Once Again Pitching Rules

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Yes, the 2002 Angels pitched their way to a World Series victory.

[baseball7897]

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.

 

I have always said good pitching with good defense is the way to win the world series. Not to mention clutch hitting.

 

The funny thing is, I belive someone on this board said defense doesnt matter.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

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.

 

What does that show? Both of you are using logic that doesn't lead to an answer.

 

EDIT: Wait a second, grassbass didn't even post anything about what he thought it'd take to win.

Edited October 28, 2006 by CaliforniaRaisin

[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.

 

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.

 

How does my logic that "anything can happen in the postseason" lead to anything you just posted? I haven't argued that offense always beats pitching. Try actually reading the posts next time.

[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.

 

How does my logic that "anything can happen in the postseason" lead to anything you just posted? I haven't argued that offense always beats pitching. Try actually reading the posts next time.

 

Ok, mother.

[fromthestretch]

Ok, mother.

 

There's no point in trying to convince you how flawed your logic is if you don't even read the posts well enough to see who is arguing what points.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Hahaha, awesome.

[fromthestretch]

What does that show? Both of you are using logic that doesn't lead to an answer.

 

EDIT: Wait a second, grassbass didn't even post anything about what he thought it'd take to win.

 

Thank you for the edit.

 

I think it takes a hell of a lot of luck to win, because anything can happen. All you can do is try to build the best team possible to even get into the postseason.

[baseball7897]

What does that show? Both of you are using logic that doesn't lead to an answer.

 

EDIT: Wait a second, grassbass didn't even post anything about what he thought it'd take to win.

 

Thank you for the edit.

 

I think it takes a hell of a lot of luck to win, because anything can happen. All you can do is try to build the best team possible to even get into the postseason.

 

So you think it just takes luck? Luck does play a role, but not a significant role.

[Flames24Rulz]

 

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.

 

I'm sorry, but the Cardinals had guys playing WAY over their heads such as Eckstein and Molina and Preston Wilson.

 

The playoffs are a small sample size. I'd still take Pudge, Polanco, Guillen, and Granderson over guys such as Molina, Eckstein, Miles, and Wilson.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

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.

 

I'm sorry, but the Cardinals had guys playing WAY over their heads such as Eckstein and Molina and Preston Wilson.

 

The playoffs are a small sample size. I'd still take Pudge, Polanco, Guillen, and Granderson over guys such as Molina, Eckstein, Miles, and Wilson.

 

Abuck doesn't believe what he's saying, he's trying to show that you can't prove either argument but that some are saying good pitching beats good hitting as a fact without proof.

[Flames24Rulz]

 

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.

 

I'm sorry, but the Cardinals had guys playing WAY over their heads such as Eckstein and Molina and Preston Wilson.

 

The playoffs are a small sample size. I'd still take Pudge, Polanco, Guillen, and Granderson over guys such as Molina, Eckstein, Miles, and Wilson.

 

Abuck doesn't believe what he's saying, he's trying to show that you can't prove either argument but that some are saying good pitching beats good hitting as a fact without proof.

 

Ok. In that case, I would say good pitching, for the most part, beats good hitting. Detroits pitchers did struggle though when it mattered most. That and creating extra outs for a team that is in the World Series usually will come back to bite you in the rear end.

 

St. Louis' rotation pretty much sucked though, as well as most of their team. If you look at the teams that have made the World Series in the past 5 years or so, about 80% of those teams had great pitching staffs, which propelled them to the Series.

[fromthestretch]

What does that show? Both of you are using logic that doesn't lead to an answer.

 

EDIT: Wait a second, grassbass didn't even post anything about what he thought it'd take to win.

 

Thank you for the edit.

 

I think it takes a hell of a lot of luck to win, because anything can happen. All you can do is try to build the best team possible to even get into the postseason.

 

So you think it just takes luck?

 

In the postseason, a lot of it is luck. I think the sentence I bolded above speaks for itself, but I'll try to clarify a little.

 

I think if you spend all your money on pitching, there's a good chance you won't score enough runs to even get into the postseason in the first place. While I do agree with you that great pitching is a very valuable thing to have and can dominate in a short series, pitching itself isn't always enough to get you to the postseason. The Cardinals did NOT have better pitching than the Tigers. They got better performances out of mediocre pitching. You claim to play baseball, so I'm sure you know that anyone can have a hot streak or a slump at any time. That can also happen in the postseason. In my opinion, the Tigers were the better all-around team. The better team doesn't always win, especially in baseball in Oct. when it's about 35 degrees. Bad hops, clutch hitting, mental mistakes...these aren't always things you can accurately predict. So build a team around the things you can predict with a greater degree of accuracy.

