Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: AdamKilgoreWP and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Sports and Redskins  |  RSS

Bog: Kasten on Versus's $ports Take

In case you missed the show, Dan Steinberg's Sports Bog recaps Stan Kasten's appearance on Versus's $ports Take with Rick Horrow Tuesday night.

The oddest part was that he said fans don't have to worry about the big picture, they just have to pay attention to the score. If you say the big picture is great, and the scores are terrible, and yet fans should just pay attention to the scores and not the big picture, then you're pretty much advising your fans to go sit in the corner and stare at the moldy wall and just wait until snack time. Or whatever.

By Alexa Steele  |  October 8, 2009; 1:15 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Bog: The Unluckiest Fan
Next: Nats Dismiss Cardenal

Comments

This sounds like an interview we could or should have heard about directly on Nationals Journal. Why do we have to hear about it through Steinbog's unnecessarily snarky take?

Posted by: Traveler8 | October 8, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse

ummm, cuz no one else here caught the interview on the radio, and Stan doesn't share his calendar?

Posted by: Sec3mysofa | October 8, 2009 3:20 PM | Report abuse

The Nats dismissed Jose Cardenal according to MLB.com's Bill Ladson. Cardenal had been a special advisor to the GM since 2005.

(from mlb trade rumors)

Posted by: NatsNut | October 8, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Cardenal was big JimBo guy. It will be nice to have a fully staffed FO soon.

Posted by: sec307 | October 8, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

5 days to the start of the AFL! I'm pretty stoked to see our guys in action (although I was looking forward to seeing Norris against better comp). First chance for Storen and Strasburg - who will always be side by side alphabetically - to play together.

You gotta figure Strasburg will be going on Day One. Anybody hear anything?

Posted by: sec307 | October 8, 2009 4:32 PM | Report abuse

sec307, what's the best way to keep track of the AZ Fall League? thanks.

Posted by: Section109 | October 8, 2009 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Looks like Strasburg is going to make another start in the Instructional League on Saturday (according to spacecoastbaseball.com) so that would put him on track to pitch on the 15th in the AFL. But of course who knows how the Desert Dogs will handle things.

Posted by: sec307 | October 8, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

http://www.mlb.com/mlb/events/winterleagues/?league=afl

If you go to mlb.com, under the tab "Stats" there is a link to the Winter Leagues. From they you can link to the AFL or the Phoenix Desert Dogs - the team the Nats guys will be on. The season goes from 10/13 to 11/19.

Nats participating:

Strasburg, p
Storen, p
Mendel, p
Wilkie, p
Espinosa, ss
Marrero, 1b

Posted by: sec307 | October 8, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

NewPost. Another one bites the dust.

Posted by: leetee1955 | October 8, 2009 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Thanks very much sec307!

Posted by: Section109 | October 8, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I'm going out there the following week, so if anybody comes up with any further intel, I'd be much obliged. Thankyouverrymuch.

Posted by: Sec3mysofa | October 8, 2009 7:33 PM | Report abuse

I guess I'll take a crack at explaining the stats as I understand them.

The 1 in 130,000 number comes from the idea that you are picking the 19 losses out of the 81 total games the Nats played at home this year. Imagine that there are 81 cards face down on a table in front of you, 33 of them are wins, and 48 of them are losses. After you pick a card you can't pick it again, so as you pick each loss, picking a loss becomes harder. After 1 game there are 33 wins and 47 losses available. After 2 games there are 33 wins and 46 losses. And this continues until the odds are actually against you picking a loss, since after 16 games the available choices are 33 wins and 33 losses. So the chance of picking 19 losers isn't .593 to the 19th, instead you have to calculate the odds of getting each loss individually.

I wonder if that explanation helped anyone...

Posted by: Hobes | October 8, 2009 4:25 PM

Posted by: Sec3mysofa | October 8, 2009 7:44 PM | Report abuse

disregard -- that belonged in the previous thread.

Posted by: Sec3mysofa | October 8, 2009 7:57 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company