ClutchFans - Could the Astros have beaten the Braves this year?

Drewdog

10-05-2003, 11:02 PM

Asuming that the Stros made the playoffs.....

Would they have finally beaten the Braves this year?

The Cubs were great, but damn the Braves looked really beatable this year.

Whatcha think?

blu_monkey

10-05-2003, 11:21 PM

Lil Francis

10-05-2003, 11:27 PM

No way. Braves have the best lineup in baseball and would have torched the Astros staff. It seems like everytime the Braves lose in the playoffs its at home (97 Marlins,98 Padres,2000 Cards,2001 D'Backs,2002 Giants, 2003 Scrubs).

Rocket Fan

10-05-2003, 11:33 PM

I wish cubs fans would calm down.. you won one series..

DaDakota

10-05-2003, 11:44 PM

Yes

rezdawg

10-06-2003, 12:05 AM

We dont have Wood or Prior.

I doubt Oswalt and Miller would have been as dominant as those two. We would have lost the series.

BigM

10-06-2003, 12:08 AM

oswalt is as dominant as wood or prior and better than anyone on atlanta's staff. miller though up and down this year has top talent as well, certainly capable of shutting down the braves.

i don't know if we would have won but atlanta didn't seem to impressive.

btw, what's up with chicago fans being all over these road games. not just atlanta but anywhere they play. i hate the cubs.

Lil Francis

10-06-2003, 12:33 AM

The Braves are so use to beating up on the Astros in the playoffs that they lose focus if they have to play anyone else. Peter Gammons said the Braves will make major changes (Lopez,Sheff,Maddux,Vinny, maybe Chip and Smoltz).

oscuro

10-06-2003, 01:21 AM

i think maybe jsut maybe the stros would have been able to beat the braves it looks like the darn cubs have a good chance to go to the world series and maybe even win it:eek:

UTweezer

10-06-2003, 01:45 AM

Do the astros ever hit in the playoffs? no. and no.

DoitDickau

10-06-2003, 01:47 AM

question: If houston and oakland ever met in the playoffs, which team would choke? :(

lalala902102001

10-06-2003, 03:04 AM

The Astros had the division title all but wrapped up and they choked at the end...so what do you think that they would do against the Braves? In the past decade it seems that Atlanta has only been successful against one team in the postseason, and that was the Astros.

Surfguy

10-06-2003, 09:49 AM

We would have gotten our butts kicked yet again by the Braves because our starting pitching would have failed us royally. Also, don't forget we don't hit well under pressure. It's like Wagner says...every game is playing like it's a game seven and we all know what happens in game sevens for the astros...untimely hitting and weak pitching. Maybe the Astros should have played those important games as if they were meaningless. We would have fared better.

I am really happy for the Cubs even though I'm not really a Cubs fan. I just can't stand the Braves as their always in the playoffs and I'm glad they finally got knocked out in the first series.

IROC it

10-06-2003, 09:49 AM

Could the Oilers have won the SuperBowl if they beat the Billlls or the Broncos, Steelers, or Raiders?

My gut tells me no.

And if they could have won in the first place, maybe.

And if they had already won it all, yes.;)

It's like asking, "Could we have started a car without any fuel? I mean assuming that it was possible to run a combustion engine without any combustible fuel and all..."

My "I wish" side that is a Homer Cheerleader says, "yes."

But I live here. You know... earth? ;)

pgabriel

10-06-2003, 09:55 AM

Originally posted by Rocket Fan
I wish cubs fans would calm down.. you won one series..

This is funny coming from an Astros fan.

nWo34Life

10-06-2003, 10:56 AM

Isn't it just obvious that all the times the Astros played the Braves....just got their ass kicked. But the Cubs come in, had the will and firepower to do it, and went in and kicked ass. Kudos to the Cubs and I hope they go all the way (they definitely deserve it).

