Jump to content
Click here to check out our updated free agents rankings, now up to 150 players and sortable by position! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

USAFChief

Twins Daily Contributor
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    36,746

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    580

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by USAFChief

  1. USAFChief
    Yeah, that wasn't an intentional slow trot, that was full speed. On a serious note, great article, John. Minnesota Twins player lore begins with Harmon Killebrew.
  2. USAFChief
    What wise and thoughtful person did that come from?
  3. USAFChief
    i'm going with "Trevor Plouffe."
  4. USAFChief
    If Santana can just match what he did for KC and ATL with that below average framing, I'll be happy.
  5. USAFChief
    How about if we said 10 percent of managers are betting on their team and you don't know who?
  6. USAFChief
    I don't think the CEO analogy holds up very well. The CEO is announcing his purchase, and it's governed by regulation and monitored. His actions are known, and other investors are free to decide whether they want to invest along with him or not. For a similar situation, the CEO would be buying stock on the sly, hoping to parlay inside knowledge into advantages of when to sell. Perhaps making decisions that boost the stock in the short term, but hurt the company in the long term...similar to burning through your bullpen to win a game you have money on, at the expense of the next few days games, which you don't care as much about. If Rosé only bet on the Reds to win (which, lets be honest, is doubtful), it doesn't make it any less bad. His decisions as a manager still come into question, which is a situation no sport can allow. Even if untrue, the perception that he (or anyone) isn't making decisions in an honest effort to win is just as bad as the actual thing. That's why baseball has hardcore rules against gambling, and are very concerned about it. It's just about the worst thing that can infest a sport.
  7. USAFChief
    No. I wasn't home from the World War yet.
  8. USAFChief
    concur.
  9. USAFChief
    Trying to win. At all costs. Nobody questions the outcome. The methods, maybe, but not the outcome. Gambling on outcomes--by the participants--by definition calls those outcomes into question, which is a situation that eventually renders the game not worth our time.
  10. USAFChief
    Off topic, but I disagree strongly. Betting on baseball,by baseball personnel, undermines the very integrity of the game in a way vastly worse than PEDs. PEDs are wrong, and constitute cheating. But their use does nothing to make me question whether the outcome of any game was decided by anything other than the play on the field. Betting does just the opposite. And once people stop believing the outcome, you have pro wrestling. I don't care if Pete Rose only bet on the Reds to win. He still potentially did enormous damage to the game, and the HOF will be just fine without him, IMO.
  11. USAFChief
    It is an interesting question. My guess is, in the short term, you would end up about even with either pitcher. But my preference would be the guy who is lights out part of the time. In the long term, He might become more consistent. The other guy already is consistent, and is probably as good as he'll ever get.
  12. USAFChief
    I would skip the 6ip 5 run starts from pitcher a. Only start him in his 8ip 1 run starts. I'd give pitcher b the other starts. Simple, really. I don't know why more managers don't use this strategy.
  13. USAFChief
    I think there might be a few question marks about a guy with 20 professional innings, none above A ball, being a sure thing top big league closer. Just sayin....
  14. USAFChief
    The world was a better place without Twitter.
  15. USAFChief
    I would guess this is indicative of different books having different opening lines. I obviously don't know, but my guess is, there hasn't been enough money bet on baseball futures yet to move anyone's opening number. You can probably find different numbers for every team if you shop around, just like you can find different numbers right up to kickoff for the Super Bowl. Generally though, they aren't going to be much different. I used Bovado for last years contest, IIRC.
  16. USAFChief
    I can't find postseason odds. I did find the same 100-1 for the Twins to win the WS, and 50-1 to win the ALCS.
  17. USAFChief
    No. Just me being a bit of a wisenheimer. I don't actually see much hope for Milone being an asset in the rotation. He was worth Fuld though.
  18. USAFChief
    There is lots of info available on this if one is interested. Google. Back in the day, each book used to employ their own expert(s) who would set lines. You might see a football game line differ by a couple points. These days, almost all the major casinos use the same consulting service (Las Vegas Sports Consultants) and so the opening line is identical (or nearly identical, if a given book doesn't like the number they get) for most events. I'm sure computer models are used, but my Personal belief is that the end result is still done by humans. Each book will then adjust as necessary for their situation as money stars to come in. This happens fast these days. I was in Vegas the weekend of the NFC and AFC Championship games ans the Super Bowl line (pick em, to start) was up within minutes of the second game ending.
  19. USAFChief
    I know nothing of these, but I am already hoping for Funkhouser. I love the name, but what I really, really want is to hear Bert pronounce it.
  20. USAFChief
    Thank you both for this series. Impressive work.
  21. USAFChief
    For the record, as of today I would take the over on the Twins.
  22. USAFChief
    Also...while we're talking betting lines...lines can and do move. But since Vegas hates to gamble, they hate to move lines. Hate, hate hate it. Doing so exposes them to the (admittedly small) risk of losing to the bigger side of the money on both lines. They moved the number because too much money was on one side, now all the money goes the other way, and the actual result ends up somewhere in between. Vegas loses to the bigger betting side on both lines. Perhaps I know too much about this subject, on reflection. :/
  23. USAFChief
    http://twinsdaily.com/topic/9673-2014-mlb-overunder-contest11-win-big/page-3?hl=contest If anyone is interested, results from last years O/U are at the link above. In theory, if you were to wager $1000 on all 30 teams, you would need to be correct on 16 to make a $600 profit. You would lose $1500 if you got 15 correct. Ashburyjohn won last year with 21. I'm assuming that explains why he is retired these days.
  24. USAFChief
    So smart his team went 66-41 before the trade deadline, 22-33 after. 22-34 if we include the "crapshoot."
  25. USAFChief
    Well, then it appears you have been presented a chance to easily double your money! Quick, mortgage the house, clean out the bank accounts, hock some valuables, and get that bet down!!1! ;-)
×
×
  • Create New...