Odds to win World Series

[DanG]

Originally Posted by MikeDee

love this thread, Indians ignored as per usual, here's hoping the Sox are looking past them as well

Both teams have their pitching set up perfectly as well. This should be a great series.

BTW: Anyone out there holding a Colorado / Cleveland future book bet…Salute; regardless of the outcomes.

[harnesslover]

Originally Posted by DanG

Both teams have their pitching set up perfectly as well. This should be a great series.

BTW: Anyone out there holding a Colorado / Cleveland future book bet…Salute; regardless of the outcomes.

Tough to figure how good Arizona is.. Cubs were a terrible, terrible playoff team, so not sure if that was easier than it should have been.

Colorado has to cool off SOMETIME... don't they??

The real interesting thing will be how the Indians offense does against Red Sox pitching.

[BIG RED]

Originally Posted by MikeDee

love this thread, Indians ignored as per usual, here's hoping the Sox are looking past them as well

No Way, dude

I mentioned before the post season, the Tribe were the hottest team going in, which scares me. Now, after a sweep of the holy ones, we better get serious with Cleveland.

(The Bambino - jinx of Boston, no more / A-Rod jinx of New York, forever!!!)

[46zilzal]

A-rod has hit something like .145 in all the divisional series since arriving in NYC.

[shanta]

Originally Posted by 46zilzal

A-rod has hit something like .145 in all the divisional series since arriving in NYC.

That's real. Complete bust.

[harnesslover]

this series they had no shot with the likes of this:

Jeter .176
Posada .133
Matsui .182

Wang 19.06 ERA in 2 starts

[OTM Al]

I love how sportswriters generally try to get us to see the negative side of baseball stats. Where is the credit for Cleveland pitching? Carmona and the majority of that bullpen was unbeliveably good and even old Paul Byrd managed to keep them off balance just enough. And how about some credit for the Cleveland hitters. You don't get 2 out hits like that if you aren't patient and very disciplined at the plate. Boston may be in for more of a fight than most figure, though I would have to pick Boston to win if pressed.

Rodriguez had an average series this year and an otherworldly series in 2004 (plus 3 good games in the ALCS before the wheels fell off the cart for the whole team) and he had 2 bad series in 2005 and 2006. He's also only one of 9 players. Only Damon and Cano really excelled in this series and many were far worse than Alex. Here's a number for you if you want to be so selective. Alex Rodriguez is 4 for 9 with a walk and a homerun in his last 2 playoff games. Thats a .500 on base and a .777 slugging average. For the whole series he had a .411 on base and a .467 slugging. The slugging is a little low, but he was by no means bad this time around

[DanG]

Originally Posted by OTM Al

I love how sportswriters generally try to get us to see the negative side of baseball stats. Where is the credit for Cleveland pitching? Carmona and the majority of that bullpen was unbeliveably good and even old Paul Byrd managed to keep them off balance just enough. And how about some credit for the Cleveland hitters. You don't get 2 out hits like that if you aren't patient and very disciplined at the plate. Boston may be in for more of a fight than most figure, though I would have to pick Boston to win if pressed.

Rodriguez had an average series this year and an otherworldly series in 2004 (plus 3 good games in the ALCS before the wheels fell off the cart for the whole team) and he had 2 bad series in 2005 and 2006. He's also only one of 9 players. Only Damon and Cano really excelled in this series and many were far worse than Alex. Here's a number for you if you want to be so selective. Alex Rodriguez is 4 for 9 with a walk and a homerun in his last 2 playoff games. Thats a .500 on base and a .777 slugging average. For the whole series he had a .411 on base and a .467 slugging. The slugging is a little low, but he was by no means bad this time around

I have to disagree there Al. He failed at the key moments, which is why baseball data can be so deceiving.

I used to watch Aubrey Huff (who I am NOT comparing to A-Rod btw) fill the back of his baseball card each year during a 6 week tear and on either side of lop-sided scores. Give me a team of 2-out, down by one, late inning RBI men and I'll take them over many who out stat them each year. A-Rod had a key at bat early in game-4 where a single turns that game around; while his late inning HR looks terrific, it wasn’t a decisive blow.

This Yankee team had several obstacles, not the least of which was nagging injuries due to age and the 10 week blitz they put on to make the show.

As you said; Cleveland’s pitching is legitimate and the core of that team is in their prime. They have had this run coming for several years now and the good fans of Cleveland should enjoy the ride!

[harnesslover]

Originally Posted by OTM Al

Rodriguez had an average series this year and an otherworldly series in 2004 (plus 3 good games in the ALCS before the wheels fell off the cart for the whole team) and he had 2 bad series in 2005 and 2006. He's also only one of 9 players. Only Damon and Cano really excelled in this series and many were far worse than Alex. Here's a number for you if you want to be so selective. Alex Rodriguez is 4 for 9 with a walk and a homerun in his last 2 playoff games. Thats a .500 on base and a .777 slugging average. For the whole series he had a .411 on base and a .467 slugging. The slugging is a little low, but he was by no means bad this time around

I don't think the sportswriters are 'picking on' A-roid, I think they simply expect more from the highest paid player in baseball.

I'm sorry, but youve got to step up i the postseason one of these days if you expect to be a $30 million man.

I ALMOST feel sorry for the guy, he had an absolutely insane regular season, probably one of the best all around ever, yet another lackluster post season will be what he's remembered for yet again this year.

[OTM Al]

Dan, at least you make a good arguement, but I still can't agree. If a hitter could get a hit whenever he wanted to, he would bat 1.000. Every hitter has a hole in his swing and Byrd got him with a very nicely pitched strikeout and, if I remember right, a big popup that had Alex been all of about 1/4 inch higher on would have put out someone's teeth in the left field bleachers. So credit to Byrd in one instance and a push in the other as Byrd hung one and Alex just missed it.

