Annabelle Posted October 27, 2006 Author Report Posted October 27, 2006 i understand that this is baseball. and i'll get over it. i am just taking people to task for saying how amazing the cards have been. how surprised we should be by their playing. i just think the tigers have more to do with this series result than the cards. i'll give carpenter credit for tossing a gem. i'll give them credit for those hits where they've capitalized on the tigers mistakes. but without the tigers mistakes, the cards hitters would not have had the opportunity to make those timely hits. and this has nothing to do with the tigers pitching. outside of the bullpen performance in game 3 and some of verlander's start, they've beem great. fielding? not so good.
iggymcfly Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 I'm not saying that the Cardinals were great in the sense that they dominated the game and played perfect baseball for nine innings. I'm saying it's great in the sense that they trailed going into the bottom of the 7th, and got three late clutch runs when they absolutely needed them. Yeah, the Rodney error was pretty bad, but most of the runs came from the Cards hitting the ball hard, and putting it where it was going to be very difficult for anyone from Detroit to make a play on it. All through the NLCS, everyone was saying that it didn't matter how many clutch plays the Cardinals made because the NL was teh suck, and they'd just get destroyed by the Tigers. Well, now they're making clutch plays to win games against that Tigers team in the World Series, and I think they deserve some credit.
J. Hungerford Smith Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 i understand that this is baseball. and i'll get over it. i am just taking people to task for saying how amazing the cards have been. how surprised we should be by their playing. i just think the tigers have more to do with this series result than the cards. i'll give carpenter credit for tossing a gem. i'll give them credit for those hits where they've capitalized on the tigers mistakes. but without the tigers mistakes, the cards hitters would not have had the opportunity to make those timely hits. and this has nothing to do with the tigers pitching. outside of the bullpen performance in game 3 and some of verlander's start, they've beem great. fielding? not so good. The only time the mistakes even mattered were tonight. Game 1: Cards offense pounded Verlander and Reyes pitched them to a win. Game 2: Rogers pitched a gem, pine tar or not, and the Tigers little offense won them the game. Game 3: Carpenter pitched a gem, and Edmonds double was the difference. Not the Zumaya error, it only added insurance, which wasn't needed because the Tigers plated zero runs, regardless. Game 4: Cardinals fought back to 3-2 with clutch hitting from Eckstein, Rolen and Molina. Then, they caught a break with Granderson slipping on a wet field and Rodney threw a ball away. After that, it was timely hits by Wilson and Eckstein (Monroe was playing in and he got it hit over his head, this was not a defensive lapse). This is not as fluked as you are going on about. Yes, the Tigers have been flat. But you can't blame it all on defense and the layoff. Give credit to the Cards pitching which has been stellar throughout the postseason.
lomasmoney Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 The Tigers are blowing this series to this point, and while its not over, Detroit has given up so many unearned runs its becoming borderline absurd
Annabelle Posted October 27, 2006 Author Report Posted October 27, 2006 certainly, but game 4 was crucial. series should be 2-2. which makes their chances much better. and game 1, while mistakes weren't overt, the gave reyes an easy time. they were impatient and hacking at everything. there's a reason why la russa is pitching weaver instead of reyes in game 5. but still, i'll admit the cards deserved to win game 1. but no one in their right mind should say that the cards deserved game 4. no one. it was the tigers game to win and they lost it. game 3, there is something to say about zumaya's error. afterwards one could say it meant nothing. but it deflated their egos when they can easily make a 2 run comeback instead of a four run. it was a nail in the coffin. and before we go batty with the cardinal supporters, they are batting .220 as a team in the world series. obviously something else is at work here if they're up 3-1. come on.
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 To be fair, Im sure the Tigers have a similar, if not worse, batting average in the Series. edit: yep, .211.
Bruiser Chong Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 We're also seeing the downside of a team that walks infrequently and relies on stringing together hits to score the bulk of its runs. They tend to be streaky and right now, they're cold. It doesn't help that they've run into some great pitching and when that's the case, you aren't going to be able to string together a lot of hits.
The Man in Blak Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 and before we go batty with the cardinal supporters, they are batting .220 as a team in the world series. obviously something else is at work here if they're up 3-1. come on. Despite batting .220, the Cardinals are doing better offensively than the Tigers: St. Louis: .220/.331/.362, 29/19 K/BB ratio in 127 ABs Detroit: .211/.257/.336, 27/6 K/BB ratio in 128 ABs Obviously, we're not talking about eye-popping dominance here, but there is one critical difference: the Cardinals are being patient with the Tigers pitchers, while the Tigers appear to be hacking away. The Cardinals rotation has almost always been filled with finesse pitchers in recent years and a free-swinging team like the Tigers plays right into their hands. (See the 2004 World Series, if you want an example of how St. Louis fares against a patient lineup.) Also, a lot of talk has been made about the errors from the Tigers pitchers, but there hasn't been as much discussion as to why. Two of the throwing errors have come from bunt plays, which don't happen very often in the American League. Though Leyland has done an outstanding job with the team this year, I wonder if a little more practice around bunts may have helped to prepare the young pitchers to deal with the tactic appropriately. That being said, a lot of things definitely aided the Cardinals in their Game 4 win. Granderson's slip obviously comes to mind, as he certainly has the range to turn that double into an out. The same applies for Monroe, who may have been a little tentative going after that ball, having seen Granderson belly flop earlier in the game. Here's a question for Al, if he happens to have the stats. What are the average BA/OBP/SLG numbers for playoff games as a whole over the last few years? My initial thought would be that the run environment for playoffs games would be a lot "tighter", as hitters faced tougher pitching than they would see over the course of the regular season, but you never know with baseball sometimes.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 I remember reading somewhere that run scoring has averaged about a run less per game than the regular season. I'll try and run some more numbers and get a firm result.