MadMax

10-06-2003, 11:17 AM

Originally posted by nWo34Life
Isn't it just obvious that all the times the Astros played the Braves....just got their ass kicked. But the Cubs come in, had the will and firepower to do it, and went in and kicked ass. Kudos to the Cubs and I hope they go all the way (they definitely deserve it).

not that's not obvious..that's revisionist history..i would agree that was the case in 97...but in 99, the astros gave that series up. that was theirs to win that year.

ArtV

10-06-2003, 11:49 AM

If they had Prior and Woods on their team then - yes. Otherwise - no.

A-Train

10-06-2003, 03:25 PM

The Braves?? Heck, I'd settle for winning 3 out of 4 against the Brewers!

Uprising

10-06-2003, 03:31 PM

well, I am still rooting for the Marlins!! Let's go fish!

king911

10-06-2003, 03:59 PM

Biggio still would have hit below .100 as our leadoff hitter, so no we would have still been under ownership from "Daddy"/the Braves.

Oswalt might have been able to help the Stros steal a game, while Miller would have either played well or horribly, so a 2nd win would have been real iffy. Redding could have played well in a Game 3, but he would have only been able to go 5.

Jimy would have managed a way to lose 1-2 games.

MadMax

10-06-2003, 04:00 PM

Originally posted by king911

Jimy would have managed a way to lose 1-2 games.

you're right...we should have kept Dierker...he rocked in the playoffs!!! :rolleyes:

rrj_gamz

10-06-2003, 04:36 PM

If we would have gotten in, yes...

We'll be there next year...

The Cubs fans need to calm down...Although, I'm glad to see Dusty doing a great job and I'm glad SF is out...I'm so sick and tired of hearing about Barry Bonds...

PhiSlammaJamma

10-06-2003, 05:04 PM

Da' Cubs have the best pitcher in baseball. They are supposed to win a 7 game series. It would have been tuffer for the Stro's. But possible. The only thng that can Stop the cubs now will be the Yankees. They have maybe the best picther ever in Clemens. And he may be able to overcome Mark Prior. Pedro could certainly out pitch Prior too, but the lack of a bull pen and any other pitcher would ultimately catch up to them in my opinion. Although they would put up a good fight. I don't underestimate good hitting, but dudn't it always seem like good pitching trumps it. So I go with pitching every time.

Lil Francis

10-06-2003, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by MadMax
you're right...we should have kept Dierker...he rocked in the playoffs!!! :rolleyes: But atleast Dirk got us there every year. The Braves are the most successful team in the past 13 years and they just had more talent than the Astros when they faced them in the playoffs.

JBIIRockets

10-06-2003, 06:16 PM

No way, Biggio and Hidalgo would've killed every rally.

king911

10-06-2003, 07:36 PM

Originally posted by MadMax
you're right...we should have kept Dierker...he rocked in the playoffs!!! :rolleyes:

Did I say we should have kept Dierker?

Jimy would have pulled out any of our starters in the 5th or 6th inning and blown out the bullpen.

rockets-#1

10-06-2003, 07:40 PM

Probably not, but at least the f'n Cubs wouldn't have made the playoffs.

Mr. Slim Citrus

10-06-2003, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by PhiSlammaJamma
Da' Cubs have the best pitcher in baseball...

When did Pedro Martinez sign with the Cubs?

RocketsPimp

10-08-2003, 02:18 PM

Man Drew, I don't know if the 'Stros could have finally gotten over that hump. I think both teams are comparable when it comes to offense, but the Cubs pitching is easily a step above the Astros rotation.

We could have possibly beaten them, but judging from past performances, doubtful.

MadMax

10-08-2003, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by Lil Francis
But atleast Dirk got us there every year. The Braves are the most successful team in the past 13 years and they just had more talent than the Astros when they faced them in the playoffs.

1. the question wasn't about getting us there...it was about winning in the playoffs

2. dirk's teams were infinitely more talented than either team Jimy's had to manage...infinitely...particularly in starting pitching.

