DWKB
ASFN Icon
Well this is your problem, the ASG doesn't decide the winner of the WS, the two teams playing in the games decide that. The ASG just decided where those games are going to be played. So there is our misunderstanding.
Could the All-Star game mean something?
- Thread starter Lefty
- Start date
Well this is your problem, the ASG doesn't decide the winner of the WS, the two teams playing in the games decide that. The ASG just decided where those games are going to be played. So there is our misunderstanding.
unc84steve
Veteran
Re: Home field advantage
Seriously, your post raises a couple of good issues:
First, who knows if Randy Johnson gets more calls at home than others--or even more win. Why would he? Strikeouts may be less suseptible to park-effects, but reportedly Shea Stadium "lights" helped Doc Gooden-type, power pitchers.
Baseball "research"--as opposed to agenda-driven sportswriting proposes hypotheses first, then tests them. Most writers start with the conclusion, then find supporting research.
Second, Bob Brenly weighed numerous factors deciding his 2001 WS rotation. Yankee Stadium favors lefties: hitters & pitchers, (shorter RF fence). That skew maxed out during Stengel's 1950's (not as big now or for Ruth).
"Lefties, lefties, lefties" is another topic, but it's true at the big Bronx ballpark. That justified Brian Anderson's game 3 start (plus he was a good sacrificial lamb in case the team collapsed--e.g. trouble catching popups--despite Mark Grace's field mentorship )
I thought "5 aces in 7 games" was sound strategy in 2001 & it will be the next time a WS contender is fortunate to have baseball's 2 best pitchers (Phillies 2004? BoSox 2003?). RJ would have been ideal for Yankee Stadium (I don't know his lifetime record there--I'm talking theory ).
But as of 10/19/2001 to 10/27/2001 without question, Curt Schilling was our "Big Horse Gamer" and most likely to come back on 3 days rest--let alone 0 days--not Randy Johnson.
I thought RJ pitched games 2 & 6 to get his bat in the game
Seriously, your post raises a couple of good issues:
First, who knows if Randy Johnson gets more calls at home than others--or even more win. Why would he? Strikeouts may be less suseptible to park-effects, but reportedly Shea Stadium "lights" helped Doc Gooden-type, power pitchers.
Baseball "research"--as opposed to agenda-driven sportswriting proposes hypotheses first, then tests them. Most writers start with the conclusion, then find supporting research.
Second, Bob Brenly weighed numerous factors deciding his 2001 WS rotation. Yankee Stadium favors lefties: hitters & pitchers, (shorter RF fence). That skew maxed out during Stengel's 1950's (not as big now or for Ruth).
"Lefties, lefties, lefties" is another topic, but it's true at the big Bronx ballpark. That justified Brian Anderson's game 3 start (plus he was a good sacrificial lamb in case the team collapsed--e.g. trouble catching popups--despite Mark Grace's field mentorship
)I thought "5 aces in 7 games" was sound strategy in 2001 & it will be the next time a WS contender is fortunate to have baseball's 2 best pitchers (Phillies 2004? BoSox 2003?). RJ would have been ideal for Yankee Stadium (I don't know his lifetime record there--I'm talking theory
).But as of 10/19/2001 to 10/27/2001 without question, Curt Schilling was our "Big Horse Gamer" and most likely to come back on 3 days rest--let alone 0 days--not Randy Johnson.
unc84steve
Veteran
Good anwer.
I understand your point of view, but I disagree.
I'm going to find at least 5 games from 2002 that were less important than the All-Star Game (with links included too):
Game One:
Sunday March 24th Arizona at Chicago White Sox
Arizona 10-4 over ChiSox
WP Mike Morgan (1-0) LP B West (0-1) T--2:32. A--11,644.
Jose Guillen went 4 for 4 & Steve Finley collected his 3rd HR on the Cactus league season to lead the Diamondbacks to a 10-4 victory over their Tucson Electric Park neighbors....
