October revelation

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    October revelation

    Baseball at its best if you are a Sox fan.  Thrills galore.  Great defense and semi-awful defense, including two errors by the same centerfielder who went like three seasons with zero errors.  Great hitting and awful hitting, often by the same guys.  Maybe the best Boston bullpen ever based on performance.  I would also argue the World Series umpiring has been first rate.  They reversed a bad call and stayed with a tough but good call (obstruction), whining by RSN notwithstanding. 

    I cannot emphasize too strongly that each postseason opponent--Tampa, Detroit, and St Louis--has been worthy and tough to beat.  Tampa did have the two big lefties, but they turned out not to be so big.  Detroit has a terrific rotation, but a weak bullpen, and Cabrera's injury made their lineup a little weaker.  The Cardinals are solid in all categories, rotation, bullpen, lineup, etc. 

    Three huge hits--grandslams by Ortiz and Victorino and a 3-run dinger by Gomes--have led to crucial wins. 

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Baseball at its best if you are a Sox fan.  Thrills galore.  Great defense and semi-awful defense, including two errors by the same centerfielder who went like three seasons with zero errors.  Great hitting and awful hitting, often by the same guys.  Maybe the best Boston bullpen ever based on performance.  I would also argue the World Series umpiring has been first rate.  They reversed a bad call and stayed with a tough but good call (obstruction), whining by RSN notwithstanding. 

    I cannot emphasize too strongly that each postseason opponent--Tampa, Detroit, and St Louis--has been worthy and tough to beat.  Tampa did have the two big lefties, but they turned out not to be so big.  Detroit has a terrific rotation, but a weak bullpen, and Cabrera's injury made their lineup a little weaker.  The Cardinals are solid in all categories, rotation, bullpen, lineup, etc. 

    Three huge hits--grandslams by Ortiz and Victorino and a 3-run dinger by Gomes--have led to crucial wins. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The last two WS wins by the Sox were anti-climatic, to say the least.

    Every series has been a battle.

    No matter what happens, this has been a memorable post season!

     

     

    But, the Sox are going to win. Wink

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: October revelation

    This series has been amazing.  Whether this ends in duckboats or a river of tears, I love this club.  Just been great to watch all year, and this gritty world series is the fiiting apex for this gritty club.  A Tito-era sweep would have been great, but, indeed, anti-climactic.

    Poll:  Will Papi see a pitch within shouting distance of the strike zone from here out?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: October revelation

    To be honest, I think the Sox were over-achievers in the regular season.  And maybe they are doing exactly that in the postseason.  As spaceman says, these guys are gritty. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: October revelation

    Why is baseball going to allow managers to "challenge" plays as they do in the NFL?

    Why have they decided this is necessary?

    Because they know it's necessary. Just like football, the camera doesn't lie. These guys make too many mistakes.

    In Postseason they add two umpires. In Postseason you get controversial calls every year. Shouldn't there be less controversy when you have two more sets of eyes? It reminds of Hockey when they added another referee and still were unable to see hooking, holding, slashing going on all over the ice....what's the point?

    It's too bad that these "challenges" won't include the part of the game that the umps seem most "challenged" and can't seem to get right....balls and strikes. If the same umpire is behind the plate for both teams, why does one team get low strikes, the other doesn't , one team gets the ball 4 inches off the outside corner , the other team does?

    I can live with an umpire calling balls outside the strikezone strikes , and vice-versa...just do it for both teams, equally.  The FOX K-zone, or whatever the hell they call shows pitches by Stl. pitchers being called strikes when they are clearly out of the zone.

    Either Yadier Molina is the best in the world at framing pitches and has these guys fooled or you are surely missing something that is clear to me and many of my associates at work ( that Cardinal pitcher are getting  amuch bigger strikezone). When you label these guys "first-rate" , I can only wonder if we are all watching the same games.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from bosoxmal. Show bosoxmal's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    To be honest, I think the Sox were over-achievers in the regular season.  And maybe they are doing exactly that in the postseason.  As spaceman says, these guys are gritty. 

