9/14 Post Game Thread

[SilverBullet]

47 minutes ago, GuitarPik said:

Fuck David Samson. What an ass. 

Depending on how you say this out loud it can have many different meanings.  

[SilverBullet]

2 hours ago, jeffreysfishfry said:

If the Marlins win it all this year, be prepared for an asterisk narrative, with the shortened season, covid, and the Braves game. In reality we know we have had to endure more adversity than any other team.  We are on a stretch of playing 24 days in a row not counting double headers. We lost what, 18 players who tested positive for two weeks, while the cesspool media twisted the truth.

 

 

 

Many will say this season was easier than others, even though despite less games there are a myriad of reasons why this season has actually been harder than others, but my point is that if this season was easier than others then the really good teams would have had it easier as well and would have ran roughshod over the competition. Only the Dodgers have done it right and have been able to make this season look "easier." I give them plenty of credit but there are plenty of supposedly great teams who haven't been able to escape from the pack so I think that's even more reason to tip your caps to the overachieving teams like us.

[FishFan95]

35 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

Man if you had told me when Jeter bought the team that in 2020 the Marlins would most likely not even reach 30 losses... lmao I probably would have went into total shock with a massive smile on my face thinking we would reach over 130 wins! 

If they ever come up with time travel they should do a social experiment where they tell half of the Marlins fans that the Marlins only lose around 30 games and tell the other 8 that they only win around 30 games in 2020.

[Photo-Realistic Billy]

6 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

I'll admit that's a little Loria/Samson-esque. I'm as frustrated with the lack of coverage as anyone but never ask for positive coverage, force the media to give it to you. It comes off as begging. 

Reminds me of that time post 2012 fire sale that Loria put put a page in the newspapers trying to explain himself and ask for forgiveness. I even agreed with much of it but the act was not well received. 

I think the difference is the Loria Marlins sent out this kind of stuff in the off-season, after signing a mediocre reliever. The Jeter Marlins just hit 80% in Playoff Probability with a magic number at like 16 with two weeks left.

[FishFan95]

6 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

Many will say this season was easier than others, even though despite less games there are a myriad of reasons why this season has actually been harder than others, but my point is that if this season was easier than others then the really good teams would have had it easier as well and would have ran roughshod over the competition. Only the Dodgers have done it right and have been able to make this season look "easier." I give them plenty of credit but there are plenty of supposedly great teams who haven't been able to escape from the pack so I think that's even more reason to tip your caps to the overachieving teams like us.

The only thing that I can think of as reasons why it might be easier for the Marlins would be that because of the shortened season the Marlins did not have to worry about inning limits on their young arms, so they could just let the kids play. But that is not as much of an advantage as it is a fast forward button for the team.

[FishFan95]

3 hours ago, SilverBullet said:

This last week feels like the week where we established that this is no fluke, this team is for real, people can no longer downplay how well we've played. 

Marlins beat the Nationals....

... BuT It'S onLy ThE NatIONalS!

Marlins beat the Mets (when deGrom isn't pitching)...

...bUT iT'S OnLY ThE mEtS!

Marlins beat the Phillies...

...bUt IT's oNLy tHe phILLIes!

Marlins take 2 of 3 in Atlanta...

...but it's only the Braves????

 

[1.618]

39 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

Many will say this season was easier than others, even though despite less games there are a myriad of reasons why this season has actually been harder than others, but my point is that if this season was easier than others then the really good teams would have had it easier as well and would have ran roughshod over the competition. Only the Dodgers have done it right and have been able to make this season look "easier." I give them plenty of credit but there are plenty of supposedly great teams who haven't been able to escape from the pack so I think that's even more reason to tip your caps to the overachieving teams like us.

In all honesty all or most of the teams that where projected to be playoff contenders are first place or very close to it.  Yes, the win to loss spread doesn't appear much but the win percentage still backs it up.  I'm not sure but if we where to take the teams of last year at this time I'm sure they would be close to this years with record and win percentage. 

The Dodgers are the exception because they are that good. The Marlins may be overachieving from the standpoint of how fast they have emerged, but not because of anything else IMO. 

If I had time I would compare last year's results at this time from this year.  Win percentage is the key, I think. Right now I might do a ball and strikes comparison on the Phillies series.  

