|
Post by Allen Wiener on Sept 24, 2012 20:05:19 GMT -5
It's getting very exciting, Lou! However, like many fans, I'm totally miffed and mystified by MLB's bone-headed idea for the one-game, winner-take-all "playoff" round. Imagine you've played as well as Atlanta and find yourself in that spot; imagine your starting pitcher just happens to have a lousy day and you quickly find yourself in a 5-0 hole. An entire season down the tubes all because of a few bad innings. That's just not compatible with the rest of the baseball season, which is played over a long haul, with teams playing each other for 3 or 4 days at a time, for 6 months over a 162-game stretch. It's a game you win by making it through the long haul. Any playoff worth doing at all is worth making a multi-game playoff. Otherwise, why do this idiotic thing at all??? Has the money-grubbing gotten to this degree of greed? Soooooooooo, having said that, anyone want to place a long-shot bet on the Cardinals going all the way again? ??
|
|
|
Post by loucapitano on Sept 30, 2012 16:10:09 GMT -5
Allen: Just came off watching an excruciating win against the Jays and now we play Boston like Baltimore just did. How did we come to this? I agree, this one game playoff could be disaster. I suppose MLB thought if two non division winning teams with the best records should play a round to see who qualifies for the Wild Card Series. But one game really settles nothing in baseball where any team can win or lose any day. I think they have a long term idea up their sleeve and they're testing the waters with this one game sudden death. Personally, I'd prefer four divisions in each league and only the winners get to the playoffs and all the series are seven games. By the way, I hope you know your question about money-grubbing was retorical. The business of baseball is business and the games are just an opiate to the masses (like you and me.) Good luck in the HOME STRETCH!
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Oct 3, 2012 10:02:14 GMT -5
Allen, We agree on a lot of things (politics aside) , but I have to disagree with you on what I call the "play-in" game between the two wild cards. I like it because it returns the importance of winning your division to its former glory. Under the one wild card team format, winning the division was not a big deal. While certainly preferred, it does not necessarily dictate success in the postseason (e.g. Phillies, D-backs, Brewers last year.)
I like the drama of the one-game playoff as well. I understand your point about one game not being reflective of the entire season, but I suppose you could say the same thing about any playoff series since the regular season is a marathon and the playoffs are more like a mile relay. We can ask the 2001 Seattle Mariners about that.
Anyways, baseball will be hard-pressed to match the drama of last year, but today and the following days should provide plenty of excitement for us fans. GO BIRDS! (both kinds, NL and AL)
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 3, 2012 16:40:06 GMT -5
I hadn't quite thought of it that way, Hiram - but you have a point. Nonetheless, I still think making it 2 out of 3 would be more appropriate to baseball, if they are going to expand the post season to include more clubs. I actually don't have a real problem with wild cards because baseball is such a long season and teams wax and wane, get hot and cold, as do individual players. So, a team that hasn't had a stellar season, but has really been hot down the stretch, might deserve a shot at the post season. However, I do see your point about there being more significance to winning the division this way. The Nats certainly learned that this week.
And, although I would love to see our Birds and the Nats in the WS, I developed a real affection for the Cardinals last year. Maybe the significant thing here is your point about post season being a sprint. It's always been that way. Ask the 1954 Cleveland Indians! So, I guess I can't gripe of MLB wants to do it this way.
Anyway - the As and Rangers are REALLY making the last day of the season very interesting!
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 4, 2012 9:25:40 GMT -5
Well -- here we go! Time for the "second season," very different from the six-month "first season." I hope it's even half the fun it was last year. Meanwhile, before the action begins tomorrow, it's kind of fun to go back to page 1 of this thread and see what we were all thinking back in April-May! I'm impressed with how accurate some of our predictions and analyses were! Many of us saw the Nats coming. One that I really missed by a mile was the Orioles astonishing resurgence!
|
|
|
Post by loucapitano on Oct 6, 2012 11:08:27 GMT -5
The umpiring bloopers during the one game wildcard playoff should persuade MLB to extend this to at least a 2 out of 3 series. We'll see how they feel come November. Our predictions came out pretty well, even the longshots. Congrats to the O's! The one prediction I made that came true was Bobby Valentine not coming back in 2013. For us New Yorkers, it was "been there, done that" with Mr. V.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 6, 2012 13:43:26 GMT -5
I agree, Lou, although I don't think Atlanta can blame the loss on that one REALLY bad call. They just blew it and the Cards took advantage of that. That's baseball. I still can't figure what they were drinking in the Red Sox front office when they even considered Valentine for the job. Axing him reminds me of the joke about 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean: It's a start.
