moon_lit_tears Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Champions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Boo. I was rooting for Texas.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazorbeak Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Champions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was pretty amazing how everything came together. What a great series for the Cards. Hopefully Pujols re-signs so they can win another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabataged Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Champions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was awesome. I was at Game 6 and in St Louis (did not have tickets) for Game 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted October 29, 2011 Author Share Posted October 29, 2011 <p>The only thing that sucks about the Cardinals winning is now Selig is going to use this as proof that Baseball needs more Wild Card teams. Thus diluting the playoffs even more. </p><p> </p><p> What is the point of the regular season if a team can back into the playoffs and win it just because they happened to peak at the right time. That has always been my problem with the Wild Card.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stennick Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 <p>I agree the Wild Card isn't perfect but I'm ok with it. Its 2011 I'm ok with 8 of the 30 plus teams making the playoffs. Its the fewest amount of teams out of all the major professional sports that make the playoffs. Football is 12, Basketball is what 16, Hockey is 16 as well I believe. So I'm ok with them having four less than the next lowest.</p><p> </p><p> The problem I have is ironically that a Wild Card team could get home field advantage. Now I'm certainly thankful for it this year, but its pretty silly.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldStingberg Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I was initially hesitant to the idea of another wild card in each league, but I've been swayed. I like the idea of a play-in game between two wild cards. Not only because it'd add two dramatic playoff-atmosphere games, but also because it'd probably liven up the pennant races. As it is, it's not uncommon for a division leader to go on cruise control for the final month because even if they get overtaken, they're still in position to get the wild card. With a play-in game between two wild cards, though, winning the division would always be important and worth fighting for, because no one would want to play that play-in game and have a 50% chance of elimination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stennick Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I agree it would add more risk in being the wild card and add more importance to the "bye" that the division winner would receive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazorbeak Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The only thing that sucks about the Cardinals winning is now Selig is going to use this as proof that Baseball needs more Wild Card teams. Thus diluting the playoffs even more. <p> </p><p> What is the point of the regular season if a team can back into the playoffs and win it just because they happened to peak at the right time. That has always been my problem with the Wild Card.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'm not sure most people would consider recovering ten games in a month to be "backing in" to the playoffs. Same with the 2005 Astros, 2004 Red Sox, and other teams where "backed in" meant they caught fire at mid-season or later and came into the post-season with momentum. </p><p> </p><p> What's interesting is that 5 wild cards have won the world series and 5 have lost. That's 10 appearances in 15 years. Simple statistics (1 in 4) would cause us to estimate that we should only have 4 (rounding up) wild card series appearances from each conference, and that's before you take into account home field advantage. Factoring that the home team wins more often (conservatively we'll say 52% of the time), and a wild card never has home field getting to the world series, that's two slightly weighted coin-flips: 48/100, and 48/100 again. So even with a low estimate, we're at 23%, and if we said home field advantage was closer to 55% (52% is the regular season standard), then we're down to 20%. That's an estimated 3 World Series appearances per 15 years per conference, which is pretty significantly short of where we are. </p><p> </p><p> Compare that to the NFL, where in 8 years one wild card reached the Super Bowl once (and lost) in the four team set-up. Then they changed the format to 3 rounds, 6 teams, which makes the road even harder: only 9 wild card super bowl appearances in 30 years, meaning NFL wild cards don't even make it half as often as MLB wild cards. This has been the decade of the NFL wild card though, with the Packers, Steelers and Giants all winning within 5 years. </p><p> </p><p> Even though basketball has mandatory 3 rounds and 5 "wild cards" per conference, it's even tougher for non-division winners to make it. The Houston Rockets and New York Knicks are the only two teams ever to make it to the NBA finals after being seeded lower than third. The Knicks were a shortened season, and Rockets missed Hakeem for most of the regular season. </p><p> </p><p> In the mlb, the "getting hot at the right time" theory is more or less a myth: <a href="http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2011/5/25/2176025/do-hot-teams-perform-better-in-the" rel="external nofollow">http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2011/5/25/2176025/do-hot-teams-perform-better-in-the</a> The exceptions are the teams that due to chemistry, injuries, trades, or whatever, aren't able to perform up to their ability until the post-season. That said, because even a great team in baseball has a winning percentage of 60%, home field advantage just doesn't count for as much. To compare, a 100 win baseball team would win 50 games in the NBA or 10 in the NFL. Only the Phillies broke 100 wins, while 13 teams in the NFL won that many, and so did 9 in the NBA.</p><p> Basically baseball is such a game of averages that it's nearly impossible to dominate the way you can in other sports, so the wild cards have a much better chance to advance. