mike546 Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 After the press conferences, it's Wang/Byrd tomorrow, and Joba is available tomorrow. I'm confident for tomorrows game, but then again I thought Pettite/Burkett game 6 at the Stadium in 03 was a lock too, so who knows.
Boon Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Fuck those fucking bugs. I don't care what anyone says the Yankees win game two without those motherfucking bugs. The bugs were attacking Carmona, too. But he still pitched through it.
Guest Gym Class Fallout Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Fausto must've made a deal with the devil to pitch through those bugs!
Guest Gym Class Fallout Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Come on, I thought it was funny.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 8, 2007 Author Report Posted October 8, 2007 Here's something. The Rockies/D'backs NLCS will be only the third league championship series contested between two expansion clubs. The others were the 1982 ALCS (Angels/Brewers) and the 1986 NLCS (Mets/Astros).
KingPK Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Here's something. The Rockies/D'backs NLCS will be only the third league championship series contested between two expansion clubs. The others were the 1982 ALCS (Angels/Brewers) and the 1986 NLCS (Mets/Astros). I actually was going to look that up. Is this the one with the youngest teams in terms of years in the league (Colorado's been in for something like 12 years and the D'Backs have only been around about 10, I think)?
MrRant Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Are they still considered an "expansion" club at 12 years though?
Guest Gym Class Fallout Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Everyone except the following are expansion teams: Cubs, Cardinals, Braves, Dodgers, Reds, Giants, Pirates, Phillies Yankees, Red Sox, Orioles, White Sox, Twins, Tigers, Indians, Athletics
treble Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Here's something. The Rockies/D'backs NLCS will be only the third league championship series contested between two expansion clubs. The others were the 1982 ALCS (Angels/Brewers) and the 1986 NLCS (Mets/Astros). 82 ALCS (Brewers/Angels), 85 ALCS (Royals/Blue Jays)
Slayer Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Here's something. The Rockies/D'backs NLCS will be only the third league championship series contested between two expansion clubs. The others were the 1982 ALCS (Angels/Brewers) and the 1986 NLCS (Mets/Astros). 82 ALCS (Brewers/Angels), 85 ALCS (Royals/Blue Jays) 1982 ALCS (Milwaukee/California)
MrRant Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Everyone except the following are expansion teams: Cubs, Cardinals, Braves, Dodgers, Reds, Giants, Pirates, Phillies Yankees, Red Sox, Orioles, White Sox, Twins, Tigers, Indians, Athletics Clearly the AL teams are expansion teams since they came ~20 years after the NL teams.
Guest Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 Everything post-1960 is expansion. To simplify for the mentally retarded. The AL teams were part of what I call, "the growth period." Then we had a period in which no new teams came about, then expansion. There's a difference.
MrRant Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 17 years is a period? Then wouldn't it have been a "period" between the M's and Blue Jays and the Rockies/Marlins? If we want to get technical, every current team is an expansion team besides the Braves since the next current MLB team's first year was 1874 since anything added after the original teams at the start of the league would be considered expanding the league from a technical standpoint. I just happen to disagree with stating a team like say the M's or Jays who have been in the league for 30 years is an expansion team if and would be referred to as such if they played in the WS at this time.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 8, 2007 Author Report Posted October 8, 2007 17 years is a period? Then wouldn't it have been a "period" between the M's and Blue Jays and the Rockies/Marlins? If we want to get technical, every current team is an expansion team besides the Braves since the next current MLB team's first year was 1874 since anything added after the original teams at the start of the league would be considered expanding the league from a technical standpoint. I just happen to disagree with stating a team like say the M's or Jays who have been in the league for 30 years is an expansion team if and would be referred to as such if they played in the WS at this time. I did not intend for it to be an insult. The 1986 NLCS featured without question the greatest clinching game of all time. The 1982 ALCS was very good, decided by one run in the deciding game. I missed the 1985 ALCS, that again was a very good series. "Expansion" to me quite simply describes teams added after MLB elected to add more than the 16 original franchises that carried the leagues for sixty years. One way to change the definition is to say teams after the latest expansion cycle, which would include no such series. Oddly, there has never been a World Series between two expansion franchises.
MarvinisaLunatic Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 I still think its gonna be Cleveland losing to another 93 expansion team in the WS. How great would a Cleveland/Colorado WS be? *crickets chirping*
Guest Smues Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 If the Yankess make the ALCS Roger Clemens will have to stay in George's box I guess. He's off their roster and ineligible for the ALCS.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 8, 2007 Author Report Posted October 8, 2007 I still think its gonna be Cleveland losing to another 93 expansion team in the WS. How great would a Cleveland/Colorado WS be? *crickets chirping* I think it would be fantastic.
MarvinisaLunatic Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 I still think its gonna be Cleveland losing to another 93 expansion team in the WS. How great would a Cleveland/Colorado WS be? *crickets chirping* I think it would be fantastic. Im sure there would be good games, but from a National standpoint, any WS not featuring the Red Sox (or yankees) is going to be a ratings disaster for FOX.
mike546 Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 The Indians BABIP must be fucking like a billion in this series.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 9, 2007 Author Report Posted October 9, 2007 I still think its gonna be Cleveland losing to another 93 expansion team in the WS. How great would a Cleveland/Colorado WS be? *crickets chirping* I think it would be fantastic. Im sure there would be good games, but from a National standpoint, any WS not featuring the Red Sox (or yankees) is going to be a ratings disaster for FOX. Fortunately, I don't own stock in Fox. And the success of Survivor, Fear Factor, well just about anything on television indicates that the average viewer is a fucking idiot.
Guest Smues Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 I still think its gonna be Cleveland losing to another 93 expansion team in the WS. How great would a Cleveland/Colorado WS be? *crickets chirping* I think it would be fantastic. Im sure there would be good games, but from a National standpoint, any WS not featuring the Red Sox (or yankees) is going to be a ratings disaster for FOX. Fortunately, I don't own stock in Fox. And the success of Survivor, Fear Factor, well just about anything on television indicates that the average viewer is a fucking idiot. Amen
mike546 Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 Wow these umps fucking BLOW. edit: Doesn't the hand become a part of the bat? FUCKING AWFUL WANG.
Guest NYankees Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 Cant blame the Umps while Want continues to FUCKING SUCK.
Boon Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 No. They got that one right. He got hit on the hand while pulling the bat back.
Guest NYankees Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 GREAT JOB CHIEN MING WANG SUCK DICK CHINC GOOK.
NYU Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 GREAT JOB CHIEN MING WANG SUCK DICK CHINC GOOK. lmao.
Guest Gym Class Fallout Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 Seemed to me that it was fouled off.
Slayer Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 GREAT JOB CHIEN MING WANG SUCK DICK CHINC GOOK. Is that you, Shaq?
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 9, 2007 Author Report Posted October 9, 2007 Well the racial slur gives me a reason to toss NYankees for 24 hours. Chien-Ming Wang sucked. That is an indictment of his ability, not himself.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now