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Oct 6, 2012 15:14:19 GMT -5
The disputed call took away one baserunner in exchange for an out and both runners advanced. Bad call or not, that doesn't put a team behind the 8 ball or prevent them from winning a ballgame. Failing to hit with men in scoring position and making bad throws will lose you a game almost every time however.
You want to talk about a disputed call that changed the outcome of a postseason game? Okay, I'm going with Don Denkinger's call @ first base in the 9th inning of Game 6 of the 1985 World Series. Cost the Cardinals the game (which would have ended the series) and forced a Game 7 which of course they lost.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 6, 2012 15:50:40 GMT -5
You mean this one?
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Oct 6, 2012 15:58:06 GMT -5
AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!! (Me screaming internally inside my head)
yes...that one. But I've gotten over it now...I'm "much" better!
Thanks for sharing Allen...you're such a friend! LOL
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Oct 6, 2012 16:06:14 GMT -5
Of course, my old friend Don Denkinger wasn't finished with the Redbirds yet. Guess who had the plate for Game 7? Yep...Double D. Guess who went ballistic over more than one poorly called pitch? Yep...Joaquin Andujar. Bottom line is Kansas City scored 11 runs that game and the Cardinals scored none, that's why St. Louis lost the Game 7. Love the stirrups on the socks though!
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Oct 6, 2012 16:48:29 GMT -5
Looking back (25 April post), my biggest miscalculation was thinking there was no way the BoSox could be bad all year. I obviously underestimated their ability to sustain their high level of ineptitude. Whatever skill Bobby Valentine once possessed as a big league manager, he has since lost. Having said that, the Red Sox problems run deep in that organization. They need a major overhaul, not a minor tuneup.
One final thought, there are no Cinderellas at this stage of the season. Oakland is a very good team. Baltimore is a very good team. The Cardinals are a very good team. If they win their respective series, that's why. If they lose, it's not because the glass slipper didn't fit; it'll be because the better team won.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 6, 2012 17:40:14 GMT -5
I wish I could blame the Os' collapse in 1979 series on bad umps, but they just blew it. I give Chuck Tanner and the Pirates full credit for noy giving up and finding a wY to win. Yes, when you get to the postseason, all the teams earned their way there through the gruling 162 game marathon.
|
|
|
Post by loucapitano on Oct 7, 2012 11:54:02 GMT -5
I don't remember that play in the 1985 series, probably because I wasn't watching. From the picture, assuming the ball is in the glove and the foot is about to touch the bag, it looks like an outl. But I wouldn't call it blown when the action occurs in a nano second. Umps are human too (I think). It seems a better example of an argument about "instant replaY." But I've got mixed feelings about IR although I think we'll see it sooner or later. No, I agree, if you're in the playoffs, you most likely deserved to be there. And if a game hinges on a blown call or an error in the 9th, you can almost always find a missed opportunity or misplay earlier that set the stage for that crucial moment. (Take heart Mr. Buckner) (cliche time) "That's baseball" "That's why we play nine innings" "It ain't over til it's over!" ;D Tonight Tankees play the O's. It could come down to pitching. The Yanks and the Rangers are both slugging teams, yet Baltimore always gave them a tough time. The Yanks can't let down for a moment. Advantage, Baltimore if they can remain loose and calm.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 7, 2012 13:28:18 GMT -5
Os have not been scoring in the last few games and no long ball. Notice that they beat Texas the other day with classic small ball and clutch pitching & defense. In the end, that may carry the day. I can but hope. Nats and Os both in the post season this very day. Who would even have dared THINK that six months ago???
|
|