MLB 2009 Season

[Dan Gould]

Well, here's another one to warm your heart!

A.J.'s troubles

Frankly, Dan, as well as the Yanks have been playing, the starting rotation does have me concerned once you get past CC and Pettite. In addition to Burnett's generally woeful performances of late, Chamberlain seems to be a real question mark as well (though he pitched well the other night after a rocky start). I mean, sure, that's OK if you're scoring 8-10 runs every time out...but that obviously won't be the case against top-tier teams in the playoffs.

Oh, I've been noticing A.J.'s troubles, and Chamberlain is almost completely out of sorts and has been ever since that run of three good starts out of the ASB came to an end. What's interesting to consider is this whole debate about which schedule the Yankees should choose as the highest winning percentage in the lead (I don't see how the Angels make up the gap even though they do have some games head to head): the shorter series with fewer days off that requires a fourth starter, or the longer series that could be handled with just three.

It seems to me you go with the longer series and use all four starters. Why? Because you'll be facing the top four for Detroit. You're going to see Verlander twice anyway, why would you want to see Edwin Jackson, whose ERA is lower than Verlander, twice, too? With four starters, the Tigers run out Washburn, who has been terrible since he came over from Seattle and I believe has a terrible track record against NY.

In the meantime, I am just beginning to get a tiny bit of hope - Lester has pitched great for several months now - did you know his ERA is no different from Sabathia, and in twenty fewer innings (two fewer starts) he has 25 more strikeouts and the same number of walks - and Beckett is showing signs that his stretch of ugly performances is coming to an end. Buchholz actually looks like the hype wasn't misplaced (he's got two terrible starts since the beginning of August but seven or eight excellent ones otherwise) and if he keeps it up, I am actually OK with him as the number three starter. Now if somehow or another Dice-K pitches with the same results as last year, suddenly I think there is potential here for a playoff run.

[Tim McG]

Yeah, but to get thumped like that by the [hated] Dodgers tonight?

What's going on with these guys, anyway?

The defense and the way they don't make productive outs doesn't help the fact the line up isn't good at all. The great news is the pitching has been even better than expected and going into next year they addressed the needs of the fifth starter (if Penny comes back thats Six) and a 2nd baseman.

Its mid September and the Bay Area is still taking Giants so thats a good thing.

True.

The Gigantes still hold their fate in their own hands...at least for now. And you're right: Fans are still talking baseball when for the last five years, we all started saying, "Go Niners" around this time of year.

Penny is 3-0 since joining the team; even better news if he signs next year.

Pray for a sweep of the hated Dodgers next weekend!

Edited September 13, 2009 by GoodSpeak

[Dan Gould]

Actually, Lester's ERA is now lower than Sabathia. From MLB.com:

This torrid run that Lester is on began on May 31. Over that 19-start stretch -- which has included 11 starts of one earned run or less -- Lester is 10-2 with a 2.02 ERA.

Over almost 2/3 of the season, pitching in the AL East to an ERA barely over 2. And to think, people were worried about the Verducci Effect after his innings jumped by about 70 last year including the post-season.

No two ways around it, Lester is a stud.

[Dan Gould]

The Gigantes still hold their fate in their own hands...at least for now.

Newsflash:

If you don't at this moment qualify for a playoff spot, you don't hold your fate in your own hands.

Doesn't matter how many games you have against the competition. If they win against everyone else, chances are your games against them won't matter at all. The Rockies just need to win. The Giants need help.

[Chalupa]

The Phillies swept a doubleheader from the Mets yesterday. Lidge is still provoking a white knuckled reaction from me every time he gets the ball from Cholly. Thank God the Phils had a 3 run lead in the 9th when Lidge gave up 2 runs. Pedro however looked like the 3 time Cy Young award winner yesterday blanking the Mets for 8 innings. Leading the division in mid-September is such a strange experience for a Phils fan. Doesn't happen very often.

14.

[Big Al]

Rangers lose 2 of 3 to Seattle.

{{{sigh}}}

Well, it was a fun year, more fun than usual.

[Tim McG]

The Gigantes still hold their fate in their own hands...at least for now.

Newsflash:

If you don't at this moment qualify for a playoff spot, you don't hold your fate in your own hands.