(I wrote the above)
Link to Box Score of 3/24/2002 game
Game Two:
Saturday March 16th Tampa Bay at Philadelphia
Philadelphia 9-8 over D-Rays
WP Terry Adams (1-0) LP Estaban Yan (0-1) T--2:38. A--5,353.
The Phils bunched 9 runs in the middle innings and weathered a furious D-Ray comeback of 4 runs combined in the 7th & 8th to hold onto a Grapefruit League battle over the symetrically numbered "fifty-three fifty-three" St. Patrick's eve day crowd....
(I wrote that one too)
Link to Phils 9-8 win over TB
Game Three:
Here's a regular season game less important (IMO) than the ASG:
"I think that Manny won't start the game tomorrow,'' Boston manager Grady Little said after Tampa Bay's Randy Winn homered during a seven-run seventh inning to give the Devil Rays a 9-6 victory over the Red Sox.
Link to ESPN coverage of 9/28/02 TB 9-6 Boston game story
Game Four:
The same day as "Game Three" in equally important action (but I'd say less important than the ASG) was this one:
CLEVELAND (AP) -- Jim Thome saw just one pitch clearly in the late-afternoon shadows. That was all he needed.
Thome tied the game with his 52nd homer, a three-run shot in the eighth inning, and the Cleveland Indians went on to beat the Kansas City Royals 6-5 in 10 innings Saturday.
Link to ESPN/AP Cle 6-5 KC game story 9-28-02
Game Five:
And a few days earlier the KC Royals were involved in this important thriller that was a hair less important than the ASG IMHO:
GAME DAY RECAP Wednesday, September 25
Simon's fourth hit helps set up Tigers' win
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) -- Randall Simon didn't forget how to hit
Simon, who played just two of the previous 13 games while the Tigers looked at prospects, had four hits Wednesday night, including one that moved up the winning run for Chris Truby's sacrifice fly in the 12th inning as Detroit beat the Kansas City Royals 7-6.
"He's incredible,'' manager Luis Pujols said. "The man knows how to hit.''
Link to ESPN/AP story of 9/25/02 Det 7-6 KC game
Very good put a few pre-season games (which are not a part of the regular season) and a few games played by teams eliminated.
put a few pre-season games (which are not a part of the regular season) and a few games played by teams eliminated. unc84steve
Veteran
Thanks! LOLOriginally posted by Dback Jon
Very good
(Actually, I thought that the ASG as "exhibition game" was part of your argument. I was just showing that I "get" your point!! I agree, that a Tucson Electric or Surprise AZ game deciding whether the DH should be used in the NLDS would be going too far.)
Honestly. Lots of fans like the ASG. Not me, but maybe I will in the future. I'm a big Byung-Hyun Kim fan (actually defender), and it was further work/grief when some on the MLB/Dbacks board cited his ASG performance as evidence that BK "chokes" on the big stage.
But I'd prefer to think of it as you do Dback Jon--BK knows a "meaningless game" when he sees one.
More seriously, here's a site with some data about lot's of best of seven series called "Who Wins":
Link to "WhoWins(tm) Best-of-7" site--I'm "betting" they won't mind the "tm" abuse b/c "gambling??? gambling!?!" might be involved!!!
p.s. I notice in their credits of "societies" is more along the lines of Society of American Baseball Research and recommends the excellent John Allen Paulos, book Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy and Its Consequences
(I have it
). I don't see offshore casinos. Sorry.
unc84steve
Veteran
Here are some potential "research" questions about World Series Home Field Advantage:
Which game has the biggest HFA? (Many here are speculating it's game 7)
Has WS HFA increased in recent years? (The Metrodome & 2001-2002 make it seem so).
Does Baseball have the smallest playoff HFA?
Does the WS have a smaller HFA than the LCS since both went to 7 game formats? (on both series & game comparisons)
Has HFA changed since the DH rule has become home park dependent? (BTW what is the DH rule chronology overall, in WS, etc.?)
The site has FAQ's and articles. I was thinking of doing a study or 2 based on already raised topics. My bias is that the Selig proposal is good. I think I can do unbiased research by disclosing biases & methods beforehand:
I think HFA has increased a little, (Metrodome, BOB, Edison, PacBall have real effects) but we're also on a streak. If HFA stakes are higher, I think so much the better actually
I games are more relevant than series, but series could be studied too. It's important to do things before the fact & not retrospectively.
