Once Again Pitching Rules

[soccer10k]

Good pitching shuts down good hitting.

 

detroit's good pitching didn't shut down st. louis' good hitting.

 

Well game 1 Verlander gave up 6 runs and they lost. Game 2 Rogers pitched good and they won. Game 3 they gave up 3 runs and Carp gave up 0 and the Cards won, game 4 they got some bad breaks gave up 3 runs and lost. And game 5 again bad breaks and gave up 2 runs and lost. So they pitched OK in the W.S., but the cards pitched better and guess what, the better pitching won.

 

If you really believe that the rotation of Carpenter, Weaver, Suppan, Reyes is better than the rotation of Rogers, Verlander, Bonderman, Robertson you are insane.

 

It's called sample size. The Cardinals happened to pitch better in 4 out of 5 freaking games. That's it.

[Derwood]

The Tigers led the majors in ERA.

 

perhaps due to all those unearned runs.

 

btw, a run shouldn't be unearned if the pitcher was the one making the error. that rule is re-tar-ded

[wolf stansson]

Pitching wins in the postseason plain and simple.

Actually a combination of good pitching performances, good offense, timely hitting, and luck is what wins in the postseason. You have to have players playing over their heads at the right time.

[UK1679666180]

I want to know what the hitters were told to look for, I know what they were looking for, but their approach made their avg. hitting line-up look terrible. Edited October 28, 2006 by UK

[indifferent]

I think this is the best assessment of why the Cards won, http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/baseball/mlb/10/28/extra.mustard.game.5/1.html.

 

Especially this part regarding the post season Cards v. the regular season Cards:

 

The dead weight factor. The Cardinals gave 17 starts to Mark Mulder during the regular season, who had a 7.14 ERA before his shoulder finally gave out. They gave 13 starts to Sidney Ponson (5.24 ERA). Thirty-three starts to Jason Marquis (6.02 ERA). And Jason Isringhausen was their closer for most of the season; he was second in the National League with 10 blown saves. None of those pitchers were on the World Series roster. This is the corollary to the superstar factor. It's far easier to replace truly execrable performers with adequate ones -- Ponson, say, for Jeff Weaver -- than it is to exchange average performers for blue-chip talent. The Cardinals didn't make any big ticket acquisitions at the trade deadline, but they cut out a lot o fat.

 

I don't think the 2006 Cardinals were a 100-win team, by any means. But they were probably a 90-win team, a 92-win team, at least based on the roster they fielded during the playoffs. Plenty of teams with 90-win talent have won the World Series. If this result was an embarrassment to baseball in any way, it's because there's a reward system in place that allows an 83-78 team to compete in October. It wasn't because of the Cardinals.

 

[Geech]

perhaps due to all those unearned runs.

 

btw, a run shouldn't be unearned if the pitcher was the one making the error. that rule is re-tar-ded

 

I agree that the distinction between earned runs and unearned runs is problematic, but Detroit also allowed the fewest total runs in baseball.

[baseball7897]

Good pitching shuts down good hitting.

 

detroit's good pitching didn't shut down st. louis' good hitting.

 

Well game 1 Verlander gave up 6 runs and they lost. Game 2 Rogers pitched good and they won. Game 3 they gave up 3 runs and Carp gave up 0 and the Cards won, game 4 they got some bad breaks gave up 3 runs and lost. And game 5 again bad breaks and gave up 2 runs and lost. So they pitched OK in the W.S., but the cards pitched better and guess what, the better pitching won.

 

ugh...this is such after-the-fact analysis that i can't believe you don't see the flaw in your logic.

 

 

let's take last night's game -- verlander vs. weaver. verlander is clearly the better pitcher, so going in you (using your pitching beats hitting philosophy) would say the tigers should win since they have the better pitcher. then weaver outpitches verlander and you say 'well, good pitching beats good hitting' and weaver pitched better than verlander.

 

i don't see how anyone can subscribe to this idiotic 'good pitching beats good hitting' mantra and then cite the 2006 world series, in which the team with the team with the BEST PITCHING IN ALL OF MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL got beat by a team with the 16TH BEST PITCHING IN ALL OF MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL.

 

It's true. Good pitching always shuts down good hitting.

 

In the postseason, Weaver was better than Verlander.

[abuck1220]

 

It's true. Good pitching always shuts down good hitting.

 

 

nope. good hitting beats good pitching. eckstein, molina, rolen, etc were just better than pudge, guillen and granderson.

