+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: The Lurker Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: Baseball playoffs (/thread-5574.html)
Baseball playoffs - Munkay - 10-28-2005
Minionman,Oct 27 2005, 09:39 PM Wrote:I don't know about the regular season, but after reading about the Astros vs. the cardinals, and seeing some of the first two white Sox games that were very close, The Astros seemed to be playing enough to win 2 or 3 games in the world series.
Baseball has it's flukes. The KC Royals (the worst team in baseball right now) still wins games against the Yankees, the Red Sox and the White Sox. There is a quote that goes, in a season everyone team in baseball will win 50 games, every team will lose 50 games, and the other 50 games decide all the difference.
Now I admit at this point I seem rather absurd in saying it would be a total fluke if the Astros won a game. They aren't that bad; they aren't the KC Royals (sorry to the Royals fans out there). What I originally ment to say is something more along the lines that although I wouldn't have been surprised if the Astros did pick up a game in the series, I'm also not surprised that they didn't. They played a superior team and that sometimes spells sweep.
But, it would of been unfair of me to call it a fluke if they had won.
Cheers,
Munk
Baseball playoffs - Occhidiangela - 10-29-2005
Munkay,Oct 27 2005, 11:08 PM Wrote:Baseball has it's flukes. The KC Royals (the worst team in baseball right now) still wins games against the Yankees, the Red Sox and the White Sox. There is a quote that goes, in a season everyone team in baseball will win 50 games, every team will lose 50 games, and the other 50 games decide all the difference.
Now I admit at this point I seem rather absurd in saying it would be a total fluke if the Astros won a game. They aren't that bad; they aren't the KC Royals (sorry to the Royals fans out there). What I originally ment to say is something more along the lines that although I wouldn't have been surprised if the Astros did pick up a game in the series, I'm also not surprised that they didn't. They played a superior team and that sometimes spells sweep.
But, it would of been unfair of me to call it a fluke if they had won.
Cheers,
Munk
[right][snapback]93382[/snapback][/right]
I have to disagree, there is little flukish about it. Unlike football, playoff process is a multi game effort. It is in the nature of the game for odd combinations of talent to succeed against another combination of talent. There is also the matter of performance streaks. The variation of performance, particuarly in run productions, is considerable. Success for a good batter is getting a hit, or on base, 1/3 to 2/5th's of the time respectively. The strike zone, allegedly fixed, is somewhat amorphous. So, no, not flukes, a result of the inherent variability of outcomes imbedded in the process.
The quantum nature, as in uncertainty of what impacts what else, of baseball is what makes surprising and thrilling outcomes part of the game's charm.
Occhi
Baseball playoffs - Rhydderch Hael - 10-29-2005
The abberation of the umpires directly influencing the postseason series' outcomes throws a little twist into the matter as well.
Baseball playoffs - Occhidiangela - 10-29-2005
Rhydderch Hael,Oct 29 2005, 02:47 PM Wrote:The abberation of the umpires directly influencing the postseason series' outcomes throws a little twist into the matter as well.
[right][snapback]93554[/snapback][/right]
Baseball and Chaos Theory. This smacks of a book just dying to be published, a direct counter to Billy Bean and his number crunching franchise manpower model.
Occhi
Baseball playoffs - Minionman - 10-30-2005
here's a pretty good top ten list on why the Yankees lost. Read and enjoy.
Baseball playoffs - --Pete - 11-01-2005
Hi,
Occhidiangela,Oct 29 2005, 08:26 AM Wrote:The quantum nature, as in uncertainty of what impacts what else, of baseball is what makes surprising and thrilling outcomes part of the game's charm.And here I thought it was the opportunity to eat hot dogs and drink beer while basking in the sun that gave it its charm :)
[right][snapback]93542[/snapback][/right]
--Pete
Baseball playoffs - Occhidiangela - 11-01-2005
Pete,Nov 1 2005, 09:03 AM Wrote:Hi,
And here I thought it was the opportunity to eat hot dogs and drink beer while basking in the sun that gave it its charm :)
--Pete
[right][snapback]93767[/snapback][/right]
Oh, yeah, that too. The two features are not mutually exclusive, so I guess we are dealing with compound charm here . . . though at the prices these days of a dog and a brew, one ends up risking compound interest if one is careless in use of credit card for said charm inducing agents. At least the sun doesn't come with a fee . . . yet.
Occhi
Baseball playoffs - Darian - 11-02-2005
Munkay,Oct 27 2005, 04:53 PM Wrote:You kidding me? They barely broke .500 in the regular season! Sorry to Astros fans here (sorry Occhi) but they are not a great team. The NL west was a joke this season, and although it's great the Astros made it to the World Series for the first time in franchise history, it was a fluke.
[right][snapback]93346[/snapback][/right]
89-73 isn't "barely breaking .500," and the Astros have nothing to do with the NL West. ;)
Baseball playoffs - Rhydderch Hael - 11-02-2005
Darian,Nov 2 2005, 02:15 PM Wrote:89-73 isn't "barely breaking .500," and the Astros have nothing to do with the NL West. ;)Especially since it was the Cardinals, noit the Astros, that steamrolled over the "joke" NL West Division leaders, the Padres.
[right][snapback]93937[/snapback][/right]
Baseball playoffs - Munkay - 11-03-2005
Darian,Nov 2 2005, 05:15 PM Wrote:89-73 isn't "barely breaking .500," and the Astros have nothing to do with the NL West. ;)
[right][snapback]93937[/snapback][/right]
Hmm, I don't quite know what I was thinking then. I was meaning the Astros and was typing the record of the Padres.
I think I've made it clear from other posts, but to reiterate my intended meaning (before I botched it up :P ) was that I was unimpressed by their play during regular season. The Rocket pitched great when he was at the closed dome, and I can't deny he did have the best ERA in the league for a long time (<.055 iirc). Their pitching was great at times, but the rest of the team (bats and fielding) never looked good on the games I caught on national TV (I don't get a lot of Astro's games up in the Northeast). Their home field domination was obvious, they went 53-28 at home, but only 36-45 while away (the White Sox by comparison won more on the road than at home).
Their record of 89-73 is mediocre. Competeing against the monstrosity that is the NL West makes the wild card run that much easier (Hell, the Indians had a 93-69 record and still came up 2 short of the wildcard in the AL).
I don't mean to come off as an Astro basher. In truth have a slightly above average team, and there is definitely a lot of possibility of going places with the right management choices. But they certainly aren't there right now.
Cheers,
Munk