Astros can win the Wild Card with this team but ...

[Luckyazn]

can not beat St. Louis.

Do you think Drayton will be satisfy enough just to see this team back in the playoff? without adding more salaries. (probably)

I like this team dont get me wrong but, I still think we need another bat (Dunn) to give us a better chance at beating St. Louis and in the WS(if we get there). I mean, are we just playing for the Wildcard or trying to win the whole thing. Since, this could be Clemens last year and we have the pitching staffs I think we should try to make a run at it (like with Beltran last yr). We are only 2 games back in the wild card as oppose to last year when we were like 6-7 game back at this time.

If Hunsicker was still the GM he would know what to do to get us over the top but with Purpura I dunno, I still thnk Hun was our biggest lost this offseason.

PS: Can you imagine if Biggio stayed at being out catch then we wont have to worry about Asumus or Chaves batting. Our line up would probably be better too. (was it his throwing arm that prevented him from being a catch?)

[MadMax]

biggio would already be retired if he had caught all those years.

i don't see any reason we absolutely CAN'T beat the Cards in a playoff series. no matter who we get, the Cards will be the favorite in every series they enter this postseason ASSUMING THEY STAY/GET HEALTHY. but with our pitching, i'll take my chances.

[koochingchang]

PS: Can you imagine if Biggio stayed at being out catch then we wont have to worry about Asumus or Chaves batting. Our line up would probably be better too. (was it his throwing arm that prevented him from being a catch?)

biggio became a 2nd baseman bc there was already a catcher for the astros when he came up i believe. i dont think it was bc of his abilities or anything...

[junglerules]

Actually, I'm pretty certain that Biggio was removed from being a catcher to help protect his knees. Biggio was known for having a lot of speed for a catcher, and to keep him back there would likely cause that speed to be ultimately neutralized and eliminated by the physical toll of catching.

That's my assumption, anyway. It definitely wasn't a talent thing as evidenced by his all-star appearances as a catcher and a 2B.

[Xerobull]

I agree that we can beat anyone with our pitching (healthy). Pitching and defense always wins in a series.

[Major]

can not beat St. Louis.

Do you think Drayton will be satisfy enough just to see this team back in the playoff? without adding more salaries. (probably)


Why not? This St. Louis team is not the juggernaut offense of last year. Rolen & Walker are now hurt and have both been terrible all season. Reggie Sanders is now hurt until September, at the earliest. Renteria & Matheny are gone. Their lineup this year includes some pretty mediocre players.

Pujols and Edmonds have a combined 43 HR's. No one else in their active lineup has more than 5. (Walker has 11 and Sanders has 18). Whether Sanders, Rolen and Walker can contribute anything substantial the rest of the year is in question - Sanders probably will, but Rolen and Walker may be injured the whole time.

[bobrek]

can not beat St. Louis.

Do you think Drayton will be satisfy enough just to see this team back in the playoff? without adding more salaries. (probably)

I like this team dont get me wrong but, I still think we need another bat (Dunn) to give us a better chance at beating St. Louis and in the WS(if we get there). I mean, are we just playing for the Wildcard or trying to win the whole thing. Since, this could be Clemens last year and we have the pitching staffs I think we should try to make a run at it (like with Beltran last yr). We are only 2 games back in the wild card as oppose to last year when we were like 6-7 game back at this time.

If Hunsicker was still the GM he would know what to do to get us over the top but with Purpura I dunno, I still thnk Hun was our biggest lost this offseason.

PS: Can you imagine if Biggio stayed at being out catch then we wont have to worry about Asumus or Chaves batting. Our line up would probably be better too. (was it his throwing arm that prevented him from being a catch?)


Hunsicker was here last year and that did not get the Astros "over the top". Hunsicker was here in 1998 when the Astros had arguably the best team in the majors (especialoly with the addition of Johnson) and that did not get them "over the top". If Hunsicker truly left due to a power play in which he did not want to sign Biggio, then if Hunsiker won that power play, Biggio may not even be around.

If Biggio had stayed at catcher, he would have been out of baseball a few years ago.