 

prove me wrong.

Edited October 28, 2006 by abuck1220

[b_wiggy_66]

Good pitching shuts down good hitting.

 

detroit's good pitching didn't shut down st. louis' good hitting.

 

Well game 1 Verlander gave up 6 runs and they lost. Game 2 Rogers pitched good and they won. Game 3 they gave up 3 runs and Carp gave up 0 and the Cards won, game 4 they got some bad breaks gave up 3 runs and lost. And game 5 again bad breaks and gave up 2 runs and lost. So they pitched OK in the W.S., but the cards pitched better and guess what, the better pitching won.

 

ugh...this is such after-the-fact analysis that i can't believe you don't see the flaw in your logic.

 

 

let's take last night's game -- verlander vs. weaver. verlander is clearly the better pitcher, so going in you (using your pitching beats hitting philosophy) would say the tigers should win since they have the better pitcher. then weaver outpitches verlander and you say 'well, good pitching beats good hitting' and weaver pitched better than verlander.

 

i don't see how anyone can subscribe to this idiotic 'good pitching beats good hitting' mantra and then cite the 2006 world series, in which the team with the team with the BEST PITCHING IN ALL OF MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL got beat by a team with the 16TH BEST PITCHING IN ALL OF MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL.

 

It's true. Good pitching always shuts down good hitting.

 

In the postseason, Weaver was better than Verlander.

 

I understand that the Tigers had the best pitching during the season, but over the last week they did not and the better pitching at the time won. Either way if I have my choice of a great rotation or a great lineup, gimme the great rotation any day of the week.

[abuck1220]

 

I understand that the Tigers had the best pitching during the season, but over the last week they did not and the better pitching at the time won.

 

nope. the better hitting won.

[abuck1220]

Either way if I have my choice of a great rotation or a great lineup, gimme the great rotation any day of the week.

 

detroit had a great rotation and they lost.

[abuck1220]

Good pitching shuts down good hitting.

 

detroit's good pitching didn't shut down st. louis' good hitting.

 

Well game 1 Verlander gave up 6 runs and they lost. Game 2 Rogers pitched good and they won. Game 3 they gave up 3 runs and Carp gave up 0 and the Cards won, game 4 they got some bad breaks gave up 3 runs and lost. And game 5 again bad breaks and gave up 2 runs and lost. So they pitched OK in the W.S., but the cards pitched better and guess what, the better pitching won.

 

well, game 1 the cards offense scored six runs and they won. in game 2, the cards scored one run and they lost. in game 3 they scored five runs and they won. in game 4 they scored five runs and they won. in game 5 they scored four runs and they won.

 

clearly, when the offense scored runs, the cardinals won. offense wins championships.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

My goodness there is some terrible logic in this thread.

[abuck1220]

i hope you realize that my terrible logic was used in an effort to show how terrible other's logic was.

[sethuel1]

My goodness there is some amusingly terrible logic in this thread.

fixed

[CaliforniaRaisin]

i hope you realize that my terrible logic was used in an effort to show how terrible other's logic was.

 

You can't fool us, abuck.

[baseball7897]

 

It's true. Good pitching always shuts down good hitting.

 

 

nope. good hitting beats good pitching. eckstein, molina, rolen, etc were just better than pudge, guillen and granderson.

 

prove me wrong.

 

It's pretty sad that you believe "good hitting beats good pitching". There really is no use arguing this if you already believe that.

 

If you think "good hitting" is the way to win a world series, then why didnt the Whitesox win it this year? Why didnt they make the playoffs? Why didnt the Red Sox win it this year? Why didnt he Yankees win it this year? Plain and simple, they didnt have the pitching to get it done.

Edited October 28, 2006 by baseball7897

[fromthestretch]

It's true. Good pitching always shuts down good hitting.

 

In the postseason, Weaver was better than Verlander.

 

Weaver may have pitched better in the postseason, but not many people in this world would ever say that Weaver is a better pitcher than Verlander. Even bad pitchers have some good games. Shawn Estes is proof enough of that.

 

The Tigers pitching staff as a whole is much better than the Cardinals pitching staff. Carpenter was clearly better this season than any Tigers' starter, but Jeff Suppan, the Cards second-best starter this season, would have ranked fifth in the Tigers' rotation in ERA had he put up those same numbers in Detroit. Therefore, the team with the best pitching didn't win.

