The Riff
Before we discuss yesterday’s complete baseball failure, I’d like to offer an unpaid product endorsement.
And I mean unpaid. LARQ has absolutely no idea I’m doing this. They haven’t sent me anything, there is no promo code and nobody has offered me three cents every time one of you buys a water bottle.
For the past few years I’ve used a HidrateSpark bottle. It’s one of those smart water bottles that keeps track of how much water you drink throughout the day, reports it to your phone and occasionally lights up and beeps at you because apparently even drinking water now requires software.
I actually liked it.
The only problem is that the little puck in the bottom that does all the smart stuff has another feature HidrateSpark probably doesn’t advertise: it occasionally makes people wonder whether I’m carrying a covert nuclear weapon.
Eventually I needed a new bottle, so I bought another HidrateSpark thinking I’d just move my existing puck into the new one.
Nope.
New bottle. New puck.
Except HidrateSpark doesn’t actually have the new puck.
It’s been out of stock for what appears to be approximately the entire second Trump administration, which is an interesting business model when the puck is the thing that makes your smart water bottle… smart.
This pissed me off.
Fortunately, the Internet Gods were listening.
Because shortly thereafter, my feeds started filling with ads for LARQ.
Apparently LARQ performs some sort of magical light trick inside the bottle that sanitizes the water and cleans the bottle every couple of hours. I’m sure there’s actual science involved, but frankly I’m perfectly comfortable believing there’s a tiny wizard living in the cap.
So I bought one.
And dammit…
I’m a LARQ evangelist now.
The water tastes better. The tracking has been considerably more consistent than my old HidrateSpark. It cleans itself every two hours, which already makes it more responsible than approximately half the cast of Below Deck.
And nobody from LARQ paid me to say any of this.
Although if somebody at LARQ happens to stumble across Don’t Pick What I Pick, I’m not opposed to revisiting that arrangement.
I can be bought.
Apparently just not with a replacement puck, because those are out of stock.
Which brings us to yesterday’s picks, where Bertie and I could have used whatever magical light is inside this bottle to sanitize the entire fucking card.
We went 0-3.
The Autopsy
There are days when you go 0-3 and want to burn the model, fire the research department and investigate whether FanDuel has a witness protection program.
Yesterday wasn’t quite that.
It was bad. Make no mistake. There is no advanced metric that turns zero wins into three wins. But when we started cutting the bodies open this morning, we found three different causes of death.
And that’s the point of this whole ridiculous experiment.
Seattle: We Got What We Asked For… Until We Didn’t
Seattle First Five +115 was built around the starting-pitching matchup. We liked Bryce Miller against Will Warren and, following one of the few things we’ve actually learned around here, we didn’t buy four extra innings we didn’t need.
For a while, it looked great.
Seattle was ahead 5-3 entering the bottom of the fifth.
Five runs from the offense. A two-run lead. All Bryce Miller had to do was finish the inning without setting the furniture on fire.
He did not.
The Yankees came back in the fifth and killed the bet.
I don’t hate this pick after the fact. The wrapper was right. Seattle’s offense did more than enough. The pitcher we handicapped simply couldn’t finish the five innings we hired him to pitch.
Sometimes the bird just loses the fight.
Baltimore: The Zebby Penalty Was Assessed to the Wrong Guy
Then there was Baltimore.
We liked Shane Baz against Zebby Matthews, in part because Matthews entered with numbers that weren’t exactly demanding a plaque in Cooperstown.
Baltimore apparently agreed. They got to Zebby and built a 4-1 lead.
This was the moment when Benzo Industries Research & Development presumably began preparing the celebratory memorandum.
Then Shane Baz exploded.
Three innings. Nine hits. Five earned runs.
Minnesota turned 4-1 Baltimore into 5-4 Minnesota before Baz was even out of the game.
So our initial thought this morning was that maybe we had made the same mistake again by betting the full nine innings when our handicap involved the starter.
Except an F5 bet would have lost too.
The bullpen didn’t murder us.
Baz did.
And maybe the bigger thing we missed was sitting on the other side of the field. Minnesota’s offense had been playing well, and we still spent more time staring at the pitching matchup than asking whether Minnesota might actually hit the guy.
Which means the Zebby Penalty worked.
Unfortunately, we assessed it against the wrong pitcher.
And Then We Stepped on the Land Mine
Philadelphia/St. Louis First Five Under 4 is the one that actually pisses me off.
Not because it lost.
Because we saw the problem before we made the bet.