[msn]

biggio became a 2nd baseman bc there was already a catcher for the astros when he came up i believe. i dont think it was bc of his abilities or anything...
Not at all. Biggio was the successor to the great Alan Ashby. In fact, Ash spent most of '89 on the bench while Bidge started. For a catcher, he had great speed and a really good bat. The Astros wanted that great speed and solid bat to be around for a long time, so they began grooming him for the outfield. His noodle arm didn't help matters any, so they shifted their focus to 2B. After 3 and a half seasons at catcher with 60 or so games in the OF during that span, Biggio start Spring Training of '92 at 2B and never looked back.

[Puedlfor]

I believe Craig Biggio is the only player in MLB history to go from full-time catcher to full-time 2B, much less All-Star at both.

[redgoose]

I guess i'll be the one to point out what the Stro's lost.

3 All Stars. :(

Jeff kent, Jeff Bagwell, and Carlos Beltran. We at least gained Pettite back, but the Cards neutrilized that by adding Mark Mulder.

The only way we beat them is by superior pitching, that won't be as easy as it used to be with Morris being considered their #3 pitcher, when he used to be their #1. Carpenter is a stud and Mulder is no slouch.

They can out slug us plain and simple. It's just a matter of if our pitchers are red freakin hot and we get out of the 1st round with our rotation in set.

[Major]

I guess i'll be the one to point out what the Stro's lost.

3 All Stars. :(

Jeff kent, Jeff Bagwell, and Carlos Beltran. We at least gained Pettite back, but the Cards neutrilized that by adding Mark Mulder.

The only way we beat them is by superior pitching, that won't be as easy as it used to be with Morris being considered their #3 pitcher, when he used to be their #1. Carpenter is a stud and Mulder is no slouch.


Bagwell was not an all-star. St. Louis lost a pair of allstars too (Rolen, Renteria), along with Walker, Matheny, and possibly Sanders. Here's the STL lineup from last night:

Eckstein
Nunez
Pujols
Edmonds
Gall
Grudzielanek
Taguchi
Diaz
Pitcher

This is not last year's Womack/Renteria/Pujols/Edmonds/Walker/Sanders lineup. There are exactly two good players in that lineup.

[AzCkR]

I also used to think there was no way we could beat the Cardinals in a 7 game series, but with their recent injury problems I could see us beating them if we're playing like we are now. There pitching is much better this year, Mulder hasn't played as well as has in the past, but Carpenter has really stepped up. However, their offensive is nowhere near what it was last season. Rolen has battled injuries all year, Walker just went on the DL, and Sanders is going to be out for awhile. More than likely they'll all be back by seasons end, but if they're not at full strength we could really give them a run for their money. Don't forget though we'll likely have to face the Braves in the first round if we win the Wild Card and they're no pushover.

[Harrisment]

Bagwell was not an all-star. St. Louis lost a pair of allstars too (Rolen, Renteria), along with Walker, Matheny, and possibly Sanders. Here's the STL lineup from last night:

Eckstein
Nunez
Pujols
Edmonds
Gall
Grudzielanek
Taguchi
Diaz
Pitcher

This is not last year's Womack/Renteria/Pujols/Edmonds/Walker/Sanders lineup. There are exactly two good players in that lineup.


You are saying this like Rolen and Walker won't be available for the playoffs. They're not expected to be healthy by then? :confused:

[white lightning]

I'm not sure that we'd be much of an underdog against them. Obviously our starters and closer can dominate. Our offense is coming around. Let's see how we're playing at the end of the year, but it's way to premature to say we can't beat them. (Of course we have to get there first, knock wood).

[Major]

You are saying this like Rolen and Walker won't be available for the playoffs. They're not expected to be healthy by then? :confused:

Rolen is questionable - his surgery did not go well, and what he has played his year (pre and post injury), he's been a 0.230 hitter with no power. Walker has had chronic back pain all season long and contemplated retiring earlier in the season. Now he has a herniated disc, and he's had a down year (for him, of course) when healthy. Sanders has more of a freak injury (broken bone?) and should heal up just fine, I would think.

LaRussa was interviewed a few days ago and said he was hoping Rolen and Sanders would be back in September, but it wasn't guaranteed. Walker's injury happened after that, so he didn't discuss him. But if I'm STL, I'm not counting on Rolen or Walker, and certainly not for them to be difference makers.