    [/QUOTE]


    There's no such thing as "overachieving"; that's a cute term invented by some long-dead sport writer. Some things are possible and some things are not. Anything that's achievable is possible. The Red Sox had the talent to win a lot more games than they did, this past year. Did they under-achive? I don't think so. Cliches drive me crazy, and this is one of the worst.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: October revelation

    Overachievers always win.

     

    As many of you who were in the BDC2013 Fantasy Baseball League already know. ..

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to bosoxmal's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    To be honest, I think the Sox were over-achievers in the regular season.  And maybe they are doing exactly that in the postseason.  As spaceman says, these guys are gritty. 

    [/QUOTE]


    There's no such thing as "overachieving"; that's a cute term invented by some long-dead sport writer. Some things are possible and some things are not. Anything that's achievable is possible. The Red Sox had the talent to win a lot more games than they did, this past year. Did they under-achive? I don't think so. Cliches drive me crazy, and this is one of the worst.

    [/QUOTE]

    Maybe it is a cliche, but back in ST I sure didn't think these guys would win 97 games and get to the WS.  Did you?  And do you really think the Sox had the talent to win more than 97 games?  Speaking of overachievers, do you really think 2011 was just a normal season for Ellsbury and that before and after 2011 he was just not trying? 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Overachievers always win.

     

    As many of you who were in the BDC2013 Fantasy Baseball League already know. ..

    [/QUOTE]


    your so modestTongue Out

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why is baseball going to allow managers to "challenge" plays as they do in the NFL?

    Why have they decided this is necessary?

    Because they know it's necessary. Just like football, the camera doesn't lie. These guys make too many mistakes.

    In Postseason they add two umpires. In Postseason you get controversial calls every year. Shouldn't there be less controversy when you have two more sets of eyes? It reminds of Hockey when they added another referee and still were unable to see hooking, holding, slashing going on all over the ice....what's the point?

    It's too bad that these "challenges" won't include the part of the game that the umps seem most "challenged" and can't seem to get right....balls and strikes. If the same umpire is behind the plate for both teams, why does one team get low strikes, the other doesn't , one team gets the ball 4 inches off the outside corner , the other team does?

    I can live with an umpire calling balls outside the strikezone strikes , and vice-versa...just do it for both teams, equally.  The FOX K-zone, or whatever the hell they call shows pitches by Stl. pitchers being called strikes when they are clearly out of the zone.

    Either Yadier Molina is the best in the world at framing pitches and has these guys fooled or you are surely missing something that is clear to me and many of my associates at work ( that Cardinal pitcher are getting  amuch bigger strikezone). When you label these guys "first-rate" , I can only wonder if we are all watching the same games.

    [/QUOTE]

    Don't kid yourself.  These endless reviews of plays are all about commercials, which is why the NFL does them and MLB is following suit.  Expect the games to get longer because they gotta get in just one more commercial.  But don't expect to the experience of watching the game to improve.  Au contraire . . .

    Sports isn't about perfection, but about competition and excellence and sometimes failure, including errors and misjudgments.    Umpire mistakes have been part of the game since the beginning, and they make for great conversation and arguments.  Some are more egregious than others, but they all contribute to our experience. 

    Way back when players and managers assumed umpires would not call balls and strikes accurately every time and would adjust to what they did see being called.  Today a missed ball or strike is a federal case.  Yes, absolutely, an automated balls and strikes system would make for more accurate calls, but it would make baseball a lesser game and lesser experience for the fans and players. 

     

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This series has been amazing.  Whether this ends in duckboats or a river of tears, I love this club.  Just been great to watch all year, and this gritty world series is the fiiting apex for this gritty club.  A Tito-era sweep would have been great, but, indeed, anti-climactic.

    Poll:  Will Papi see a pitch within shouting distance of the strike zone from here out?

    [/QUOTE]


    Great post.  100% agree!

