2014 MLB Thread & Pissing Match

[brandx]

Apparently Ned Yost is managing the pitching for the Dodgers too.  Over 100 pitches, into the 7th inning, loads the bases, gives up 2 runs.  Hell, lets just keep him in there!

Well, Kershaw has earned a little leeway, but leaving him while giving up 6 hits in the 7th is a little much.

But to me, Mattingly ranks right up there with Gibson and Yost among baseball's great minds.

[wadesworld]

Raise your hand if you had KC and Baltimore 1 win away from meeting in the ALCS.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Raise your hand if you had KC and Baltimore 1 win away from meeting in the ALCS.

Baltimore yes. Royals? Ha.

[tower912]

Anibal Sanchez to the DL, Verlander left tonight's game with right shoulder soreness.   Clubhouse lacks a fiery leader, as it has for the last several years.    Move your money to KC.   

Ahem.   

[wadesworld]

Ahem.   

I meant more long term but even if we just talk before game 1 of the ALDS it'd still be impressive if someone predicted those 2.

[tower912]

I thought in August that KC was better than my beloved Tigers.   IMO, if this hadn't been their first rodeo, they win the division.   KC has a better bullpen, better team speed, better defense, and more heart.   That is why in August, I advocated moving your money to KC.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

Raise your hand if you had KC and Baltimore 1 win away from meeting in the ALCS.

I told you the other day how dangerous the Royals are.  That's why I wanted the A's.

We had the privilege to sit last night in front of the Royals wives....my wife and Jay Frasor's wife are practically exchanging Christmas cards a good two hours of talking...my wife literally buying the Frasor kids ice cream and goofing with the little ones for Much of the game, trying to give mom a break to watch her team and then her husband pitch...very nice family.    Actually the whole Royals group we were with were great, very enjoyable people.  After the game I just shook their hand and said if we don't pull it out I hope you go all the way, you remind me of the 2002 Angels.  

In front of me were the Angels team surgeons and a few of them have been with the team when I was there.  They felt the same way, this Royals team is a lot like the Angels of that year.  Fearless, team speed, great defense, timely power.  Hard not too root for them.

[tower912]

And it won't matter.    With the exception of the starting rotation, Cabrera, V Martinez, and Kinsler, Detroit is below average.  No dirtbags.   No one I expect to raise their game in the playoffs.    Several I expect to do worse in the playoffs.   Maybe it will be enough, but in my heart of hearts, I think Mr. I is disappointed yet again. 

Bump again.   My love affair with the Tigers goes back over 40 years.  This year,  I am saddened, I am disappointed, but I am not surprised.   A bad mash up of talent.  A new coach who was not the hard ass this team needed. The Fister trade was so mind-bogglingly bad that, IMO, it was foreshadowing how weird this season was going to be.  Iglesias injury leading to more bad trades,  streaky hitting, streaky starting pitching, a lack of production from half the line up, a dumpster fire of a bullpen where not one guy could be counted on throughout the entire season, the revolving door of other team's castoff closers since Nathan was so bad, never picking up a bat to bring off the bench.   The team has lacked a dirtbag since their 2006 run.   Just another disappointing year.   

[CTWarrior]

Bump again.   My love affair with the Tigers goes back over 40 years.  This year,  I am saddened, I am disappointed, but I am not surprised.   A bad mash up of talent.  A new coach who was not the hard ass this team needed. The Fister trade was so mind-bogglingly bad that, IMO, it was foreshadowing how weird this season was going to be.  Iglesias injury leading to more bad trades,  streaky hitting, streaky starting pitching, a lack of production from half the line up, a dumpster fire of a bullpen where not one guy could be counted on throughout the entire season, the revolving door of other team's castoff closers since Nathan was so bad, never picking up a bat to bring off the bench.   The team has lacked a dirtbag since their 2006 run.   Just another disappointing year.   

Feel for you Tower.  I liked Baltimore in this series.  Stunned by KC over LAA, though.  Angels just didn't hit in the first two games.  Big guns (Trout, Pujols, Kendrick, Hamilton) 5-50 in the series.  That's not going to get it done.  Still like Baltimore over KC.

Also surprised Giants are up two on Washington.  Zimmerman retires 20 in a row, walks a guy and Williams takes him out.  I was surprised at the move, but I don't blame the manager because your closer still should get out of a guy on first and two outs situation.  He basically had two good options and it just didn't work out.  Sometimes the players have to make plays.