So if we know that 15 out of 17 series were won by "home teams" already that's including "after the fact" the "all home series" of the Twins 1987, 1991 & the 2001 D'backs-Yanks. I know that & I'm just a relatively casual fan coming out of a 1994-95 strike hibernation to get on the Phoenix bandwagon. (I was in Champaign-Urbana to hear the "injustices" from Cardinal fans of 1985 & 1987)
So I know any game study is going to have a 21-0 home-away skew if it includes those years. Fine. That's life.
My "random" year or number generator is going to be the baseball-reference . com site which has a select a player at radom feature. I'm going to select it the number of times as the last digit of the winning 3-digit Arizona lottery number from Monday 1/20/03 (ten times if it's a "0"--I don't play the lottery--I don't believe in tax the poor schemes--except as random number generators
)If this player was born between the 1903-1968 WS, I will use that as the year to start tracking WS games to compare to the last 17 years. (1968 = 2002 - 17 -17) so 1968 won't run into 1985. If the player was born before 1903, I will use his year of death if it is between 1903 & 1968. If this doesn't work, I will pick again, until a player qualifies.
I then will have a baseline World Series starting with the player's birthday (or date of death). I will compare the 17 WS that follow.
I expect that HFA in those 17 series will be undramatic or counter intuitive.
I expect people will say--that's what makes the ASG even more inappropriate to use now!!! Don't you get it???
unc84steve
Veteran
Actually I'm going to use the years from 1920 to 1968 because the 1919 WS (Black Sox) was the last best of 9 affair I believe.
Another messing with tradition that went hay-wire, right?
DWKB
ASFN Icon
Originally posted by unc84steve
Actually I'm going to use the years from 1920 to 1968 because the 1919 WS (Black Sox) was the last best of 9 affair I believe.
Another messing with tradition that went hay-wire, right?
1920 Brooklyn Robins:
1921 NY Giants:
1922 Polo Grounds:
unc84steve
Veteran
Oh already I can see this World Series "Home Field Advantage" study is running into trouble. And no, I wasn't referring to DWKB's historical "voices from the past" because I haven't got that far yet.
I enjoy these types of studies because of these refreshing my memories & learning more about baseball knowledge.
No, I'm referring to WW2 and how the Axis of Evil back then (original version) was disrupting life as we know it by messing up what was sacred: The 2-3-2 World Series formula.
I think we can fairly give the 1945 Cubs "HFA" even though they opened up with 3 games at Detroit before losing Game 7 at Wrigley in their last WS game 10/10/1945.
And we can give the Cardinals HFA over their Stadium-mates (& I think landlords) the Browns in the 1944 all Sportsman Park series because I think much of HFA back then was batting last (attendance 31,630 for Game 6 was the lowest but was won by the "home team")
But how do we handle 1943?
The first 3 games were at Yankee Stadium, with the Bombers taking 2 of 3. The Yankees then closed it out in St. Louis by taking the next 2 to win the WS 4 games to 1. Who had "HFA"?
I assume that the war-time travel restrictions were in effect and they weren't going back to NYC or doing a coin-flip to decide Game 7 HFA, so it was like 1945 3 games here, 4 games there. So if/when the algorithm includes 1943 should I mark this as a "road" series win? Or another Yankee "home advantage" win since they got the 3 home games? Or does it help the case to say "well HFA used to be nothing, but now it's really strong"?
(And no, I can't handle 5 out of 9 series. I'm not too proud to admit that!)
I enjoy these types of studies because of these refreshing my memories & learning more about baseball knowledge.
No, I'm referring to WW2 and how the Axis of Evil back then (original version) was disrupting life as we know it by messing up what was sacred: The 2-3-2 World Series formula.
I think we can fairly give the 1945 Cubs "HFA" even though they opened up with 3 games at Detroit before losing Game 7 at Wrigley in their last WS game 10/10/1945.
