SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 27, 2015 22:35:18 GMT -5
What a great game thus far. Both teams are so gutsy, so old school. I really hope this goes the full seven.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 28, 2015 0:07:38 GMT -5
Baseball is good and this game specifically is good.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 28, 2015 0:25:09 GMT -5
Eric Hosmer is such an OG. You can see the Royals broke the Mets when Wright couldn't make that play. Any other sport and this is a sweep, but the Mets rotation is just insane so this could go the distance.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 28, 2015 0:32:57 GMT -5
I'd be pretty surprised by a sweep. The 1999 Braves got swept with a ridiculous rotation, but that Yankee team was obviously historically strong. Mets get to come back with deGrom tomorrow and even if they are zombies, back to NY Friday night.
Most surprising sweep I can think of was the 2005 Astros losing in four to the White Sox. Everything really came together for Chicago that year. The 1990 A's getting swept by the Reds was nuts too.
Michael Cuddyer is clearly toast and that makes me feel old. Alderson has done an outstanding job building that team but giving up a draft pick there seemed like a bad idea at the time and worse now.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 28, 2015 0:39:45 GMT -5
Yeah, I agree, there won't be a sweep but the momentum shift in this game was just ridiculous. If this was the NBA you'd already see Lebron getting cramps.
Cuddyer looks dreadful out there, but so does Cespedes. He's clearly still injured. Collins really really should start Lagares in CF and DH Cespedes.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,675
|
Post by gerry on Oct 28, 2015 2:19:49 GMT -5
So what is the point of Harold Reynolds? Tim McCarver would get on my nerves sometimes, but he had a well-earned reputation for being able to explain the game in fairly simple terms using flowery languange. His biggest problem in the last 10 years or so was that a) he got old and b) he really didn't have much chemistry with Joe Buck. Both are forgivable. Reynolds, though, doesn't have anything near the poetic delivery of McCarver and his descriptions of what is going and the strategy being used are often confusing and even self-contradictory. He's really a terrible analyst. EDIT: Does anyone on this forum like Reynolds? That's not a rhetorical question - I'm legitimately interested and I won't judge or mock or anything. This forum has a pretty great group of posters who enjoy the game in a variety of different ways and I'm honestly wondering if there is some appeal to him that I am missing. He occasionally contributes valuable information on the game at hand, which I appreciate, but often find him unprepared and wandering, and he seems mostly to have just one gregarious speed. I always have the remote in hand and sometimes mute or fast forward.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 28, 2015 19:20:28 GMT -5
So what is the point of Harold Reynolds? Tim McCarver would get on my nerves sometimes, but he had a well-earned reputation for being able to explain the game in fairly simple terms using flowery languange. His biggest problem in the last 10 years or so was that a) he got old and b) he really didn't have much chemistry with Joe Buck. Both are forgivable. Reynolds, though, doesn't have anything near the poetic delivery of McCarver and his descriptions of what is going and the strategy being used are often confusing and even self-contradictory. He's really a terrible analyst. EDIT: Does anyone on this forum like Reynolds? That's not a rhetorical question - I'm legitimately interested and I won't judge or mock or anything. This forum has a pretty great group of posters who enjoy the game in a variety of different ways and I'm honestly wondering if there is some appeal to him that I am missing. Harold Reynolds is so bad that he's not worth my constructing a comic "makes Joe Morgan look like" comparison. It's one thing to add nothing to the game. Reynolds actively makes listeners stupider. If you believe what he says, you leave the broadcast knowing less about baseball than when you started. He often makes assertions about the game that has been transpiring that are just demonstrably untrue. For instance, last night, about the bottom of the 5th, he went on about how the key to the game so far was Harvey really settling into his game after a rough start. Well, the 4th inning had ended with two well-hit balls off him, first a fliner by Moustakas caught by Granderson in semi-deep right center and then an absolute rocket by Perez that Wright had made a great leaping catch on. Looking at the scorecard, there was absolutely no pattern of Harvey changing his level of play as the game progressed at all. And then there was the deep fly ball to left -- I believe it was Gordon facing Reed, leading off the bottom of the 7th -- where he talked about how it was the pitcher's job to make the batter miss, and that while Gordon didn't miss the ball, he did "miss" the ball (in the sense that he just missed getting all of it, although I don't think he was articulate enough to state it that clearly), and that Reed importantly deserved credit for that. Of course, the correct thing to say would be that Reed had been lucky, had gotten away with a pitch, and that the differences between HR/FB among pitchers are small and the random variations are large, and the reason is that the difference between Gordon hitting that ball out and instead hitting it to the warning track is a small fraction of an inch and hence mostly luck, and that's it's always a mistake to ascribe that luck to skill, and when a player's luck does not even out in the long run, it's the bad GMs who read the luck (good or bad) as skill, and the good ones who can see the luck as luck .. . well, obviously you wouldn't say all that just then, but the point is that Reynolds was being aggressively 180 degrees incorrect about one of the most important truths of the game.