Last year, Pujols, Edmonds, and Rolen all had 1.000 OPSes - only Pujols is at that level this year. Walker was close, and they had a tablesetter in Renteria. The majority of that lineup is in shambles right now. (Their catcher is worse than Ausmus, for example). Last year was one of those magical years for all their hitters - this year, they are certainly a good offense, but nothing like last year.


My main comparison is that their

[redgoose]

You are saying this like Rolen and Walker won't be available for the playoffs. They're not expected to be healthy by then? :confused:

That's the point i didn't think needed mentioning.

Yes, Sanders is out with a broken leg, not really one of the guys our pitchers were fearing. ;)

Walker and Rolen are just on the 15 day DL. If one was real serious you'd probably at least of heard of one rumor about the Card's trying to pick up a bat.

[redgoose]

I thought Walker just had a neck sprain. But i guess that could easily be related to the back.

As for Rolen's shoulder, maybe you know more than me. I thought it would be near full strength by the end of the year and he could opt out of a surgery if neccessary untill then w/o affecting his performance.

At least Sanders shouldn't be much of a running threat coming of a broken leg. ;)

[Major]

I thought Walker just had a neck sprain. But i guess that could easily be related to the back.

He's on the DL with a herniated disc in his neck. He's had it for two months but was trying to play through it.


As for Rolen's shoulder, maybe you know more than me. I thought it would be near full strength by the end of the year and he could opt out of a surgery if neccessary untill then w/o affecting his performance.

Rolen started the season sucking, had surgery, went on the DL for much of the first half, came back and something wasn't right. That's why he dropped out of the All-Star game to rest it and then he tried to play to start the 2nd half and was in too much pain and went back on the DL. He was expected to be healthy but something is wrong and they are hoping more rest will help. LaRussa said they are hoping he'll be back by September, but that it was questionable.

[Svpernaut]

Beating the Cardinals all comes down to our pitching staffs... it has been feast or famine against them this year, and the same goes for them. The days our pitchers are on their A-Games we win, the days theirs are, they win. They have a more explosive offense, but that doesn't mean jack if Oswalt, Clemens and Pettitte have their stuff. I'd love to face them again and get a little redeption.

[TheFreak]

The inferior St. Louis lineup is somehow 63-37. The Astros are not as bad as they were early on, but they're probably not as good as they've played since then either. The bottom line is they can't win in St. Louis and 4 of the 7 games would be there.

[Major]

The inferior St. Louis lineup is somehow 63-37. The Astros are not as bad as they were early on, but they're probably not as good as they've played since then either. The bottom line is they can't win in St. Louis and 4 of the 7 games would be there.

First of all, the argument wasn't that St. Louis has an inferior lineup - it's that it it nothing like last year. Last year, they scored 5.3 runs a game - this year, 5.0 Second, their record is also due to the fact that they have the best ERA in all of baseball. They are a great team, but not as good as last year. And while you may not be willing to admit it and just say we're playing over our heads, we're pretty damn good too.

As far as not winning in St Louis, did the Rockets inability to beat San Antonio in '95 just have you write off the Rockets? Those kinds of "trends" are just silly. This year, we've lost 6 games in St Louis, three of which were by 1 run, another by 2 runs, and the remaining two by 3 runs. I don't think this team has any doubt they can win in St. Louis - they just haven't done so yet. Our team has a far better home record than StL so if we can win our home games, all it takes is ONE game on the road. You really believe this team is incapable of going 1-3 vs. StL on the road?

As for the St. Louis record, here it is:

April: 15-7
May: 18-11
June: 16-11
July: 14-8

Here's our record:

April: 9-13
May: 10-19
June: 16-9
July: 19-6

We've played better than St. Louis for 2 full months now. Why people continue to think that's a fluke is beyond me.

[pariah]

I agree that we can beat anyone with our pitching (healthy). Pitching and defense always wins in a series.

that theory is definitely put to the test with Pujols batting four times a game. You can't stop him, you can only hope to contain him. :(

not to mention, edmonds, rolen, or that little b@stard catcher that hits a home run every 200 (?) at bats unless it's a game winning opportunity against the stros.

I'll take a deal that puts Manny(wishful, but WS champs if we did it) or Helton , or to a slightly lesser extent, Dunn or Ibanez, in a Stros uni. Hun could make the deals and Purp hopefully can too.

if we don't do a deal for a bat - we have Pettitte this year - and that's HUGE.