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: October revelation

    Papi's been Papi.  Pedroia and Ellsbury have underperformed.  Everyone else has been who they are.  Thank God for Papi.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to hangnail's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Papi's been Papi.  Pedroia and Ellsbury have underperformed.  Everyone else has been who they are.  Thank God for Papi.

    [/QUOTE]

    I wouldn't say Pedroia has underperformed.  I don't think you can look at batting averages in post-season series and draw conclusions.  Dustin has been on-base and part of key rallies in this series and has made some clutch, money plays in the field.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Overachievers always win.

     

    As many of you who were in the BDC2013 Fantasy Baseball League already know. ..

    [/QUOTE]


    your so modestTongue Out

    [/QUOTE]

    Now, now.  There's no Fantasy Crying in baseball. Cry

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Stalino. Show Stalino's posts

    Re: October revelation

    You all need to look at Xander's stats for the post-season... do it right now! Dude is good. Another difference maker on the club.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: October revelation

    Ellsbury have underperformed. \

    6 for 11 RISP.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from AFNAV130. Show AFNAV130's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to jimdavis' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This series has been amazing.  Whether this ends in duckboats or a river of tears, I love this club.  Just been great to watch all year, and this gritty world series is the fiiting apex for this gritty club.  A Tito-era sweep would have been great, but, indeed, anti-climactic.

    Poll:  Will Papi see a pitch within shouting distance of the strike zone from here out?

    [/QUOTE]


    Great post.  100% agree!

    [/QUOTE]

    Negative.  Some fans died never having seen the Sox win the title. Actually, quote a lot.  I feel bad for other cities who haven't seen one in a long, long time either.  Once you get to the dance, and especially now up 3-2, you close it out. Period. Anything less is irrelevant. For those who may never get to see another one. If you don't, it's a missed opportunity and that is never a good thing. The gloss of the teamwork this year will eventually wear off to a dull finish. What will be left is regret. No one remembers who loses, unless it's something epic. I too love this team, but if they can't close it out..it's pretty much for not. Remember, it was 86 years. It's only been 6 this go around.  Let's keep it at that rate from now on.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: October revelation

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Why is baseball going to allow managers to "challenge" plays as they do in the NFL?

    Why have they decided this is necessary?

    Because they know it's necessary. Just like football, the camera doesn't lie. These guys make too many mistakes.

    In Postseason they add two umpires. In Postseason you get controversial calls every year. Shouldn't there be less controversy when you have two more sets of eyes? It reminds of Hockey when they added another referee and still were unable to see hooking, holding, slashing going on all over the ice....what's the point?

    It's too bad that these "challenges" won't include the part of the game that the umps seem most "challenged" and can't seem to get right....balls and strikes. If the same umpire is behind the plate for both teams, why does one team get low strikes, the other doesn't , one team gets the ball 4 inches off the outside corner , the other team does?

    I can live with an umpire calling balls outside the strikezone strikes , and vice-versa...just do it for both teams, equally.  The FOX K-zone, or whatever the hell they call shows pitches by Stl. pitchers being called strikes when they are clearly out of the zone.

    Either Yadier Molina is the best in the world at framing pitches and has these guys fooled or you are surely missing something that is clear to me and many of my associates at work ( that Cardinal pitcher are getting  amuch bigger strikezone). When you label these guys "first-rate" , I can only wonder if we are all watching the same games.

    [/QUOTE]


    Much as it pains me, I completely agree with Zilla. And FTR the umpires have NOT been part of the game since that awful call at third. I don't think they want that call to decide the series. They screwed up.

    As for balls and strikes, the most egregious calls, it should not be a rotating squad. IMO There really needs to be specialty umpires for that position, and they should know what the strikezone actually is, and not create one of their own so it varies depending on the umpire. And framing pitches is sooooo ridiculous. You should see the pitch, and call it going over the plate.

    And I don't need to hear that the ump was watching the bag, or watching the glove or watching his watch. If there's too many things to have eyes on at the same time, they need more eyes, and preferably younger eyes. There really should be an age limit for such an important position.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share