And he does both of these things pretty much continually. You know what would make good theater? Have someone who understands the game in the booth, and tell him to contradict Reynolds openly every time Reynolds is in error. It would be hilarious. Epic. (You could tell viewers beforehand that they could play a drinking game where they'd take a shot every time they heard "Actually, Harold, that's not true.") I don't think Reynolds would last more than five or six innings. If I were put in charge of the Fox broadcast, I'd absolutely do this. You could attract so much attention with that stunt that you could get a permanent boost in ratings.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Oct 28, 2015 20:48:10 GMT -5
And Alex Rodriguez is surprisingly good.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 28, 2015 21:03:20 GMT -5
Congratulations to the 2015 World Series Champion Kansas City Royals.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Oct 28, 2015 21:06:32 GMT -5
It's a serious cognitive mistake to conflate a random variable with "luck", they're not the same thing. You or I would hit ~ .000 in the majors, and it wouldn't be because we're unlucky. Mathematically, the densities are different
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 28, 2015 21:43:13 GMT -5
They invented a fake reliever of the year award, and then didn't even give it to Wade Davis? What the heck? If Davis had that season somewhere in the 1980-2005 reliever-obsessed period, he probably would've won the Cy Young Award. He led all American League pitchers in WPA for crying out loud! Now, WPA isn't really a great measure of "best" because by its nature the events of the ninth inning have much larger effects on win probability. But still.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Oct 28, 2015 22:08:49 GMT -5
Brace yourself for all the offday 'it was the layoff' stories
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Oct 28, 2015 23:40:35 GMT -5
JUST TWO MORE MY MAN, WE GOT THIS!
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,677
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 28, 2015 23:56:08 GMT -5
Congratulations to the 2015 World Series Champion Kansas City Royals. Kind of premature, no? Last time the Mets won the Series they lost the first two games if I recall correctly. I get that it doesn't mean that the 2015 Mets will beat KC, but I think KC can be beaten. It wouldn't shock me to see their starters struggle the second time around, nor would it shock me to see their hitters start to slump a little, as they've been scoring a bunch of runs lately. The Series might feel different in New York than KC. I think it was smart of Yost to keep Cueto pitching both of his games in KC, and avoid using him in NY for Game 5.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Oct 29, 2015 9:26:00 GMT -5
The Mets's starters look gassed. Degrom was bad last night, and Harvey had a decent game but his stuff was trash. Without good performances from their starters, I don't see what chance the Mets have.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Oct 29, 2015 9:27:23 GMT -5
The Mets's starters look gassed. Degrom was bad last night, and Harvey had a decent game but his stuff was trash. Without good performances from their starters, I don't see what chance the Mets have. Yeah, all the pressure on Syndergaard, the rookie.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Oct 29, 2015 14:27:42 GMT -5
And Alex Rodriguez is surprisingly good. I'll second that, and I never have anything good to say about him. He's doing a good job.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,987
|
Post by jimoh on Oct 30, 2015 20:41:36 GMT -5
Raul Mondesi JR just made hi mlb debut in the World Series.
What Red Sox player appeared in his *second* mlb game in the World Series?
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,677
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 30, 2015 22:44:49 GMT -5
Raul Mondesi JR just made hi mlb debut in the World Series. What Red Sox player appeared in his *second* mlb game in the World Series? Ken Brett?
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,677
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 30, 2015 22:49:46 GMT -5
The Mets's starters look gassed. Degrom was bad last night, and Harvey had a decent game but his stuff was trash. Without good performances from their starters, I don't see what chance the Mets have. Maybe, but I'll tell you something. If it gets to Game 7 and it's Syndergaard vs Ventura, the Royals, even at home, will have a lot to worry about. And not only that, Franklin Morales is on the Royals. How's THAT for analysis?! He was terrible as a post-season pitcher for the Rockies, the Red Sox, and now the Royals. He came so close to doing so much damage in such a short span of time in Game 6 of the 2013 ALCS. Fortunately Brandon Workman, and later Victorino, came to the rescue. Seriously, though, I do think this series will return to KC. I just wonder which team will lead 3-2.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 31, 2015 14:26:56 GMT -5
The most amazing moment in last night's game was, for me, when Cain reached on the check-swing single to Moustakas in the 1st, and Harold Reynolds then proceeded to explain why this was not luck, but, rather, the product of the Royals' team offensive style. Of course, even if there were a style of hitting that led to more check-swing infield singles -- an extremely dubious idea to begin with -- it seems unlikely that swinging at everything in the strike zone with great hand-eye coordination but mediocre power would constitute that style.
So I take back all of the negative stuff I said about Harold. He's on the verge of crossing a line which has always existed in film (and less notoriously, in literature) that I didn't even know existed in baseball commentary. He is becoming the Ed Wood of the broadcast booth.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 31, 2015 14:31:45 GMT -5
Raul Mondesi JR just made hi mlb debut in the World Series. What Red Sox player appeared in his *second* mlb game in the World Series? Ken Brett? Yup. (Had to check it, though.) The great trivia item with Brett at that point in his career is that he had more GF in the WS (2, games 4 and 7) than he did G in the regular season.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Oct 31, 2015 14:49:21 GMT -5
That would be pretty amazing Cain hitting a check swing single to Moustakas.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Oct 31, 2015 20:40:14 GMT -5
Congratulations to the 2015 World Series Champion Kansas City Royals. It's all your fault. Unless you were doing a reverse J. and rooting for the Mets.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Oct 31, 2015 20:46:32 GMT -5
Who'll be the better hitter in five years? Michael Conforto or Andrew Benintendi?
|
|
|