First, a brief history of the number zero:

 

According to Live Science, the Babylonians borrowed the concept of zero from the Sumerians, the first people in the world to develop a counting system. (probably invented the accountant, tax shelter and tax collector, too) Also, thanks to the invention of Zero, we’re able to perform sabermetrics, calculus, differential equations, algebra and show the real balance of a checkbook. (yeah, yeah, I know, sometimes the balance of the checkbook is less than zero. However, negative numbers aren’t a part of this thread. The TD Game Thread style sheet expressly forbids mentioning anything negative)

 

 

Now that we’ve covered nothing, let us move on to something, KC versus the Twins. It’s early in the season and reasons for optimism abound. For instance, baseball has started. And, those who know have put forth their prognostications and declared the who will be in the post season. Some have even gone so far as to declare the winner of the World Series. Fortunately, those who know and write about baseball generally know about as much about how the season will progress as your humble scrivener. Which would be zero.

 

 

Which bring me to expectations: Zero!! I am going to do my best to enjoy baseball and the season without any pre-conceived notions as to what should happen. Taking that approach, I have a near zero expectation of being disappointed.

 

 

Some nothings to think about:

 

1. 0-4 = BA .000
2. 0 errors = fielding percentage of 1.000%
3. 0 WAR = scrub player
4. 0 ERA = imaginary number*
5. 1000 BA = imaginary number*

 

 

*Over the course of the season. There is also a mathematical function known as an “imaginary number.” However, I decided against going down that rabbit hole.

 

Pitching for the Twins:

 

Hector Santiago

 

Twins Lineup:

 

1. Brian Dozier ® 2B
2. Max Kepler (L) RF
3. Byron Buxton ® CF
4. Joe Mauer (L) 1B
5. Miguel Sano ® 3B
6. Jason Castro (L) C
7. Eduardo Escobar (S) SS
8. Eddie Rosario (L) LF
9. Robbie Grossman (S) DH

 

Pitching for KC:

 

Ian Kennedy

 

Royals lineup to follow.

 

Play Ball!

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQnaRtNMGMI

Sigh. Mods, would someone kindly correct the starting time of "Noon" to "Noon:10"

 

Thanks.

 

Royals lineup:

 

Alex Gordon(L) LF
Mike Moustakas(L) DH
Lorenzo Cain® CF
Eric Hosmer(L) 1B
Salvador Perez® C
Paulo Orlando® RF
Cheslor Cuthbert® 3B
Alcides Escobar® SS
Raul Mondesi(S) 2B

Edited April 5, 20179 yr by Blake

Yay Twins baseball while I'm at school!

Just so you all know, when I got home on Monday and turned the game on it was right when Kepler's bunt happened... You can blame it on me if we lose today
But we're the Twins so that's not gonna happen!

Any explanation as to why Polanco is not in the lineup?  

Great job Blake.

Zero was also "outlawed" by the Church, since there could be no place where there was no God....hence, zero could not exist. 

Twins matchups against Ian Kennedy:

 

• Escobar is 6 for 14 against Kennedy, which may have factored into the decision to start Eduardo Escobar at SS.
• Dozier has 2 career HR against Kennedy in 15 AB
• Mauer is only 2 for 14 (.143) lifetime against Kennedy
• Eddie Rosario is 4 for 8 (.500) lifetime against Kennedy

I think between some of these nice splits, and Santiago pitching, we might have a high-scoring affair today.

Edited April 5, 20179 yr by Respy

 

Any explanation as to why Polanco is not in the lineup?  

 

I assume he'll be splitting time with Escobar for the first month or two to see who takes the job.
He didn't hit high in the lineup yesterday so maybe they don't value him as much as we thought

 

Any explanation as to why Polanco is not in the lineup?  

 

Escobar has excellent career numbers against Kennedy.

 

Molitor may also be making a 'Game 2 statement' as to the importance and role of Escobar on the team this year?

I think Escobar has to due to the fact he is hitting .429 off Kennedy in 14 ABs. Very small sample size, but game 2 counts the same as game 162. Still questioning the decision to have Santiago #2 in the rotation. I'd like to see Gibson go today.

People think they are deciding the lineup on 14 AB samples? I hope not.

 

Zero was also "outlawed" by the Church, since there could be no place where there was no God....hence, zero could not exist. 

Evidently the Church wasn't paying attention to scripture because there is a place where there is no God, and that would be the void known as "H*ll."

There's a nice book about a modern mathematician's hunt for the origin of the numeral zero (not necessarily the number). Looks like it may be in what is now Cambodia.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Zero-Mathematicians-Odyssey-Uncover/dp/1137279842/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1416420900&sr=1-1&keywords=finding+zero

Great intro Blake! OOhh Math! Imaginary numbers, negative numbers, placeholders. I love it!

I highly recommend this book:

 

E=mc2: A biography of the world's most famous equation.

 

 

*too lazy to figure out how to do the squared sign correctly....

I'll be there with my daughter. I'm wearing a navy TC hoodie, daughter will be more generic. Don't know yet where we'll be sitting but it probably won't be the same place the whole game. If the game is videoed in some way you can look for us.

 

I highly recommend this book:

 

E=mc2: A biography of the world's most famous equation.

 

 

*too lazy to figure out how to do the squared sign correctly....

That may be the most famous equation, but check out this and my sig line.

 

http://www.livescience.com/51399-eulers-identity.html

 

Great intro Blake! OOhh Math! Imaginary numbers, negative numbers, placeholders. I love it!

Well, when I consult the muse, sometimes it's bit scary as to what may flow from my keyboard.

Edited April 5, 20179 yr by Blake

 

Evidently the Church wasn't paying attention to scripture because there is a place where there is no God, and that would be the void known as "H*ll."

 

maybe I should stop, to avoid annoying anyone.

 

maybe I should stop, to avoid annoying anyone.

Didn't bother me. I found your historical observation to be very interesting. I was merely pointing out the position of the early Church was inaccurate.

 

That may be the most famous equation, but check out this and my sig line.

 

http://www.livescience.com/51399-eulers-identity.html

And to run with that, as I absolutely adore Euler's Identity;

 

http://www.ctralie.com/Teaching/Euler/

I would like to have seen Polanco again today, just to keep the infield unit together-- but boy, you sure can't argue with 14 at bats...

 

That may be the most famous equation, but check out this and my sig line.

 

http://www.livescience.com/51399-eulers-identity.html

 

I have noticed that, and wondered what it was about....now I've read that article, and I only understood half of it. haven't done math like that in a decade or two....and I'm rusty at best (that's on top of being mediocre at it in the first place).

 

thanks!

 

Any explanation as to why Polanco is not in the lineup?  

Polanco doesn't play on any day ending in "y?"

 

Polanco doesn't play on any day ending in "y?"

But Hey, that means...

Great intro Blake! OOhh Math! Imaginary numbers, negative numbers, placeholders. I love it!

You love it.... I'm having nightmares about college calculus again.

 

I'm going to go hide in the corner until the math wizards figure this out!

 

Evidently the Church wasn't paying attention to scripture because there is a place where there is no God, and that would be the void known as "H*ll."

 

I have heard the only thing in that void is Hawk Harrelson's voice on an endless loop.

 

You love it.... I'm having nightmares about college calculus again.

I'm going to go hide in the corner until the math wizards figure this out!

You do realize the analytics crowd is about to disown you, right?

I thought my math career ended years ago with linear algebra ... thanks a lot for those who continue to bring math to the thread ...

 

What are the odds Joe hits into a double play out of the four hole today?