OnlyBucs

One more Giants win, and I have the NL rep guaranteed in my futures bets.



Need the White Sox to pull through. I'm guaranteed money if they face the Braves, Brewers, or Giants.

604641545D51465058330 wrote: One more Giants win, and I have the NL rep guaranteed in my futures bets.



Need the White Sox to pull through. I'm guaranteed money if they face the Braves, Brewers, or Giants.
Good luck

331512070E0215030B600 wrote: One more Giants win, and I have the NL rep guaranteed in my futures bets.



Need the White Sox to pull through. I'm guaranteed money if they face the Braves, Brewers, or Giants.


Better save that money, guy.

Game 5's in a LDS are always intense affairs, but this one is completely off the charts.



Three 100 win teams this season, but after tonight, only one will advance to the LCS

7A5C5B4E474B5C4A42290 wrote: Game 5's in a LDS are always intense affairs, but this one is completely off the charts.



Three 100 win teams this season, but after tonight, only one will advance to the LCS


Highest win total of two teams meeting in the PS of all time. We very well may never see it again in many members' lifetimes.



Wish it was @ PNC.

A game like this, you can't have a schlep calling balls and strikes. Bryant strikes out after seeing two balls that were WAYYY out of the zone called strikes.



I hate umpires that make the game about them and their effing strike zones. This clown is awful

When you beat the best, you're the best. Dodgers win- in San Francisco. I dont see the Braves beating them, but I've been wrong a lot this PS.



Competitive in '23? I think not, which is the one thing I'll be right about.

4F7A6D6D665F6D6D66616D080 wrote: When you beat the best, you're the best.  Dodgers win- in San Francisco.  I dont see the Braves beating them, but I've been wrong a lot this PS.



Competitive in '23?  I think not, which is the one thing I'll be right about.
What defines "competitive" in your view? Were the Blue Jays and Mariners competitive, eliminated on the final day of the season? Or the A's, eliminated third to last day of the season? Were the Phillies competitive, playing for the division title in the second to last series of the season?



Were the Padres and Reds and Mets competitive, only to watch The Loo run off 17 in a row? Are you saying the last couple of weeks defined their entire season?



Tell us, what constitutes "competitive"?

You're full of questions.  Tell you what.  Rather than asking me, tell us what YOUR opinion is, and I'll let you know if I agree.



We have been through this before, more than once, and answers have never been clear.  I've asked your questions before, recently.



"Competitive" is arbitrary.  Means different things to different people...often, at different times.



Is it "competitive" during games (.500?)



Is it, "competitive" for the division titles that we've failed to win for 30 years?



Is it "competitive" for reaching the playoffs (Wild Card?)



Is it "competitive"for the NL Pennant (which means success flooring the playoffs?)



Is it "competitive" for the World Championship?



I've been consistent.  My objective is to reach the NLCS.  I have never expected the team to win the World Series under current conditions.



In MLB as in most other sports, there is distinct difference between the teams that finish 9th and 10th (eliminated during the WCG) and the champion.



The Blue Jays were entertaining.  They were nowhere to be found when it matters.



The addition of the second wild card makes 25 teams think that they're "competitive" leading to the TDL.  For many fans, being in the final 10 is good enough to satisfy them.



On August 1, The season is a long way from over. It's a long way from being over on October 1.

4C6A6D78717D6A7C741F0 wrote: A game like this, you can't have a schlep calling balls and strikes. Bryant strikes out after seeing two balls that were WAYYY out of the zone called strikes.



I hate umpires that make the game about them and their effing strike zones. This clown is awful


This brings up the point again about whether or not umpiring as always been this inconsistent with strike zones, or has calling balls and strikes correctly become worse over time? Technology allows us to see the mistakes so easily now whereas, in the past, we didn't know if umpires missed the number of calls that are missed now.