[MU B2002]

Feel for you Tower.  I liked Baltimore in this series.  Stunned by KC over LAA, though.  Angels just didn't hit in the first two games.  Big guns (Trout, Pujols, Kendrick, Hamilton) 5-50 in the series.  That's not going to get it done.  Still like Baltimore over KC.

Hamilton is awful.  Looks like he has no clue at the plate anymore. 

[Lennys Tap]

Underdogs who have won:
4 - KC, KC, Baltimore, SF

Underdogs who lead:
1- SF

Favorites who have won:
0

Favorites who lead:
0

Series that are tied:
1- STL vs LA

Wow. Talk about your crap shoots.

[CTWarrior]

Underdogs who have won:
4 - KC, KC, Baltimore, SF

Underdogs who lead:
1- SF

Favorites who have won:
0

Favorites who lead:
0

Series that are tied:
1- STL vs LA

Wow. Talk about your crap shoots.

Agree with you on the crap shoot part, but was Detroit really the betting favorite over Baltimore?  Baltimore better record, home-field advantage, better/deeper lineup, better bench, starting rotation with better ERA and vastly superior bullpen and defense, not to mention manager.  I would have thought Baltimore was a favorite in that series.

I have a general rule when it comes to betting on baseball.  The rule is, "Don't bet on baseball."

[ChicosBailBonds]

Not surprising.  I mentioned months ago to you Lenny that having the best record has never meant the best team, especially when injuries down the stretch are masked by that record.  Baseball, especially, where you can get the best record because you win your fair share of games with the 4th and 5th starter, who rarely pitch in the playoffs.  If you have 3 good starters, and you're hot, key injuries, etc....that's all it takes....especially in baseball where one pitcher can dominate.

I love baseball for that reason, the nuance is terrific.  The same team is never on the field one game to the next because the pitching is so different.  Unlike any other sport.

[Lennys Tap]

Agree with you on the crap shoot part, but was Detroit really the betting favorite over Baltimore?  Baltimore better record, home-field advantage, better/deeper lineup, better bench, starting rotation with better ERA and vastly superior bullpen and defense, not to mention manager.  I would have thought Baltimore was a favorite in that series.

I have a general rule when it comes to betting on baseball.  The rule is, "Don't bet on baseball."

At the Golden Nugget (only place I checked) Detroit was -1.50, Baltimore +1.30.

[Lennys Tap]

Not surprising.  I mentioned months ago to you Lenny that having the best record has never meant the best team, especially when injuries down the stretch are masked by that record.  Baseball, especially, where you can get the best record because you win your fair share of games with the 4th and 5th starter, who rarely pitch in the playoffs.  If you have 3 good starters, and you're hot, key injuries, etc....that's all it takes....especially in baseball where one pitcher can dominate.

I love baseball for that reason, the nuance is terrific.  The same team is never on the field one game to the next because the pitching is so different.  Unlike any other sport.

Sounds like you're saying it's one big crapshoot, a competition in which any of the participants can (and do) win. Unlike basketball (NCAA or NBA) where a big chunk of the teams have no realistic chance of winning. Hmmmmm...

[MU B2002]

Play nice you two.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Sounds like you're saying it's one big crapshoot, a competition in which any of the participants can (and do) win. Unlike basketball (NCAA or NBA) where a big chunk of the teams have no realistic chance of winning. Hmmmmm...

Go back over the last few years and see what I've said.  NCAA basketball, biggest crapshoot out there.  NBA basketball, not a crapshoot at all.  You continue to want to make the NCAA tournament not a crapshoot and you continue to be wrong.

You also continue to make the mistake you have always made, which is to assign the "best team" to the one with the best record, which is wildly inaccurate and shown to you many times over.  I can't help you on this one.

[wadesworld]

Go back over the last few years and see what I've said.  NCAA basketball, biggest crapshoot out there.  NBA basketball, not a crapshoot at all.  You continue to want to make the NCAA tournament not a crapshoot and you continue to be wrong.

You also continue to make the mistake you have always made, which is to assign the "best team" to the one with the best record, which is wildly inaccurate and shown to you many times over.  I can't help you on this one.

Are you saying the Angels weren't the best team in baseball throughout the regular season?  I would have to completely disagree with you there.  The best record in baseball by 2 games in the toughest division in baseball.  No question about it, the Angels were the best team in baseball.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Are you saying the Angels weren't the best team in baseball throughout the regular season?  I would have to completely disagree with you there.  The best record in baseball by 2 games in the toughest division in baseball.  No question about it, the Angels were the best team in baseball.

This Angles team reminds me of the mid-2000 Yankees who had a home run high octane offense that seemed to disappear in the playoffs when they started facing better pitching.  The 2014 Angels were way different than early 2000 Angels that were well balanced much like the Yankees of the late 1990s.