Do it!!!

[DaDakota]

These games against the Mets will tell a lot, can we win against a good team when we have our lessor pitchers on the mound?


As for St. Louis, I disagree, we can beat them....heck, we almost beat them last year without Pettite.

GO STROS !!

DD

[MadMax]

These games against the Mets will tell a lot, can we win against a good team when we have our lessor pitchers on the mound?


As for St. Louis, I disagree, we can beat them....heck, we almost beat them last year without Pettite.

GO STROS !!

DD

LOOK AT YOU!!!! My boy's all grows up!!!! :) All optimistic and crap!!!

[Groogrux]

These games against the Mets will tell a lot, can we win against a good team when we have our lessor pitchers on the mound?

For Wandy's start, I agree. For Astacio's start, I do not.

[apostolic3]

If the Stros have a magical year, avoid major injuries, and our 3 aces continue to pitch lights out, we can beat anyone. It's that simple. The 3 games in St. Louis didn't discourage me at all; they proved we can play with them. If we meet the Cards in the playoffs and our pitchers are on, the games will be close and clutch hitting will make the difference.

There are a lot of ifs. The Cards are better than us but we could beat them in a 7 game series with timely hitting. If we trade for a bat, that would help our chances. The NL is wide open this year because the Cards' lineup isn't nearly as good.

[ROXRAN]

As for the St. Louis record, here it is:

April: 15-7
May: 18-11
June: 16-11
July: 14-8

Here's our record:

April: 9-13
May: 10-19
June: 16-9
July: 19-6

We've played better than St. Louis for 2 full months now. Why people continue to think that's a fluke is beyond me.

Very nice! :cool:

[what]

As for the St. Louis record, here it is:

April: 15-7
May: 18-11
June: 16-11
July: 14-8

Here's our record:

April: 9-13
May: 10-19
June: 16-9
July: 19-6

We've played better than St. Louis for 2 full months now. Why people continue to think that's a fluke is beyond me.

Three of those losses in July were to St. Louis, in rout to a series sweep and we've lost like the last nine games against st. louis in st. louis, and we are a terrible road team, etc.

[Groogrux]

Three of those losses in July were to St. Louis, in rout to a series sweep and we've lost like the last nine games against st. louis in st. louis, and we are a terrible road team, etc.

We're 18-11 in our last 29 road games. Two of the St. Louis games after the All-Star game could've just as easily been Astros wins. It's not like we lost 11-0 each game.

[Major]

Three of those losses in July were to St. Louis, in rout to a series sweep and we've lost like the last nine games against st. louis in st. louis, and we are a terrible road team, etc.

This might be a little (or a lot) out there, but with St. Louis struggling right now (3-5 in their last 8 with the decimated lineup).. if we can get to within 4 games or so by September - we're 9.5 out now and have made up 4 games in the last 10 days) .... we have 5 games left against them in September. The division could be stolen.

It would take a mini-miracle, but who would have expected us to be near the wild card lead in July?

[MadMax]

This might be a little (or a lot) out there, but with St. Louis struggling right now (3-5 in their last 8 with the decimated lineup).. if we can get to within 4 games or so by September - we're 9.5 out now and have made up 4 games in the last 10 days) .... we have 5 games left against them in September. The division could be stolen.

It would take a mini-miracle, but who would have expected us to be near the wild card lead in July?

man, i'm psyched!!! get your butt to Houston so we can go to a game together!!!

[Major]

man, i'm psyched!!! get your butt to Houston so we can go to a game together!!!

I need to do that! Scheduling has been a pain in the ass with a bunch of stuff going on here, but I'm definitely planning on it some time! I'll be in town the weekend of Aug. 13th ... perhaps I skip RM95's wedding and just go to the game. :)

[MadMax]

I need to do that! Scheduling has been a pain in the ass with a bunch of stuff going on here, but I'm definitely planning on it some time! I'll be in town the weekend of Aug. 13th ... perhaps I skip RM95's wedding and just go to the game. :)

yeah, i'm sure he'd be cool with that. no big deal! :)

[Svpernaut]

LOOK AT YOU!!!! My boy's all grows up!!!! :) All optimistic and crap!!!