And we can give the Cardinals HFA over their Stadium-mates (& I think landlords) the Browns in the 1944 all Sportsman Park series because I think much of HFA back then was batting last (attendance 31,630 for Game 6 was the lowest but was won by the "home team")
But how do we handle 1943?
The first 3 games were at Yankee Stadium, with the Bombers taking 2 of 3. The Yankees then closed it out in St. Louis by taking the next 2 to win the WS 4 games to 1. Who had "HFA"?
I assume that the war-time travel restrictions were in effect and they weren't going back to NYC or doing a coin-flip to decide Game 7 HFA, so it was like 1945 3 games here, 4 games there. So if/when the algorithm includes 1943 should I mark this as a "road" series win? Or another Yankee "home advantage" win since they got the 3 home games? Or does it help the case to say "well HFA used to be nothing, but now it's really strong"?
(And no, I can't handle 5 out of 9 series. I'm not too proud to admit that!)
Derek in Tucson
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2002
- Posts
- 179
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh I'd say it's relatively easy for a major league pitcher to groove a flat 85 mph fastball right over the heart of the plate. Of course he has the easy part, it's the hitter who has the tough job of hitting it over the fence.
The difference between that and the home run derby is in the former case you have a major league pitcher, a player with actual talent and pinpoint control for the most part. During the home run derby though you have bullpen coaches or designated BP tossers who are not paid millions of dollars a year to throw a baseball.
But getting back to Selig and his hairbrain schemes. I thought the "problem" with last year's game was that it ended in a tie. Just how is Selig's "solution" supposed to fix the problem? You mean to tell me that just by having the All Star game decide the home field advantage, the game will no longer have a chance of ending in a tie?
And to those of you who are on Selig's side with this, why aren't you also calling to an end of having every team represented? After all, if you actually have something riding on this game, why wouldn't you want the best players from each league playing in it? Of course in order to do that you'd have to set up some kind of panel to pick the players, right? You can't have the fans vote interfering with a process that'll pick the best team, because they don't always get it right. And the managers aren't much better most of the time since they often play favorites by picking some players off their own team.
I just can't believe that some of you don't take these kinds of things into consideration. By placing ANY kind of importance on the All Star game, MLB is just opening itself up to more criticism by the fans, the media, and the critics of the game.
All I see is Selig trying to deflect any criticsm that might come his way. He's setting this up to put all of the blame on the players and the managers if another game does end in a tie. He just doesn't want the embarassment he went through last year, and doesn't really care about the All Star game as long as it makes money.
unc84steve
Veteran
Another learning opportunity is when the same league has "home field advantage" consecutively.
In 1946 the NL Cardinals had a "back to normal" 2-3-2 when "Axis of Evil I" fell.
In 1945 the NL Cubs allegedly had "HFA" 4-3, but you wonder, because...
in 1944, the NL Cards had it 2-3-2 over their Sportsman Park neighbors the AL Browns. It's suspicious because...
in 1943, the NL Cards seemed to be heading for the 4-3 "HFA" pattern the 1945 Cubs had, and...
in 1942, the NL Cards had a 2-3-2 HFA pattern going over the Yanks. Finally...
in 1941, the AL Yanks finally had a 2-3-2 HFA pattern over Brooklyn
Either the NL had a 5 year "HFA" streak the times placed a premium on Game One HFA (see 1943 & 1945) over "total game" HFA.
I note this because some second guess Dodger manager Chuck Dressen decades later for choosing Game 1 home field int the 1951 NL playoff against Bobby Thomson's NY Giants instead of HFA in Games 2 & 3. This historical record shows that early series HFA was considered more important than total game HFA.
But what's more ironic is a clearer case of 2 consecutive same league HFA's--1934 & 1935--with the same team: the Detroit Tigers!
The 10/9/1934 game is the most famous cases of 7th game home field disadvantages known when the Detroit crowd heaped garbage on St. Louis LF Ducky Medwick. Commissioner Landis ordered him off the field "for his own safety" with the visitors leading 9-0, before winning 11-0.
