At this point, split the MVP between Craig & Freese; who'd thought two STL natives would do so much?

What in the unholy hell is going on in St. Louis right now?

Also, fuck cold weather baseball. Feels like 41 in the stadium.

Can we make a rule that you can't put pitchers in for a single at bat, or after the 2nd pitcher none others get to stand on the mound to warm up, or just a straight limit on the number of substitutions? This is ridiculous, especially with the guy on deck batting around .175 with only 1 hit all series long.

I was so excited after the first inning, that we might be in for a true classic. Instead, we got an excruciating fifth inning that sealed the Series for the Cardinals.

Deacon wrote:Can we make a rule that you can't put pitchers in for a single at bat, or after the 2nd pitcher none others get to stand on the mound to warm up, or just a straight limit on the number of substitutions?

My least favorite things in all of sports:
5) Pitchers faking a throw to third base, turning around, and throwing to first base.
4) Football teams calling a timeout to "freeze" the opposing kicker.
3) Losing basketball teams continuing to foul their opponent well after a comeback has been rendered impossible.
2) The NFL's Instant Replay process.
1) One out relief pitchers.

I'm all for limiting the amount of pitching changes in a game. Maybe even cut it down to three. It would be a great strategy wrinkle: imagine if Texas and St. Louis could only use three relievers each last night. (If that's taking matters too far, how about a simple "one pitching change per inning" rule?

For anyone who still hates the designated hitter: did you enjoy watching the Rangers' pitchers attempt to bunt throughout the World Series? Was that fun? Did that add to your enjoyment of a great World Series, watching these guys try to advance runners (and often fail)? It nearly took Mike Napoli out of the series in game six...

I think you'd have an easier time resolving the Palestinian - Israeli conflict than resolving the DH versus non-DH conflict.

Anyway, I should go and see if my fanatical Cardinals friend hasn't died of glee. Or if he got shot in East St. Louis.

The ESPN commentators called La Russa's pitching management "genius." Let your starter work through about the 7th, manage the 8th with a bunch of different pitchers, then let a strong closer cap off the 9th.

I call it annoying, no matter what team is doing it.

And we really shouldn't be paying attention to the merits of a strategy that continues to drive viewers away from baseball. It's "genius" that the late innings take so long that World Series ratings at this point are dependent on the fans of the two teams involved? "Genius" that, in a game of timing and routine, a manger gets to make each batter in an inning stop for a few minutes and stand in the on-deck circle, thinking about his huge at-bat to come?

I think baseball should take a lesson from the NHL and the New Jersey Devils. In the 1990s, the Devils got good. Really good. But they got good playing a style of hockey that was incredibly boring to watch, especially on television. So despite the NHL being at the height of its popularity in the early 1990s, by 2000 it was an afterthought. After the lockout, what did they do? Tweak the rules to make that boring game the Devils played pretty much obsolete, open up scoring more, and make the game more entertaining. A few short years later, the NHL is back where it was before Martin Brodeur and Scott Stevens ruined everything. Meanwhile, Tony La Russa continues to turn baseball into a long and boring sport, driving people away every year, and baseball experts give him nothing but praise.

La Russa is going to retire. Baseball's future looks that much brighter.

Perhaps, but he has produced results with his methods. And that is why he is being praised, for his results. I agree that Baseball should change the rules to make LaRussa's strategy obsolete, but I suspect baseball loathe to change anything anymore. Much to its determent as it may continue to dwindle from even a Regional sport to pretty much having pockets of support. Sort of like Major League Soccer.

ampersand wrote:Perhaps, but he has produced results with his methods.

Yeah. Not everyone could win three titles spread out over three decades. And look at those teams! How can one deny the manager's impact on the A's, who only had Jose Canseco and Mark McGwire (ahem) as well as Dennis Eckersley and the best leadoff hitter ever? And it must take a real strategic genius to win two titles with a workhorse ace and a once-in-a-lifetime first baseman. (Okay, that's harsh, but still...we're not talking about a guy who won with scraps. And that Oakland team got beat twice in the World Series by teams with fewer memorable players. Though I am, of course, thankful that he got his Cardinals to just roll over in 2004.)

Probably, as with most coaching discussions in sports, La Russa's successes and failures were player-driven. With excellent teams, he excelled. With poor teams, well, the year McGwire hit 70 home runs the Cardinals finished in dead last. In a crappy division. With a first baseman hitting the cover off of the ball.

ampersand wrote:And that is why he is being praised, for his results.