We looked at Zack Wheeler and specifically noted that his recent form wasn’t particularly Wheeler-like. In fact, it was enough to make us uncomfortable laying the price with Philadelphia.
Good.
That’s exactly what Rule #3 is supposed to do.
Recent form can veto season form.
Then, having successfully identified the land mine, we constructed a wager that required Zack Wheeler to pitch well.
The game was 1-1 through four innings.
Then St. Louis scored four in the bottom of the fifth.
First-five under dead.
Apparently identifying the land mine doesn’t help if you subsequently step on it.
That wasn’t variance.
That was a process mistake.
And those are the ones we’re actually trying to eliminate.
So What Did We Learn?
Seattle doesn’t need a new rule. Sometimes a reasonable handicap loses.
Baltimore reminded us that checking recent offensive production isn’t something we do only when it’s convenient. Minnesota had been showing signs of life and then put 14 hits on the board.
Philadelphia/St. Louis was the important one. If recent form gives us a reason not to trust a pitcher, we probably shouldn’t immediately build another bet that depends upon trusting that pitcher.
That sounds embarrassingly obvious now.
Most of our rules do.
Which brings us to today.
Today’s Grinder
Only nine games today, which was a welcome development because after yesterday I wasn’t emotionally prepared to examine fifteen more ways to lose a baseball bet before breakfast.
We ground the board down and initially found three plays.
Then something interesting happened.
We almost made a mistake before the games started.
Look at us evolving.
Cleveland/Detroit First Five Under 4 +105
This one starts with Parker Messick and Keider Montero.
Both starters have been pitching well, and Cleveland First Five was available at a price that initially tempted us.
But why force Cleveland to be ahead?
Our actual handicap says both pitchers are the interesting part.
So we took the first-five under instead.
Four gives us some protection if the offenses land exactly there, and we’re getting plus money.
This is what the experiment is supposed to look like when we remember our own rules.
Minnesota -105
Hello again.
Yesterday we apparently learned Minnesota can hit a baseball.
Today they get Aaron Nola, whose season has not exactly been a lengthy advertisement for run prevention.
Taj Bradley goes for Minnesota, but this isn’t purely a starting-pitcher bet. We’re combining the pitching matchup with what Minnesota’s offense has actually been doing recently.
Which means we’re taking the full game instead of paying extra to isolate the first five.
See?
Sometimes we do listen to ourselves.
Milwaukee/Los Angeles First Five Under 4.5 -105
This wasn’t originally the bet.
Originally we liked Milwaukee +128.
The Dodgers were priced like the Dodgers, Milwaukee was getting plus money and Roki Sasaki’s season numbers suggested there might be an opening.
Then I mentioned the bet to Benzo.
And Benzo said, essentially:
Wait a minute. Hasn’t Sasaki been really good lately?
Fuck.
Yes.
He has.
And there was Rule #3 standing in the corner with its arms folded.
We went back and looked at Sasaki’s recent starts, and the pitcher suggested by his season ERA wasn’t the pitcher currently taking the mound.
So Milwaukee moneyline went directly into the garbage.
But the investigation uncovered something else.
If Sasaki is pitching considerably better lately, and we already liked what Shane Drohan brings on the other side, maybe the better bet isn’t deciding who wins at all.
Maybe it’s First Five Under 4.5.
So that’s what we’re doing.
And I actually like this bet more because we nearly talked ourselves into the wrong one first.
Apparently Rule #3 works considerably better when we remember to use it before placing the bet.
Today’s Picks
Three survived:
Cleveland/Detroit First Five Under 4 +105
Minnesota -105
Milwaukee/Dodgers First Five Under 4.5 -105
They’re going into singles, doubles and the triple.
That’s all the public accounting department is getting.
Benzo Industries recently underwent another round of financing, and we’re not discussing it further.
Tomorrow
Yesterday was 0-3.
Today could be 3-0.
It could also be another disaster and tomorrow’s Riff could be an unpaid endorsement for bankruptcy attorneys.
But I’m actually encouraged by something that happened before today’s first pitch.
We caught ourselves.
We liked Milwaukee because Sasaki’s season numbers gave us a reason to like Milwaukee. Then we remembered to ask the question we’ve supposedly built this entire thing around:
What has he been doing lately?
The answer changed the bet.
Maybe the new bet wins.
Maybe it loses.
But at least we’re finally starting to use the autopsy before there’s a body.
And if everything goes horribly wrong again, perhaps LARQ will let us borrow whatever magical light is inside my water bottle.
This isn’t called Pick What I Pick.
It’s called Don’t Pick What I Pick.
Please wager accordingly.
