[Madera86]

Great pitching from Uber out of the bullpen. Only 3 runs allowed by relief (although Uber was responsible for two of those runners). No wild pitches that I can recall. I'm optimistic again. The bullpen was dead to me after the Washington fiasco. 

And we swept the series. Extra sweet because it was against the Weenies.

[Madera86]

Great pitching from Uber out of the bullpen. Only 3 runs allowed by relief (although Uber was responsible for two of those runners). No wild pitches that I can recall. I'm optimistic again. The bullpen was dead to me after the Washington fiasco. 

And we swept the series. Extra sweet because it was against the Weenies.

[TonyLima]

9 runs, 3 outs. Even Stanford’s bullpen can’t blow this one, right? Right?

BC

Apparently.

[TonyLima]

9 runs, 3 outs. Even Stanford’s bullpen can’t blow this one, right? Right?

BC

Apparently.

[Maple Leaf]

Stanford is rank 7th, 8th and 9th in three separate polls as of 5/9/22.  Oregon State is rank #1, #2 and #2 in the same three polls.

[Maple Leaf]

Stanford is rank 7th, 8th and 9th in three separate polls as of 5/9/22.  Oregon State is rank #1, #2 and #2 in the same three polls.

[JJJ]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/stanfordbsb/status/1523741623284232192?s=21&t=nYoagsVGarOGzaJ8IvR7hw[/tweet]

[JJJ]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/stanfordbsb/status/1523741623284232192?s=21&t=nYoagsVGarOGzaJ8IvR7hw[/tweet]

[TonyLima]

Selected Stanford baseball games and highlights on my Youtube channel.  https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvfUV...2VBI23jMfQ

Youtube has assured me there are no copyright issues with these videos.  Also I won't make a dime from these videos -- which is what I wanted.

Enjoy! And subscribe!
Tony

[TonyLima]

Selected Stanford baseball games and highlights on my Youtube channel.  https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvfUV...2VBI23jMfQ

Youtube has assured me there are no copyright issues with these videos.  Also I won't make a dime from these videos -- which is what I wanted.

Enjoy! And subscribe!
Tony

[TonyLima]

Stanford 9 USF 7.  Down 6-0 at one point, our guys hit three consecutive two-run HRs to take the lead. The cardiac kids at it again.

[TonyLima]

Stanford 9 USF 7.  Down 6-0 at one point, our guys hit three consecutive two-run HRs to take the lead. The cardiac kids at it again.

[Leftcoast]

Thanks for the links and updates, Tony!  This team is ahead of where many of us predicted earlier this year.  Go Cardinal.

[Leftcoast]

Thanks for the links and updates, Tony!  This team is ahead of where many of us predicted earlier this year.  Go Cardinal.

[GK3]

Thanks for the links and updates, Tony!  This team is ahead of where many of us predicted earlier this year.  Go Cardinal.

Many seemed to think that Esquer replacing Marquess was a mistake, but you can't challenge the heart of this group of guys.

[GK3]

Thanks for the links and updates, Tony!  This team is ahead of where many of us predicted earlier this year.  Go Cardinal.

Many seemed to think that Esquer replacing Marquess was a mistake, but you can't challenge the heart of this group of guys.

[BobK]

I think it’s time to get over hiring Esquer was a mistake. It wasn’t. Yes I was wrong but bringing it up after 5 years ? It was a brilliant hire

[BobK]

I think it’s time to get over hiring Esquer was a mistake. It wasn’t. Yes I was wrong but bringing it up after 5 years ? It was a brilliant hire

[BostonCard]

Goes to show how challenging it is to evaluate hires ex ante.  I think if you polled people about who was more likely to be a good hire between Esquer and Haase, most people (myself included) would have guessed that Haase would be more likely to take us to the NCAA tournament routinely than Esquer taking us to the CWS (at least regionals) regularly.  The reverse is what has happened.

BC

[BostonCard]

Goes to show how challenging it is to evaluate hires ex ante.  I think if you polled people about who was more likely to be a good hire between Esquer and Haase, most people (myself included) would have guessed that Haase would be more likely to take us to the NCAA tournament routinely than Esquer taking us to the CWS (at least regionals) regularly.  The reverse is what has happened.