Lil Francis

10-08-2003, 04:44 PM

Originally posted by MadMax
1. the question wasn't about getting us there...it was about winning in the playoffs

2. dirk's teams were infinitely more talented than either team Jimy's had to manage...infinitely...particularly in starting pitching. Yeah the starting pitching was much better but im not sure the offense was. IMO the Astros have the 3rd best lineup in the N.L. behind Atl, and STL. The only thing they were missing was a leadoff man and I think that hurt the RBI totals of Berkman, Bags,Hidalgo, and Kent. If we had a guy like Juan Pierre to leadoff I know we would have had 4 men drive in 100 RBIs.

MadMax

10-08-2003, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by Lil Francis
Yeah the starting pitching was much better but im not sure the offense was. IMO the Astros have the 3rd best lineup in the N.L. behind Atl, and STL. The only thing they were missing was a leadoff man and I think that hurt the RBI totals of Berkman, Bags,Hidalgo, and Kent. If we had a guy like Juan Pierre to leadoff I know we would have had 4 men drive in 100 RBIs.

1998 and 1999 were better offensive teams by far. it wasn't just a bunch of lumberjacks. there was speed and people actually hit for average throughout the lineup. remember carl everett?? how about biggio stealing 50 and hitting 50 doubles in the leadoff spot??

agreed...IF we had a better leadoff man we'd be better. and if the Texans had a better running back and a more solid offensive line, they'd have a better offense. and if michael jordan were at the 2 for the rockets, they'd be better, too. but those are all hypotheticals...which brings me back to my point...

the teams larry had to coach were infinitely more talented than either team jimy has had.

Rocket Fan

10-08-2003, 06:33 PM

pgabriel.. if the astros one one series I wouldnt want them running around with champagne... and the fans running through the streets.. just like I dont like celebrations for winning a divison.. you dont see teams in other leagues celebrating near that much.. the only team that needs to be celebrating is the world series champs

Behad

10-09-2003, 06:11 AM

Originally posted by Lil Francis
If we had a guy like Juan Pierre to leadoff I know we would have had 4 men drive in 100 RBIs.

Biggio scored 102 runs this year, Pierre scored 100.

kmbwa

10-09-2003, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by Behad
Biggio scored 102 runs this year, Pierre scored 100.

What does that mean? Hopefully, you aren't suggesting that Biggio is a better leadoff man than Pierre simply because he scored more runs.

Bags had 109 runs...maybe he should have leadoff???

Pierre would have scored 125 runs on this team.

Lil Francis

10-09-2003, 03:12 PM

bobrek

10-09-2003, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by kmbwa
What does that mean? Hopefully, you aren't suggesting that Biggio is a better leadoff man than Pierre simply because he scored more runs.

Bags had 109 runs...maybe he should have leadoff???

Pierre would have scored 125 runs on this team.

Not counting errors, Pierre was on base 260 times this year, Biggio 250. Although Pierre stole 65 bases, he was caught 20 times, so in actuality, Biggio remained on base more often than Pierre.

Biggio had 259 total bases via hits as opposed to Pierre's 249. If you add in walks and HBP, Biggio is ahead 343-305 which offsets Pierre's stolen base totals.

More than likely, with Pierre putting up his exact same stats,he would not have scored more runs than he did with the Marlins.

Behad

10-09-2003, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by bobrek
Not counting errors, Pierre was on base 260 times this year, Biggio 250. Although Pierre stole 65 bases, he was caught 20 times, so in actuality, Biggio remained on base more often than Pierre.

Biggio had 259 total bases via hits as opposed to Pierre's 249. If you add in walks and HBP, Biggio is ahead 343-305 which offsets Pierre's stolen base totals.

More than likely, with Pierre putting up his exact same stats,he would not have scored more runs than he did with the Marlins.

