10/8 MLB LDS Game Thread

SemperFidelisSox

suzyn
SoSH Member
May 25, 2008
21,289
Boston, MA
Yeah, fans may not like them, and they were rightfully punished, but you have to respect what the Astros are doing. No Verlander, no Cole, no Hinch, and they’re back in the ALCS.
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
46,100
New York City
Yeah, fans may not like them, and they were rightfully punished, but you have to respect what the Astros are doing. No Verlander, no Cole, no Hinch, and they’re back in the ALCS.
I respect NOTHING. Because if they win the 2020 World Series, in this ridiculous year, after getting caught blatantly cheating, it is officially proof we're in a simulation.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
66,386
Oregon
Imagine the frustration of seeing a team punished for breaking the rules keep winning titles.

What is this ... the NFL?
 

terrynever

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2005
17,960
pawtucket
Higgy made this game a lot easier to watch. And Gary was seen smiling on the bench. Win, win.

Oops. Wrong thread!
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
66,386
Oregon
wrong thread

but if i were to say some, it would be that Braves, Dodgers, Astros, Yankees would be exceptionally boring
 

Brand Name

make hers mark
Staff member
Dope
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 6, 2010
3,327
The Land of Thomas Cecil
If the Dodgers win the NLCS, funny pattern in the specific order of last three NL teams eliminated: Marlins, Padres, Braves.

Why so? Well, what about the NL pennant winners from 1997-1999? Marlins, Padres, Braves.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The Rays won. I like that.

But, damn, they've got to de-juice the fucking baseball. This home run or nothing approach by the batters and strikeout or nothing approach by the pitchers sucks to watch compared to a more balanced baseball game.

I've watched a half dozen playoff games and in just about every one there's been a ball hit that carried out of the park that shocked the announcers. The ball's juiced. Get your head out of your ass, Rob Manfred and return a semblance of balance to the game.
 

jaytftwofive

lurker
Jan 20, 2013
647
Drexel Hill Pa.
Well a good thing happened. YANKEES LOSE....YANKEES LOSE....THEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEYANKEES LOSE!!!!!!!!!!
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
14,124
No game thread today was weird, but you can’t argue with results. Happy YED (almost) everyone!
 

Ale Xander

Lacks black ink
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
33,264
No game thread today was weird, but you can’t argue with results. Happy YED (almost) everyone!
No other games today. Already a game thread for this game. terrynever and jon abbey are very classy for allowing us in there. Wingack and Pride and Coup and Brand Name are good people, too.
 
I've watched a half dozen playoff games and in just about every one there's been a ball hit that carried out of the park that shocked the announcers. The ball's juiced. Get your head out of your ass, Rob Manfred and return a semblance of balance to the game.
Not that I necessarily disagree with your overall premise, but how many of the playoff games so far were commentated on by announcers not physically in the ballpark? I know ESPN was using a lot of remote commentators during the first round, and there's really no way to judge how hard a ball is hit and whether or not it's going to leave the park when you're not there in person to hear the bat crack and follow the trajectory. Certainly, you'd much rather sound surprised by a ball leaving the yard than the other way around - making a shallow fly to right sound like a homer off the bat. (I'm due to call my first remote baseball games at the Olympics in Tokyo, and this absolutely frightens the heck out of me.)
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
25,661
Hingham, MA
Not that I necessarily disagree with your overall premise, but how many of the playoff games so far were commentated on by announcers not physically in the ballpark? I know ESPN was using a lot of remote commentators during the first round, and there's really no way to judge how hard a ball is hit and whether or not it's going to leave the park when you're not there in person to hear the bat crack and follow the trajectory. Certainly, you'd much rather sound surprised by a ball leaving the yard than the other way around - making a shallow fly to right sound like a homer off the bat. (I'm due to call my first remote baseball games at the Olympics in Tokyo, and this absolutely frightens the heck out of me.)
Just listen to some old Jerry Trupiano audio, you'll be fine
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
27,574
It all worked out for Brosseau in his battle vs. Chapman, but I can't believe he took the first pitch of the AB. Also, the 9th pitch by Chapman was just plain nasty, and Brosseau fouled it back to get to the fateful pitch #10.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Not that I necessarily disagree with your overall premise, but how many of the playoff games so far were commentated on by announcers not physically in the ballpark? I know ESPN was using a lot of remote commentators during the first round, and there's really no way to judge how hard a ball is hit and whether or not it's going to leave the park when you're not there in person to hear the bat crack and follow the trajectory. Certainly, you'd much rather sound surprised by a ball leaving the yard than the other way around - making a shallow fly to right sound like a homer off the bat. (I'm due to call my first remote baseball games at the Olympics in Tokyo, and this absolutely frightens the heck out of me.)
I don't know. I guess I thought most of them were in the park but I'm not sure.