BC

[Spiny_Norman]

Back to the current season, NCAA.com projects Stanford to be a 15 seed and regional host when the field is announced 2 weeks from Monday.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/artic...s-field-64

[Spiny_Norman]

Back to the current season, NCAA.com projects Stanford to be a 15 seed and regional host when the field is announced 2 weeks from Monday.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/artic...s-field-64

[CTcard]

Back to the current season, NCAA.com projects Stanford to be a 15 seed and regional host when the field is announced 2 weeks from Monday.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/artic...s-field-64

As always, Stanford's treatment in NCAA seeding will be largely determined by just how the committee uses the RPI. 

The RPI should be discarded altogether. Even in concept it's not much of a power rating, more of a bad strength of schedule rating. In practice it has clear mathematical bias against the top west coast teams (which is combined with a bias towards bottom west coast teams - but that doesn't affect NCAA tournament selection). 
The RPI's main advantage is that it is simple and totally transparent. With little effort, anyone can reproduce it. The basketball NET rating is almost certainly a better power rating than the RPI, but it's complicated and not easily reproduced independently. 

It is also clear that the authors of that projection don't really believe it is appropriate themselves. Two of the three are at D1Baseball and produce the D1Baseball rankings. That ranking has Stanford #8 and Gonzaga #11 - but they get overall seeds of #15 and #16 because of RPI rankings of 24 (at that time) and somewhere around 26 (currently 24). 

There are a few years where the NCAA seeding looks more like the polls and less like RPI, but most of the time seeding looks far too much like the RPI. 

Since that article was written, Stanford has moved up to 21 in RPI. That changes daily. I am not sure how much Stanford moved up or others moved down, but winning at San Francisco was helpful because road wins count more. 

Going forward, there are 4 road games, 3 home games, and as many neutral as we manage in the conference tournament. Fortunately both Utah and $C have winning records overall, even if losing records in conference. Santa Clara also has a winning record overall right now, though finishing with three on the road at TCU will make it tough to stay that way. 

Overall, Stanford seems to be in good enough shape that IF they win the majority of their remaining games, they should host first round (top 16). I suspect a top 8 seed will be tough to get.

[CTcard]

Back to the current season, NCAA.com projects Stanford to be a 15 seed and regional host when the field is announced 2 weeks from Monday.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/artic...s-field-64

As always, Stanford's treatment in NCAA seeding will be largely determined by just how the committee uses the RPI. 

The RPI should be discarded altogether. Even in concept it's not much of a power rating, more of a bad strength of schedule rating. In practice it has clear mathematical bias against the top west coast teams (which is combined with a bias towards bottom west coast teams - but that doesn't affect NCAA tournament selection). 
The RPI's main advantage is that it is simple and totally transparent. With little effort, anyone can reproduce it. The basketball NET rating is almost certainly a better power rating than the RPI, but it's complicated and not easily reproduced independently. 

It is also clear that the authors of that projection don't really believe it is appropriate themselves. Two of the three are at D1Baseball and produce the D1Baseball rankings. That ranking has Stanford #8 and Gonzaga #11 - but they get overall seeds of #15 and #16 because of RPI rankings of 24 (at that time) and somewhere around 26 (currently 24). 

There are a few years where the NCAA seeding looks more like the polls and less like RPI, but most of the time seeding looks far too much like the RPI. 

Since that article was written, Stanford has moved up to 21 in RPI. That changes daily. I am not sure how much Stanford moved up or others moved down, but winning at San Francisco was helpful because road wins count more. 

Going forward, there are 4 road games, 3 home games, and as many neutral as we manage in the conference tournament. Fortunately both Utah and $C have winning records overall, even if losing records in conference. Santa Clara also has a winning record overall right now, though finishing with three on the road at TCU will make it tough to stay that way. 

Overall, Stanford seems to be in good enough shape that IF they win the majority of their remaining games, they should host first round (top 16). I suspect a top 8 seed will be tough to get.

[TonyLima]

Goes to show how challenging it is to evaluate hires ex ante.  I think if you polled people about who was more likely to be a good hire between Esquer and Haase, most people (myself included) would have guessed that Haase would be more likely to take us to the NCAA tournament routinely than Esquer taking us to the CWS (at least regionals) regularly.  The reverse is what has happened.

BC

I supported Ryan Garko. Esquer has done a really good job. Somehow he’s held this team together through an incredibly up and down season. No idea if Garko would have done as well, but I doubt he could have done better.

