2019 MLB Playoffs thread

[jncuse]

That is true for most starting pitchers because it is the only inning where one is guaranteed to be facing the top of the lineup.

This is one of the reasons the "opener" strategy that Tampa uses makes sense. Bring in a reliever who can hard for an inning to face the best batters. Then bring in the guy that will pitch more innings in the game , after those batters have cleared - less initial stress on that second pitcher.

 

[Bayside44]

This is one of the reasons the "opener" strategy that Tampa uses makes sense. Bring in a reliever who can hard for an inning to face the best batters. Then bring in the guy that will pitch more innings in the game , after those batters have cleared - less initial stress on that second pitcher.

Corbin also got the groundball to Freese that he needed, but there was an overshift that didn't make a ton of sense.

Dodgers might be going bullpen tonight. IT also could rain which would skip Hill I would think if they play tomorrow...

 

[OrangeDW]

Up 2-1, but gotta beat Scherzer or Strasburg to advance. Tough task. Need our starters to come through, and need to get to their bullpen as early as we can.

Rich Hill is a very good pitcher, but he didn’t have a ton of time to get back to speed after returning. Hope he comes through.

If it comes to a game 5, I’m in favor of Buehler getting the start.

 

[Alsacs]

Up 2-1, but gotta beat Scherzer or Strasburg to advance. Tough task. Need our starters to come through, and need to get to their bullpen as early as we can.

Rich Hill is a very good pitcher, but he didn’t have a ton of time to get back to speed after returning. Hope he comes through.

If it comes to a game 5, I’m in favor of Buehler getting the start.

Dodgers got to take a lot of pictures and force deep counts. Nationals have the best starting rotation In the NL. However their bullpen is utter trash.

They got to foul off a ton of pictures and try to get Scherzer out after 7 Innings.

 

[Forza Azzurri]

Can they beat the yankees once?

Sure...when their payrolls are in the same zip code...then, if they still can't win, you will have every right to say they are pathetic...

 

[Briancuse]

Sure...when their payrolls are in the same zip code...then, if they still can't win, you will have every right to say they are pathetic...

Look at the Ray's their payroll is lower than the twins and at least they are competing against a much better team They.beat the daylights out of the stros today.

 

[jncuse]

Sure...when their payrolls are in the same zip code...then, if they still can't win, you will have every right to say they are pathetic...

It's really only the Twins and A's that can't get over the hump in countless tries since 2000 (although that does not make either franchise pathetic.. But I will compromise and say their playoff performance is really bad).

Many other low payroll or mid payroll teams have found ways to advance in recent years. The playoffs for the most part have not been predictable.

1. The Royals have made the World Series twice in the past 5 years.
2. The Indians made it 3 years ago.
3. And even 11 years ago the Tampa Bay Rays made the world series

And in that time frame the Yankees have only made it once, and that was all the way back in 2009.

4. And from the NL, while not lower payroll, the San Francisco Giants were not a great team and somehow won 3 world series this decade. Even the Cardinals have won 2 world series with bad teams.

I guess my point is that the playoffs are typically fairly randon, although the best teams over time will of course do a bit better. All the lower or mid-tier teams have found a way to have success at times.

The one potential counter-point is that these playoffs have more "super" teams in recent years - 2016 Cubs and in the last 3 years the Red Sox, Yanks, Astros, Dodgers. (More teams winning 100 getting in now) So that could be a fair counter as to why the playoffs have been more predictable in recent years.

 

[OrangeDW]

It's really only the Twins and A's that can't get over the hump in countless tries since 2000 (although that does not make either franchise pathetic.. But I will compromise and say their playoff performance is really bad).

Many other low payroll or mid payroll teams have found ways to advance in recent years. The playoffs for the most part have not been predictable.

1. The Royals have made the World Series twice in the past 5 years.
2. The Indians made it 3 years ago.
3. And even 11 years ago the Tampa Bay Rays made the world series

And in that time frame the Yankees have only made it once, and that was all the way back in 2009.

4. And from the NL, while not lower payroll, the San Francisco Giants were not a great team and somehow won 3 world series this decade. Even the Cardinals have won 2 world series with bad teams.

I guess my point is that the playoffs are typically fairly randon, although the best teams over time will of course do a bit better. All the lower or mid-tier teams have found a way to have success at times.

The one potential counter-point is that these playoffs have more "super" teams in recent years - 2016 Cubs and in the last 3 years the Red Sox, Yanks, Astros, Dodgers. (More teams winning 100 getting in now) So that could be a fair counter as to why the playoffs have been more predictable in recent years.

As a Dodgers fan, those SF Giants titles were like UConn’s Kemba and Napier titles. They weren’t even that good. Just horrible stuff.

 

[Alsacs]

As a Dodgers fan, those SF Giants titles were like UConn’s Kemba and Napier titles. They weren’t even that good. Just horrible stuff.

San Francisco got lucky their AL opponent.
Texas, Detroit, Kansas City.
They never drew an AL power.

 

[OrangeDW]

San Francisco got lucky their AL opponent.
Texas, Detroit, Kansas City.
They never drew an AL power.

Sounds like UConn getting Butler, Georgia Tech, and a weak Kentucky team.

 

[Alsacs]

Braves manager should have left Tomlin in.
Managers following those analytics/binders cost the Braves that game.

 

[Day2]

Braves manager should have left Tomlin in.
Managers following those analytics/binders cost the Braves that game.

I think that’s a stretch. It’s not like Tomlin is some world beater. Could have just as easily given up the double to Goldy, who had three extra base hits today.

 

[Alsacs]

I think that’s a stretch. It’s not like Tomlin is some world beater. Could have just as easily given up the double to Goldy, who had three extra base hits today.