Game 7 "Home Field" was such an onus then, the Tigers were punished in 1935 with the 2-3-2 hosting chores. Fortunately for them, Detroit beat the Cubs 4-3 eking a Game 6, 9th inning run, or surely they would have lost another Game 7 home rout and the Cubs would not be the laughing stocks they are with this "1908" nonsense (White Sox 1917, Red Sox 1918 )
In 1946 the NL Cardinals had a "back to normal" 2-3-2 when "Axis of Evil I" fell.
In 1945 the NL Cubs allegedly had "HFA" 4-3, but you wonder, because...
in 1944, the NL Cards had it 2-3-2 over their Sportsman Park neighbors the AL Browns. It's suspicious because...
in 1943, the NL Cards seemed to be heading for the 4-3 "HFA" pattern the 1945 Cubs had, and...
in 1942, the NL Cards had a 2-3-2 HFA pattern going over the Yanks. Finally...
in 1941, the AL Yanks finally had a 2-3-2 HFA pattern over Brooklyn
Either the NL had a 5 year "HFA" streak the times placed a premium on Game One HFA (see 1943 & 1945) over "total game" HFA.
I note this because some second guess Dodger manager Chuck Dressen decades later for choosing Game 1 home field int the 1951 NL playoff against Bobby Thomson's NY Giants instead of HFA in Games 2 & 3. This historical record shows that early series HFA was considered more important than total game HFA.
But what's more ironic is a clearer case of 2 consecutive same league HFA's--1934 & 1935--with the same team: the Detroit Tigers!
The 10/9/1934 game is the most famous cases of 7th game home field disadvantages known when the Detroit crowd heaped garbage on St. Louis LF Ducky Medwick. Commissioner Landis ordered him off the field "for his own safety" with the visitors leading 9-0, before winning 11-0.
Game 7 "Home Field" was such an onus then, the Tigers were punished in 1935 with the 2-3-2 hosting chores. Fortunately for them, Detroit beat the Cubs 4-3 eking a Game 6, 9th inning run, or surely they would have lost another Game 7 home rout and the Cubs would not be the laughing stocks they are with this "1908" nonsense (White Sox 1917, Red Sox 1918 )
unc84steve
Veteran
You are right again Derek.
Actually, I'd make the case that if Cal didn't know a juicy meatball was coming up there, he'd have an easier time hitting an HR, (because his reflexes would jump on the ball) compared to a hitter waiting on a BP pitch--thrown by the best MLB pitcher in the world, or not--consciously knowing that a fat pitch was supposed to be coming.
Absolutely.
The primary object of the ASG has been to get everyone in the game. Knowing that something is at stake will give the managers a perfect reason/excuse to hold back players and avoid the "running out" situation. Everyone will understand why some need to sit (players, fans, media).
This is much better than a written or "unwritten" rule of "hey, don't do that again." That's a mixed message. Which is different than my next answer.
You are probably right about why Bud Selig has made this decision. I agree that he has done much to waste great opportunities to make baseball a more popular sport.
And I am not thrilled about having each club represented. Yet I understand the reasoning--it's called marketing. The target audience is 8 year olds (mentally).
As schillingfan & others in life have noted, nothing is perfect. These "flaws" may be called "problem constraints" to optimize a solution (winning the game, not getting anyone injured, not upsetting rival managers, letting players have a little fun, marketing the game, showing a national audience I'm not a dim-bulb of a manager, etc.)
Bud Selig may be hare-brained but to use another animal metaphor "even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while"
unc84steve
Veteran
Okay the 1919 Black Sox are not only a problem for the obvious motivational reason, but because I'm not sure where home field advantage was going. Here's the list for the first 8 game sites:
NL, NL, AL, AL, AL, NL, NL, AL
The Doug Pappas article says a coin flip decided the HFA for games 1 & 7 for a while "before this scheme [alternating HFA] was adopted in the 1920s" so I assume a coin flip may have decided game 9 HFA--unless that was fixed.
