5259515D5859420701764F575E5959185559360 wrote: Shouldn't every game be played to win?
This is an interesting post coming from someone who defends an owner and GM that don't care about trying to win 162 times each year.
Who are YOU rooting for?
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Who are YOU rooting for?
081531333D580 wrote: Shouldn't every game be played to win? It's different because that one Wild Card game is the only one and done game all year. Also, like its the final game of the season so you advance to a series.
In 162 games, as long as you win like 55% to 57% of them, you will probably make the playoffs. Teams don't press for every single win.
Would you have kept in those pitchers who were struggling? I wish every game had all that strategy and atmosphere involved. They were really exciting in a must win game.
I don't know, man. The games were 4 freakin hours. That wasn't exciting. It had no flow or feel. Scoring and the score meant nothing until late in the game. I daresay it was almost NBA like. Just catch the last quarter. It was a parade of managers and unpracticed strategy. Again, you can't train an athlete to train mentally and physically a certain way for 8 month and then think that they will succeed in a completely different role/prep.
Thanks for that comparison to the 72 Phillies, Bobster. Fascinating thing to think about.
I get your point about the length of games and disjointed flow. Since 1972 was brought up, I looked up game 5 (elimination game) of the NLCS. ...the Bob Moose game. The Reds beat the Bucs in 2 hours 19 minutes. Moreover two of the games in that incredibly competitive series lasted less than 2 hours. Man have times changed.
In 162 games, as long as you win like 55% to 57% of them, you will probably make the playoffs. Teams don't press for every single win.
Would you have kept in those pitchers who were struggling? I wish every game had all that strategy and atmosphere involved. They were really exciting in a must win game.
I don't know, man. The games were 4 freakin hours. That wasn't exciting. It had no flow or feel. Scoring and the score meant nothing until late in the game. I daresay it was almost NBA like. Just catch the last quarter. It was a parade of managers and unpracticed strategy. Again, you can't train an athlete to train mentally and physically a certain way for 8 month and then think that they will succeed in a completely different role/prep.
Thanks for that comparison to the 72 Phillies, Bobster. Fascinating thing to think about.
I get your point about the length of games and disjointed flow. Since 1972 was brought up, I looked up game 5 (elimination game) of the NLCS. ...the Bob Moose game. The Reds beat the Bucs in 2 hours 19 minutes. Moreover two of the games in that incredibly competitive series lasted less than 2 hours. Man have times changed.
Who are YOU rooting for?
74735F485E3D0 wrote: Shouldn't every game be played to win? It's different because that one Wild Card game is the only one and done game all year. Also, like its the final game of the season so you advance to a series.
In 162 games, as long as you win like 55% to 57% of them, you will probably make the playoffs. Teams don't press for every single win.
Would you have kept in those pitchers who were struggling? I wish every game had all that strategy and atmosphere involved. They were really exciting in a must win game.
I don't know, man. The games were 4 freakin hours. That wasn't exciting. It had no flow or feel. Scoring and the score meant nothing until late in the game. I daresay it was almost NBA like. Just catch the last quarter. It was a parade of managers and unpracticed strategy. Again, you can't train an athlete to train mentally and physically a certain way for 8 month and then think that they will succeed in a completely different role/prep.
Thanks for that comparison to the 72 Phillies, Bobster. Fascinating thing to think about.
I get your point about the length of games and disjointed flow. Since 1972 was brought up, I looked up game 5 (elimination game) of the NLCS. ...the Bob Moose game. The Reds beat the Bucs in 2 hours 19 minutes. Moreover two of the games in that incredibly competitive series lasted less than 2 hours. Man have times changed.
That's hard to imagine. During the Yankees/Indians extra innings game, I watched the first three inning. Then I shut it off to eat dinner with the family, then watched the second half of the first Lord of the Rings movie with my kids, and still saw the last 3 innings.
In 162 games, as long as you win like 55% to 57% of them, you will probably make the playoffs. Teams don't press for every single win.
Would you have kept in those pitchers who were struggling? I wish every game had all that strategy and atmosphere involved. They were really exciting in a must win game.
I don't know, man. The games were 4 freakin hours. That wasn't exciting. It had no flow or feel. Scoring and the score meant nothing until late in the game. I daresay it was almost NBA like. Just catch the last quarter. It was a parade of managers and unpracticed strategy. Again, you can't train an athlete to train mentally and physically a certain way for 8 month and then think that they will succeed in a completely different role/prep.
Thanks for that comparison to the 72 Phillies, Bobster. Fascinating thing to think about.
I get your point about the length of games and disjointed flow. Since 1972 was brought up, I looked up game 5 (elimination game) of the NLCS. ...the Bob Moose game. The Reds beat the Bucs in 2 hours 19 minutes. Moreover two of the games in that incredibly competitive series lasted less than 2 hours. Man have times changed.
That's hard to imagine. During the Yankees/Indians extra innings game, I watched the first three inning. Then I shut it off to eat dinner with the family, then watched the second half of the first Lord of the Rings movie with my kids, and still saw the last 3 innings.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Who are YOU rooting for?
Chris Sale just came in as relief for the Red Sox in Game 4. Its 2-1 Astros in the 4th inning.