[TonyLima]

Goes to show how challenging it is to evaluate hires ex ante.  I think if you polled people about who was more likely to be a good hire between Esquer and Haase, most people (myself included) would have guessed that Haase would be more likely to take us to the NCAA tournament routinely than Esquer taking us to the CWS (at least regionals) regularly.  The reverse is what has happened.

BC

I supported Ryan Garko. Esquer has done a really good job. Somehow he’s held this team together through an incredibly up and down season. No idea if Garko would have done as well, but I doubt he could have done better.

[Madera86]

Esquer has certainly been able to recruit talent. Montgomery was a great get. The young man could have stayed closer to home in the SEC or ACC. 

I wonder if he can expand his recruiting to Japan and the Caribbean.

[Madera86]

Esquer has certainly been able to recruit talent. Montgomery was a great get. The young man could have stayed closer to home in the SEC or ACC. 

I wonder if he can expand his recruiting to Japan and the Caribbean.

[BobK]

Top of 7. Stanford up 4-0 behind Williams. Jones with 2 HRs

[BobK]

Top of 7. Stanford up 4-0 behind Williams. Jones with 2 HRs

[Madera86]

Phew. It got a little too exciting at the end. Utah loaded the bases in the ninth with Mathews having some trouble finding the strike zone. But he gets the last batter to hit into a double play, throwing out the runner at home plate himself. Stanford wins, 5-0.

[Madera86]

Phew. It got a little too exciting at the end. Utah loaded the bases in the ninth with Mathews having some trouble finding the strike zone. But he gets the last batter to hit into a double play, throwing out the runner at home plate himself. Stanford wins, 5-0.

[Ballbuster]

Goes to show how challenging it is to evaluate hires ex ante.  I think if you polled people about who was more likely to be a good hire between Esquer and Haase, most people (myself included) would have guessed that Haase would be more likely to take us to the NCAA tournament routinely than Esquer taking us to the CWS (at least regionals) regularly.  The reverse is what has happened.

BC

I supported Ryan Garko. Esquer has done a really good job. Somehow he’s held this team together through an incredibly up and down season. No idea if Garko would have done as well, but I doubt he could have done better.

Garko, why was he the popular choice? He gave up on UOP and would have done the same if things would have not gone right here! Esquer endured a lot of crap at Cal both from fans and Milano scheming on the backend. Esquer was not handed anything when he walked on the baseball team, so he knows how to fight through some tough times. He is teaching his teams not to take anything for granted. 

He could not implement what he learned at Stanford when he was with Cal. The living ghost of Milano would not allow it!

[Ballbuster]

Goes to show how challenging it is to evaluate hires ex ante.  I think if you polled people about who was more likely to be a good hire between Esquer and Haase, most people (myself included) would have guessed that Haase would be more likely to take us to the NCAA tournament routinely than Esquer taking us to the CWS (at least regionals) regularly.  The reverse is what has happened.

BC

I supported Ryan Garko. Esquer has done a really good job. Somehow he’s held this team together through an incredibly up and down season. No idea if Garko would have done as well, but I doubt he could have done better.

Garko, why was he the popular choice? He gave up on UOP and would have done the same if things would have not gone right here! Esquer endured a lot of crap at Cal both from fans and Milano scheming on the backend. Esquer was not handed anything when he walked on the baseball team, so he knows how to fight through some tough times. He is teaching his teams not to take anything for granted. 

He could not implement what he learned at Stanford when he was with Cal. The living ghost of Milano would not allow it!

[BobK]

Garko was a great Stanford player. Why wouldn’t he be the popular choice. Esquer? Never really thought of him.
As it turned out Esquer was a great choice Garko probably would be gone by now

[BobK]

Garko was a great Stanford player. Why wouldn’t he be the popular choice. Esquer? Never really thought of him.
As it turned out Esquer was a great choice Garko probably would be gone by now

[TonyLima]

It’s 420 feet to the center field wall at Utah. Carter Graham just hit one a bit to the right of the distance sign. Wow. See it here.

[TonyLima]

It’s 420 feet to the center field wall at Utah. Carter Graham just hit one a bit to the right of the distance sign. Wow. See it here.

[TonyLima]

Ryan Bruno clocking in at 93-95 mph.

[TonyLima]

Ryan Bruno clocking in at 93-95 mph.