balls. I don't think he knows how to focus with a big lead. I expect an implosion from him and the Brewers to at least get close.

If the Phillies actually had a set-up man, nobody would have cared about Hamels leaving the game against the Cubs after 7 innings.

I understand they have Johan this year. They also don't have Maine or Wagner yet. Pedro might be out and Niese lasted three innings.

And a horrible bullpen, for good measure.

I'm not saying the Phillies aren't without fault, just we'll see on Monday. I love the matchups (if Hamels goes). If we take 2 out of 3 the attitude changes considerably.

Regarding Hamels versus Santana, I have always wondered about the wisdom of putting an ace against an ace.

My thinking is this- Ace against non ace is generally as close to a sure thing as we can get in baseball. Ace against ace, its basically 50-50. I would rather throw our #5 who has to pitch and likely loose sometime against their ace, and throw our ace against their #2 or #3.

Ace vs. #2 or lower=.9 wins
#5 vs. Other= .1 wins
Ace vs. Ace= .5 wins
#5 vs Other= .1 wins

The numbers are totally bogus, but you get the idea. I am not convinced, I just have always been curious.

"It is invalid to add percentages."

That was what I thought, when CJ wrote his post explaining my first post. But then I got to thinking about it & I couldn't put my finger on why it's invalid.

If the Phillies have a 50% chance of getting in under Scenario 1, and a 50% chance of getting in under Scenario 2, and Scenarios 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive of each other, why doesn't that mean they are 100% certain to get in? I don't really get it.

Because you're not taking into account the third possibility of not making the playoffs period

bap: Sort of.

They may not be mutually exclusive because achieving a record to pass the Brewers might also mean passing the Mets. I guess it'd be fair to say that there is a 40% chance the Phils finish with a record better than the Mets and a 5% chance they finish with a record worse than the Mets but better than the Brewers and Cardinals.

I would think you could add the percentages in that case (which is sorta the same as what you were saying all along).

Phantastic: Of course you are. You're giving the Phils a 55% chance of not making the playoffs. Is math that hard?

Uhh because I was replying to BAP. And your numbers are meaningless

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel