an update on the season...

[oldandslow]

Albert Pujols - 14 HR in 81 AB.
Kansas City Royals - 14 HR in 722 AB.

That's all for now...

[ChiTown]

Albert Pujols - 14 HR in 81 AB.
Kansas City Royals - 14 HR in 722 AB.

That's all for now...

But, but, but............ahh, fukit. There's just no diguising just how fn bad this franchise is.

[vckcchiefs04]

Oh yeah.......well we might get a rolling roof! So there! :bong:

[kc1977]

Albert Pujols - 14 HR in 81 AB.
Kansas City Royals - 14 HR in 722 AB.

That's all for now...

Uh - it's not just the Royals.

What a dumb statistic. Yeah, the Royals suck, but take Pujols out of the equation, and you get about the same results (in fact, in 16 more at-bats, the Cardinals, not including Pujols, have hit one more HR than the Royals.

Albert Pujols - 14 HR in 81 AB
St. Louis Cardinals ex-Pujols - 15 HR in 738 AB
Kansas City Royals - 14 HR in 722 AB

So, take the best player in the game out of the lineup, and it looks like the Royals fare pretty comparably to the rest of the Cardinals. But I'd venture out that the Cardinals without Pujols are still better than the Royals. But this statistic wouldn't suggest that - further proof in what a dumb statistic this is.

Dumbass Cardinal fans.

[Pitt Gorilla]

I'm still angry over losing a 5-1 to the weather. :cuss:

[RockChalk]

I'm still angry over losing a 5-1 to the weather. :cuss:

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but didn't MLB used to pick up games from the point where they got delayed? I know this is how college baseball does it. Rather than the game being rained out and replayed in it's entirety, years ago, they would continue the game from the 4th inning with the royals holding a 5-1 leading and batting with men on base. When did they change this rule?

[kc1977]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but didn't MLB used to pick up games from the point where they got delayed? I know this is how college baseball does it. Rather than the game being rained out and replayed in it's entirety, years ago, they would continue the game from the 4th inning with the royals holding a 5-1 leading and batting with men on base. When did they change this rule?


That is the case if they are tied after the ballgame becomes "official" - i.e., when 5 innings have been played. Any ballgame less than 5 innings (or 4.5 if home team is winning) - gets started over completely.

Retarded rule - but theoritically no bias - as should be nuetral over time as to when it happens to you and when it happens for you. Statistically speaking, it should actually happen more often to better teams.

Of course, with the Royals over the past 15 years, statistics should argue that it would work in our favor more often than not - as playing ball at a .400 clip for 15 years should result in this working in our favor 6 out of 10 times.

I'd be interested (not interested enough to do any research) on if we've been hosed on reality vs. probability on this as well.

[kcfanXIII]

here's an update, the royals still suck. i'm still a fan though. however, i'm thinking of boycotting the games, seeing as how glass made 20 mil last year, and won't aquire an impact player. grud and minky were good pickups, but kc needs pitching very badly.

[sedated]

Glass raised payroll, so it seems less his fault now.

The blame falls squarely on the front office, they need to go.

They can't use the money excuse now, they just suck.

[Thig Lyfe]

You know your team is bad when the crowd chants "RAIN DE-LAY! RAIN DE-LAY!"

[RockChalk]

That is the case if they are tied after the ballgame becomes "official" - i.e., when 5 innings have been played. Any ballgame less than 5 innings (or 4.5 if home team is winning) - gets started over completely.

Retarded rule - but theoritically no bias - as should be nuetral over time as to when it happens to you and when it happens for you. Statistically speaking, it should actually happen more often to better teams.

Of course, with the Royals over the past 15 years, statistics should argue that it would work in our favor more often than not - as playing ball at a .400 clip for 15 years should result in this working in our favor 6 out of 10 times.

I'd be interested (not interested enough to do any research) on if we've been hosed on reality vs. probability on this as well.



thanks!