Faceman

no game is a gimme. I'm just saying that I believe in momentum, and it's only as good as the next game pitchers. If Hill can be good at home, it's a series again. The problem is that Lilly looked like [expletive] tonight, and would go game 5 right? What if the Cubs win Game 3 - do you consider going Marquis in 4, on a short lease? Big Z for Game 5?

Livan Hernandez and Micah Owings. We could tie this thing up. I am not giving up yet. This team is very tough at home. That is why last night was crucial. One win at home. Then big Z in Game 4. You'd take your chances in Game 5 right? I mean, the worm has to turn right? EVERY break has gone AZ way so far.

all it takes is one game to turn it around. gotta get something out of Hill.

I hate the expansion teams. And their fans. They haven't earned it yet.

OK that old dude is hilarious. . . laugh at that after the Cubs come back and win the series.

wow - pizz azz luck tonight hard balls in play everywhere.

Hey hey - it's finally here. Gotta love 34 pages of game thread, over an hour before the start. Come on guys - start it off right tonight. Good luck Cub Fans - enjoy the postseason. May it last a couple weeks.

Giles has a weak arm. He may not have set his feet, but he was somewhat coming in on the ball. What an absolute garbage call from a great ump. If he thought Holliday hit the plate, he would have emphatically called safe when he saw the ball on the ground. Instead, it looks like he didn't want to call a guy out who might be knocked out or wasn't going back to touch the plate. He gave up on the play. Very weak.

Is Marquis gonna make the roster?

come on guys - win one tomorrow. good luck fellas

WInner winner chicken dinner. OUCH That's gotta hurt Brewcrew.

That run was mandatory to kick dirt in Yost's face. Coulda been a tie game. . .

I think the Red Birds are just paying me back for all the love and devotion I've shown them over the years on this site. You have been quite the loyal servant, indeed. You just know the Brewers will score one here, what should have tied the game.

Dude, come on. They were tanking it until Yost got stupid and decided to piss them off. Lol true that. Stupid Yost. Get a brain MORAN. http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/f/f/get_a_brain_morans.jpg

40+ pages for a Cards game. I think some of you (Soul) owe the Cards an apology. 8-) I told you guys, blow out, blow out, win. 1 out of 3. You are welcome.

because they've won 3 in a row? they lost 4 in a row right before that At least they haven't given up, like the Cards. It's interesting to see a team that won the World Series last year play with such a lack of pride. more like lack of talent Did Wainwright, Eckstein, Edmonds, Spiezo, Ankiel, Miles and that Pujols guy all of a sudden all become talentless bums? As for the bolded no not all of a sudden, its been like that for awhile. As for Edmonds, it hasnt been all of a sudden, its been this year, hes old and his body is beat up. Hes not the early 2000's Edmonds. As for Pujols, the guy is hurt. He could barely make it around the bases last night. [/b] They've still got enough talent on that roster to not get blown out by 7 runs every game. Time to face it: the Cards are tanking it. Thanks Tony. They must have been tanking it all year long then. To date, the Cards have 84 losses. By run differential 5: 4 (1 in Sept) 6: 8 (1 in Sept) 7: 5 8: 4 (2 in Sept) 9: 2 10: 5 11: 4 (2 in Sept) 13: 1 14: 1 17: 1 (1 in sept) That is 35 of their losses, by 5 or more runs. That settles it, they have been tanking all year long.

Sure but all sports have bad divisions that boost the record of other teams. Heck the main three have bad CONFERENCES...the NFC, NL, and Eastern Conference are all bad, and so the "good" teams in those conferences have a natural advantage. My problem is more that there isn't an even schedule for teams in the same division. Part of that is a function of interleague. Part of it is a 6 team division. In any case, it's a pet peeve that I'd like to see fixed. I remember growing up it was so nice. NL, 6 teams per division. Play your 5 18 times each, the 6 from the other division 12 times each. 90+72 = 162. AL, 7 teams per division. Play your 6 13 times each, the 7 from the other division 12 times each. 78 + 84 = 162. Of course, the complaint then was in the AL you played more games vs. the other division than your own, but not per team.