Also, the home run should not be discounted. If you're down 4, you have to get yourself to down 3 before you have a chance to tie or go ahead. Giambi hit one of those so called meaningless homeruns in the 7th game of the 2003 ALCS if I remember correctly and you know what ended up happening there.

I really have to disagree on your assessment of the 2 out down 1 rbi guys. I do not believe in the so called clutch hitter. I believe there are good hitters who do not fold under pressure and continue to be good hitters and are able to hit well in such spots. Kenny Lofton would be a prime example of this from the past series. If you somehow hit better in such a situation, I would have to ask where you were the rest of the time. Because if you somehow manage to find a team of guys like that, you won't have enough of them on base to let someone knock them in.

Again, this is an issue that broadcasters and sports writers have beat into our heads over the years and its just not true. To many people these days seem to be analyzing baseball games with a football mentality and that just doesn't mesh

[DanG]

Originally Posted by OTM Al

Dan, at least you make a good arguement, but I still can't agree. If a hitter could get a hit whenever he wanted to, he would bat 1.000. Every hitter has a hole in his swing and Byrd got him with a very nicely pitched strikeout and, if I remember right, a big popup that had Alex been all of about 1/4 inch higher on would have put out someone's teeth in the left field bleachers. So credit to Byrd in one instance and a push in the other as Byrd hung one and Alex just missed it.

Also, the home run should not be discounted. If you're down 4, you have to get yourself to down 3 before you have a chance to tie or go ahead. Giambi hit one of those so called meaningless homeruns in the 7th game of the 2003 ALCS if I remember correctly and you know what ended up happening there.

I really have to disagree on your assessment of the 2 out down 1 rbi guys. I do not believe in the so called clutch hitter. I believe there are good hitters who do not fold under pressure and continue to be good hitters and are able to hit well in such spots. Kenny Lofton would be a prime example of this from the past series. If you somehow hit better in such a situation, I would have to ask where you were the rest of the time. Because if you somehow manage to find a team of guys like that, you won't have enough of them on base to let someone knock them in.

Again, this is an issue that broadcasters and sports writers have beat into our heads over the years and its just not true. To many people these days seem to be analyzing baseball games with a football mentality and that just doesn't mesh

Al, we agree very often on sports and various things, but on the issue of when an athlete delivers the knockout punch, we really are far apart. I believe there are true money athletes, horses, handicappers, Wall Street investors and then there are some who perform well, but often fail at the crucial moments.

I understand what you’re saying in terms of a run is a run, but in my opinion two players can have 90 RBI’s and yet have very different years and actual impact on wins and losses.

If I’m a GM I break down a potential hitter by quality of opposition they hit well against and game circumstances.

I’m not interested in paying for the dangerous hitter when it’s 9 - 2 or vice a versa, but the man who can up his concentration when down one in the ninth when a monster closer is throwing gas…That’s the guy I want in the dugout.

As far as “they should always be concentrating 110%”…In theory I completely agree, but my experience in athletics and / or handicapping for that matter is its just not possible for most humans.

I’m reminded of a kid we had on our senior league baseball team in Jersey. Real good kid who always busted his butt who was thrown out on a close play at first. On the way back to the dugout his dad yelled out…”Just run faster!”…If we could all just “run a little faster” at the proper moment, how much easier life would be.

[OTM Al]

I don't think we are that far apart because in reading what you just wrote, I think we are in almost perfect agreement. You are right in that you don't want the guy that bats, say .300 in non pressure situations, but then bats .100 when the heat is on. You would much rather take the guy that hits .290 regardless. Yet somehow this idea of clutch that gets thrown around is there are guys out there that bat .200 with no pressure and .400 with pressure. I'd still rather have the .290 guy because odds are this so called clutch guy isn't even going to be up when I need him and he's much less likely to get rallies started.

And how can there be more pressure than elimination games in which you are behind? Those were the last 2 games and again, Alex was 4 for 9 with a walk. Yes, he could have hit a couple more and made the fans happy, but so could pretty much every guy on the team. I've watched him for the last 4 years and this guy plays all out all the time. One of the hits was an infield single. The Yankees were basically in elimination mode for 4 months of the season, so how can anyone tell me this guy isn't really a money athlete after doing what he did during this stretch.

Derek Jeter had an awful series compared to his norm and there's even sportswriters out there based solely on that that are muttering that his skills are in decline. Guess they forgot about the 200 hits 100 runs scored and .322 average. This sort of idiocy drives me nuts. When Casey Stengel got the Yankees in 1949, he looked at the team and said something like "There is far less wrong with this team than many I have seen". That is, without a doubt, what I see right now.

[harnesslover]

Al, let's focus on his Yankee post season stats only for a moment. And let's see what all the hub-bub is about:


Cumulative postseason stats as a Yankee:

24 games, 94 AB, .244 Avg, 4 homers, 9 RBI, 22 K's,

Not HORRIBLE, not very good either.

Now, just for kicks, lets take out the 2004 post season, we are left with:

13 games, 44 AB, .144 avg, 1 HR, 1 RBI, 15 Ks


Now, all things being equal, if you are the superstar making $25 million per year, is a 3 year post season total of 1 rbi and 15Ks, along with a .144 average something that might or should be open to scrutiny?

[OTM Al]

Now for kicks lets just take out all the hits he's gotten. Wow he was horrible a .000 average! Why would anyone want that guy?

[harnesslover]

Originally Posted by OTM Al

Now for kicks lets just take out all the hits he's gotten. Wow he was horrible a .000 average! Why would anyone want that guy?

So as a Yankee fan, you are pleased 4 postseason appearances that produced 9 rbi in 24 games from your $25 million player? Including 1 RBI in the past 3 years?