• This

    Posted by on November 1st, 2015 · Comments (15)

    World Series - Kansas City Royals v New York Mets - Game Four

    Just as much fun 19 hours after it happened as it was when it happened live.

    Comments on This

    1. KPOcala
      November 2nd, 2015 | 1:51 am

      http://nypost.com/2015/11/01/3-striking-similarities-between-royals-and-joe-torres-yankees/

      Bingo. This modern day theory of the play-offs being a “crap-shoot” is crap. It’s damned hard to get through all those games, and Actually win the WS. I was thinking the same thoughts during the last few innings of the Royals win today. No mistakes, very few poor at-bats, the pitching not as good as the Yankees, but the Yankees Could play “D” in those days. Congrats to the Royals.

      Funny, all (most) of the pundits were calling Dayton Moore the village idiot a few years back. Maybe, Keith Law, for example, would have two rings by now………

    2. redbug
      November 2nd, 2015 | 7:17 pm

      The only thing is…baseball is over for 4 months. I hate not having a game on.

    3. Evan3457
      November 2nd, 2015 | 8:40 pm

      KPOcala wrote:

      http://nypost.com/2015/11/01/3-striking-similarities-between-royals-and-joe-torres-yankees/
      Bingo. This modern day theory of the play-offs being a “crap-shoot” is crap. It’s damned hard to get through all those games, and Actually win the WS. I was thinking the same thoughts during the last few innings of the Royals win today. No mistakes, very few poor at-bats, the pitching not as good as the Yankees, but the Yankees Could play “D” in those days. Congrats to the Royals.
      Funny, all (most) of the pundits were calling Dayton Moore the village idiot a few years back. Maybe, Keith Law, for example, would have two rings by now………

      They’re not really that similar. The Torre Yankees had better starting pitching. On offense, they drew a lot more walks. They were well below average defensively, as a team. (10th in Defensive Effiicieny, 11th in team Rtot at -45 runs below the league average). And the 1998-1999-2000 Yankees weren’t very similar at all.

      The post-season is still very much a crapshoot; the team that won it all was 6 outs away from being eliminated in the 4th game of the first round, needed two errors by a rookie shortstop to avoid doom, and could easily have lost 4 out of 5 to the team it beat for the title.

      I think the Royals might be the best team. But they might not be. Before I concede that, let me see them do it again.

    4. Raf
      November 2nd, 2015 | 9:08 pm

      redbug wrote:

      The only thing is…baseball is over for 4 months. I hate not having a game on.

      Youtube has MLB classic games. MLB has the winter leagues going in AZ, Australia and Latin America, which will wind up just in time for Spring Training.

    5. November 3rd, 2015 | 7:52 am

      redbug wrote:

      The only thing is…baseball is over for 4 months. I hate not having a game on.

      I know EXACTLY how you feel. That’s what makes finding a Arizona Fall League, Australian League or D.R. game on the TV during the winter so sweet. It’s like finding money in a coat pocket that you forgot about…

    6. redbug
      November 3rd, 2015 | 6:03 pm

      @ Steve L. and Raf

      Thanks for that info. I’ve tried that but it’s just not the same as MLB, esp the American League where I’m familiar w/ the players. I did enjoy the playoffs, including the Nat’l League. so maybe I’ll give it a shot again.

    7. redbug
      November 3rd, 2015 | 6:05 pm

      Steve,

      Do you care enough to dislike the Mets and root against them? I understand why Mets fans root against the Yankees – they’re jealous.

    8. November 3rd, 2015 | 6:41 pm

      I really don’t dislike the Mets. Actually, I really like Citi Field. It’s a great park. That said, much like what Schilling said about Yankees fans, I do enjoy watching something that makes all the Mets fans shut up. It’s intolerable the way they crawl out of cracks when the team does well…and then root for the Red Sox when their team does poorly.

    9. redbug
      November 3rd, 2015 | 6:49 pm

      True enough about how they root for the Red Sox vs the Yanks. Again, just due to jealousy.

      That said, how many WS rings do they have, 2? So, I’m happy for friends who’ve been fans through the years. It’s not really comparable, but it reminds me how great I felt after ’96 – so many years in between. Of course, the yanks won in ’96, while the Mets lost in ’15.

    10. KPOcala
      November 5th, 2015 | 4:11 pm

      @ Evan3457:
      I noted that the Yankees had the better starting pitching. But let’s face it (I was, and am against having wild card teams), there are more layers to get to WS than in the days of league v league, and I still can’t buy into the “crap shoot” theory, although it can happen in any given playoff series. Maybe I’m wrong, but I thought the Yanks had the better team when they lost to Arizona (they went cold, and Schilling and Johnson didn’t help), when the lost to a “lucky” Angels team in the ACLS (where ever ball found an empty spot), and Marlins. But lose they did, so I’m on my own Yankee cloud 😉

    11. Evan3457
      November 7th, 2015 | 1:25 am

      KPOcala wrote:

      @ Evan3457:
      I noted that the Yankees had the better starting pitching. But let’s face it (I was, and am against having wild card teams), there are more layers to get to WS than in the days of league v league, and I still can’t buy into the “crap shoot” theory, although it can happen in any given playoff series. Maybe I’m wrong, but I thought the Yanks had the better team when they lost to Arizona (they went cold, and Schilling and Johnson didn’t help), when the lost to a “lucky” Angels team in the ACLS (where ever ball found an empty spot), and Marlins. But lose they did, so I’m on my own Yankee cloud

      That’s the point. Everything in the playoffs is small sample size, so teams that aren’t as good win series in the playoffs just about every year.

      Which is what makes the post-season a crapshoot.

    12. KPOcala
      November 8th, 2015 | 1:12 pm

      @ Evan3457:
      OK, you do have some points here, I’ll grant. What IS funny is that over the past thirty years (at least) is how many GMs try to copy the winner (as though that team had finally figured the game out), and fail miserably. It DOES bring what the nineties team did even further into the conversation of “best ever”. The team who wins isn’t just a collection of metrics, but also have to have the “intangible, ‘ability to slow the game down’. Hard to put together a team of ‘those guys’, no?

    13. Evan3457
      November 9th, 2015 | 6:30 pm

      Especially when you consider the following two points:

      1) If it wasn’t a crapshoot, if they were a magic formula, then every team would copy the champ, and the law of competitive balance would say that makes it harder to repeat. It is very hard to repeat, but that’s not the reason. The reason is that even the champ can’t “copy” itself; that is, the same attributes that won a title are rarely repeatable.

      2) The champ in any given year is not only a product of its own attributes, but also to random things that cannot be counted on to repeat. I’ll repeat something I said above: this year’s champ would’ve been beaten in the first round if a very talented rookie shortstop, who is, by all scouting and all metics, a good defender, didn’t make two errors in the same 5-run rally. Just one example of what’s not repeatable.

    14. KPOcala
      November 10th, 2015 | 3:22 pm

      @ Evan3457:
      Oh, I agree completely. Excepting the ’98 team which simply destroyed all ‘comers’, I remember thinking how a string of balls which jussssssssst missed being a homer, or a hit, the critical error, etc, and how the Yankees Could have been the nineties Braves….. Like Sid Vicious, “gone but not forgotten”. 😉

    15. KPOcala
      November 10th, 2015 | 8:49 pm

      @ KPOcala:er, make that “Johnny Rotten”, doh!

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.