Tomlin was locked in.
4 outs on 10 pitches.
I don’t take the guy out there. These managers are robots now they do whatever the book says.

Not taking anything away from the Cardinals. I had no skin in that I am just saying the Braves manager over managed there. Also Greene got lit up in game 1 from that part of the order.
Tomlin should have stayed in till he gave up a base runner.

 

[Day2]

Tomlin was locked in.
4 outs on 10 pitches.
I don’t take the guy out there. These managers are robots now they do whatever the book says.

Not taking anything away from the Cardinals. I had no skin in that I am just saying the Braves manager over managed there. Also Greene got lit up in game 1 from that part of the order.
Tomlin should have stayed in till he gave up a base runner.

Greene pitched a scoreless inning in Game 1. He did give up a double to Ozuna.

 

[MSOrange]

What really screwed up the Braves was having Chris Martin get hurt. We'd set up a pretty good 7th 8th 9th rotation with Martin, Greene and Melancon. But injuries are part of the game. My initial impulse was to leave Tomlin in the game. He's been a starter most of his career so he's used to getting lefties and righties out and seemed to be on a roll. Just a tough break off the tip of Freeman's glove. What really hurt the Braves was going 0-9 with guys in scoring position. So many missed chances in the 6th 7th and 9th

 

[Briancuse]

The twins doing what they do best choking against the yankees.

 

[cuseattle]

Like a dog with a bone.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

given his historic regular season dominance, is it fair to say clayton kershaw is the most unclutch pitcher in history?

He's no Jack Morris

 

[jncuse]

Power goes way up in mid 30's (even relative to the ball)
Neck size growing.
Raging on the bench out of control at times.

Is it totally unreasonable to ask questions about Gardner?

 

[Alsacs]

Twins are the Washington Generals to the Yankees.
I don’t think they will ever be able to beat them unless they get another Johan Santana type of pitcher.
I think in 2004 Santana beat them in game 1.
Twins are good team but they just can’t beat the Yankees.

Houston better be careful today. Verlander isn’t a guy I would start on 3 days rest.
Nats-Dodgers is going to be a pitcher’s duel. Strasburg vs. Buehler,

Braves-Cardinals is a coin flip. The Cardinals have the slight edge just because of their pitcher.

 

[Newhouser]

What really screwed up the Braves was having Chris Martin get hurt. We'd set up a pretty good 7th 8th 9th rotation with Martin, Greene and Melancon. But injuries are part of the game. My initial impulse was to leave Tomlin in the game. He's been a starter most of his career so he's used to getting lefties and righties out and seemed to be on a roll. Just a tough break off the tip of Freeman's glove. What really hurt the Braves was going 0-9 with guys in scoring position. So many missed chances in the 6th 7th and 9th

The fact that Mark Melancon was so missed speaks volumes about the Braves pen. That said the Braves had their chances but somehow it seems just that it is going to Game 5. Two evenly matched teams.

 

[Chip]

It's really only the Twins and A's that can't get over the hump in countless tries since 2000 (although that does not make either franchise pathetic.. But I will compromise and say their playoff performance is really bad).

Many other low payroll or mid payroll teams have found ways to advance in recent years. The playoffs for the most part have not been predictable.

1. The Royals have made the World Series twice in the past 5 years.
2. The Indians made it 3 years ago.
3. And even 11 years ago the Tampa Bay Rays made the world series

And in that time frame the Yankees have only made it once, and that was all the way back in 2009.

4. And from the NL, while not lower payroll, the San Francisco Giants were not a great team and somehow won 3 world series this decade. Even the Cardinals have won 2 world series with bad teams.

I guess my point is that the playoffs are typically fairly randon, although the best teams over time will of course do a bit better. All the lower or mid-tier teams have found a way to have success at times.

The one potential counter-point is that these playoffs have more "super" teams in recent years - 2016 Cubs and in the last 3 years the Red Sox, Yanks, Astros, Dodgers. (More teams winning 100 getting in now) So that could be a fair counter as to why the playoffs have been more predictable in recent years.

Which is evidence of why payroll isn't as big a factor. The luxury tax helped even the playing field.

The problem the small market teams have now is when teams like the Yankees don't go after Harper or Machado because they're getting under the biggest luxury tax thresholds. Also goes to show that the big time free agents don't necessarily make for the better team.

Yankees aren't where they are today because their payroll is high. You want to say it's because of extra resources for scouting/analytics, etc., then fine. But you can't say it's the $200M payroll. $50M of that was dead weight this year (Stanton & Ellsbury).

 

[Chip]

 

[OrangeDW]

Which is evidence of why payroll isn't as big a factor. The luxury tax helped even the playing field.

The problem the small market teams have now is when teams like the Yankees don't go after Harper or Machado because they're getting under the biggest luxury tax thresholds. Also goes to show that the big time free agents don't necessarily make for the better team.

Yankees aren't where they are today because their payroll is high. You want to say it's because of extra resources for scouting/analytics, etc., then fine. But you can't say it's the $200M payroll. $50M of that was dead weight this year (Stanton & Ellsbury).

Yup. You don’t really see good teams put together through high priced FA’s. Pretty much the entire Dodgers core is either homegrown players or guys who had been around the league but did little, until blossoming in LA. The payroll is high largely from keeping their own guys - which is an enormous advantage of having money.

 

[Chip]

Yup. You don’t really see good teams put together through high priced FA’s. Pretty much the entire Dodgers core is either homegrown players or guys who had been around the league but did little, until blossoming in LA. The payroll is high largely from keeping their own guys - which is an enormous advantage of having money.

Which was the Yankee model that worked so well in the 90s. Strategic trades, signings and developing drafted players. Then they got away from it starting with Giambi. Once you start down that rabbit hole...