LOL! I've been slowly watching that division race, and it is within reach of the Astros if they continue their pace. Currently the Cards are 9.5 games ahead of us, but they've also played 5 more games at home then they have on the road... which could easily makes us up 2-3 games in the standings. The Astros have the best record in baseball since late may, that is over two freaking months which is far from a fluke. It will take some amazing pitching and clutch hitting like last night and last year to steal the division but the fact that there is even a chance in August is all I could ever dream of after the start they had. Zeke's last two starts have been great, and Wandy has been a huge suprise... if those two (and Backe) can win 60-70% of their decisions we have a great chance to steal it all.

[TheFreak]

We've played better than St. Louis for 2 full months now. Why people continue to think that's a fluke is beyond me.

Not a fluke. They've played slightly better the last two months than St. Louis. Key differences I see are that St. Louis has had the division locked up during that time and hasn't had any sense of urgency, and they've been beaten up. Also, during this incredible stretch, the Cardinals still swept the Astros. And who was on the mound for that sweep? Pettitte/Oswalt/Clemens.

[dskillz]

The way we are playing now, I think we can beat anyone. Everything is clicking right now. I would love to see a NLCS re-match with the Cards this season. But let's get the wild card first, lol. This team's turnaround has been amazing, totally amazing. I thought they were dead in the water early in the season, but they and the A's have totally turned things around. Just goes to show that baseball really is a marathon, not a sprint.

[Svpernaut]

Not a fluke. They've played slightly better the last two months than St. Louis. Key differences I see are that St. Louis has had the division locked up during that time and hasn't had any sense of urgency, and they've been beaten up. Also, during this incredible stretch, the Cardinals still swept the Astros. And who was on the mound for that sweep? Pettitte/Oswalt/Clemens.


The people that think the Cards are a sure bet winner over the Astros are the same ones who thought we had NO CHANCE after the first couple of weeks of the season... anotherwords, they don't know what the hell they are talking about. Our pitching staff is easily better then theirs with the exception of a lefty out of the pen, and in the playoffs that is what counts the most. Better pitching always beats better hitting in the playoffs... see Arizona, California and Florida.

[msn]

The people that think the Cards are a sure bet winner over the Astros are the same ones who thought we had NO CHANCE after the first couple of weeks of the season... anotherwords, they don't know what the hell they are talking about. Our pitching staff is easily better then theirs with the exception of a lefty out of the pen, and in the playoffs that is what counts the most. Better pitching always beats better hitting in the playoffs... see Arizona, California and Florida.
I wouldn't go so far as to say they don't know what they're talking about.

It's not so cut-and-dried, although I share your optimistic outlook.

There are as many examples of good pitching getting beat in the playoffs, and sadly enough for Astros fans, several of them are from Astros' history.

1998: RJ, Shane Reynolds, Hampton, and Lima. Not too shabby. RJ lost twice.
1999: Two 20-game winners. One win--by the guy who *didn't* win 20 games.
2004: Roger Clemens and Roy O. Roger in Game 7, are you kidding me?

There are non-Astros examples, too. Hopefully 2005 plays out a touch differenlty.

[Sishir Chang]

I'm pretty excited about the Stros and have to remind myself to never doubt Phil Garner again!

That said lets worry about securing a playoff spot first before looking to meeting the Cards. If we do meet the Cards I'm very concerned. While they're not as good hitting they are a lot better pitching this year and as so many have noted pitching wins series. To beat the Cards we gotta play phenomenally. One of the things I'm worried about is that while we've lost some great hitters we've also lost experience and are counting on younger players like Taveras to come up big for us. Plus with Backe hurt our pitching beyond our top three is shaky.

I love the Stros and the run they're making but trying to keep expectations in perspective. After looking like we were dead last year we had a miraculous run. I'm amazed we can do it again another year. I think looking forward to an NLCS against the Cards or a World Series is distracting from the amazing play of the Stros now.

[Svpernaut]

I wouldn't go so far as to say they don't know what they're talking about.

It's not so cut-and-dried, although I share your optimistic outlook.

There are as many examples of good pitching getting beat in the playoffs, and sadly enough for Astros fans, several of them are from Astros' history.

1998: RJ, Shane Reynolds, Hampton, and Lima. Not too shabby. RJ lost twice.
1999: Two 20-game winners. One win--by the guy who *didn't* win 20 games.
2004: Roger Clemens and Roy O. Roger in Game 7, are you kidding me?