The 1920 Brooklyn Robins (aka Dodgers NL) WS vs. Cleveland went this way:
NL, NL, NL, AL, AL, AL, AL (Cleveland winning 5-2)
I don't know how DWKB (I mean the Robins) know they had "HFA" Doug Pappas said the coin flip took place before game 6 (or game 8 here). Was this going to be a 3-4-2 formula? Maybe.
9-game series are tough, so I concede the 1921 all Polo Grounds affair between the Giants and the Yankees.
Here's the 1922 Polo Grounds situation where the Yankees were the tenants playing their landlords (before Babe built his house):
NL, AL(tie!), NL, AL, NL (4 game sweep for the landlords who got to bat last 3 times).
Even when the Yanks built their own stadium in 1923, things aren't totally clear:
AL, NL, AL, NL, AL, NL (Giants beat former tenants who have moved clear across the Harlem River, a long ball shot away).
Who would have hosted game 7?
Thank goodness from 1924 to 1926 there are 3 consecutive 7 game series and all follow the 2-3-2 pattern that the baseball gods intended.
If/when there is a study, the starting year will be 1924
1968 will be the final year. Same methods as before.
(btw all these clarifying posts are killing me. As a quasi new-health resolution, I'm doing 3 push-ups each time I make a new post).
DWKB
ASFN Icon
(As I've said before ) The problem with the ASG occured way before last year.
I'm not on Selig's side. I'm on the idea's side. I don't care if it was Selig, Pete Rose, or Bob Costas who came up with it. What bothers me is people against it just because it's Selig's idea. Talk about not thinking things out.
You know, you've perfected the Strawman arguement here. You tell us that "if you believe in that than you must believe in this too!!" and then you tell us why this idea means we should believe in those ideas. And of course those ideas don't even remotely coincide with the original that idea. Hell I don't even need to post anymore because Derek can insinuate my ideas for me to an extreme.
unc84steve
Veteran
On Mon 1/20/2003 the Ariz Lottery "Coyotes tax the poor apparently to build them an arena numbers racquet" digits were: 5-6-6
I went to baseball-reference.com site & used their random page 6 (at least) times to get my start year. Here's what I got:
1) Bill Calhoun 6/13/1890 to 1/28/1955 went 1 for 13 in cup of coffee for pre-miracle 1913 Boston Braves (1914) nickname "Mary"
Link to Bill "Mary" Calhoun
2) 1954 Washington Senators (66-88--6th out of 8, neat?) Raises issue of what WS to start with if a team is the "player" Decide that 1954 would be the "DOB". Harmon Killebrew at 18 is toiling as the Rule 5 equivalent.Link to 1954 Senators
3) 1987 Boston Red Sox (78-84 5th in AL East) the year after Billy Buck's gaffe: he, Baylor, Wade, Rocket, Oil Can, et al. sulk in a hang-over funk.Link to 1987 BoSox
4) Ray Adelphia Benge 4/22/1902 to 1/27/1997 "pitcher" Birth & Death dates outside of range. Leaderboards show he "led" NL in "Earned runs allowed" 1929, always among the leaders (also in HR's BB's allowed, losses). Wait! Is that a good thing? ERA in 1929 was 6.29 in the Philadelphia Baker Bowl, hey I know that was a tough park in a tough era but I think the AL voters may have voted for this guy if fans could vote for pitchersLink
5) Bill Phebus 8/2/1909 to 10/11/1989 Washington Senator pitcher for 3 years, 13 games, no leaderboard appearances or anything except he died between just before the "Earthquake" WS.Link
#6 could be our guy
6) Don Lund born 5/23/1923 Nope. I excluded the 1923 all NYC, alternating 6-game WS. They don't list a date of death. Outfielder best season at age 30. Let's move on Link
7) 2001 NY Mets Schedule & Splits Page. The only interesting thing I see here is a hot Sept (16-5 .762) I wonder if that means that they might contend in 2002 if they can some big bats and some veteran leadership
Link 8 ) Joe Carter born 3/7/1960 Oklahoma City OK future possible HOF'er. Traded for 1984 NL Cy Young Award Winner Rick Sutcliffe. Current Cubs announcer. I like him--think he gets a bad rap as announcer. DWKB will like him because the 17 year run starting in 1960 probably had a lot or "road" teams winning WS Link to Joe Carter page
unc84steve
Veteran
During the 17 World Series from 1960 to 1976 the NL has the "home field advantage" in the even years and the AL in the odd years.Originally posted by unc84steve
8 ) Joe Carter born 3/7/1960 Oklahoma City OK future possible HOF'er. Traded for 1984 NL Cy Young Award Winner Rick Sutcliffe. Current Cubs announcer. I like him--think he gets a bad rap as announcer. DWKB will like him because the 17 year run starting in 1960 probably had a lot or "road" teams winning WS Link to Joe Carter page
7-game series will be underlined & bold
Years NL won with HFA (3): 1960, 1964, 1976
Years AL won with HFA (2): 1961, 1973
Years NL lost despite HFA (6): 1962, 1966, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1974
Years AL lost despite HFA (6): 1963, 1965, 1967, 1969, 1971, 1975
Overall:
NL won more WS 9-8 over AL
"HFA" leagues won 5 times and lost 12 times.
