Mr. S£im Citrus Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Am I the only person who thinks that the next guy that Colorado sends out to the mound is going to get hung out to dry for the duration?
Mr. S£im Citrus Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Fuck... three straight walks with the bases loaded? Okay, I'm a casual baseball fan, so maybe one of you diehards can help me out here: when was that last time that happened in the World Series?
Mr. S£im Citrus Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Sesame Street! :: marks out ::
KingPK Posted October 25, 2007 Author Report Posted October 25, 2007 Probably not that often. Wow, the inning's finally fucking over!
The Niggardly King Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 please bring in goggles paisan
Richard Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 What about the biggest blowout in series history? Anyone know what game that was?
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 What about the biggest blowout in series history? Anyone know what game that was? Here it is Game Four of the 1999 ALDS, Boston 23, Cleveland 7.
KingPK Posted October 25, 2007 Author Report Posted October 25, 2007 But what about World Series history? Was it Game 5 of the 2002 Series?
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 But what about World Series history? Was it Game 5 of the 2002 Series? It was actually Game Four of the 1936 World Series.
randomguy Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 This post-season has been almost nothing but blowouts. Very dissapointing.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Fuck... three straight walks with the bases loaded? Okay, I'm a casual baseball fan, so maybe one of you diehards can help me out here: when was that last time that happened in the World Series? Never. The Philadelphia Phillies drew three straight bases loaded walks against Burt Hooten in game 3 of the 1977 NLCS. The Philadelphia A's drew three bases loaded walks against the St. Louis Cardinals in game 6 of the 1931 World Series, but not all in the same inning. Thanks to Baseball-Reference
cd213 Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Just a quick question, during that inning that wouldn't end the commentators mentioned that Youkalis (sp?) was on the Sox in 2004 but not on the roster for the World Series. When the Sox won does he still get a ring even though he wasn't on the roster?
KingPK Posted October 25, 2007 Author Report Posted October 25, 2007 It was only the guys who were on the roster.
cd213 Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 That sucks this year for a guy like Wakefield then. I didn't even realize that Yukilis has only been around for a short time. You look at the guy and he looks like a 10 year vet.
randomguy Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Youkilis has been around the minor leagues for a while, he was a big part of the book Moneyball. But yeah he's only been in the majors for 3 or 4 years.
Mik Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 The Moneyball draft was the 2002 draft, so I wouldn't exactly say he was in the minors for awhile.
LivingLegendGaryColeman Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 It was only the guys who were on the roster. Are you sure about that? Cause I was pretty sure that the team was holding a vote over giving Nomar a ring because he was traded that season. Unless it is everyone on the roster and then exceptions, which in this case, I would say Wakefield would get one. I wouldn't agree with not giving rings to guys who got left off the playoff roster though because Tavarez and Wakefield missed respective rounds and were more important to the team this year the Gagne.
Guest Gym Class Fallout Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 I think the discussion related to voting a playoff share for Nomar.
randomguy Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 The Moneyball draft was the 2002 draft, so I wouldn't exactly say he was in the minors for awhile. He was in the minors in 2001, in Moneyball I don't think the context was drafting him, it was just in player evaluation. But yeah, I guess 2001 to 2004 isn't really "a while." Maybe he seems like he's been around a while because even while he was in the minors he got a lot of mention. He was written about well before he became a major leaguer.
Cartman Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 The Sox gave EVERYONE rings in 2004. Anyone that played for the team during that season, Office employees, everyone!
Guest Vitamin X Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 That was a pretty embarrassing showing by Colorado last night. I had traffic school so I couldn't watch the game, but I'm glad I didn't. 13-1? Jesus. While I knew that the Sox would have the advantage in hitting, I didn't know their defense would play as well as they did, either.
Cheech Tremendous Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 That was a pretty embarrassing showing by Colorado last night. I had traffic school so I couldn't watch the game, but I'm glad I didn't. 13-1? Jesus. While I knew that the Sox would have the advantage in hitting, I didn't know their defense would play as well as they did, either. The Red Sox had the best defense in baseball this year. Despite their history as a powerful offensive force, this year's team was all pitching and defense. They scored a lot of runs, but part of that was park effects (Fenway favored hitters more than any other park this year) and the fact they usually ran up the score on bad pitching because of their incredible OBP.
Guest Gym Class Fallout Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 I'm going to preemptively chide anyone who says the Rockies' "momentum" was ruined by having such a long layoff. They ran into a buzzsaw and they'd have been fucked whether they had one day off or ten.
Slayer Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 I can think of a few different series offhand where game 1 was a blowout but still went 6 or 7 games (87, 96 and 01 immediately come to mind)
Matt Young Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Yeah, this reminds me of 1996 a lot. I think the series will go at least 6 games.
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 I can think of a few different series offhand where game 1 was a blowout but still went 6 or 7 games (87, 96 and 01 immediately come to mind) Thanks again to the Play Index. 1945: Cubs win game one 9-0, lose series in seven. 1959: White Sox win game one 11-0, lose series in six. 1978: Dodgers win game one 11-5, lose series in six. 1982: Brewers win game one 10-0, lose series in seven. 1987: Twins win game one 10-1, win series in seven. 1996: Atlanta wins game one 12-1, loses series in six. 2001: Diamondbacks win game one 9-0, win series in seven. In fact, 13 times a team scored 8+ runs in game one. Twelve of those were wins. Of those 12, eight saw the series go six or seven games. It certainly seems that a game one blowout is not an indication that the series will be uncompetitive.
Guest Gym Class Fallout Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Rockies are going to lose tonight with Schilling going. They might catch a break against Lester, and that's it.
Slayer Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 In fact, 13 times a team scored 8+ runs in game one. Twelve of those were wins. Who scored 8+ runs and lost?
EVIL~! alkeiper Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 In fact, 13 times a team scored 8+ runs in game one. Twelve of those were wins. Who scored 8+ runs and lost? Red Sox beating the Cardinals 11-9 in 2004.
Guest Gym Class Fallout Posted October 25, 2007 Report Posted October 25, 2007 Remember, all are invited to tsmbaseball on AIM for bad, creepy, gay baseball talk.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now