Thanks, bobrek, you saved me from doing the research. Amazing how people get blinded by media performance and not see the stats.

kmbwa

10-09-2003, 05:42 PM

Thanks for unblinding me with the stats. Biggio having 40 less hits, same BB's, nearly 60 less steals and 80 more K's while offsetting that by getting nailed 20 more times really helps. Biggio remains on base more because he is absolutely no threat to run or challenge the OF on a hit.

Back when the Astros had speed, they caused opposing pitchers to get distracted which helped the batters get better looks and caused fielders to rush throws, etc. That doesn't happen today at all. This team needs speed and CF is the best place to start.

Behad

10-09-2003, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by kmbwa
This team needs speed and CF is the best place to start.

I'm not disputing that in the least. All I challenged was this statement:

If we had a guy like Juan Pierre to leadoff I know we would have had 4 men drive in 100 RBIs.

bobrek showed this to be an unlikely event, given Pierre's same production in the Astros lineup.

bobrek

10-09-2003, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by kmbwa
Thanks for unblinding me with the stats. Biggio having 40 less hits, same BB's, nearly 60 less steals and 80 more K's while offsetting that by getting nailed 20 more times really helps. Biggio remains on base more because he is absolutely no threat to run or challenge the OF on a hit.

Don't forget that Biggio was HBP 27 times, Pierre 1.

Lil Francis

10-09-2003, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by bobrek
Not counting errors, Pierre was on base 260 times this year, Biggio 250. Although Pierre stole 65 bases, he was caught 20 times, so in actuality, Biggio remained on base more often than Pierre.

Biggio had 259 total bases via hits as opposed to Pierre's 249. If you add in walks and HBP, Biggio is ahead 343-305 which offsets Pierre's stolen base totals.

More than likely, with Pierre putting up his exact same stats,he would not have scored more runs than he did with the Marlins. Biggio had more homers than Pierre so thats why the total bases were in Biggio's favor but all around Pierre is a much better leadoff man. Rachel Furcal is also a better leadoff man than Biggio. More homers, steals, higher OBP% and has a better glove than Biggio in his prime.

bobrek

10-09-2003, 07:43 PM

Originally posted by Lil Francis
Biggio had more homers than Pierre so thats why the total bases were in Biggio's favor but all around Pierre is a much better leadoff man. Rachel Furcal is also a better leadoff man than Biggio. More homers, steals, higher OBP% and has a better glove than Biggio in his prime.

Based on the stats, Pierre is not that much better of a leadoff hitter than Biggio. As I wrote, Pierre was only on base 10 more times than Biggio and that was in 30 more plate appearances. Pierre 747 TPA, Biggio 717 TPA.

Incidentally, Furcal was dead last in the NL for SS fielding percentage.

Lil Francis

10-09-2003, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by bobrek
Based on the stats, Pierre is not that much better of a leadoff hitter than Biggio. As I wrote, Pierre was only on base 10 more times than Biggio and that was in 30 more plate appearances. Pierre 747 TPA, Biggio 717 TPA.

Incidentally, Furcal was dead last in the NL for SS fielding percentage. Yeah but look at how many balls Furcal gets too. I know for a fact Andruw Jones had more errors than Biggio did in centerfield but does that make him a better outfielder?? Its not even close. Furcal gets to balls most shortstops in the ML don't get to and most of his errors are because of his cannon for an arm.

loadedAballer

10-11-2003, 06:26 PM

SLA

10-11-2003, 10:07 PM

They COULD have won. Anything is possible! The Golden State Warriors could beat the Los Angeles Lakers this year.

T_in_Charlotte

10-12-2003, 04:55 AM

No....I hate to say this because I can't stand the Braves, but they know they have the Astros' number. The bad thing is, the Astros know it too, and it shows everytime they play them. Now, if only someone in the NL East would just show up in the regular season and knock the Braves off the top, then we wouldn't have to see their endless post-season chokes!