There are non-Astros examples, too. Hopefully 2005 plays out a touch differenlty.

Our bullpen lost us the series with the Cards last year, and this year we've fixed most of those holes (minus a lefty)... not to mention we have a healthy and improving Andy Pettitte. In response to the other things I wouldn't call Reynolds and Lima great pitchers, even in their primes... as far as 1999 goes, the Padres had an amazing staff too... Kevin Brown was a stud, the best of his career. We lost those years mostly because of our lack of offense. I'm not making excuses just trying to say if we continue on our current pace or close to it and Oswalt, Clemens and Pettitte are healthy we'll be tough to beat. Either way, the season isn't over let's try to run them down so they have to play the Braves in the first round rather then the Padres. Could be a blessing in disguise like Denver over Seattle.

[Sishir Chang]

I wouldn't go so far as to say they don't know what they're talking about.

It's not so cut-and-dried, although I share your optimistic outlook.

There are as many examples of good pitching getting beat in the playoffs, and sadly enough for Astros fans, several of them are from Astros' history.

1998: RJ, Shane Reynolds, Hampton, and Lima. Not too shabby. RJ lost twice.
1999: Two 20-game winners. One win--by the guy who *didn't* win 20 games.
2004: Roger Clemens and Roy O. Roger in Game 7, are you kidding me?

There are non-Astros examples, too. Hopefully 2005 plays out a touch differenlty.

It goes even deeper than that. We had great pitching in 1986 (Scott, Ryan, DeShais, Smith, Kerfield) and lost in 6. The Mets had great pitching too but we matched up well with them. 1980 I don't remember that series very well being a wee tyke at the time but didn't we have one of the best pitching staffs in the league that year with JR Richards and the Ryan Express at his height.

[Major]

It goes even deeper than that. We had great pitching in 1986 (Scott, Ryan, DeShais, Smith, Kerfield) and lost in 6. The Mets had great pitching too but we matched up well with them. 1980 I don't remember that series very well being a wee tyke at the time but didn't we have one of the best pitching staffs in the league that year with JR Richards and the Ryan Express at his height.

Just look at last year. Statistically, the Braves had better pitching than the Astros and lost. The Angels and Twins had FAR better pitching than Boston and NY and lost. St. Louis had better pitching than the Red Sox and lost.

The whole pitching wins championships thing is a myth, IMO. Good pitching with great hitting or great pitching with good hitting wins championships - either way is a viable route to go.

[bobrek]

It goes even deeper than that. We had great pitching in 1986 (Scott, Ryan, DeShais, Smith, Kerfield) and lost in 6. The Mets had great pitching too but we matched up well with them. 1980 I don't remember that series very well being a wee tyke at the time but didn't we have one of the best pitching staffs in the league that year with JR Richards and the Ryan Express at his height.

Richard went down with his stroke that year, but Vern Ruhle stepped in and finished something like 12-4. In 1980 the Astros had a 3 run lead in the 8th with Ryan on the mound in game 5 (best of 5) and could not finish it off.

It didn't help matters that the Astros had a 3 game lead over LA with 3 games left (against the Dodgers). The Dodgers won all 3 so they had a 1 game playoff which Niekro had to pitch. That threw the rotation off a bit for the playoff series against the Phillies.

[Svpernaut]

Just look at last year. Statistically, the Braves had better pitching than the Astros and lost. The Angels and Twins had FAR better pitching than Boston and NY and lost. St. Louis had better pitching than the Red Sox and lost.

The whole pitching wins championships thing is a myth, IMO. Good pitching with great hitting or great pitching with good hitting wins championships - either way is a viable route to go.

You can win a world series without a few power hitters, but you'll never win a world series without at least two great starting pitchers. Boston had a GREAT rotation last year, much better then St. Louis (Pedro/Schilling/Lowe/Wakefield). Also, the Braves rotation last year was far from stellar... we simply had a freak showings by Brandon Backe in and Brad Lidge, not to mention Carlos Beltran making the best offensive playoff run of all-time. If offensive numbers won championships the Yankees would have won 10 in a row in the last 13-14 years.