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="OldStingberg" data-cite="OldStingberg" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I was initially hesitant to the idea of another wild card in each league, but I've been swayed. I like the idea of a play-in game between two wild cards. Not only because it'd add two dramatic playoff-atmosphere games, but also because it'd probably liven up the pennant races. As it is, it's not uncommon for a division leader to go on cruise control for the final month because even if they get overtaken, they're still in position to get the wild card. With a play-in game between two wild cards, though, winning the division would always be important and worth fighting for, because no one would want to play that play-in game and have a 50% chance of elimination.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I think that'd be cool: you can't really adopt the 6 team NFL system without seeing even more wild cards get through, as even a third wild card against a division winner would see a fair amount of upsets. This year, that would've meant the Angels vs. Detroit and San Francisco vs. Arizona, neither being a sure thing.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabataged Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Tony Larussa retires after 16 seasons as Cardinals Manager. I wonder what this does to Pujols leaving? Larussa is the only major league manager he has ever had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaynes23 Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Tony Larussa retires after 16 seasons as Cardinals Manager. I wonder what this does to Pujols leaving? Larussa is the only major league manager he has ever had. Gotta believe that it's the end of Dave Duncan as the Cardinals pitching coach as well. He's only ever coached with Tony, and with his wife being ill I don't see him coming back. I hope the Cardinals give a look at Jose Oquendo for the manager role, I think he would be really good in it. He's going to be a manager someday somewhere, so why not try to give him a shot here? Hopefully this opens the door for Ozzie Smith to return to the Cardinals in some capacity as well. He and LaRussa had an ugly feud which kept him away, now that's he's gone I really hope Ozzie at least does something with the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stennick Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Terry Francona, Joe Maddon, Jose Oquendo, Terry Pendleton thats my short list for the managerial job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted October 31, 2011 Author Share Posted October 31, 2011 Terry Francona, Joe Maddon, Jose Oquendo, Terry Pendleton thats my short list for the managerial job. Not sure why the Cardinals would bother with Francona after what has come out about the Red Sox clubhouse. Why not Willie Randolph? He is a good manager might be a good fit for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabataged Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Stennick" data-cite="Stennick" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Terry Francona, Joe Maddon, Jose Oquendo, Terry Pendleton thats my short list for the managerial job.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I am hoping for Jose</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldStingberg Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Not sure why the Cardinals would bother with Francona after what has come out about the Red Sox clubhouse. </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The two World Series would probably be a good reason.</p><p> </p><p> Keep in mind, all this stuff about the clubhouse didn't seem to be a big deal when the Red Sox were one of the best teams in the league every year. It didn't seem to be a big deal when the Red Sox were one of the best teams in the league for the first 80% of this season.</p><p> </p><p> Most people can't help but justify their existences. Give a soccer ref and a flag and a job to call offsides, and he'll call more offsides than he should in order to justify his existence. For sportswriters, that justification comes from creating narratives from circumstances that are often random. The Red Sox weren't the first team, nor will they be the last, to have a really bad stretch of games. But because of the timing, some sportswriters have created a narrative to explain it, despite the fact that the narrative makes little sense when you really think about it.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stennick Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 You know with BHK, Lazorbeak, Sab, Oldstingberg, Gatorbait and others all posting in the sports section of the dog pound there is a ton of good discussion these days. I agree with you Stingberg but the thought does concern me a bit but no more than Jose Oquendo taking over a team like the Cardinals with all that we have as his FIRST managerial job ever in any stage of baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted November 1, 2011 Author Share Posted November 1, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="OldStingberg" data-cite="OldStingberg" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The two World Series would probably be a good reason.<p> </p><p> Keep in mind, all this stuff about the clubhouse didn't seem to be a big deal when the Red Sox were one of the best teams in the league every year. It didn't seem to be a big deal when the Red Sox were one of the best teams in the league for the first 80% of this season.</p><p> </p><p> Most people can't help but justify their existences. Give a soccer ref and a flag and a job to call offsides, and he'll call more offsides than he should in order to justify his existence. For sportswriters, that justification comes from creating narratives from circumstances that are often random. The Red Sox weren't the first team, nor will they be the last, to have a really bad stretch of games. But because of the timing, some sportswriters have created a narrative to explain it, despite the fact that the narrative makes little sense when you really think about it.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I never felt that Tito was all that great of a manager to begin with. Living in the Red Sox market I have watched more Red Sox games then I care to admit. One thing I noticed about Terry was he seemed to have this inability to manage a pitching staff correctly. Not so much the starters but the bullpen.