Doesn't matter how many games you have against the competition. If they win against everyone else, chances are your games against them won't matter at all. The Rockies just need to win. The Giants need help.

Giants play the Rockies for three and get the Dodgers for three more on the weekend. Currently, they are 4.5 games behind in the Wild Card. Win and there is still a chance. Lose, go home.

In short, they control their own fate, Dan.

[Dan Gould]

Win all of them, still go home because you aren't in the lead for a playoff spot.

[Tim McG]

Win all of them, still go home because you aren't in the lead for a playoff spot.

If the season ended today, sure.

Apparently, you aren't factoring the fact everybody is still playing baseball around the league. Too many variables to go counting anybody out who is close. Still 20 games left, Dan. Those six games I mentioned loom large for the Giants. 4.5 games isn't that much to pick up at this point. Rockies could go in the tank and the Dodgers pitching is running out of gas.

Rockies meet the Dodgers for the last three games of the season, too.

A lot can happen between now and October.

Edited September 14, 2009 by GoodSpeak

[Dan Gould]

I didn't say they are out of it, I said that they do not hold their fate in their hands. Its undeniable. Yes, they have a chance, and a slightly better one than the Rangers do because the Rangers don't have head to head chances with the Red Sox. But that is not the same as saying they have their fate in their hands. They do not, because there are plenty more games.

Try it this way:

If you were two games out with three to play against Colorado, then you would have your fate in your hands.

4 1/2 games out with twenty to play, only three against the team you are desperate to catch, means you do not control your destiny.

The only thing you control is whether or not you have a shot at it, or are out of it completely, after the next series. That's all. Win all three, and you have a chance to overtake them down the stretch. That's controlling your fate?

Not on this planet, not anywhere.

[Tim McG]

I didn't say they are out of it, I said that they do not hold their fate in their hands. Its undeniable. Yes, they have a chance, and a slightly better one than the Rangers do because the Rangers don't have head to head chances with the Red Sox. But that is not the same as saying they have their fate in their hands. They do not, because there are plenty more games.

Try it this way:

If you were two games out with three to play against Colorado, then you would have your fate in your hands.

4 1/2 games out with twenty to play, only three against the team you are desperate to catch, means you do not control your destiny.

The only thing you control is whether or not you have a shot at it, or are out of it completely, after the next series. That's all. Win all three, and you have a chance to overtake them down the stretch. That's controlling your fate?

Not on this planet, not anywhere.

In your opinion.

The Giants have a shot at two teams which could elevate their chances and/or decrease the WC number of GB. They have 6 games to make-up 4.5 games in the next week.

I happen to believe you have control over anything that is left to do yet...including winning games which could propel your team into the playoffs. Give up or stop winning, then you have lost your control.

That is controlling your fate, Dan.

On this and any other planet.

Edited September 14, 2009 by GoodSpeak

[Dan Gould]

OK, does anyone else think that the Giants, by common understanding of this term by baseball fans everywhere, "control their own fate" or is it understood among everyone not named Goodspeak that unless you

A. have more games against the team you are chasing than number of games you are behind

OR

B. are in the lead for a playoff spot

that you don't control your fate?

[Tim McG]

OK, does anyone else think that the Giants, by common understanding of this term by baseball fans everywhere, "control their own fate" or is it understood among everyone not named Goodspeak that unless you

A. have more games against the team you are chasing than number of games you are behind

OR

B. are in the lead for a playoff spot

that you don't control your fate?

Oh fer crissakes...is everything a competition with you, Dan?

So, the only way to "control your fate" is when you are in the lead. Nice.

Tell that to the 1964 Phillies or the 1969 Cubs or the 1978 Red Sox or the 1995 Angels or my personal favorite: The 1951 Dodgers.

And I quote:

The Dodgers rank No. 1 on this list [of MLB collapses] because no other team can combine such a profound collapse in a pennant race with a profound collapse in a deciding game. That game, of course, was made famous by Bobby Thomson's "Shot Heard Round the World", which was preceded by the Dodgers holding a 4-1 lead to start the bottom of the ninth inning. Under those circumstances the Giants could only be expected to win 1.8 percent of the time. To have come back from a 50-to-1 shot after coming back from a 400-1 shot -- and the Giants had to put the pedal to the floor to do it, going 37-7 to close out the regular season and force the playoff -- was very special.

source: Dan, you're wrong.

THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNANT!!!

And they're going CRAZY!!!!!

Yeah...that stuff never happens huh, Dan.

Edited September 15, 2009 by GoodSpeak

[Noj]

THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!!

And they're going CRAZY!!!!!

That's "pennant," Brother Goodz.

It was the perfect storm. The Giants were considered "mathematically eliminated" but went on one of the greatest stretch runs in the history of MLB. So, it was not only a Dodger collapse, but the Giants played out of their minds. The highlight clip is amazing, and the emotion in the announcer's voice is some of the best sports audio ever. I have it on an old Sports Illustrated VHS.

[Tim McG]

THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!! THE GIANTS WIN THE PENNAT!!!

And they're going CRAZY!!!!!

That's "pennant," Brother Goodz.

It was the perfect storm. The Giants were considered "mathematically eliminated" but went on one of the greatest stretch runs in the history of MLB. So, it was not only a Dodger collapse, but the Giants played out of their minds. The highlight clip is amazing, and the emotion in the announcer's voice is some of the best sports audio ever. I have it on an old Sports Illustrated VHS.

I pulled the spelling off the web, spell check didn't catch it either...thanks for the correction, Brudda Noj.

OTOH, I will suggest to you that Hiroki Kuroda pitched out of his head on Friday. Sanchez, OTOH, just plain blew it on Saturday. Penny, however, looked real good....and thanks for letting him go.

I am happy for your guys [i've always liked Joe Torre], but pissed that my guys can hit but not score runs.

Grrrr

Edited September 15, 2009 by GoodSpeak

[Dan Gould]

That's the most insane thing you've said that's not steroid-related, Goodie.

Let's see: You want to point to historic collapses and claim that the beneficiaries were somehow in charge of their fate? You have got to be kidding me.

Why don't you ask J.H. if he thought the Phillies were in charge of their fate when the Mets collapsed two years ago. They weren't. They got in because the team in front of them started losing, and losing, and losing. Iirc, in 1978 the Red Sox were six games out with eight to play. They won eight straight, the Yankees lost six of eight and the Red Sox forced a one game playoff.

THE RED SOX DID NOT CONTROL THEIR DESTINY! They got that chance because the Yankees hit a bad patch and started losing. If they had won just one more of those last eight games, Bucky Dent is a forgotten shortstop because there is no one game playoff.

I never said you were out of the running, but you are not in control of anything, as the Phillies weren't in control nor the Red Sox. That's what baseball fans mean when they talk about "in charge of your destiny". The Giants can win every game left on the schedule, and if the Rockies go 17-3, and the Dodgers go 14-6, the Rockies and Dodgers are in and the Giants stay home.

See? You aren't in charge of your fate, because even if you go 20-0, it depends on the performance of the Rockies.

Historic collapses only proves my point!

[ghost of miles]

A relatively decent start from Chamberlain tonight, and the Yanks knocked off the Angels to boot. Aren't they headed your way next, Dan?

[Dan Gould]

Yeah, with Dice-K on the hill tomorrow. If he goes six innings, two runs, four or fewer walks, I'll be ecstatic, because that can work as a number four starter in the playoffs. And fortunately, the Rangers lost badly to the A's, so an October date with the Angels looks more and more likely.

[Quincy]

It seems to me you go with the longer series and use all four starters. Why? Because you'll be facing the top four for Detroit. You're going to see Verlander twice anyway, why would you want to see Edwin Jackson, whose ERA is lower than Verlander, twice, too?

I only know this because I have him on a fantasy team, but he's had a pretty awful 2nd half. Since the All-Star Game (11 starts) hitters are hitting .290 off him, ERA & WHIP are 4.48 & 1.55. Hmm, though he has pitched fine against the Yankees in 2 games. The Tigers lost both (the last a 2-1), another where he left a scoreless game after 6 and the team lost 11-0. Maybe lately he's just in a Jack Morris phase, where he just wins baby (oops, that's Al Davis), damn the stats. I kept him on my team so I guess I'm optimistic. Up to snuff Verlander & Jackson with shots of Leyland in the dugout dying for a cigarette makes for some potentially damn good watchable baseball.