[Lennys Tap]

Go back over the last few years and see what I've said.  NCAA basketball, biggest crapshoot out there.  NBA basketball, not a crapshoot at all.  You continue to want to make the NCAA tournament not a crapshoot and you continue to be wrong.

You also continue to make the mistake you have always made, which is to assign the "best team" to the one with the best record, which is wildly inaccurate and shown to you many times over.  I can't help you on this one.

1. Again you misrepresent my point. I don't say the NCAAs aren't a crapshoot (to a certain extent, at least). I only dispute your ridiculous and factually inaccurate assertion that they're the biggest crapshoot in all of sports.
2. Misrepresentation #2: I didn't assign the "best team" in the various series based on "best record", I let guys who have forgotten more about baseball and probabilities than you'll ever know determine that. Oakland was the favorite over KC despite having a worse record and having to play on the road. Detroit was the favorite over Baltimore despite having a worse record and having to play 3 of a potential 5 on the road.

Favorites (best teams, for the mathematically challenged) are 0-4 in this years baseball playoff series. In series still being played, they trail 0-2 and are tied 1-1. In all games played, they are 1-11. Find an NCAA tournament that can match that.

[wadesworld]

This Angles team reminds me of the mid-2000 Yankees who had a home run high octane offense that seemed to disappear in the playoffs when they started facing better pitching.  The 2014 Angels were way different than early 2000 Angels that were well balanced much like the Yankees of the late 1990s.

I can agree with this, but they were still the best team in baseball through 162 regular season games.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I get what you are saying, but 27 teams would trade their Number 1 starter straight up for Kershaw to start Game 1 of the playoffs.  Seattle probably wouldn't and St. Louis might not.  His xFIP is 3.69 in the postseason, 3.19 overall in his career.

The Kershaw playoff speedbump continues....and yes, I still agree with you that every team would take him in a heartbeat, but for whatever reason he has struggled in the playoffs.  Like many great players, hitters included.  Saw an interesting stat the other day about hall of fame players and their playoff numbers, many are really poor.

[4everwarriors]

If any one pitcher has earned the"benefit of the doubt" designation, it's Kershaw. But, this is on Mattingly. Cat was clearly gassed and pitchin' on 3 days rest. If not Mattingly, then for sure on Crean.

[ChicosBailBonds]

This Angles team reminds me of the mid-2000 Yankees who had a home run high octane offense that seemed to disappear in the playoffs when they started facing better pitching.  The 2014 Angels were way different than early 2000 Angels that were well balanced much like the Yankees of the late 1990s.

As a fan of the team for many many years, I disagree with this.  Yes, the Angels has a high octane offense, but if you look at who they did it against this year, it was no slouches.  The A's staff, Felix Hernandez, etc, etc.  Having gone to games 1 and 2, how different is that series if the Royals don't make those 4 crazy plays in game 1?  It's probably a rout for that game.  Game 2, again, balls hit hard, great plays. In 3 games, the team hit 4 homeruns, all solo.  Problem was they couldn't get timely hits and their big boys suffered tremendously.

I stated here about 5 weeks ago that the loss of 40% of the starting rotation was going to ultimately be their undoing.  That being said, the first two starts were terrific, but I'd much rather have had Shoemaker pitch game 3 having a healthy Richards pitch game 1, but that's just the way it goes.

The 2002 Angels finished the post season with a .320 batting average and an OPS of .879.  Just hit the cover off the ball every series....it was crazy and I loved every bit of it since I attended all but two of the 9 home games.  In the regular season that year, Anaheim was #4 in baseball for offense, which I would classify as high octane.  So much of it is matchups, etc.  I would have loved to have played the A's and not the Royals, especially with the A's bullpen.  It is what it is.

On to next year, the sun came up...it always does.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I can agree with this, but they were still the best team in baseball through 162 regular season games.

I would say we were the best team in baseball through about 135 games.  When Richards went down, Shoemaker went down, we were not nearly as good.  Hamilton, as mediocre as he is, at least was a .270ish hitter until he missed the last month of the season.  Those are big coggs.  Even with them, it's hard to say best team simply because of best record.  The best team in a 162 game season often takes advantage of those wins you get with the #4 and #5 starters, and those guys usually don't pitch in the playoffs.  So if you're a top 10ish team but 3 stud starters and get to the playoffs, you might be better playoff team than one with 5 very good starters (but not studs) that get you more regular season wins over the longhaul, but not in short series.  IMO