There is so much panic this year when it comes to starting pitchers. I am really not following all these manager moves.
There is so much panic this year when it comes to starting pitchers. I am really not following all these manager moves.
Who are YOU rooting for?
3A31393530312A6F691E273F363131703D315E0 wrote: Chris Sale just came in as relief for the Red Sox in Game 4. Its 2-1 Astros in the 4th inning.
There is so much panic this year when it comes to starting pitchers. I am really not following all these manager moves.
Isn't it a do or die game for Red Sox? Astros don't let Morton finish the fifth. Probably a good idea, who knows when he is going to give up a big inning.
There is so much panic this year when it comes to starting pitchers. I am really not following all these manager moves.
Isn't it a do or die game for Red Sox? Astros don't let Morton finish the fifth. Probably a good idea, who knows when he is going to give up a big inning.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Who are YOU rooting for?
193F3E293F2F5C0 wrote: Chris Sale just came in as relief for the Red Sox in Game 4. Its 2-1 Astros in the 4th inning.
There is so much panic this year when it comes to starting pitchers. I am really not following all these manager moves.
Isn't it a do or die game for Red Sox? Astros don't let Morton finish the fifth. Probably a good idea, who knows when he is going to give up a big inning.
Yes. The Red Sox must win. Sale already got rocked in this series and has never been used in relief this year.
Verlander relieved Morton.
There is so much panic this year when it comes to starting pitchers. I am really not following all these manager moves.
Isn't it a do or die game for Red Sox? Astros don't let Morton finish the fifth. Probably a good idea, who knows when he is going to give up a big inning.
Yes. The Red Sox must win. Sale already got rocked in this series and has never been used in relief this year.
Verlander relieved Morton.
-
BucsFaninGA
Who are YOU rooting for?
Rooting for the Cleveland Indians or the Houston Astros! Not a big fan of the Dodgers or Cubs or Nationals. Think the AL is actually better suited to win it all. Then again, whoever makes the most of the opportunities and wants it the most will go home with the WS Trophy! Beat'em Bucs 
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Who are YOU rooting for?
5B6C7A6A5F787770775E58190 wrote: Rooting for the Cleveland Indians or the Houston Astros! Not a big fan of the Dodgers or Cubs or Nationals. Think the AL is actually better suited to win it all. Then again, whoever makes the most of the opportunities and wants it the most will go home with the WS Trophy! Beat'em Bucs
I always felt the AL has a huge advantage because of the DH. They have an extra starter on their roster. Some are super stars and highly paid players. The NL has the best bench guy as their DH. Rarely, are they top players on their team or they would be starting.
I always felt the AL has a huge advantage because of the DH. They have an extra starter on their roster. Some are super stars and highly paid players. The NL has the best bench guy as their DH. Rarely, are they top players on their team or they would be starting.
Who are YOU rooting for?
3A31393530312A6F691E273F363131703D315E0 wrote: Rooting for the Cleveland Indians or the Houston Astros! Not a big fan of the Dodgers or Cubs or Nationals. Think the AL is actually better suited to win it all. Then again, whoever makes the most of the opportunities and wants it the most will go home with the WS Trophy! Beat'em Bucs
I always felt the AL has a huge advantage because of the DH. They have an extra starter on their roster. Some are super stars and highly paid players. The NL has the best bench guy as their DH. Rarely, are they top players on their team or they would be starting.
It seems like it is a disadvantage to AL teams when they play in World Series games without the DH. Then they have to put someone in field who may be very bad or sit out one of their better hitters.
I always felt the AL has a huge advantage because of the DH. They have an extra starter on their roster. Some are super stars and highly paid players. The NL has the best bench guy as their DH. Rarely, are they top players on their team or they would be starting.
It seems like it is a disadvantage to AL teams when they play in World Series games without the DH. Then they have to put someone in field who may be very bad or sit out one of their better hitters.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Who are YOU rooting for?
537574637565160 wrote: Rooting for the Cleveland Indians or the Houston Astros! Not a big fan of the Dodgers or Cubs or Nationals. Think the AL is actually better suited to win it all. Then again, whoever makes the most of the opportunities and wants it the most will go home with the WS Trophy! Beat'em Bucs
I always felt the AL has a huge advantage because of the DH. They have an extra starter on their roster. Some are super stars and highly paid players. The NL has the best bench guy as their DH. Rarely, are they top players on their team or they would be starting.
It seems like it is a disadvantage to AL teams when they play in World Series games without the DH. Then they have to put someone in field who may be very bad or sit out one of their better hitters.
Yeah, they have to make that decision, but they still have a starter on their bench. They are picking between two players who pretty much started for them all year. The same isn't the case for the NL. The NL doesn't have many $10 million bench players.
I always felt the AL has a huge advantage because of the DH. They have an extra starter on their roster. Some are super stars and highly paid players. The NL has the best bench guy as their DH. Rarely, are they top players on their team or they would be starting.
It seems like it is a disadvantage to AL teams when they play in World Series games without the DH. Then they have to put someone in field who may be very bad or sit out one of their better hitters.
Yeah, they have to make that decision, but they still have a starter on their bench. They are picking between two players who pretty much started for them all year. The same isn't the case for the NL. The NL doesn't have many $10 million bench players.