Good. Hopefully the Cubs get KC instead. I'm always irritated that the Cards get 2 series against KC each year. The Cards do not play KC twice each year. That is a well spread myth. They do play in KC every year, but not vice versa. And they aren't the easiest games in the world. KC really gets up for those games. yes, there are years where the Cardinals get similarly predictable cellar dwellars like Texas or Tampa instead of the second match up with the Royals. the Cubs-White Sox series come close to and often exceed the intensity of Cubs-Cards series. can the same be said for Cards-Royals? seriously, look up some of the things White Sox players say about playing the Cubs. I highly doubt you will find any such vitriol coming from KC on an annual basis. you guys get a break with your interleague 'rivalry' being one of the worst teams in baseball. chalk it up as a break, and move on. defending it in any way, shape, or form is just silly. So now it's not only KC, but the other interleague draw as well. Since you brought it up, this year the Cards played Anaheim and at Detroit, again. Neither appeared on the Cubs schedule. The Cubs did get the Rangers for three and the crappy WhiteSox for six. The Cards did not get either of those teams. You can find schedule imbalances every year - and not just interleague. Any attempt to make an argument that one team has an annual advantage by looking at only 3-6 out of 162 game schedule is BEYOND silly. And the verbal warfare in the papers is quite irrelevant. don't give me that crap. you tried to state that the Cards don't get a break with drawing the Royals on a consistent basis. they pretty much do. there's been two seasons where they haven't, and they just happened to get a different patsy in each of those years. congrats on a year where your interleague matchups were easier than the Cubs. I think this makes two in about a dozen years or so of interleague play. I'm not saying this at all. I'm saying that the schedule is different all the way around, that looking at 3 or 6 games vs KC vs the other 159 or 156 is very shortsighted. There are schedule imbalances everywhere. whether its a one game advantage, a three game advantage, or a six game advantage, I don't give a damn. it's still an advantage. maybe it hasn't made a difference, but maybe one of these years it will, and it would be a damn shame if, all other things being equal, the division came down to the Cubs going 3-3 against a damn good White Sox team while the Cards go 5-1 against the usually crappy Royals...or the Cubs going 4-2 against the Yankees/DRays while the Cards went 2-4 against the Yankees/RedSox. the white sox are damn good? And come on, in 2003 the Cards went to Yankee stadium and Fenway, hosted Baltimore and Toronto. Cubs got Tampa Bay. These things change every year. Oh by the way, in 2003 the Cubs beat the Cards by, you guessed it, 3 games. So there, the closest race between the Cubs and Cards since 2002, and the interleague schedule benefited the Cubs. If you click over to the AL standings, you'll see the Royals finished only 3 games behing the "Damn good" WhiteSox. http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL_2003.shtml the verbal warfare in the papers is quite relevant as you also tried to diminish how fortunate the Cards are to draw the Royals by stating how heated the rivalry is for them. the verbal warfare in the papers is the evidence of how fired up the White Sox get to face the Cubs. we know what a fired up interleague rival looks and sound like. I really don't think you do. why is it that the rivalry for the Cubs / White Sox counts, but STL / KC doesn't? They did play in a world series, and there is quite a bit of bitterness both ways. You are picking and choosing what you feel is important. edit-one last thing...the Cubs only got 4 interleague series this year. they got extra games against the Braves and Padres to make up for it. so let's stop implying that we got a break this year. the break, if any, is the difference between the A's and the Rangers. you are making my point for me. the schedule is imbalanced everywhere. It's not just KC vs CWS, it's not just Cubs vs. Cardinals. It's everywhere.