7-game series occurred 10 out 17 times (5 for each HFA league)
In game 7's from 1960 to 1975 the home team went 3-7 vs the visitors. The NL home teams were 2-3 & the AL home teams were 1-4.
Derek in Tucson
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2002
- Posts
- 179
- Reaction score
- 0
DWKB,
[sarcasm on]Pardon me for doubting Selig. The man has done such a great job with the game of baseball that I really shouldn't question his motives.[sarcasm off]
Obviously you must have missed all of those question marks in my last post. Other than attacking my line of questioning, I didn't really see you answer any of those questions. But I'll try one last question. Just for arguments sake, I'll buy into yours and Steves contention that HFA doesn't matter in the World Series. If it doesn't matter in determining the winner of the Series, then what is the motivation to win the game?
It just seems to me that if you want motivation out of the players to win the game, you'd be better off sending them to one of Dr. Glickman's seminars rather than putting up some artificial inducement that has no real reward.
[sarcasm on]Pardon me for doubting Selig. The man has done such a great job with the game of baseball that I really shouldn't question his motives.[sarcasm off]
Obviously you must have missed all of those question marks in my last post. Other than attacking my line of questioning, I didn't really see you answer any of those questions. But I'll try one last question. Just for arguments sake, I'll buy into yours and Steves contention that HFA doesn't matter in the World Series. If it doesn't matter in determining the winner of the Series, then what is the motivation to win the game?
It just seems to me that if you want motivation out of the players to win the game, you'd be better off sending them to one of Dr. Glickman's seminars rather than putting up some artificial inducement that has no real reward.
schillingfan
All Star
Steve, why should I care about who won before 1975 when everyone has won since 1975. It reminds me of the argument that money doesn't determine who wins in baseball.
DWKB
ASFN Icon
I believe you missed the point of my rant in that those questions don't really apply to the subject at hand, they only link to them and this is the fact that we're talking about the ASG. Obviously I didn't make that clear.
People criticize the ASG now. People don't like the fact that all the teams need a rep. People don't like the fact that the rosters have expanded so much. People don't like the fact that there is this "unwritten rule" that you've got to try and get everyone in.
I don't think I've ever said that HFA doesn't matter and I don't believe Steve feels that way either ( alert, speaking for someone else ). But I don't think it has near the effect on the outcome that I assume you and others ( DBack Jon and his previous post ) think it does. I do think that HFA is a factor but not anymore than talent, or hot streaks or injuries. Things that the ASG doesn't control.
Now to turn the table, for arguements sake, let's say I buy into your's and DBack Jon's arguement that HFA has causation on who wins the WS and that it's as dramatic as it looks with 15 out of the last 17 winning like you pointed out. Why do we play the games? I mean 15 out of the last 17 is fairly overwhelming if there really is the causation you claim there to be. Why do the gambling lines not tilt to obscene odds?