</p><p> </p><p> He tends to leave guys in longer than they should be left in, even when he had a rested bullpen. This was good when he had the pitching but was exposed when his players went all Munity on the Bounty on his ass.</p><p> </p><p> Their losing streak came about for various reasons. I think the main reason for their failure this year was lack of team chemistry. The teams that won two World Series were like a family, this team did not have it. I also think Tito lost the team somewhere, not exactly sure where but it did happen.</p><p> </p><p> Also, I would not put that much stock into his two World Series making him a good or great manager. Look at the Yankees, I consider Buck Showalter to be a better manager than Joe Torre. Yet Joe was able to do what Buck was not able to do, turn the Yankees into a dynasty. A lot of the times it is the right place, right time, right personality for the team, that makes a manager.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaynes23 Posted November 17, 2011 Share Posted November 17, 2011 Well it's official, the Astros are moving to the AL West for 2013. Guess that means year around interleague play. Not a fan of this at all. I would much rather see MLB even out the leagues with either 28 or 32 teams much more than having an odd number in each league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted November 17, 2011 Author Share Posted November 17, 2011 Well it's official, the Astros are moving to the AL West for 2013. Guess that means year around interleague play. Not a fan of this at all. I would much rather see MLB even out the leagues with either 28 or 32 teams much more than having an odd number in each league. Here, here. I am not a fan of year round interleague play either. For the rivalries yeah it is great like Yankees/Mets, Royals/Cardinals, Marlins/Rays, etc., but does anyone really want to see the Mariners take on say the Nationals (Not a knock against either team, it is just that there is no history between the two teams.). Also, with the Astros moving to the AL, it makes me wonder what the hell was the point of moving the Brewers out of the AL in the first place. I just do not like this move at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slagaholic Posted November 18, 2011 Share Posted November 18, 2011 It happened because interleague play isn't special anymore. We say it's special because MLB pretends its special, but it's not an attendance boon other than when the big clubs come to town but its like that even in their own league. The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that this is all part of a scheme to get the NL to take the DH. It's gonna happen eventually folks. And as a Phillies fan--who's 'superstar' first baseman enters the first year of a 5-year deal at $25M a year on crutches--I want it sooner rather than later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Slagaholic" data-cite="Slagaholic" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>It happened because interleague play isn't special anymore. We say it's special because MLB pretends its special, but it's not an attendance boon other than when the big clubs come to town but its like that even in their own league.<p> </p><p> The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that this is all part of a scheme to get the NL to take the DH. It's gonna happen eventually folks. And as a Phillies fan--who's 'superstar' first baseman enters the first year of a 5-year deal at $25M a year on crutches--I want it sooner rather than later.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I can't see the NL getting the DH. Bud loves offense, but the NL stays at no DH.</p><p> </p><p> Also I think interleague play is boring. The only reason the truly did it was to get like every other sport where every team can at least play each other somewhat. </p><p> </p><p> Personally I baseball is looking at expansion next. I see two teams coming into this league before this new labor agreement ends so each league is balanced. Also if this is done get rid of the three divisions and make it 4 with the lowest division winner playing the wildcard winner in a one game playoff. This would allow them to reorganize the division and give it some competitive balance.</p><p> </p><p> Lastly fix the playoff system. The one game wildcard should happen the day after the regular season, then two days off for everyone and boom playoffs hit, shorten the season by 2 to 3 weeks and make only the World Series a 5 game series with the other rounds being 3. Because lets face it, every sport is the same, to many games gets players hurt and fans spend more and grow tired of watching it. Football has got it down to a science, when they discussed the 18 game schedule they weren't making the season longer, they were shorting the preseason. Why not do that in baseball, we don't need that extra week of spring training.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BHK1978" data-cite="BHK1978" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Here, here. I am not a fan of year round interleague play either. For the rivalries yeah it is great like Yankees/Mets, Royals/Cardinals, Marlins/Rays, etc., but does anyone really want to see the Mariners take on say the Nationals (Not a knock against either team, it is just that there is no history between the two teams.).<p> </p><p> Also, with the Astros moving to the AL, <strong>it makes me wonder what the hell was the point of moving the Brewers out of the AL in the first place</strong>. I just do not like this move at all.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> That goes back to the Bud comment. Bud is a modern thinker with traditional values with the game. He likes the DH, but loves the fact that the NL still has pitchers hit. They moved to the NL because of the fact that 1) No really believed they had formed a true rivalry to keep them in the league and 2) Bud thought the Brewers would be more competitive in the NL. </p><p> </p><p> I wish baseball would do a separation of sorts with the two leagues, each one has it's own Comish and then MLB comish. the NL/AL comish would over see the daily games and making sure things are correct with rules and everything where the top comish makes sure baseball as a whole is doing well and expanding.