Hairyducked Idiot

This is amazing. Everyone who wants this to be a 3-game series can step on broken glass.

Come on dealer come on one time

I saw this as the tip-top end of what Bryant might do. It never occurred to me that Arrieta might have a whole other gear.

k

That isn't true. I know you think it's true, but it isn't. You've got a narrative in your head for my posts, and while it's not entirely unfair, it also causes you to imagine a lot of posts I didn't make and ignore posts that don't fit that narrative. I don't think it really matters, but being accused of saying things I didn't say always irks me. I'll cop to taking a perverse glee in the bad things happening, to saying doing some incredibly annoying venting after the 2008 series was over, and to becoming obsessed for a few weeks with the idea that there was at least a possibility of some kind of magical unspecified "cause" that was causing the Cubs to underperform in playoffs. But specifically saying there was almost no chance because they lost game 1? I haven't checked every post, but it doesn't sound like me and I haven't seen it in the game threads I've looked at, and given your recent history of refusing to accept that I was one of the most optimistic posters about Cubs in-season chances the last few years, I find it likely I didn't say it. This got boring and stupid, so I'll throw this out there: For this entire season, I've made it a point to read your posts with Pierce Hawthorne's voice in my head, and it's amused me every time. Edit: Here's what I said before game 2 in 2008: posting.php?mode=quote&f=26&p=1983816 I think he was joking about 7%. A generic team would be about 15%, we're not a generic team, we're a darned good one with favorable pitching matchups in 3 of 4 remaining games (game 3 absurdly so). I'd say closer to 25%.

You also remember me blathering on about how terrible the Cubs were going to be this year, which never happened. I'll generally cop to anything I've said, I've got no problems with it. I might hammer home how much a single loss lowers your chances to a degree that annoys everyone, maybe even act like everyone is disagreeing with me when nobody is, but "almost no chance" or whatever doesn't sound like me. Maybe I did though. Guess I could go look up the thread.

i mean that was probably an easy transition for you since the last two times we were in the playoffs you were like "well if we lose game 1 there's basically no chance we can win the series now" 2-for-2. I doubt I actually said that, but I've long since accepted that some weird imaginary version of my posts show up on your screen, so I'll take the free credit for being right twice.

I think I've made my peace with the one-game-and-out scenario. By telling myself that getting knocked out of the playoffs is the way most of your seasons end when you are a fan of a good baseball team, so hopefully we get used to it.

I'm sure I'll get over it eventually, but right now I just can't. The Kane thing is too demoralizing, and it'd be too weird to sit there hoping they win but their second-best player doesn't do anything good. I'm sure by the time the playoffs come around I'll chuck any emotional reservations and yell "Kaner!" every time he scores.

Being emotional is fine, but making irrationally negative posts is not fine imo. You do not better the board or discussing by declaring game over in the third inning or other even more irrational thoughts. But the scolding of such posters makes the game thread infinitely more enjoyable.

Isn't the first half from the Cubs Convention, or am I imagining that?

win cubs

The fact that a team can win 100 games and lose 4 out of 7 to a team that won 87 seems silly to me. Unfairness is inherent to the existence of playoffs.

Seriously. This is my favorite playoff format of any sport. It's darn near perfect.

Has it really been a story before the ridiculous NL Central this year? Yes. Every single year since they started divisional playoffs, I'd assume, but certainly in the WC era. Last year there was lots of kvetching over how unfair it was for the A's or Angels to be sent to a one-game playoff, before the A's death spiraled and made it moot.

The "this specific playoff arrangement seems unfair, let's scrap the system" is one of the more tiresome of the yearly baseball stories.

A game 5 win in St. Louis might be the best thing to ever happen in sports.

Pirates are gonna win, and no AL tiebreakers and now we get two full days off before the game. Lame.

Yeah, it's not *nothing*, but the revenue from playoff games isn't huge or anything. MLB takes a ton of it.

That would be the Rangers. I was half-glancing at game cast out of the corner of my eye, and I didn't realize it until I was cheering for the single and the score changed the wrong way.

Angels have bases loaded and no out in the seventh. C'mon, guys, I want my play-in game to see who goes to the play-in game.

So if the Angels win, we get some kind of tiebreaker either way, right?

We got the run home from third with 0 outs. Everyone happy?

How sick would today be if there was only one WC?

I'm sure I'll come around by the playoffs, but as of right now this stuff has left me with zero interest in the Blackhawks.