With alternating years like we have now, why not just alternate awarding the LCS champion the WS trophy. I can see a discussion kinda like this:
"Let's see, it's an even year so that means the AL gets HFA in the series. So whomever wins the ALCS gets the WS trophy since there's an 89% chance than they'll win anyways."
DWKB
ASFN Icon
Here is a logic question for you:
You have a coin that you flip.
After flipping it for a random amount of times you hit streak where for 15 times in a row it lands on tails. Now, for the 16th time, what is the % that the coin will land on tails again, what is the % that the coin will land on heads?
schillingfan
All Star
That's absurd.
BC867
Long time Phoenician!
50/50! But what does that have to do with the World Series. Baseball is a game of inches . . . not a game of chance!
unc84steve
Veteran
schillingfan
All Star
According to Merriam Webster:
Main Entry: [1]ab·surd
Pronunciation: &b-'s&rd, -'z&rd
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French absurde, from Latin absurdus, from ab- + surdus deaf, stupid
Date: 1557
1 : ridiculously unreasonable, unsound, or incongruous
2 : having no rational or orderly relationship to human life : MEANINGLESS; also : lacking order or valueincreased complexity doesn't necessarily bring clarity
Main Entry: [1]ab·surd
Pronunciation: &b-'s&rd, -'z&rd
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French absurde, from Latin absurdus, from ab- + surdus deaf, stupid
Date: 1557
1 : ridiculously unreasonable, unsound, or incongruous
2 : having no rational or orderly relationship to human life : MEANINGLESS; also : lacking order or valueincreased complexity doesn't necessarily bring clarity
BC867
Long time Phoenician!
Jolly Cholly Dressen was second-guessed also for bringing Ralph Branca in to pitch to Thomson in Game 3 . . . after having given up a HR to him in Game 1. It resulted in "The Shot Heard 'Round The World"!
Of course, Dressen didn't bring in his ace reliever Clem Labine, because he had started and pitched a 10-0 shutout in Game 2 -- at the Polo Grounds.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was a ten year old Dodger fan, living in New Jersey, when my father (a Giants fan) took me to Game 1 at Ebbetts Field. I was devistated when Jim Hearn of the Giants beat the Dodgers at home, giving the Giants a solid home field advantage.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But there are other factors. Dressen's Dodgers lost to the Giants by one game, just as they had lost to the Phillies the previous year on the last day of the season, to finish one game behind them for the NL Pennant.
And the Dodgers lost the World Series to the Yankees in 1947, 1949, and, under Dressen, 1952 and 1953. Their pitching staff was no match for Robin Roberts/Curt Simmons of the Phillies, Sal Maglie/Jim Hearn/Larry Jansen of the Giants, and Allie Reynolds/Vic Rachi/Eddie Lopat of the Yankees.
'Just not enough depth behind Don Newcombe and, later, Carl Erskine. Good pitching beats good hitting!
(I can't believe that was over 51 years ago!)
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Ossenfort's crap drafting continued. The Athletic All Rookie Team- Latest: Brian in Mesa
-
-
-
OT: The Gift that keeps on giving,...Deshaun Watson out another year- Latest: Cbus cardsfan
-
-
Staff online
-
ShaneComin for you! -
Brian in MesaAdvocatus Diaboli
-
Dback JonDoing it My Way -
Chris_SandersArizona Sports Simp -
DevilmaycareKing of Technicalities
Members online
- ASUCHRIS
- oaken1
- tennis-player
- Lorenzo
- Dr dumas
- kerouac9
- Shane
- Crimson Warrior
- Dan H
- Brian in Mesa
- Dback Jon
- unseenaz
- Cheesebeef
- 602 Native
- Heucrazy
- NMCard
- blindseyed
- RedForeman
- ajcardfan
- Town Drunk
- Chris_Sanders
- slanidrac16
- TheCardFan
- Rivercard
- MadCardDisease
- The6
- HairZach
- jmr667
- BigDavis75
- Suns_fan69
- Cardsmasochist
- hcsilla
- Chaplin
- Devilmaycare
- ProdigalSun
- Goodyear Card
- some dumb guy
- JosiahLee
- Cardiac