NLDS Game Thread

hbk72777

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,945
Are these 2 guys on FS1 Kids in the Hall rejects or something?
 
They make ESPN seem tolerable
 

FenwayFrenzy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
2,141
NYC
The biggest loss here is Vin Scully not calling additional playoff games via radio, and losing him as an option over Buck and Reynolds.
 

LynnRice75

a real Homer for the Sox
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,069
Oviedo, FL
If this turns into a Cardinals/Orioles World Series... it may be the first series I have not watched in my lifetime.
 

hitatater

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
306
So, between the LAAAAA Angels and the Dodgers, who were many people's picks to go to the WS, the both get bounced in the Division series, winning ONE game between them.  That's gotta be a wow, right?
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,681
Hee Sox Choi said:
It's all set up.  No Tigers, no Angels.  Nats almost gone.  Is there really a great team still left?
More importantly for St. Louis - no Red Sox.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,436
soxhop411 said:
Either the GM will be fired or Mattingly or possibly both.
 
It's a stretch because of how bad the Dodgers' bullpen is, but I wonder how many people will be likening Mattingly to Grady Little for not pulling Kershaw when he was at 100+ pitches on three days' rest with a lead.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
hitatater said:
So, between the LAAAAA Angels and the Dodgers, who were many people's picks to go to the WS, the both get bounced in the Division series, winning ONE game between them.  That's gotta be a wow, right?
But the weather's still great.
Or, maybe too great as the whole state's suffering from a drought of biblical, wrath of god proportions.
 

InsideTheParker

persists in error
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
40,371
Pioneer Valley
I wonder if Puig wasn't a very odd choice as base-runner. He as just been punished by being taken out of the line-up. Isn't he going to be scared to make a mistake on the basepaths? Is he actually a good base-runner?
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
Lowrielicious said:
Can't see it falling to the GM. That's a team that can win the WS.
The have a shitty BP and did nothing to improve it at the trade deadline. That falls on the GM IMO
 

hbk72777

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,945
SemperFidelisSox said:
Lester, Weaver, Verlander, Price, Scherzer, Kershaw. Not one win this postseason.
 
 
I wonder what their combined salary was for the year compared to the total of the winning pitchers (like most of the no name Oriole and Royal pitchers)
 

patinorange

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 27, 2006
30,685
6 miles from Angel Stadium
InsideTheParker said:
I wonder if Puig wasn't a very odd choice as base-runner. He as just been punished by being taken out of the line-up. Isn't he going to be scared to make a mistake on the basepaths? Is he actually a good base-runner?
He may be the worst base runner in the history of baseball. Fast but dumb dumb. He did cut down on the outrageous stuff this year, but I thought that was an odd choice.
 

Arroyo Con Frijoles

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,171
I actually like most of the Dodgers (including Crawford) and I really really fucking hate the Cardinals, so boooooo this result.
 
Dec 10, 2012
6,943
InsideTheParker said:
I wonder if Puig wasn't a very odd choice as base-runner. He as just been punished by being taken out of the line-up. Isn't he going to be scared to make a mistake on the basepaths? Is he actually a good base-runner?
The need to find their own version of Terrance Gore
 

Lowrielicious

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 19, 2011
4,328
soxhop411 said:
The have a shitty BP and did nothing to improve it at the trade deadline. That falls on the GM IMO
That's true. But with so many other weapons a good manager should be able to manage around that one weakness.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Kershaw's playoff numbers:
 
1-5, 51.0 ip, 45 h, 29 er, 18 bb, 58 k, 5.12 era, 1.24 whip, 10.2 k/9
 
Colored by two horrendous outings, but still.  That's not a great resume for the game's best pitcher.  
 
I'd still take him though.  :)
 

FredCDobbs

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2004
563
Austin
The St. Louis Yankees.  Got to give it up to those smug hayseeds.  
 
Now that Jeter's gone, is there anything I'm sicker of than Yadi's neck tatoo?
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
Harry Hooper said:
BTW, what was MLB's logic in deciding that plays like the missed foul ball call in Wong's last AB should not be reviewable?
 
Didn't want to respond during the game, but I think they just didn't think about that particular situation.  The rule is that fair/foul is only reviewable if it happens behind the standard first and third base umpire's position.  I think the reason for the rule is the peculiarity of the fair/foul rule and the limits of camera positioning.  The rule, of course, is that a ball that bounces in front of first or third base is fair or foul based on where it touches a player or crosses the bag.  If, however, the ball first touches the ground past the bag, it is fair or foul based on whether it is fair or foul when it first touches a player or the field.  In the first case, it's going to be very difficult to make a call using video.  The question whether the ball is over the base or not when it passes the base is really a 3D question.  Without some fancy technology like soccer goal line technology, or cameras in the sky directly above the bag (which do not exist in many ballparks), the view of the play is going to be very dependent on camera angles.  So, I think the judgment is that video is rarely if ever going to be reliable, or at least more reliable than a properly positioned umpire.  On a ball that first touches down after the bag, however, it's a much more objective question -- which side of the line did it land on.  That's one where video evidence in a non-negligible number of cases is likely to be more reliable than what the umpire saw.  So, it's appropriate for that fair/foul call.
 
So, that's the rationale for the rule.  My hunch is that these are really the only two scenarios they were thinking about when they drafted the rule.  They really weren't thinking about the question whether or not a batter is hit in the batter's box, which video can detect reliably.  The way the rule is written, though, what can you do?  Wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of modification.