[Chalupa]

Updated: September 14, 2009, 8:27 PM ET

Yankee Stadium HR mark set

Associated Press

NEW YORK -- The Yankee Stadium record for home runs in a season has been broken with eight games to spare.

Los Angeles Angels slugger Vladimir Guerrero hit the 216th home run in 73 games at the new $1.5 billion ballpark, one more than the high set at the previous stadium in 2004.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4473926

[paul secor]

Updated: September 14, 2009, 8:27 PM ET

Yankee Stadium HR mark set

Associated Press

NEW YORK -- The Yankee Stadium record for home runs in a season has been broken with eight games to spare.

Los Angeles Angels slugger Vladimir Guerrero hit the 216th home run in 73 games at the new $1.5 billion ballpark, one more than the high set at the previous stadium in 2004.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4473926

Don't get Dan started.

[Tim McG]

That's the most insane thing you've said that's not steroid-related, Goodie.

Let's see: You want to point to historic collapses and claim that the beneficiaries were somehow in charge of their fate? You have got to be kidding me.

Why don't you ask J.H. if he thought the Phillies were in charge of their fate when the Mets collapsed two years ago. They weren't. They got in because the team in front of them started losing, and losing, and losing. Iirc, in 1978 the Red Sox were six games out with eight to play. They won eight straight, the Yankees lost six of eight and the Red Sox forced a one game playoff.

THE RED SOX DID NOT CONTROL THEIR DESTINY! They got that chance because the Yankees hit a bad patch and started losing. If they had won just one more of those last eight games, Bucky Dent is a forgotten shortstop because there is no one game playoff.

I never said you were out of the running, but you are not in control of anything, as the Phillies weren't in control nor the Red Sox. That's what baseball fans mean when they talk about "in charge of your destiny". The Giants can win every game left on the schedule, and if the Rockies go 17-3, and the Dodgers go 14-6, the Rockies and Dodgers are in and the Giants stay home.

See? You aren't in charge of your fate, because even if you go 20-0, it depends on the performance of the Rockies.

Historic collapses only proves my point!

C'mon, Dan.

You said if the Rockies go 17-3, and the Dodgers go 14-6. They could go sub .500, too. And those losses could come at the same time the Giants win. The Dodgers are the only good bet here because the Rockies away record isn't all that great.

Everything depends on the performance of the other teams regardless if your team is in the lead or not. Lose, go home. Win, there is still a chance.

Being in the lead doesn't guarantee anything.

Edited September 15, 2009 by GoodSpeak

[Dan Gould]

"Win, there is still a chance".

The only defensible thing you've said.

Let's put it in football terms, which is where the phrase is heard more often. Last weekend of the season, and there is a logjam of playoff "contenders". One team is in position where all they have to do is win: "win and they're in." That's the team in charge of their destiny. As the games run out, it ain't the Giants.

Then there are the bunch of teams that have to win, but also need the right series of other results to make it into the playoffs. That's the Giants. Not in charge of their destiny, except in a negative way: if they lose, they'll have no chance at all. If they win, they still need help.

[Tim McG]

"Win, there is still a chance".

The only defensible thing you've said.

Let's put it in football terms, which is where the phrase is heard more often. Last weekend of the season, and there is a logjam of playoff "contenders". One team is in position where all they have to do is win: "win and they're in." That's the team in charge of their destiny. As the games run out, it ain't the Giants.

Then there are the bunch of teams that have to win, but also need the right series of other results to make it into the playoffs. That's the Giants. Not in charge of their destiny, except in a negative way: if they lose, they'll have no chance at all. If they win, they still need help.

I get your point, Dan.

All I'm saying is the teams who are still in it aren't just the ones in the lead. Hence, they have control over what happens to them if they win.

The Dodgers need help, too: The Rockies have to lose games when they are or the Rockies could knock them out of first place in the NL West. And if the Dodgers or Rockies tank, the Giants could, conceivably, catch and pass either the Dodgers or the Rockies depending who is closer to them.

It ain't over yet, Dan.

[Dan Gould]

Hard not to like what Dice-K has done so far; 70 pitches or so through five shutout innings, two walks, he didn't allow a hit until the fifth when he worked around two singles and a stolen base, 2nd and 3rd 1 out, with two strikeouts. If he had done this in his second or third September start, I'd have been happy. This gives us a real hope of having four starters that can match up with any playoff team.