2004 World Series
Boston Red Sox over St. Louis Cardinals

2003 World Series
Florida Marlins over New York Yankees

2002 World Series
Anaheim Angels over San Francisco

2001 World Series
Arizona Diamondbacks over New York Yankees

2000 World Series
New York Yankees over New York Mets

In every one of those series the team with the better pitching won.

[MadMax]

Just look at last year. Statistically, the Braves had better pitching than the Astros and lost. The Angels and Twins had FAR better pitching than Boston and NY and lost. St. Louis had better pitching than the Red Sox and lost.

The whole pitching wins championships thing is a myth, IMO. Good pitching with great hitting or great pitching with good hitting wins championships - either way is a viable route to go.

but getting there is the thing....more teams get to the playoffs with good pitching/poor hitting than vice versa.

this year alone you're seeing the astros and the nats speak to that. while the Nats are tied for a playoff spot right now....they're DEAD LAST in MLB in runs scored. whose first in the NL in runs scored you might ask?? the Reds. get my drift???

how many times have the Rockies or Rangers been at or near the top in runs scored...and missed the playoffs by a mile??? seriously, that's been the story of those franchises for nearly 10 years now.

but to the other end...it's not often a team finishes toward the top in allowing the fewest runs, and isn't at least competitive.

[Major]

You can win a world series without a few power hitters, but you'll never win a world series without at least two great starting pitchers. Boston had a GREAT rotation last year, much better then St. Louis (Pedro/Schilling/Lowe/Wakefield). Also, the Braves rotation last year was far from stellar... we simply had a freak showings by Brandon Backe in and Brad Lidge, not to mention Carlos Beltran making the best offensive playoff run of all-time. If offensive numbers won championships the Yankees would have won 10 in a row in the last 13-14 years.

Of course, no one said that offensive numbers won championships.

As for next Red Sox and Cardinals, here are the numbers:

Red Sox Rotation (ERA):

Schilling 3.26
Martinez 3.90
Arroyo 4.03
Wakefield 4.87
Lowe 5.42

Cardinals Rotation:

Carpenter: 3.46
Marquis: 3.71
Suppan: 4.16
Williams: 4.18
Morris: 4.72

Over the course of the season, here are total runs given up by various teams last year:

Minnesota 715
LA Angels 734
Boston 769
NY 808

St. Louis 659
Atlanta 668
Houston 698

St. Louis had the #1 pitching staff in the NL. The Red Sox had the #4 pitching staff in the AL. The top 2 pitching staffs in the AL lost in the first round.


In every one of those series the team with the better pitching won.


In every one of those years, a team with great hitting or pitching won - but teams with better pitching lost along the way, so the best pitching didn't just win the WS. If it did, Glavine/Maddux/Smoltz would have won 8 World Series. They consistently got beaten by teams with better hitting and good (but not as good) pitching.

[Major]

this year alone you're seeing the astros and the nats speak to that. while the Nats are tied for a playoff spot right now....they're DEAD LAST in MLB in runs scored. whose first in the NL in runs scored you might ask?? the Reds. get my drift???

how many times have the Rockies or Rangers been at or near the top in runs scored...and missed the playoffs by a mile??? seriously, that's been the story of those franchises for nearly 10 years now.

but to the other end...it's not often a team finishes toward the top in allowing the fewest runs, and isn't at least competitive.

But teams with good pitching and bad hitting aren't doing well either. The Rockies, Rangers, and Reds have *terrible* pitching. The Nats, as we're seeing, are a fluke and are getting back to where they were expected to be. The Astros didn't start making their run until they started hitting (#1 in the league for the past month). When the Astros had great pitching but terrible hitting, they were dead last in the division.

This year, Boston and NY have terrible pitching (#10 and #11 in the AL), yet are at the top of the AL East. Baltimore, with better pitching but worse hitting, is 3rd. Toronto , with really good pitching and even worse hitting, sits in 4th.

You have to be good at both to get anywhere. There are few, if any, teams that will slug their way to a title without good pitching, and there are few, if any, teams that will pitch their way to a title without good hitting. To win, you have to be good at both, and great at one or the other. Boston last year was an offensive team that had just enough patchwork pitching to win, but they won on offense.

[Major]

but to the other end...it's not often a team finishes toward the top in allowing the fewest runs, and isn't at least competitive.

I would agree with this, though. But that involves making the playoffs. Here are the rankings for last year's playoff teams. The ranks are within the team's league.

