|
Post by mummifiedstalin on Oct 24, 2010 15:18:31 GMT -5
TRIPLE POST!
The Giants surprised me. And now I don't know what to think about the WS. My gut says that Texas can outhit the Giants, but SF showed relatively consistent pitching.
|
|
|
Post by Mod City on Oct 24, 2010 22:36:06 GMT -5
I'm less surprised about the Giants than I am about Texas. Way to go, Rangers! I'm a born-again Yankees-hater this year, and Texas making it to the WS for the first time ever on top of it is cool, even though I have no particular love for the Rangers.
I agree they can outhit the Giants. Interesting to see how Texas responds to home-field advantage for the Giants, though.
Can't say it's exactly a classic World Series, but it's different. I'm rolling with it.
Tough pick. I'll say Rangers in six.
|
|
|
Post by mummifiedstalin on Oct 25, 2010 10:49:33 GMT -5
I'm with you. I'll go with the Rangers, but it'll go into the 6th or 7th games. If the Phillies had made it past the Giants, though, I probably would have given them the edge because of pitching.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Oct 25, 2010 13:45:52 GMT -5
That last Giants-Phillies game was outstanding. The Giants bullpen totally earned it for them.
In the bottom of the fourth (I think), Buster Posey was up and Juan Uribe was on deck. Buck & McCarver were talking about the impact Posey has had on the Giants. I turned to Mrs. Atari and said this exact sentence: "I don't know why, but I have this weird feeling that Uribe's going to be the hero tonight."
Man, I wish I was in Vegas that night. And a gambler.
Living in Denver and being a follower of the Western Conferences of professional sports, I couldn't be more pleased that it's a Rangers-Giants world series. Up yours, east coast bias! No Boston, New York, or Philadelphia teams? Oh, boo hoo. How sad for you entitled and obnoxious networks and fans.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Walker on Oct 25, 2010 21:20:04 GMT -5
Living in Denver and being a follower of the Western Conferences of professional sports, I couldn't be more pleased that it's a Rangers-Giants world series. Up yours, east coast bias! No Boston, New York, or Philadelphia teams? Oh, boo hoo. How sad for you entitled and obnoxious networks and fans. As both an east coaster and a Red Sox fan, I must take issue with this. I'm a baseball fan first, and this World Series is just what baseball needs, i.e. other teams. I'd have taken the Rays as well given that it seems like half the team might be dismantled next year, but someone other than the big market teams is nice and should make for a good series. I like my team to win. That said, if mine can't, I want a good Series and this should provide one. I don't really buy the east coast bias thing. I find it to be a touch lame as a concept since no matter who's in the Series the coverage will be just as extensive. That and, well, it frequently comes off sounding like whining even when the point is valid. Sure, from a ratings standpoint the networks might want certain match-ups due to larger markets, but real baseball fans know a potentially excellent Series when they see one. I think this will be one. It's especially nice to see the Rangers make it after all these years and I'm picking them to win in six (I originally had the Phillies taking it over the Rays). In the interest of full disclosure I must add that I've been a quasi-Rangers fan for two decades except during the A-Fraud days (the contract was ludicrous then and remains so now).
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Oct 25, 2010 23:21:01 GMT -5
You know, as I typed that, I thought, "Dave Walker is going to say something about this."
I know "east coast bias" is one huge generality, and doesn't cover all Yankees or Red Sox or Phillies fans. But I was referring more to the national media and general attitude towards these teams. Other than maybe a Giants-Dodgers game, can you remember seeing a national telecast of a western division game in the regular season? How many casual fans would know more than one starter on the Oakland A's? Or had ever heard of C.J. Wilson? When Carlos Gonzalez was seriously threatening a triple crown in early September, the discussion was exclusively about Pujols and Votto (who both are in the NL Central, I know. But the complete disregard all season of guys like Jimenez or Tulowitzki or Gonzalez was noticeable to this homer).
Speaking of me being a homer, could you imagine if the Red Sox or Yankees came from 8 back in mid-September to win 21 of 22 games, and become the only team ever to sweep their way through the playoffs and into the WS? It would be the stuff of bloody sock legends. When the Rockies did it, it was a quaint footnote.
Even as the Giants were putting down the Phillies, there was a tone from Buck & McCarver, SportsCenter anchors, ATH & PTI talking heads, and Deadspin writers that implied, "Other than Lincecum and Wilson, who ARE these guys? They're not supposed to beat the vastly superior Phillies." ESPN even ran a segment on, "Would you recognize Matt Cain if you saw him on the street?" Yes I would! And so would anyone who actually pays attention to west coast games instead of merely complaining about how late they start. How patronizing.
[/rant not in any way directed at Dave Walker]
Oh yeah, I almost forgot- Go Rangers! Lincecum is the biggest crybaby in the league. I'd love to see him get lit up in game 1.
|
|
|
Post by GProopdog on Oct 26, 2010 0:01:42 GMT -5
"...could you imagine if the Red Sox or Yankees came from 8 back in mid-September to win 21 of 22 games, and become the only team ever to sweep their way through the playoffs and into the WS? It would be the stuff of bloody sock legends. When the Rockies did it, it was a quaint footnote."