 

Great pitching did not beat great hitting in this series. A team with mediocre pitching happened to get hot at the same time that its opponent got cold. In fact, giving all the credit to the Cardinals' pitching staff isn't fair to the offense that managed to score some runs against a very tough Detroit pitching staff.

 

Edited to correct a misspelling.

Edited October 28, 2006 by grassbass

[abuck1220]

 

It's true. Good pitching always shuts down good hitting.

 

 

nope. good hitting beats good pitching. eckstein, molina, rolen, etc were just better than pudge, guillen and granderson.

 

prove me wrong.

 

It's pretty sad that you believe "good hitting beats good pitching". There really is no use arguing this if you already believe that.

 

If you think "good hitting" is the way to win a world series, then why didnt the Whitesox win it this year? Why didnt they make the playoffs? Why didnt the Red Sox win it this year? Why didnt he Yankees win it this year? Plain and simple, they didnt have the pitching to get it done.

 

if you think good pitching is the way to win a world series, then WHY THE HOLY HELL DID THE DETROIT FREAKING TIGERS, WHO HAD THE ABSOLUTE, WITHOUT A DOUBT, BESTEST IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD PITCHING WIN THE WORLD SERIES???????????????????????????????????????????

[baseball7897]

 

It's true. Good pitching always shuts down good hitting.

 

 

nope. good hitting beats good pitching. eckstein, molina, rolen, etc were just better than pudge, guillen and granderson.

 

prove me wrong.

 

It's pretty sad that you believe "good hitting beats good pitching". There really is no use arguing this if you already believe that.

 

If you think "good hitting" is the way to win a world series, then why didnt the Whitesox win it this year? Why didnt they make the playoffs? Why didnt the Red Sox win it this year? Why didnt he Yankees win it this year? Plain and simple, they didnt have the pitching to get it done.

 

if you think good pitching beats good hitting, then WHY THE HOLY HELL DID THE DETROIT FREAKING TIGERS, WHO HAD THE ABSOLUTE, WITHOUT A DOUBT, BESTEST IN THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD PITCHING WIN THE WORLD SERIES???????????????????????????????????????????

 

They played like crap in the world series. Errors, no clutch hitting, and mental mistakes are a few reasons why they didnt win the world series.

[fromthestretch]

It's pretty sad that you believe "good hitting beats good pitching". There really is no use arguing this if you already believe that.

 

If you think "good hitting" is the way to win a world series, then why didnt the Whitesox win it this year? Why didnt they make the playoffs? Why didnt the Red Sox win it this year? Why didnt he Yankees win it this year? Plain and simple, they didnt have the pitching to get it done.

 

Based on your logic, the Angels, Astros, and Blue Jays should have all made the postseason since their pitching staffs gave up fewer runs this season than the Cardinals. If you go by team ERA, you can add the Marlins, Indians, Diamondbacks, Reds, and Pirates to that list.

 

Also, based on your logic, San Diego should have beat St. Louis in the NLDS and then the Mets in the NLCS.

[fromthestretch]

They played like crap in the world series. Errors, no clutch hitting, and mental mistakes are a few reasons why they didnt win the world series.

 

So pitching always beats hitting, except when errors, mental mistakes, and a lack of clutch hitting prevent it from doing so. In other words, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN THE POSTSEASON.

[abuck1220]

my goodness.

[sethuel1]

good middle infielders beat good outfielders.

[baseball7897]

It's pretty sad that you believe "good hitting beats good pitching". There really is no use arguing this if you already believe that.

 

If you think "good hitting" is the way to win a world series, then why didnt the Whitesox win it this year? Why didnt they make the playoffs? Why didnt the Red Sox win it this year? Why didnt he Yankees win it this year? Plain and simple, they didnt have the pitching to get it done.

 

Based on your logic, the Angels, Astros, and Blue Jays should have all made the postseason since their pitching staffs gave up fewer runs this season than the Cardinals. If you go by team ERA, you can add the Marlins, Indians, Diamondbacks, Reds, and Pirates to that list.

 

Also, based on your logic, San Diego should have beat St. Louis in the NLDS and then the Mets in the NLCS.

 

Based on your logic, the Indians, Phillies, Whitesox, Red Sox, Atlanta, and Rangers should have all made the playoffs since their hitting was in the top 10 in all of baseball.

 

Also, based on your logic, the Yankees should have beat the Tigers in the ALDS, and then the A's in the ALCS.