(Team / Hitting Rank / Pitching Rank)

Boston 1 4
New York 2 6
LA Angels 7 2
Minnesota 10 1

St. Louis 1 1
Houston 6 5
Atlanta 5 3
LA Dodgers 9 4

The NL is hard to really say, because St. Louis was better in both. But in the AL, the teams that made the ALCS were the top two hitting teams, which beat better pitching teams that had mediocre offenses.

[MadMax]

But teams with good pitching and bad hitting aren't doing well either. The Rockies, Rangers, and Reds have *terrible* pitching. The Nats, as we're seeing, are a fluke and are getting back to where they were expected to be. The Astros didn't start making their run until they started hitting (#1 in the league for the past month). When the Astros had great pitching but terrible hitting, they were dead last in the division.

This year, Boston and NY have terrible pitching (#10 and #11 in the AL), yet are at the top of the AL East. Baltimore, with better pitching but worse hitting, is 3rd. Toronto , with really good pitching and even worse hitting, sits in 4th.

You have to be good at both to get anywhere. There are few, if any, teams that will slug their way to a title without good pitching, and there are few, if any, teams that will pitch their way to a title without good hitting. To win, you have to be good at both, and great at one or the other. Boston last year was an offensive team that had just enough patchwork pitching to win, but they won on offense.

last year the dodgers made the playoffs with very good pitching and very average to below-average hitting. you dont' see the inverse of that.

take your pick with the astros and nats. either way, you have teams that have great pitching right now...but very average to awful offense.

[Svpernaut]

Of course, no one said that offensive numbers won championships.

As for next Red Sox and Cardinals, here are the numbers:

Red Sox Rotation (ERA):

Schilling 3.26
Martinez 3.90
Arroyo 4.03
Wakefield 4.87
Lowe 5.42

Cardinals Rotation:

Carpenter: 3.46
Marquis: 3.71
Suppan: 4.16
Williams: 4.18
Morris: 4.72

Over the course of the season, here are total runs given up by various teams last year:

Minnesota 715
LA Angels 734
Boston 769
NY 808

St. Louis 659
Atlanta 668
Houston 698

St. Louis had the #1 pitching staff in the NL. The Red Sox had the #4 pitching staff in the AL. The top 2 pitching staffs in the AL lost in the first round.



In every one of those years, a team with great hitting or pitching won - but teams with better pitching lost along the way, so the best pitching didn't just win the WS. If it did, Glavine/Maddux/Smoltz would have won 8 World Series. They consistently got beaten by teams with better hitting and good (but not as good) pitching.

The difference between the Cards and the Sox last season was the two future hall of fame pitchers of Schilling, Pedro and their closer Foulke (not just talking about the series). You can't really compare their league ERA's either because an AL team's ERA is going to be higher because the combined offense is going to be higher... that's a tough one to compare. Either way if you asked anyone GM who's rotation they would have rather had last year in the series the BoSox would win every time because of the big two alone.

Obviously a well balanced team is better then a good pitching/bad hitting team, but if you have 2-3 good pitchers you will be in contention even if you have a horrible offense (see Nationals). The playoffs are always a gamble because one player can change a series, the tough part is getting to the playoffs and time and time again (unless a weak division) the teams with upper echelon pitching make it to the playoffs.

The Braves should have won more World Series, but blame it on the Yankees and their unGodly payroll for that... not their pitching.

[Major]

The difference between the Cards and the Sox last season was the two future hall of fame pitchers of Schilling, Pedro and their closer Foulke (not just talking about the series). You can't really compare their league ERA's either because an AL team's ERA is going to be higher because the combined offense is going to be higher... that's a tough one to compare. Either way if you asked anyone GM who's rotation they would have rather had last year in the series the BoSox would win every time because of the big two alone.

I think people forget that going into the playoffs, the Cardinals and Yankees were the favorites. Boston's pitching was a disaster. Pedro was having a terrible season - after 5 consecutive years of ERAs under 2.4, he had a 3.9 ERA last year. Schilling was an injury mess from the very first series. All their other starters were somewhere between mediocre and bad. Boston wasn't even favored to win the AL, less alone the World Series. In the postseason, they won by averaging nearly 7 runs a game of offense, while giving up nearly 5.