Correction.

 

The Marlins are currently at 1.9% to make the playoffs.

Or 0.7% like I said before depending on where you look.

 

http://www.sportsclubstats.com/MLB/National/NLEastern/Marlins.html

 

 

No opinions. Just math.

 

 

I'm guessing you thought we had like a 15% chance of making the playoffs.

.

Or 0.7% like I said before depending on where you look.

 

http://www.sportsclubstats.com/MLB/National/NLEastern/Marlins.html

 

 

No opinions. Just math.

 

 

I'm guessing you thought we had like a 15% chance of making the playoffs.

 

How could it be just math if you have two results of 0.7% and 1.9%?

 

If it was just math, it would be one or the other...

 

That's a cool site, though. Looks like the magic number is at least 86 wins...

C'mon, dude.

 

How about this.......

 

Their chances of making the playoffs is less then 2%.

 

It's in absolute miracle territory, not "halfway through the (Brewers) series and I think you see what's possible" territory like you said earlier.

C'mon, dude.

 

How about this.......

 

Their chances of making the playoffs is less then 2%.

 

It's in absolute miracle territory, not "halfway through the (Brewers) series and I think you see what's possible" territory like you said earlier.

 

 

 

I said it's definitely possible, but certainly not probable. What about that statement isn't true?

K.

There are space blue whales and their semen is being confused for dark matter.

 

Hey its possible, but certainly not probable.

 

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

 

 

K.

 

 

They're 3 1/2 games out. If they pulled it out of their ass, it will not have been the most improbable come back in baseball history. Not even by a long shot.

 

 

There are space blue whales and their semen is being confused for dark matter.

 

Stop trying to make this thread sexier

 

 

They're 3 1/2 games out. If they pulled it out of their ass, it will not have been the most improbable come back in baseball history. Not even by a long shot.

 

 

This.

 

While it may not happen, reading some people's opinions you'd think we're talking about the Rockies or the Diamondbacks' playoff odds here.

 

 

This.

 

While it may not happen, reading some people's opinions you'd think we're talking about the Rockies or the Diamondbacks' playoff odds here.

 

 

 

No, just the 1.9% chance that MLB.com is giving us.

No, just the 1.9% chance that MLB.com is giving us.

 

 

I think our only beef is that you have conceided this season, and it's close enough that it would be stupid to have given up.

 

 

Even if we don't make the playoffs this is one fun year. Just think about it did any of you really think we would be looking at the standings saying OMG we have a chance? Enjoy it and have have fun.

 

 

Even if we don't make the playoffs this is one fun year. Just think about it did any of you really think we would be looking at the standings saying OMG we have a chance? Enjoy it and have have fun.

 

 

I would have said it was possible... with Jose Fernandez leading the Cy Young charge.

 

Without him? Wouldn't have guessed in a million years.

 

 

I would have said it was possible... with Jose Fernandez leading the Cy Young charge.

 

Without him? Wouldn't have guessed in a million years.

 

I would have also thought Jose would be in line for the Cy Young, in fact I bet money on it before the season started (don't tell Selig)

 

That being said, it is hard to imagine Jose having a better season than the one Kershaw is having. Jose is great, Kershaw is inhuman.

 

 

I would have also thought Jose would be in line for the Cy Young, in fact I bet money on it before the season started (don't tell Selig)

 

That being said, it is hard to imagine Jose having a better season than the one Kershaw is having. Jose is great, Kershaw is inhuman.

 

 

I agree.

 

Speaking of that, if I had an MVP vote, how could I justify giving it to Kershaw, who will have appeared in less than 30 of his teams games and will have pitched below 200 innings, over a guy who played in 162 of his teams games and led the league in most offensive categories while keeping his team in post-season discussion most of the year?

 

I get why this is a thing, but I hope the rest of the voters agree that Stanton is the right decision.

 

 

I agree.

 

Speaking of that, if I had an MVP vote, how could I justify giving it to Kershaw, who will have appeared in less than 30 of his teams games and will have pitched below 200 innings, over a guy who played in 162 of his teams games and led the league in most offensive categories while keeping his team in post-season discussion most of the year?

 

I get why this is a thing, but I hope the rest of the voters agree that Stanton is the right decision.

 

I really hope that people realize one thing. The Dodgers were expected to make the playoffs either way, and while Kershaw is amazing, they're still contenders without him. The Marlins were expected to be in last again with no possibility of contention past, say, oh, idk, June 1st, and without Stanton, this team is absolutely in last place. With Stanton, the Marlins are in contention, the Marlins are not in last place and will not be in last place barring a massive collapse [and by massive, I mean lose all 19 remaining games].

 

So, I hope the writers realize this.

 

Dodgers without Kershaw - contending

 

Dodgers with Kershaw - division champions

 

Either way, in the playoffs most likely.