Yes, and he gets credit for being copied by so many other managers, but my assertion is that his greatest contribution to baseball ended up hurting the sport in terms of fan following and (ultimately) revenue.

ampersand wrote:Much to its determent as it may continue to dwindle from even a Regional sport to pretty much having pockets of support. Sort of like Major League Soccer.

I think it'll end up more like the NHL, but with better markets. I mean, keep in mind that the three biggest cities in the country still count themselves among those pockets of support, plus much of the midwest, all of New England and the Bay Area, and here's hoping Texas sticks around. Those are some good outposts.

Offseason thoughts:

-I'll come out and say it: Jonathan Papelbon reminds me of a clean cut version of Mitch Williams.

-C.J. Wilson doesn't have a new contract yet, and already I feel like it will be the worst contract of the offseason. He's good, but he hasn't been a starter long enough to constitute a "sure thing" and he's being treated as such. It could be that he lives up to his billing, but he could also struggle.

-The guy in this field you overpay is Mark Buehrle. He's a back-of-the-rotation guy for a serious contender, but he's a workhorse with a pretty consistent set of numbers over his career. A rotation looking for stability could do a lot worse.

-If I were the Red Sox GM, I'd get Buehrle, kick the tires on trading for Joe Blanton from the Phillies, sign Madson (or bargain bin Joe Nathan if Madson asks for too much), and pay Ortiz whatever he asks for. It would be a damn shame to let everybody from that 2004 team retire somewhere else. Besides, from a competitive standpoint, it would be absolutely stupid to let a player whose swing seems custom built for Lego Yankee Stadium sign elsewhere. Oh, and I'd hire Ryne Sandburg to manage, if just to watch Pedroia turn into Ryno circa '89. Frankly, it doesn't seem that complicated.

-Either Grady Sizemore or J.D. Drew is going to sign somewhere for cheap, miraculously stay healthy, and get a few outlier MVP votes. I have no evidence for this other than that it seems to happen all the time.

-Is there a way to bet on who will make the flashiest signing in free agency? Because it seems destined to be Chicago with their new front office (these are the kind of moves Theo tends to love to make), their abysmal 2011 season, and their piles upon piles of currency.

-We're about to find out just how much difference a new ballpark makes on attendance. The Marlins don't draw many fans, win or lose, but they've long played in what was once called Joe Robbie Stadium about twenty names ago. Now they're opening Marlins Stadium (I'm sure somebody will buy the name before it opens), which is supposed to be state-of-the-art. If it translates to people showing up to watch the Marlins, we'll know just how much the scenery matters. (Of course, then again, the longest sellout streak in the history of American sport is still going on at a stadium that will turn 100 in 2012.)

<sarcasm>I'm just disappointed that MLB and the MLBPA didn't get into a tiff war like the NFL or threaten to forgo the next season like the NBA is doing. It's almost like they actually learned something from those two. </sarcasm>

Verlander wins the MVP, I agree.

Now for some random stuff I would like to see, but will never happen.

I want so see a 52 pitch game
Someone win the MVP while coming in second for the cy young
An 81 pitch game
A prefect winning over a no-no
Someone hitting the home-run cycle
An outfielder getting a W
Pirates playing in Roberto Clemente Park

Calus wrote:Verlander wins the MVP, I agree.

Yeah. He put the Tigers into the playoffs. Hard to be more valuable. I don't buy the "pitchers shouldn't be considered for an MVP" argument. The Cy Young isn't for the most valuable pitcher, it's an award for the most outstanding pitcher. (MOP, by the way, would be an award I could get behind.)

Calus wrote:I want so see a 52 pitch game

The record is 58, set in 1944.

Calus wrote:An 81 pitch game

To quote a meme, it's more likely than you think.

Calus wrote:Pirates playing in Roberto Clemente Park

That would be nice. Makes too much sense for the Pirates though.

I'll add to that list:
-A walkoff strikeout (passed ball or wild pitch on a third strike, ends up scoring a runner from third. Saw it happen in a college game.)
-A game where runs are scored in each half of three or more extra innings. (Almost got it in the World Series.)
-A highly-paid player that isn't living up to his contract retires with a few years left on his giant contract.
-A player-manager. Come on, why can't that work now?

Maybe I should have put something after that. Announcer, "Now to the bottem half of the 9th. The Game tied Zero Zero. We have been playing for a total of 30 minutes, but sadly most of that was the 7th inning stretch."

And 81 pitches? PERFECT PERFECT game.