Red Sox v. Angels ALDS Discussion - Page 2 - Talksox

YAZMAN · 10-01-2009, 04:09 PM

More than anything else right now I'd like to see a little spark somewhere and have the team get a little mo going in. The Sox never seem to do well when they just limp in.

RWTP24 · 10-01-2009, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YAZMAN

More than anything else right now I'd like to see a little spark somewhere and have the team get a little mo going in. The Sox never seem to do well when they just limp in.

I could not agree more. I would love to see the Sox win four in a row going into the playoffs. That would give us a little MO going in.

redsoxrules · 10-01-2009, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RWTP24

I could not agree more. I would love to see the Sox win four in a row going into the playoffs. That would give us a little MO going in.

it dosent matter if we win 4 in a row or lose 10 in a row . its starts all over

I'd actually rather see them lose 10 in a row so that way they'll be waaaaay overdue for a win LOL

RWTP24 · 10-01-2009, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redsoxrules

it dosent matter if we win 4 in a row or lose 10 in a row . its starts all over

I'd actually rather see them lose 10 in a row so that way they'll be waaaaay overdue for a win LOL

For some reason this would scare me going into the playoffs losing 10 in a row.

I am going to stick with the win four in a row.

Jacoby_Ellsbury · 10-01-2009, 05:06 PM

IIRC St. Louis nearly blew the division in 2006 in the final week, each game having a chance to clinch. And they won it all.

Limping in or flying in, it doesn't matter. If anything, maybe the Angels come in have their guard down knowing we've lost 10 in a row, or have a poor record going into the playoffs. If not that, maybe they end up trying too hard not to be the streak-snapper, and start playing erratically.

**Coco's Disciples** · 10-01-2009, 05:19 PM

Detroit lost 5 straight going into the playoffs in 2006 and went to the WS.

EDIT: J_E, the Cards also lost 8 of 11 going into the playoffs.

Rdsxmbnt · 10-01-2009, 07:00 PM

I see us as a much better team here. The Angels (as constructed) are the type of team that does very well in the regular season due to a solid lineup of around ~.800 OPS hitters and 3.80-4.50 ERA SP that are consistent. But their only real impact bat is probably Morales and Weaver/Lackey are solid pitchers but not of the ace variety like Beckett/Lester are. Furthermore their bullpen has zero high-power arms like the Sox do with Bard/Papelbon/Wagner. Once we get their starters out we're going to really open things up.

Sox in 3 or 4

Dojji · 10-01-2009, 07:01 PM

Both teams are weak against the best game of the other. We have a lot of smart but low-range infielders rendering us weak against little ball, and they can be pitched to and don't have a good bullpen meaning we'll do our best work with power in late innings..

It comes down to who's better able to impose their will on the other team in the playoffs.

TheKilo · 10-01-2009, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rdsxmbnt

I see us as a much better team here. The Angels (as constructed) are the type of team that does very well in the regular season due to a solid lineup of around ~.800 OPS hitters and 3.80-4.50 ERA SP that are consistent. But their only real impact bat is probably Morales and Weaver/Lackey are solid pitchers but not of the ace variety like Beckett/Lester are. Furthermore their bullpen has zero high-power arms like the Sox do with Bard/Papelbon/Wagner. Once we get their starters out we're going to really open things up.

Sox in 3 or 4

I'm with you, and I'll make it even simpler.

Sox have strikeout, power pitchers, both in their rotation and in their bullpen.

Angels do not.

Sox in 4.

Dojji · 10-01-2009, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKilo

I'm with you, and I'll make it even simpler.

Sox have strikeout, power pitchers, both in their rotation and in their bullpen.

Angels do not.

Sox in 4.

The Red Sox also have a lot of strikeout power hitters and the Angels do not.

Just sayin'.

**yeszir** · 10-01-2009, 07:28 PM

I think it's a fact that the Angels can't beat the Red Sox in the playoffs.

Dojji · 10-01-2009, 07:35 PM

Oh, they'll beat us eventually. Law of averages if nothing else.

I do think we have a superior roster though.

TheKilo · 10-01-2009, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dojji

The Red Sox also have a lot of strikeout power hitters and the Angels do not.

Just sayin'.

In the summer yeah

October nights in Boston? hmmmm

Also, law of averages is a logical fallacy.

Dojji · 10-01-2009, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKilo

Also, law of averages is a logical fallacy.

[Captain_Obvious]
Depends on how you use it.

Anything that is possible will happen eventually, given unlimited opportunities to do so.

If you're saying a .250 hitter on the season, who is usually a .300 hitter, will hit so well he winds up with a cumulative .300 average that's an abuse of the law of averages. If you argue he has a good chance of hitting up to his career averages from this point forward and there's no known reason for the change, that's better.

In this case there's no known cause that's good enough to explain away the possibility of the Angels eventually beating us. That being the case, we have an the same chance to beat the Angels as we would any other team with a similar roster.
[/Captain_Obvious]

TheKilo · 10-01-2009, 08:14 PM

That's not the context you used it in, though.