 

Marlins without Stanton - last place, very close to 100 loss season

 

Marlins with Stanton - contending

 

Huge, huge difference.

 

 

It seems like as the days go by, more and more people are taking Stanton.

 

I understand how great Kershaw's year has been, but the fact that it's this close is kinda crazy. I mean, when Verlander won, at least he threw a ridiculous 251 IP. That's as involved as a SP can be in this era of baseball, and because Jacoby Ellsbury, Jose Bautista, Curtis Granderson, and Miguel Cabrera probably took votes away from each other... Verlander won. There was no "unanimous" choice, as several people were deserving.

 

Kershaw, as dominant as he has been, will not even pitch in 30 games or reach 200 IP (despite the fact that he was able to start the season more than a week before the rest of the league could). And will Kershaw's 2014 really end up being that much better than the 2013 season that saw Andrew McCuthen win the NL MVP? Probably not, and it could end up being even less impressive, actually. Among position players in the NL this season, there is Giancarlo Stanton and then there is everyone else. He is the clear-cut choice among all position players in the NL, so there is nobody else that should take away from his vote totals (like the AL MVP in 2011). He is having a season that, considering his age, is historic. He's also been able to do it in the largest ballpark in major league baseball, which people tend to forget as well.

 

I think we could all go on and on about this. I hope it plays out the way it should.

 

 

I think Stanton should win it, but you're making it seem like Kershaw has no business in the conversation. Kershaw's WAR is actually higher than Stanton's despite the time missed. He's having a historic season.

 

The only problem I have with it is that there seems to be no such debate in the AL. If pitchers are getting the award, it's weird that there seems to be no talk of Felix over Trout. So it seems like a bit of a double-standard just because these guys play on better teams which is dumb.

I think our only beef is that you have conceided this season, and it's close enough that it would be stupid to have given up.

 

 

 

This is exactly what I'm saying, 1.9% chance or not, I'm not giving up and I don't think it's unrealistic to still give a shit about our postseason chances, unlikely as they may be.

I think Stanton should win it, but you're making it seem like Kershaw has no business in the conversation. Kershaw's WAR is actually higher than Stanton's despite the time missed. He's having a historic season.

 

The only problem I have with it is that there seems to be no such debate in the AL. If pitchers are getting the award, it's weird that there seems to be no talk of Felix over Trout. So it seems like a bit of a double-standard just because these guys play on better teams which is dumb.

 

 

Well, Trout is getting his due from 12-13, as well. If it's even close in the AL, he wins it just because he hasn't yet.

 

Since you bring up 2013, Kershaw's WAR of 8.4 was a half-win better than McCutchen's 7.9. That didn't seem to matter when Cutch received 28 of 30 first place votes (Kershaw received 0 and finished 7th!). What's funny to me is that Kershaw, while he is having an amazing year, isn't really having a year much better than 2013, and he isn't really having a better year at all if you consider the fact that he will have put up similar numbers in a lot less starts. His ERA and WHIP are a tad lower, he has a few more wins, but the fact that those numbers are going to be posted in a lot less total IP should mean something (and it does, because even with lowering those numbers, his WAR will decline from last year due to less time on the mound).

 

Last year, Cutch was the clear cut favorite despite Kershaw's historic season. Things should not change this year, and the writers should not go reinventing the wheel. Kershaw deserves the Cy, but Stanton deserves the MVP.

 

 

I really hope that people realize one thing. The Dodgers were expected to make the playoffs either way, and while Kershaw is amazing, they're still contenders without him. The Marlins were expected to be in last again with no possibility of contention past, say, oh, idk, June 1st, and without Stanton, this team is absolutely in last place. With Stanton, the Marlins are in contention, the Marlins are not in last place and will not be in last place barring a massive collapse [and by massive, I mean lose all 19 remaining games].

 

So, I hope the writers realize this.

 

Dodgers without Kershaw - contending

Dodgers with Kershaw - division champions

 

Either way, in the playoffs most likely.

 

Marlins without Stanton - last place, very close to 100 loss season

Marlins with Stanton - contending

 

Huge, huge difference.

 

 

 

This is the big thing that bugs me every year about the MVP award regardless of if a Marlin is part of the discussion. So many voters gravitate to voting towards players who are already on great, contending teams. Or there's the concept that an MVP must come from a playoff team. Stanton is a perfect example of how that's not always true but he wouldn't be the first example.

This is the big thing that bugs me every year about the MVP award regardless of if a Marlin is part of the discussion. So many voters gravitate to voting towards players who are already on great, contending teams. Or there's the concept that an MVP must come from a playoff team. Stanton is a perfect example of how that's not always true but he wouldn't be the first example.

 

 

Yea, Paul Goldschmidt could have easily been the NL MVP last season. I understand why it was Cutch, and I can't say I disagree with it, but Goldy did put up a hell of a season.