Dan said it best:
Two.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Game 7
Wow.
I see two big mistakes by the Tribe coaches. First, obviously, was third base coach Joel Skinner not sending Kenny Lofton around to score on that screamer down the line in the seventh inning when it was still a 3-2 game. I think you gotta send him, put pressure on the Sox and on Manny to make that throw.
On the other hand, it was a hard hit ball, it was caroom-ing toward Manny, and there was just one out. I think it was a wrong decision, but not an easy one.
The bigger mistake was by Eric Wedge, when he took out Jake Westbrook after six innings. Westbrook had been pitching very, very well in his last couple of innings. He'd only pitched 94 pitches to that point, and he was really cutting up the Sox. The first three innings weren't so good, but as he tired, his sinker improved. In the sixth, he pitched great and only threw about ten pitches. He looked good to go another inning or two, and why not?
Big mistake from Wedge. Betancourt's been great all year, but why take out a pitcher who's pitching great?
I see two big mistakes by the Tribe coaches. First, obviously, was third base coach Joel Skinner not sending Kenny Lofton around to score on that screamer down the line in the seventh inning when it was still a 3-2 game. I think you gotta send him, put pressure on the Sox and on Manny to make that throw.
On the other hand, it was a hard hit ball, it was caroom-ing toward Manny, and there was just one out. I think it was a wrong decision, but not an easy one.
The bigger mistake was by Eric Wedge, when he took out Jake Westbrook after six innings. Westbrook had been pitching very, very well in his last couple of innings. He'd only pitched 94 pitches to that point, and he was really cutting up the Sox. The first three innings weren't so good, but as he tired, his sinker improved. In the sixth, he pitched great and only threw about ten pitches. He looked good to go another inning or two, and why not?
Big mistake from Wedge. Betancourt's been great all year, but why take out a pitcher who's pitching great?
Game 7
Well, after all I've said about the Albatross, maybe I was too harsh. Nothing like a grand slam to improve my outlook on someone.
Game 7 is tonight and Dice-K is on the mound. Recent events aren't encouraging, but as everyone knows, anything can happen in a Game 7.
Game 7 is tonight and Dice-K is on the mound. Recent events aren't encouraging, but as everyone knows, anything can happen in a Game 7.
Labels:
Baseball,
Baseball playoffs,
J.D. Drew,
Matsuzaka,
Red Sox
Friday, October 19, 2007
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Josh Beckett
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Clemens-Maddux
I noted at the start of the season that while Clemens has more wins than Maddux, his lead has been shrinking since 1991.
Maddux had a pretty good year last year. Clemens, a little less so, but it wasn't too bad. Both of them had ERAs significantly better than the league average. Clemens, though, seems less likely to come back. I can't imagine that anyone will pay him that much money again.
After this year, Maddux is within striking distance. Clemens' lead was 15 at the end of last season; now it's 7.
Maddux keeps rolling along and I believe he has another year left on this contract. Of course he could get hurt. But barring injury, he looks good for another 10-13 wins next year. I don't know about Clemens.
I still think it's cool that the #8 and #9 career wins leaders are simultaneously active. I can't imagine it will ever happen again. I don't know that Clemens will get to Kid Nichols and Pud Galvin, but I wouldn't put it past Maddux if he stays healthy. Probably not next year, when he ought to finish with about 358 wins. But maybe after the following, if he sticks around. If he stays healthy for two more years, it's possible he could pass Warren Spahn and end up #5 on the all time list.
Maddux had a pretty good year last year. Clemens, a little less so, but it wasn't too bad. Both of them had ERAs significantly better than the league average. Clemens, though, seems less likely to come back. I can't imagine that anyone will pay him that much money again.
After this year, Maddux is within striking distance. Clemens' lead was 15 at the end of last season; now it's 7.
Maddux keeps rolling along and I believe he has another year left on this contract. Of course he could get hurt. But barring injury, he looks good for another 10-13 wins next year. I don't know about Clemens.
I still think it's cool that the #8 and #9 career wins leaders are simultaneously active. I can't imagine it will ever happen again. I don't know that Clemens will get to Kid Nichols and Pud Galvin, but I wouldn't put it past Maddux if he stays healthy. Probably not next year, when he ought to finish with about 358 wins. But maybe after the following, if he sticks around. If he stays healthy for two more years, it's possible he could pass Warren Spahn and end up #5 on the all time list.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Torre
Will Steinbrenner really fire Torre?
He can't blame Torre for not having any good pitchers, can he? Of the Yankees rotation, Wang was solid, Pettitte was acceptable, Mussina was at best a #5 starter, and Clemens was tired. That staff is just old.
Wang's a legitimate #2 starter, Pettitte a #3, Mussina a #5, Clemens maybe a #4. Phil Hughes unquestionably has a lot of potential. The obvious problem in the staff is no dominant #1 starter, inexcusable for a team with the $215 million payroll. Before the season, who did they think was going to be their #1 starter?
It's hardly Torre's fault that he has an old, tired staff. Their offense could get them through the regular season, but you can't win in the postseason without pitching.
I won't even touch their bullpen. How can they have only two good relievers on the staff?
He can't blame Torre for not having any good pitchers, can he? Of the Yankees rotation, Wang was solid, Pettitte was acceptable, Mussina was at best a #5 starter, and Clemens was tired. That staff is just old.
Wang's a legitimate #2 starter, Pettitte a #3, Mussina a #5, Clemens maybe a #4. Phil Hughes unquestionably has a lot of potential. The obvious problem in the staff is no dominant #1 starter, inexcusable for a team with the $215 million payroll. Before the season, who did they think was going to be their #1 starter?
It's hardly Torre's fault that he has an old, tired staff. Their offense could get them through the regular season, but you can't win in the postseason without pitching.
I won't even touch their bullpen. How can they have only two good relievers on the staff?
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Sox-Halos
I don't know who's going to win the Sox-Angels series, but it's certainly not encouraging that nine out of ten ESPN experts pick the Sox. Baseball's a funny game, especially in the playoffs. Conventional wisdom is often wrong.
I also queasy with pitching Beckett, Matsuzaka, then Schilling. I'd rather have Schilling for a Game 5.
I also queasy with pitching Beckett, Matsuzaka, then Schilling. I'd rather have Schilling for a Game 5.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)