Royals Favored!?

by dejackso on Aug 3, 2008 9:48 AM EDT

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/preview?gameId=280803107

According to ESPN's Accuscore, the Royals are favored to win Sunday's game with their chances at success at 57% compared to the underdog Sox who only have a 43% (incredibly these scores add up to 100 thus negating the possibility of a tie). Also, Buck, Gordon, and Guillen are equally likely to hit a HR this game.

In an related note, ESPN has proposed to use .001% of their total available coverage on this game versus 61% coverage for Favrervevererv and 53% coverage for NYY or BOS (I assume that some coverage will be speculation on a Yankee - Packers deal).

---------------------------

Oh yeah, Hi everybody. I've been busy a lot so I haven't had a lot of time to post / read post / argue with NYRoyal. I also saw that Ross Gload's mom...err...Joel is back on the site. Hey Joel!!!

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

But,

what were the odds of Buehrle v. Davies yesterday? It sometimes doesn’t play out the way it’s supposed to.

I hereby resign from this post.

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Aug 3, 2008 10:47 AM EDT reply actions

The point isn’t whether we win today or not…the point is that we are actually favored over the best team in out division at all. That has to say something about this team’s improvement. Were we ever favored to win against the #1 team in our division in the past few years?

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 3, 2008 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions

I'm sure that we have been

it’s so dependent on the pitching…i’m sure you could find any number of times that we were favored this year when Meche or Greinke pitched.

Totally agree, though, that the team is improved, I can think of a number of games this year where we won or were competitive when the old Royals would have just lain down.

I hereby resign from this post.

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Aug 3, 2008 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions

We've got Zack

going up against a kid with two starts under his belt, in which he gave up five runs in each without escaping the fifth inning.

Yeah, we’re favored today. There’s a reason.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Aug 3, 2008 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions

Well, duh.

There’s also a reason for someone to be favored. The point is that the reason is in our favor which hasn’t been a regular thing in the past ten plus years.

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 3, 2008 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Always…not also

"I DARE you to make less sense."

by dejackso on Aug 3, 2008 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions

The "odds" are all about the pitching today

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by Matt Klaassen on Aug 3, 2008 11:28 AM EDT reply actions

Welcome back, dejackso

You’ve been missed. When we’ve got our legitimate ace pitching against not only the Chisox #5, but essentially a AA pitcher who isn’t very impressive, we’d better be favored. I’d give us considerably better than a 57% chance of winning.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by Scott McKinney on Aug 3, 2008 11:40 AM EDT reply actions

Sucks that the whitesox decimate Zack,

wait.. maybe thats just in Chitown?

by cfizzle on Aug 3, 2008 12:16 PM EDT reply actions

Maybe, it would make sense

That’s a HR park. The K is on the safer side of avergae for flyball pitchers like Greinke, I believe

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by Matt Klaassen on Aug 3, 2008 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions

I noticed something even more interesting, however.

Apparently, the entire deficit between .500 and our current record has been our record in games we’ve been favored to win.

In games where we’re the underdog, we’re .500. Go figure.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Aug 3, 2008 1:03 PM EDT reply actions

The Royals are obviously being held back by their superior talent

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by Matt Klaassen on Aug 3, 2008 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions

It looks like that oddsmakers were

correct to favor us today.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Aug 3, 2008 5:13 PM EDT reply actions

for sure

went pretty much according to Hoyle. that’s 2x through the rotation with a 3.3 ERA. Small sample but still nice to see.

I hereby resign from this post.

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Aug 3, 2008 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions

We won. That's all that matters.

Don't forget to send your broken maples to the US Forest Service.

by 306008 on Aug 3, 2008 8:52 PM EDT reply actions

I never bet on baseball

But I still remember the one time I did, we had Runelvys Hernandez going against Roy Halladay and the Jays and the odds we heavily for the Jays. So I put $10 on the Royals. The Royals won like 9-0. I don’t remember how much I won, but it was pretty good for a $10 bet. I remember the guys next to me in the lounge of Caesers saying “how the hell did the Royals beat Halladay?”

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Aug 3, 2008 9:40 PM EDT reply actions