Title: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: JGreenMachine on October 22, 2014, 08:04:52 am And the Giants strike early and often to take game 1
Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: MaineDolFan on October 22, 2014, 11:30:46 am I ultimately feel KC wins this in 6, but the Giants did what they always do last night. Win, and leave me wondering how.
Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: EDGECRUSHER on October 22, 2014, 07:03:12 pm The Giants are a mystery because there is no blueprint, they just win. Middle of the pack with their starters, slightly above average with their offense. It just boggles the mind.
The only thing I know is that Bumgarner is the best there is right now. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: JGreenMachine on October 23, 2014, 07:59:57 am The Royals evened it up last night with a big showing offensively. I must point out that they won their wild card "play in" game in extra innings, and their first two divisional round games in extra innings. That makes them the seventh team in MLB history to win at least three postseason games in extra innings. Of the previous six that did it, all of them went on to win the World Series.
Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Sunstroke on October 23, 2014, 12:46:28 pm The only thing I know is that Bumgarner is the best there is right now. In this series? Sure. In all of baseball? No chance. There's this cat named Kershaw who is still the best pitcher in the game. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Spider-Dan on October 23, 2014, 05:46:51 pm I'm no baseball fan, but I thought Kershaw was considered strictly a regular-season hero.
Looking at his playoff stats, he has 1 win in 8 starts, with a playoff ERA of 5.12 and an NLCS ERA of 7.23. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Sunstroke on October 23, 2014, 06:34:25 pm Peyton Manning had some pretty memorable postseason collapses, but I still consider him the best QB in the game. When calling Kershaw the greatest pitcher in the game, I am going solely on his ability, not the record of his team in a limited sample size group. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Spider-Dan on October 23, 2014, 06:52:50 pm If Kershaw's postseason ERA was in the 2s, I'd agree with that analogy, but it's in the 5s. Peyton's postseason passer rating is 89.2, which is still very good (just not as good as his incredible regular season rating).
Furthermore, I think baseball pitchers (and hockey goalies) have unique roles as players that can almost singlehandedly dominate games. In comparison, even football QBs and basketball point guards have significantly less impact. But, leaving Peyton aside, if you want to say that you don't think Kershaw's horrible postseasons outweigh his brilliant regular seasons, that's fine too. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Sunstroke on October 24, 2014, 12:40:50 am I ultimately feel KC wins this in 6... Yeah, KC in 6 would be my pick as well. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: JGreenMachine on October 25, 2014, 07:44:20 am KC held off San Fran last night to regain their home field advantage
Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: MaineDolFan on October 27, 2014, 09:53:05 am In this series? Sure. In all of baseball? No chance. There's this cat named Kershaw who is still the best pitcher in the game. If we played the "you're starting a franchise and you can have one of the two to start your team with," game... I'm wondering why you're being so cruel, making me choose. And then I'm picking Bumgarner. Is Kershaw sick? Yes. Is Madison off the rails ridiculous? YES. People focus on what he has done in the WS. Look at this past season: Kershaw: 21-3, 1.77 ERA, 198 IP, 0.857 WHIP. Ridiculous numbers. Madison wasn't too shabby: 18-10, 2.98, 217 IP, 1.09 WHIP. 19 additional innings, a WHIP which is basically within comparison, and while no one can sneeze at an ERA under 2.00 for a season...can anyone say jack-diddley about an ERA under 3.00 for a season? Now, because it's not all about the regular season, let's take a look at both pitchers once they get to the post season: Kershaw: 1-5 5.12 ERA Bumgarner 7-3 (including the 4-0 in the WS) 2.27 ERA (including a SUB 1.00 ERA in the WS) I'm taking Bumgarner. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: JGreenMachine on October 27, 2014, 11:01:44 am Giants have the lead. Royals have the field. Game six tomorrow and it's do or die for the Royals.
Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Sunstroke on October 27, 2014, 02:30:23 pm If we played the "you're starting a franchise and you can have one of the two to start your team with," game... I'm wondering why you're being so cruel, making me choose. And then I'm picking Bumgarner. Kershaw and Bumgarner, both with identical teammates, both with identical opponents and schedule. I still take Kershaw. His stuff is nastier. 19 additional innings, a WHIP which is basically within comparison, and while no one can sneeze at an ERA under 2.00 for a season...can anyone say jack-diddley about an ERA under 3.00 for a season? The difference between Kershaw's WHiP and Bumgarner's is roughly the same as the difference between Bumgarner's WHiP and Wily Peralta's. The difference between Kershaw's ERA and Bumgarner's is roughly the same as the difference between Bumgarner's ERA and Bartolo Colon's. I like Bumgarner, and agree that he is an excellent pitcher. Kershaw, on the other hand, is the best pitcher in the game. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: MaineDolFan on October 27, 2014, 04:07:48 pm ^^Who, time after time, hasn't figured out how to get it done when the lights are the brightest. I love the kid, but I'll take the guy who is nails when it means the most.
Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Spider-Dan on October 27, 2014, 04:26:58 pm I'm usually one of the most outspoken opponents of overvaluing the postseason, but in this case:
- Kershaw is a dominating regular season pitcher and, frankly, a bum (ahem) in the postseason - Bumgarner is a very good regular season pitcher and a dominating postseason pitcher It's certainly valuable to have a pitcher that can get you into the playoffs, but when you have a playoff ace that can basically take over every 3rd-4th game (and hand an L to the opposing team's best pitcher in the process), there really isn't a substitute. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Sunstroke on October 27, 2014, 04:29:22 pm ^^Who, time after time, hasn't figured out how to get it done when the lights are the brightest. I love the kid, but I'll take the guy who is nails when it means the most. This all comes back to the "team accomplishments vs individual accomplishments" debate. This is the same debate that puts Tom Brady ahead of Peyton Manning on the all-time greatest QB list. Tom is a fantastic QB, and arguably one of the top-10 QBs of all time, but Peyton IS the greatest of all time. Talent and ability are the only measurements in the debate I'm looking at, and Peyton has more talent than Tom...and Clayton has more talent than Madison. I posed the "starting a baseball team, every player back in the pool, which pitcher do you take first?" question to three of my baseball fanatic friends today. The response was Kershaw: 3, Everyone else: 0 Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Spider-Dan on October 27, 2014, 04:48:15 pm I still think you're (greatly) undervaluing a pitcher when you compare them to a QB. A dominating pitcher is the equivalent of like, your entire defensive front 7 on a football team... maybe even more than that.
QBs are important, but they aren't nearly THAT important. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: JGreenMachine on October 29, 2014, 11:26:35 pm Bumgarner is a beast. Pitches a shutout in game 5, comes in and gives up one single then shuts down the Royals the rest of the way. Retired 12 straight after that single. He gets the World Series MVP trophy and no one is more deserving
Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Sunstroke on October 30, 2014, 01:39:17 am ^^^ Couldn't agree more. Still can't believe how many fastballs upstairs that the Royals were swinging at though. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: MaineDolFan on October 30, 2014, 10:23:31 am ^^^ Couldn't agree more. Still can't believe how many fastballs upstairs that the Royals were swinging at though. They aren't starting upstairs, though, and his delivery is almost criminal. His delivery / release point on those high and away heaters SCREAMS cutter (which he throws), and they are coming out of his hand in the strike zone and rising. It's NUTS. It's almost like a knuckleball, as a hitter you need to decide to swing when you've established a release point with the pitcher hand, and establish timing (and hope to hell the bat is somewhere close to where the ball is). Go back and look where the Royals were swinging through. The swing / miss was maybe chest high, where Posey, a couple times, had to literally stand up to catch a couple of those. IF you get a bat on one, it's going on the ground. Madison made one mistake and kept one chest level and Gordon mauled it. They are lucky that thing didn't bounce around a little more, could have been a in-the-park tying run. A complete magical show. Amazing. Another 88 win San Fran title. These guys are nails. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Dave Gray on October 30, 2014, 11:47:29 am I watched the bottom of the ninth. Exciting. I thought that guy in the outfield who let that ball past was going to be the next Buckner.
Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Spider-Dan on October 30, 2014, 12:27:25 pm So does this make the Giants a "dynasty" and the "team of the '10s"?
Some of the sports radio talking heads (national, not local) have been saying that failing to make the playoffs in their off years disqualifies them. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: MaineDolFan on October 30, 2014, 01:51:33 pm I think 3 titles in 5 years is pretty good. But I also think 3 titles in 10 years is also good, which puts the Sox in the conversation as well.
I don't know about dynasty, I tend to agree a team should win at least two back to back, but I will say San Fran is certainly in a upper tier right now. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: MaineDolFan on October 30, 2014, 01:53:55 pm I watched the bottom of the ninth. Exciting. I thought that guy in the outfield who let that ball past was going to be the next Buckner. The Gordon could have scored crowd need to quiet down, however. He was at 3rd when the ball hit the cut off. It takes three seconds, literally, for the ball to travel from the cut off to the catcher, the ball would have been waiting for him. You can't run into the last out of the WS at home. No collisions allowed, so he couldn't try to knock it free. It was a good hold sign at 3rd. Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: Spider-Dan on October 30, 2014, 03:10:56 pm I think 3 titles in 5 years is pretty good. But I also think 3 titles in 10 years is also good, which puts the Sox in the conversation as well. 2 of BOS's championships were in a different decade. It would be difficult for them to be team of the '10s based on one title (of course, they could win more).NYY and BOS both have 2 titles in the '00s (the only teams with 2), but NYY has more pennants. I don't really know if there was a team of the '00s, but if so, I guess I'd give it to NYY? Title: Re: World Series- Royals vs Giants Post by: EDGECRUSHER on October 30, 2014, 09:55:15 pm If I was a Giants player, I would ask Bumgarner permission before I accepted my championship ring. The most dominating pitching performance in playoff history and the numbers back this up.
Seriously, ask permission first. |