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GatorBait19" data-cite="GatorBait19" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Best season of baseball in a while?????<p> </p><p> both wildcards are tied with the last game tonight. Rays go against the best team in the AL while Sox play on of the worst. Cards the worst team in MLB in Astros while Braves get best team in NL (yes better than Brewers) in the Phils.</p><p> </p><p> Cards and Rays came back the final month after trailing a combined 17.5 games. The Rays are one of the best pitching teams in the MLB and Sox one of the best Offense. I think this is great for baseball and to me this should say to Rays fans "Hey if you filled that stadium 25k monday through thursday and 30k plus Friday through Sunday the Rays could afford to keep people and pay people to come here.</p><p> </p><p> Anyways, great season.</p><p> </p><p> My awards</p><p> </p><p> AL MVP: Miguel Cabrera if the Soxs dont make it in, if the Sox get in the Ellsbury</p><p> </p><p> <strong>AL CY Young: Verlander</strong>, sorry I think this is a run away.</p><p> </p><p> AL Rookie: While Nova has the better record he also gets a lot of run support and his 3.70 ERA points this out. <strong>Jeremy Hellickson</strong> to me is the top rookie this year with a winning record and a 2.90 ERA</p><p> </p><p> AL Comeback Player: James Shields, Shields has been the ace of the great Rays rotation and leads the league in complete games and his past two games went 8.2 innings each time.</p><p> </p><p><strong> AL Manger of the Year: Joe Maddon</strong>, I don't even know who else to consider. The Rays lost a crap load of talent, didn't promote their C.C replacement till August, Traded their number 2 pitcher (and only no-hitter) to the cubs and replaced their entire bullpen with cast offs, yet on the last day of the season at a 40 million dollar payroll they are 1 win away (and a bosox loss) from the playoffs.</p><p> </p><p> (side note)</p><p> </p><p> Jim Hickey (Rays pitching coach) and Joe Maddon have always caught a lot of crap from Rays fans for this team, but I believe (honestly) Maddon is the best (or at least top 3) mangers in the league. I honestly think they need a better hitting coach. Hickey has gone and helped guide Hellickson, Davis, Neimann, into respectable pitcher and the bullpen has looked amazing this year. Most teams spend 10's of millions on bullpen and the Rays probably spent a combined 5 mill or less on theirs.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> AL Fireman (reliever): Jose Valverde, I know a bunch of people want Mo, but Jose is perfect on the year.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> NL MVP: Matt Kemp, I am sorry I don't look at records when I do this. Matt Kemp was the most valuable to his team with out a doubt, 3rd in avg, tied for 1st in hr (only because Fielder went ape **** last night), 1st in RBI, 1st in runs, 2nd in hits, and the list goes on. If Kemp was on the Cards surrounded by better player I could only imagine. Hell A-Rod won it on an even worse team in an offensive era.</p><p> </p><p> <strong>NL CY: Kershaw</strong>, Listen this is a four horse race, but again the other 3 are on winning teams, Kershaw has the best ERA and tied for wins. Kershaw to me is the CY Young and the Dodgers become the first team ever to have the MVP and CY Young winner and yet don't make the playoffs. (if I were picking)</p><p> </p><p> NL Rookie: Freddie Freeman, I think the Braves are starting their rebuilding while they are still in contention.</p><p> </p><p> <strong>NL Manger: Kirk Gibson</strong>, yeah, brewers and Phils are top two. Kirk though took a struggling team and turned them around. Phils were supposed to win, Brewers traded for Zach G. to give them a front of the rotation guy. Arizona traded for Yankee cast off..... ya</p><p> </p><p> NL Comeback Player: Jose Reyes, wanna know why..... go look at his play and numbers from last year and this year (hell you can look two years ago as well)</p><p> </p><p> NL Fireman: John Axford..... ya I like that pick.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> 5 awards right not bad, Fireman award hasn't been givin and two of the other awards were won by teammates. I get why Braun won over Kemp, Brewers were a better team. Sheilds came in second but I forgot Ellsbury was out for most of last year and I completely forgot about Berkman.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHK1978 Posted November 24, 2011 Author Share Posted November 24, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GatorBait19" data-cite="GatorBait19" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26724" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>That goes back to the Bud comment. Bud is a modern thinker with traditional values with the game. He likes the DH, but loves the fact that the NL still has pitchers hit. They moved to the NL because of the fact that 1) No really believed they had formed a true rivalry to keep them in the league and 2) Bud thought the Brewers would be more competitive in the NL. <p> </p><p> I wish baseball would do a separation of sorts with the two leagues, each one has it's own Comish and then MLB comish. the NL/AL comish would over see the daily games and making sure things are correct with rules and everything where the top comish makes sure baseball as a whole is doing well and expanding.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> They used to have the League Presidents but they got rid of that office.</p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbergey_2005 Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Albert Pujols and CJ Wilson to the Angels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaynes23 Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Most of my friends have been super angry about Albert leaving. I'm not in that camp. I put this one on the Cardinals. They slow played this thing for the past few years and seemed indifferent. They didn't start pressing until yesterday, and by then it was too late. Plus, I think he felt that they disrespected him by spending 120 million on Matt Holliday before they locked him up long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.