USC Wuz Robbed! Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 Last time both World Series teams had less than .250 batting averages was 1995.
TheDevilAndGodAreRagingInsideMe Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 Didn't the Yankees in 2001 hit around, perhaps even under .200 against Arizona?
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 Didn't the Yankees in 2001 hit around, perhaps even under .200 against Arizona? They hit .183 as a team. This is interesting. The '96 Yankees hit .216 in their World Series. Bad hitting performances are entirely common. It's a short series.
TheDevilAndGodAreRagingInsideMe Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 Plus they were facing the best pitching staff of the '90s and then the best of the '00s.
CanadianChris Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 Didn't the Yankees in 2001 hit around, perhaps even under .200 against Arizona? They hit .183 as a team. This is interesting. The '96 Yankees hit .216 in their World Series. Bad hitting performances are entirely common. It's a short series. They're not even the worst winners. The '83 Orioles hit .213 against the Phillies and won (mostly because the Phils hit .195). Oakland hit .209 in 1972, .212 in 1973 and .211 in 1974, and won three straight. The '96 Yankees at least had an OBP over .300, as the Cardinals do this year. Oakland's was around .300 all three years. The '83 Orioles are the only team with an OBP even within 20 points of Detroit's to win a WS since 1970.
Guest Princess Leena Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 So, who wins tonight's game because their opponent slipped, or misthrew a wet, cold ball.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 The worst combined performance is almost certainly the Orioles and Dodgers in 1966. The Orioles hit 200/267/342 and SWEPT the Dodgers, who hit 142/226/192. The Dodgers' Maury Wills stole the only base of the series. The O's outscored the Dodgers 13-2 over four games.
naiwf Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 As much as I can't root for the Cards I hope they win tonight just to end this miserable WS, which as I predicted no one outside of St. Louis or Detroit would watch. So much for the Cards and their national fanbase bringing eyeballs to the TV.
CanadianChris Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 The worst combined performance is almost certainly the Orioles and Dodgers in 1966. The Orioles hit 200/267/342 and SWEPT the Dodgers, who hit 142/226/192. The Dodgers' Maury Wills stole the only base of the series. The O's outscored the Dodgers 13-2 over four games. At least they had an excuse -- the pitcher's mound hadn't been lowered yet.
Annabelle Posted October 27, 2006 Author Report Posted October 27, 2006 We're also seeing the downside of a team that walks infrequently and relies on stringing together hits to score the bulk of its runs. They tend to be streaky and right now, they're cold. It doesn't help that they've run into some great pitching and when that's the case, you aren't going to be able to string together a lot of hits. exactly. what i'm saying is that this series is more a result of the tigers faults than the cards supposed great play. thats all i was trying to say. this is the series that tigers pissed away; through errors, pitching, poor managing, impatient hitting, sloppiness, ect. the numbers explains this completely. nearly any team would be up 3-1 with the way the tigers have been playing. and i'm not debunking the cardinals completely, but all of the sports writers across america are lauding a st. louis team for almost being GIVEN a world series ring by detroit.
naiwf Posted October 27, 2006 Report Posted October 27, 2006 If it makes you feel better the Mets did the same thing (hand over a series) and as you stated St. Louis was portrayed like they were world beaters in that series as well.
Annabelle Posted October 28, 2006 Author Report Posted October 28, 2006 If it makes you feel better the Mets did the same thing (hand over a series) and as you stated St. Louis was portrayed like they were world beaters in that series as well. definately. the cards squeaked by the mets with their top two pitchers. not excuses by they're beating people at their worst. its not about what they're doing, its what is wrong with their opponants. if they win the world series, they will be total lame duck champions. seriously.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 28, 2006 Report Posted October 28, 2006 This is insipid. The Cards have played as well as they have all season. They deserved their wins.
Annabelle Posted October 28, 2006 Author Report Posted October 28, 2006 This is insipid. The Cards have played as well as they have all season. They deserved their wins. they deserved game 4? really? deserved? come on. the cards have played as well as having 83 wins. the lowest amount ever to win a world series.
CanadianChris Posted October 28, 2006 Report Posted October 28, 2006 Hey, Stan the Man's here tonight. Still looks pretty good, too.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 28, 2006 Report Posted October 28, 2006 This is insipid. The Cards have played as well as they have all season. They deserved their wins. they deserved game 4? really? deserved? come on. the cards have played as well as having 83 wins. the lowest amount ever to win a world series. Yes. David Eckstein came up with the clutch hit when his team needed it, and Yadier Molina did the same.
CanadianChris Posted October 28, 2006 Report Posted October 28, 2006 Verlander doesn't look like he has it tonight. No control.
The Man in Blak Posted October 28, 2006 Report Posted October 28, 2006 Fear not. Edmonds will strike out.
CanadianChris Posted October 28, 2006 Report Posted October 28, 2006 He should have walked on the fourth and fifth pitches of that at-bat. Gotta love John Hirschbeck.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now