What would you call it if he came up and struck out? A typical at bat for him. Obviously the player isn't going to hit a HR every time. He's human. But I don't see how, in that scenario, you can't see how momentum can be a factor. Bottom line... baseball players are human. People are affected by momentum. As a result, so are baseball players. I still find it funny that some people believe mometum is possible in basketball and not baseball. It's stupid. I find it funny that you see some sort of connection between basketball and baseball. Not all sports are the same. Is there momentum in anything that is some sort of competitive activity? If you don't believe in momentum, then you don't. Baseball vs basketball doesn't make sense. Hell momentum probably exists in chess if a surprise move gets in the oppositions head. No I do belive in momentum. I was laughing at the people who believe it exsits in Basketball and not Baseball. It's senseless. Sorry - I meant to quote SSR. I agree with you 100%

What would you call it if he came up and struck out? That the momentum created from the diving play was not enough to change his AB. We look at baseball like it's all a science. With all the sabr-stuff, you like to think that if you have the better numbers, then you win. Baseball is very much luck, moreso than any of us would like. Momentum that causes the player to believe a little bit more cannot and does not always overcome a devastating 0-2 pitch. Isn't that agreeing that momentum isn't predicative, and is only attributable after the fact? If momentum gets the credit for that Jones HR, what gets the credit for the "meaningless" HRs Jones hits? It doesn't get credit for the HR. It's gets credit for helping. He may have homered, he may not have. The AB is a function of the pitcher's skill, hitters skill, and the situation. Momentum can change the situation in favor of one or the other.. Luck rides on top of it all. It's not just one thing.

What would you call it if he came up and struck out? A typical at bat for him. Obviously the player isn't going to hit a HR every time. He's human. But I don't see how, in that scenario, you can't see how momentum can be a factor. Bottom line... baseball players are human. People are affected by momentum. As a result, so are baseball players. I still find it funny that some people believe mometum is possible in basketball and not baseball. It's stupid. I find it funny that you see some sort of connection between basketball and baseball. Not all sports are the same. Is there momentum in anything that is some sort of competitive activity? If you don't believe in momentum, then you don't. Baseball vs basketball doesn't make sense. Hell momentum probably exists in chess if a surprise move gets in the oppositions head.

How can you say mometum is what caused all that? Teams get hot, pitchers get hot, how can you say that its caused by momentum? Being hot, is because the team did their job, its not about momentum. Like you said its all about that next days starter. I'm not saying it caused it. Obviously momentum isn't real. IMO, its a emotion. You have a good play or two - now you start to get excited, you start to believe more, the crowd gets excited, the other team gets rattled, etc. There is no such thing as momentum but IMO opinion it describes a mindset change for the players involved - on both sides. Certainly you believe in crowd noise helping right? That is part of momentum. And it can be shut down very quickly. Like a 3 run homer when you are down 4 in the 9th. No I dont believe crowd noise helps really. Does it probably keep the team more alive, yea, but does it help them get a hit? Throw a strike? Probably not. Ive seen Wrigley loud as hell, only to watch a ball 4 go by and us walk in a run, or us strike out with a runner on 3rd. It's not all or nothing. If a player has a 1/3 chance of getting a hit, maybe momentum makes it 1/2.5 - that's still more likely to not get a hit.

What would you call it if he came up and struck out? That the momentum created from the diving play was not enough to change his AB. We look at baseball like it's all a science. With all the sabr-stuff, you like to think that if you have the better numbers, then you win. Baseball is very much luck, moreso than any of us would like. Momentum that causes the player to believe a little bit more cannot and does not always overcome a devastating 0-2 pitch.

How can you say mometum is what caused all that? Teams get hot, pitchers get hot, how can you say that its caused by momentum? Being hot, is because the team did their job, its not about momentum. Like you said its all about that next days starter. I'm not saying it caused it. Obviously momentum isn't real. IMO, its a emotion. You have a good play or two - now you start to get excited, you start to believe more, the crowd gets excited, the other team gets rattled, etc. There is no such thing as momentum but IMO opinion it describes a mindset change for the players involved - on both sides. Certainly you believe in crowd noise helping right? That is part of momentum. And it can be shut down very quickly. Like a 3 run homer when you are down 4 in the 9th.

2003 ALCS 2004 WS 2005 WS 2006 Post-season I'm not saying momentum can't switch, or be a tiny factor. But momentum and crowd turns the 2003 ALCS from a sweep to a RedSox comeback. It turns Jeff Weaver into a post-season hero. It can and does exist. Not always 100% responsible. And it can get shut down by tomorrow's pitcher.