I for one was rooting like hell for the Rockies during that big surge they had. I thought it was making for an incredibly great Cinderella story. I really wanted to see them beat the Red Sox in the WS that year, not just because I dislike the Red Sox, but also because it would have been the perfect ending to the story. I think it's a damn shame that more people don't mention just how great a surge the Rockies *did* have that year.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Oct 26, 2010 2:09:08 GMT -5
I for one was rooting like hell for the Rockies during that big surge they had. I thought it was making for an incredibly great Cinderella story. I really wanted to see them beat the Red Sox in the WS that year, not just because I dislike the Red Sox, but also because it would have been the perfect ending to the story. I think it's a damn shame that more people don't mention just how great a surge the Rockies *did* have that year. And they should have had a better chance. But because of the days off that MLB added to the playoff schedule that year, and because it took the Red Sox 7 games to dispatch the Indians (how do you not send Kenny Lofton in game 7?), the Rockies had to sit for 2 weeks between the NLCS and the WS, cooling off the hottest team ever. And don't get me started on how Matt Holliday was absolutely robbed that season for MVP in favor of the vastly statistically inferior, but east coast friendly, Jimmy Rollins. Or how Tulowitzki was equally robbed of ROY. But that was so 2007. Sorry for bringing it up. I agree with DW that this should be an outstanding series. I'm hoping that the Rangers can keep playing loose and aggressive baseball, because the Giants can't score more than 3 runs a game.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Walker on Oct 26, 2010 7:23:31 GMT -5
You know, as I typed that, I thought, "Dave Walker is going to say something about this." Fair enough. In general terms, I know you have a point. It just gets irritating to hear over and over again as I frequently do. That said, I would recognize Matt Cain. I do know the names of A's starters, the Rocks run in 2007 was phenomenal (though the WS outcome was to my liking, obviously), CGon going for the Triple Crown this year was compelling though he fell short, etc. Again, as a baseball fan, I see these things, appreciate these things, but I also agree that sometimes they don't get the coverage. Of course, that's why I haven't paid attention to ESPN in years, and seriously tune out Buck & McCarver as much as possible.
|
|
|
Post by GProopdog on Oct 26, 2010 11:24:31 GMT -5
I for one was rooting like hell for the Rockies during that big surge they had. I thought it was making for an incredibly great Cinderella story. I really wanted to see them beat the Red Sox in the WS that year, not just because I dislike the Red Sox, but also because it would have been the perfect ending to the story. I think it's a damn shame that more people don't mention just how great a surge the Rockies *did* have that year. And they should have had a better chance. But because of the days off that MLB added to the playoff schedule that year, and because it took the Red Sox 7 games to dispatch the Indians (how do you not send Kenny Lofton in game 7?), the Rockies had to sit for 2 weeks between the NLCS and the WS, cooling off the hottest team ever. And don't get me started on how Matt Holliday was absolutely robbed that season for MVP in favor of the vastly statistically inferior, but east coast friendly, Jimmy Rollins. Or how Tulowitzki was equally robbed of ROY. But that was so 2007. Sorry for bringing it up. I agree with DW that this should be an outstanding series. I'm hoping that the Rangers can keep playing loose and aggressive baseball, because the Giants can't score more than 3 runs a game. Absolutely 100 percent agreed on that rest period that the Rockies had. Had they not had to sit and cool off for 2 weeks, not only do I think the Rockies could have taken it to more then 4 games, I honestly believe they would have *beaten* the Redsox, if not taken them to 7 games.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Oct 26, 2010 13:20:23 GMT -5
I'm not sure they could have beaten the Red Sox that year, even without the layoff. Beckett, Schilling, Pedroia, and Ellsbury were outstanding. But I do think it would have been a better and more competitive series if the Rockies could have played when they still had the mojo.
Man, it's fun to reminisce. That was a great October.
My favorite McCarverism: "Beckett's retired 19 batters through 6 1/3 innings. He's having a phenomenal night."
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Oct 28, 2010 11:01:59 GMT -5
What the heck was that?
I'd like to know how often the Giants scored 11 runs in a game this season. I know Freddy Sanchez once won a batting title, but last night was completely out of nowhere.
Whenever Lincecum pitches in Coors Field, he whines and moans about juiced balls (because he can't pitch above sea level, apparently, and also because he's a big puss). During the game last night, my buddy wondered aloud at how curious it was that the worst offensive team in baseball, who also is the team that whines the most about juiced balls in other ballparks, could suddenly put up 11 on the best postseason pitcher in the game.
I think Kevin Millar on the MLB network was right, though, when he pointed out how Lee kept challenging in the middle of the plate with 88 mph cheese all night.
|
|
|
Post by Mod City on Oct 28, 2010 11:58:06 GMT -5
Yeah, when Lee grooved one, they nailed it. And he did it fairly often. A lot of his stuff looked good, but man, the Giants torched the stuff that was down the pipe.
Rangers had some chances later, but that was a big, big deficit to overcome, especially on the road. I don't expect the Giants to hit like that the whole series, though. I enjoyed watching the game, even though it wasn't the prettiest thing I've ever seen.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Oct 28, 2010 22:24:10 GMT -5
Wow. Just...wow.
The Rangers really have no bullpen. This could be over quick. Color me surprised.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Walker on Oct 29, 2010 11:14:43 GMT -5
I'm not giving up on the Rangers yet, but it's looking ugly. Who knew the Giants could score like that.
Two pitching notes: I've often wondered if Cliff Lee might be a touch overrated. Sure, he's good, but is he really as good as his Cy season, is he really as good as his postseason record prior to the shelling? I never thought so, but it's only one game.
As for the Giants, people seem surprised by Matt Cain. I am left to wonder why. He's overshadowed by Lincecum, and a victim of often poor run support, but he's still one hell of a pitcher, so his performance last night did not surprise me.
|
|