 

Someone's signature on this site says something about building a team with pitching AND offense. You need both.

[abuck1220]

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.

 

to review...your logic has been proven wrong. and so has this imaginary logic that you've magically attributed to no one in particular.

[fromthestretch]

I bet if we all think really hard and remember back to...oh, let's say 2003, we can think of a seven-game series where a team with three young dominant starters didn't win the series, where a few unpredictable things happened.

[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.

 

to review...your logic has been proven wrong. and so has this imaginary logic that you've magically attributed to no one in particular.

 

Didnt the Astros make the world series last year because of their pitching?

 

My logic has been proving wrong? By who? You? LOL

[baseball7897]

I bet if we all think really hard and remember back to...oh, let's say 2003, we can think of a seven-game series where a team with three young dominant starters didn't win the series, where a few unpredictable things happened.

 

Let's not forget how that 03 Cubs team made the playoffs. PITCHING

[Drew Doughty]

I bet if we all think really hard and remember back to...oh, let's say 2003, we can think of a seven-game series where a team with three young dominant starters didn't win the series, where a few unpredictable things happened.

 

Let's not forget how that 03 Cubs team made the playoffs. PITCHING

 

The Dodgers had a team ERA of 3.16 that year and they missed the playoffs.

[fromthestretch]

I bet if we all think really hard and remember back to...oh, let's say 2003, we can think of a seven-game series where a team with three young dominant starters didn't win the series, where a few unpredictable things happened.

 

Let's not forget how that 03 Cubs team made the playoffs. PITCHING

 

They were fourth in the NL in pitching and middle of the pack in offense. Their offense played more of a role than you'd like to give them credit for. Don't believe me? The Dodgers had a major league best 3.16 team ERA that season. The next closest was Seattle at 3.76...that's how much better LA's staff was than everyone else (for the record, the Cubs were at 3.83). And they didn't make the postseason, finishing 15.5 games out of first in their division. Want to know why? They had one of the worst offenses in baseball that year.

 

I'm not arguing that you need offense more than pitching, although you seem to think I am. I'm arguing that you need both.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Let me see if I have this right. Good pitching wins in the playoffs, except this year when worse pitchers pitch better than the good ones. But that's because they weren't clutch enough and made errors.

 

Maybe, just maybe, sometimes good pitching beats good hitting, and sometimes good hitting beats good pitching. That's why it's good to aim for both, because when you make the playoffs and your season comes down to 4-7 games you can't really plan for short cold streaks from either.

[fromthestretch]

I bet if we all think really hard and remember back to...oh, let's say 2003, we can think of a seven-game series where a team with three young dominant starters didn't win the series, where a few unpredictable things happened.

 

Let's not forget how that 03 Cubs team made the playoffs. PITCHING

 

The Dodgers had a team ERA of 3.16 that year and they missed the playoffs.

 

Damn. Beat me to it.

[Flames24Rulz]

I bet if we all think really hard and remember back to...oh, let's say 2003, we can think of a seven-game series where a team with three young dominant starters didn't win the series, where a few unpredictable things happened.

 

Let's not forget how that 03 Cubs team made the playoffs. PITCHING

 

I'm not arguing that you need offense more than pitching, although you seem to think I am. I'm arguing that you need both.

 

Agreed.

[CuseCubFan69]

Hendry will search for pitchers who can throw to first and third base.

 

At the same time? Cool, I hope he gets a guy that can do that!

[CuseCubFan69]

I bet if we all think really hard and remember back to...oh, let's say 2003, we can think of a seven-game series where a team with three young dominant starters didn't win the series, where a few unpredictable things happened.

 

Let's not forget how that 03 Cubs team made the playoffs. PITCHING

 

The Dodgers had a team ERA of 3.16 that year and they missed the playoffs.

 

The Cards had clutch pitching. Yeah, that's the ticket.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

The 2002 Angels won the World Series with a 6.34 ERA in the World Series.

 

And yes, the Giants nearly gave up an earned run less per game and lost that World Series.