[FishFan95]

Magic numbers (team):

Playoffs: 12 (MIL*/COL*)

Division 2nd place: 14 (PHI*)

Division 1st place: 17 (ATL-x)

Games left: 15

Despite a higher magic number to win the east the Marlins still control their destiny since they play Atlanta 4 more times.

 

* = Marlins hold the tiebreaker

-x = other team holds the tiebreaker

 

Note that the magic numbers posted assume all respective teams play 60 games.

Edited September 15, 2020 by FishFan95

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, FishFan95 said:

The only thing that I can think of as reasons why it might be easier for the Marlins would be that because of the shortened season the Marlins did not have to worry about inning limits on their young arms, so they could just let the kids play. But that is not as much of an advantage as it is a fast forward button for the team.

I mean, the same could be said of other teams, too, though.

41 minutes ago, jeffreysfishfry said:

In all honesty all or most of the teams that where projected to be playoff contenders are first place or very close to it.  Yes, the win to loss spread doesn't appear much but the win percentage still backs it up.  I'm not sure but if we where to take the teams of last year at this time I'm sure they would be close to this years with record and win percentage. 

The Dodgers are the exception because they are that good. The Marlins may be overachieving from the standpoint of how fast they have emerged, but not because of anything else IMO. 

If I had time I would compare last year's results at this time from this year.  Win percentage is the key, I think. Right now I might do a ball and strikes comparison on the Phillies series.  

What results were you trying to compare?  I could look into some numbers if you mean recordwise, but not sure what you're wanting to compare.  Do you mean 45 games in?

40 minutes ago, FishFan95 said:

Magic numbers (team):

Playoffs: 12 (MIL*)

Division 2nd place: 14 (PHI*)

Division 1st place: 17 (ATL-x)

Games left: 15

Despite a higher magic number to win the east the Marlins still control their destiny since they play Atlanta 4 more times.

 

* = Marlins hold the tiebreaker

-x = other team holds the tiebreaker

 

Note that the magic numbers posted assume all respective teams play 60 games.

I don't quite understand these numbers.

[FishFan95]

Just now, rmc523 said:

I mean, the same could be said of other teams, too, though.

Just think that not having to worry about prospect pitchers innings is an advantage for any team with a deep farm- at least in terms of pitching like the Marlins. More of a fast forward into the future than an advantage anyway.

2 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

I don't quite understand these numbers.

To calculate the magic number you take your team's wins and add it to the other teams losses. Then take the total number of games plus one and subtract out the previous sum.

Ex:

Marlins have 24 wins

Phillies have 23 losses.

There are 60 games

61-(24+23)=14

 

Of course with tiebreakers you can clinch with a magic number of 1 if your tiebreaker favors you. You would have to get it to zero to be sure.

[1.618]

40 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

What results were you trying to compare?  I could look into some numbers if you mean recordwise, but not sure what you're wanting to compare.  Do you mean 45 games in?

 

rmc523, yeah I was referring to this years record opposed to last year 45 games in. Win percentage would be around the same. Thats the main factor because it solidifies, even now on a short season any streaks have leveled out  

You can if you like, look up that information.  Might take some time so it's entirely up to you. 

Edited September 15, 2020 by jeffreysfishfry

[1.618]

A real assessment is taking last years playoff teams and see where they stood in the standings 45 games in.  The streaks should have leveled out by then. 

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, jeffreysfishfry said:

rmc523, yeah I was referring to this years record opposed to last year 45 games in. Win percentage would be around the same. Thats the main factor because it solidifies, even now on a short season any streaks have leveled out  

You can if you like, look up that information.  Might take some time so it's entirely up to you. 

Baseball reference has a ton of info like that including results.

 

Through 45 games last year, they were 14-31, a .311 winning percentage.

 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIA/2019-schedule-scores.shtml

Edited September 15, 2020 by rmc523

[GuitarPik]

4 hours ago, SonOfJack said:

That feels like an inappropriate downvote from a shared tweet. Someone ban @GuitarPikplease. 

Aww shit, what did I do now?

[GuitarPik]

4 hours ago, SilverBullet said:

Depending on how you say this out loud it can have many different meanings.  

True, didn’t realize that. I thought with the amount this guy runs, and the shape of his gluteus Maximus, it was fairly obvious. 

[mk613]

8 hours ago, SonOfJack said:

 

God how this guy has a job I have no clue. He’s a utter moron..