But the phenomenon of being stunned that a less than optimal swing and imperfect contact resulted in a ball leaving the park has gone from exceptional to commonplace. The game has become unbalanced to the point that it's less entertaining to watch. Last night's Rays-yankees game was a good game to watch. But I think that's largely because it was a close game and the deciding game of a series. The typical midseason game of hitters trying to homer and pitchers trying to K them is not compelling.

This style of baseball with almost every batter try to jack the ball out of the park and every pitcher trying to K every hitter is boring. And it's all made possible the juiced ball with, IIRC, also low seams that they're using. It's the direct result of the ball. When even the weaker hitters can jack the ball out to the opposite field and teams will hit 250-300 homers, hitters would be dumb not to try for that jackpot. And with it being so relatively easy to do so, pitchers would be stupid to rely on letting the hitters put the ball in play. Everything's based on the ball they're using, the same one that when they finally had the minor leagues use the same baseball a couple years ago, the frequency of homers in the minors exploded. 23 out of 30 teams in MLB hit 200 homers in 2019 including 2, the Twins and yankees, that hit over 300. They've warped the game by putting a juiced, low seam ball into play.
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,774
Pioneer Valley
This style of baseball with almost every batter try to jack the ball out of the park and every pitcher trying to K every hitter is boring.
The really stupid part is that no one takes advantage of the extreme shifts by bunting for hits. I won't be able to list the examples, but I noticed this failure time and again in this series.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The really stupid part is that no one takes advantage of the extreme shifts by bunting for hits. I won't be able to list the examples, but I noticed this failure time and again in this series.
Yes.

And, I'll blather some more. To me, the most interesting games in any sport are when two organizations with different conceptions of how to play clash. In baseball, those 1980's Cardinal teams playing the Mets of that era. The early 2000's moneyball Red Sox against the "productive out" Angels of that time. The 1990 Giants against the 1990 Bills. The spread the wealth across the roster, outdoor team Patriots against the pay for Peyton and his weapons dome Colts. Etc etc etc.

But when the ball is juiced, there's pretty much only one way to play. There's no significant difference in offensive philosophy between any two teams. And why should there be? You'd be stupid to be sacrificing and moving guys over if your team is likely to hit 240 homers. You'd be stupid to be focused on stealing bases when your team is going to hit 240 homers. You'd be stupid to not make 4 - 5 pitching changes a game when the average opponent you face is going to hit 240 homers and take your starter deep if you let him face their batters a third time.

Rob Manfred and his juiced ball have funneled all the possible strategies down into one option. Duel of the launch angles! Appointment viewing!
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
52,034
Rob Manfred and his juiced ball have funneled all the possible strategies down into one option. Duel of the launch angles! Appointment viewing!
I think it's a chicken and egg thing to an extent, most of these pitchers are too good to string together three runners against, homers are the only way teams can score against them. Look at Verlander last year or Cole this year, most of the runs they allowed were on homers. You can say that this is because everyone just goes for homers now, but they do that in large part because elite pitchers are that good.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
14,124
Yes.

And, I'll blather some more. To me, the most interesting games in any sport are when two organizations with different conceptions of how to play clash. In baseball, those 1980's Cardinal teams playing the Mets of that era. The early 2000's moneyball Red Sox against the "productive out" Angels of that time. The 1990 Giants against the 1990 Bills. The spread the wealth across the roster, outdoor team Patriots against the pay for Peyton and his weapons dome Colts. Etc etc etc.

But when the ball is juiced, there's pretty much only one way to play. There's no significant difference in offensive philosophy between any two teams. And why should there be? You'd be stupid to be sacrificing and moving guys over if your team is likely to hit 240 homers. You'd be stupid to be focused on stealing bases when your team is going to hit 240 homers. You'd be stupid to not make 4 - 5 pitching changes a game when the average opponent you face is going to hit 240 homers and take your starter deep if you let him face their batters a third time.

Rob Manfred and his juiced ball have funneled all the possible strategies down into one option. Duel of the launch angles! Appointment viewing!
It’s now a game of the Three Boring Outcomes, the three plays where no one on the field ever runs or even hurries.
It’s like they said we need to turn baseball into slo-pitch softball, but replace all groundouts and pop outs with strikeouts.
Fun!

if I had the least bit of confidence in Manfred or Tony Clark, I’d hope that they understood this issue and were working on solutions, but I highly doubt that either understands or cares.

A less lively ball would help a lot. I think, counterintuitively, that a bigger strike zone would help too, because hitters would have to adjust to that to try to put the ball in play more often. And I think robot umps would naturally call a wider strike zone, so that could lead to improvement beyond just getting those calls right.
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,774
Pioneer Valley
Hitters are ahead of the pitchers this early in the season
My impression is that the Rays won with better relief pitching. Not that the Brousseau (sp?) HR wasn't key, but they way that Chapman pitched, and the way that Sanchez received the ball in that inning were even more important. (I missed one of the games owing to a power outage, but that is the way I saw the others.)