LOL with the 3000 or so people left in the Yankee Stadium they can't even properly boo J.D. Drew for winning the MVP.
So, having a 1.12 ERA and going 20-for-20 in save opportunities in, you know, actual games means nothing compared to giving up one run in an exhibition? You know, considering he plays for the Philadelphia Phillies, it seems a little silly to attach any significance at all -- much less call it a "big game" -- to a game in which he isn't even playing for the team.
tell that to the: cubs cards phillies mets dback dodgers brewers the ones that have a shot at needing home field advantage.
Key word with my post: BIG GAMES Halfway through the season few games would be considered "big". I'm talking playoff or playoff clinching games. But whatever, I'm obviously just bitter
Or they all still view it the same as ever -- an exhibition. http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/25643875/ Of course, he's only a player in the game -- what would he know?
Ok Cat, I honestly am not being sarcastic, you'll see I haven't posted in any of these Lidge threads at all. But what is the deal with your man-crush of Lidge? Why do you so staunchly defend him all the time now that he's on the Phillies and doing well? Who cares about him now dude, just forget him and move on.
No, you used the term "again," quite obviously labeling tonight as a big game. And I'm very curious how a game in which he isn't even playing for his team counts as big, but numerous other saves in crucial situations when he is don't qualify.
Eh, I'm an equal opportunity defender against stupidity -- it just so happens that Lidge, for whatever reason, brings it out of people. With tonight, the idea that an exhibition counts as a "big game" is absolutely silly. If any other pitcher on the planet had been on the short end (and someone eventually had to), no one would've even cared because it's an exhibition for the fans. But because it's Lidge, it represented a chance to pile on. Given the context of his 2008 performance in actual games, it's a little irrational to say the least.
If somewhere down the road Philly wins the pennant, do you think this exhibition loss will suddenly become more important?
Read the quote from Berkman's mouth. Whether it determines home field or not, it doesn't change how players approach the game. It's still an exhibition.
Home field advantage isn't all that crucial in baseball, first of all. Spare me the 18-in-22 statistic -- that's a small sample size in the grand scheme of the World Series, and it's a flawed concept logically because it assumes most teams are created equal. They're not. Here's the bottom line -- there's not a player in either clubhouse who would go on the record (yes, I've asked this myself) who would give up a single regular season win to win the All-Star Game. Not a single win. Yes, there's the possibility it might have a very small impact down the road. It still doesn't change that it's an exhibition. "It's an All-Star Game, it's not as important as the regular season, it's not as important as getting to the postseason. It's an exhibition. It's for the fans to see their favorite players, the best players in the game." -- Bret Boone
In addition to Gagne, there's this from the 2005 All-Star Game. A certain pitcher in that game threw even worse than Lidge did tonight, giving up 2 runs in his inning for an 18.00 ERA. Who was it? That vaunted choker ROY OSWALT, of course! That bum! He was doomed for a second half collapse... mentally scarred for September and October! Oh, wait. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/scores105/105193/MLB24055.htm
I agree, I really don't think home field advantage is real important in baseball. So much of the game is dictated by starting pitching anyways.
Yeah and Brad Lidge is having a fantastic year and I'm happy for him. I think a lot of people here are just having a little fun with the fact that he was the one who got tagged with the loss.