[SilverBullet]

1 hour ago, mk613 said:

God how this guy has a job I have no clue. He’s a utter moron..

His current job is to make ridiculous comments to get people to talk about it... he's a professional at that! 

[SilverBullet]

Sounds like Jeter's "pay attention to us" press release is at least working and there seems to be a push with the same message on their social media accounts. My local morning radio station finally mentioned them and there's this type of stuff on their Twitter...

 

[fish53]

Watching MLB this morning and the Marlin highlights were one hit by us for two runs, two Matt Joyce catches and both Philly runs.  That is it.  No Miggy HR, no Starling HR but other games they show every ground ball out.  We still get minimal recognition even after taking 5 out of 7 in a rare, hugely important, 7 game series.  Even on MLB.COM the Marlins are not even listed in their top stories of the day.  Regardless of bias, the Marlin story, the 7 games series and the playoff implications should have made this more than an afterthought in coverage.

LATEST NEWS

• Padres on Dodgers' heels with 8th straight W
• Jumpman! Lewis' HR robbery Griffey-esque
• Another HR riles a Padres opponent
• Standout September players to watch
• Postseason Watch: White Sox extend lead
• Minor two-hits Mariners to split twin bill
• 1st base gets crowded on wonky Seattle play
• Engel’s clutch knock lifts White Sox in a pinch
• Exciting Latin stars 'hungry for the game'
• O's get their man with slick deflection play
• Five older players who still got it

[SilverBullet]

Sometimes I wonder what drives the coverage on something like MLB network because it's not like the Marlins aren't a great story, the people on there can't be totally obvlious to what the team is doing (unlike say a local news station that wouldn't even look at the scores), and all the MLB network people when they discuss the team on air seem like they enjoy the coverage... so it must just be money and ratings that say they have to cover larger market teams first and foremost. You would just think a network to MLB is more open to covering the real top stories over just the big teams. 

[rmc523]

3 hours ago, SilverBullet said:

Sometimes I wonder what drives the coverage on something like MLB network because it's not like the Marlins aren't a great story, the people on there can't be totally obvlious to what the team is doing (unlike say a local news station that wouldn't even look at the scores), and all the MLB network people when they discuss the team on air seem like they enjoy the coverage... so it must just be money and ratings that say they have to cover larger market teams first and foremost. You would just think a network to MLB is more open to covering the real top stories over just the big teams. 

Maybe especially this year they're trying to make up for lost revenue by mentioning the bigger teams?

Not saying it's right, especially for a network owned/run by the league which should in theory mean like you said coverage on the real stories.

[SilverBullet]

13 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Maybe especially this year they're trying to make up for lost revenue by mentioning the bigger teams?

Not saying it's right, especially for a network owned/run by the league which should in theory mean like you said coverage on the real stories.

Now I'm really curious if what teams they cover even makes that big of a difference. For a network like ESPN that covers all sports they have limited coverage time for each so if you only have X amount of time to cover baseball you lead with the major teams because it might make a difference but MLB Network has 1) so much more time to cover so there is time to cover the real stories and 2) people who watch MLB Network consistently are serious baseball fans who would appreciate real coverage and wouldn't be swayed by covering major teams more. I'm saying would they really lose ratings by discussing the Yankees over the Marlins on MLB Network?

[SilverBullet]

 

[SilverBullet]

16 hours ago, SonOfJack said:

 

 

[rmc523]

33 minutes ago, SilverBullet said:

Now I'm really curious if what teams they cover even makes that big of a difference. For a network like ESPN that covers all sports they have limited coverage time for each so if you only have X amount of time to cover baseball you lead with the major teams because it might make a difference but MLB Network has 1) so much more time to cover so there is time to cover the real stories and 2) people who watch MLB Network consistently are serious baseball fans who would appreciate real coverage and wouldn't be swayed by covering major teams more. I'm saying would they really lose ratings by discussing the Yankees over the Marlins on MLB Network?

Oh, hey, I'm right there with you - doesn't make sense on a network that has 24 hours (or let's call it 12-18 hours since they'll just do re-runs in the middle of the night) of time to fill up each day that they won't 1) devote some time to every team, and 2) cover a team IN CONTENTION.

I didn't like it, but understand when they don't really cover a/your team that's in the cellar and doesn't have much going for them.  But a team in contention that's doing well should absolutely be covered, regardless of market.