Red Sox v. Angels ALDS Discussion - Page 3 - Talksox

Dipre · 10-01-2009, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dojji

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

Just sayin'.

This makes no sense.

The Yanks strike out every bit as much if not more than the Sox, and they're the best offense in the game.

I fail to see how the fact that they strike out a lot correlates to their likely success against Anaheim pitching.

Emmz · 10-01-2009, 08:38 PM

The Law of Averages simply doesn't apply here, and I have no idea how you use it as an argumentative tool, it gives you no leverage in this case. We have their number in the postseason, simple as that. To say they will eventually beat us due to "the law of averages" is illogical.

Dipre · 10-01-2009, 08:43 PM

An argument that they could beat us because of our inability to control their running game with V-Mart and VariFAIL seems much more logical.

Emmz · 10-01-2009, 08:46 PM

That's really saying a lot

I just think using law of averages as an argumentative tool is about the worst thing you can do. It takes away all of your credibility. There's simply no place for it here

Dipre · 10-01-2009, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emmz

That's really saying a lot

I just think using law of averages as an argumentative tool is about the worst thing you can do. It takes away all of your credibility. There's simply no place for it here

I don't think so.

Did you know base-stealers this year have a nearly 90% success rate against Boston catchers?

In the playoffs, that's a weakness that can and will be thoroughly exploited.

BOSOX11 · 10-01-2009, 08:55 PM

Bottom line: Anything can happen in a short series.

Dojji · 10-01-2009, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BOSOX11

Bottom line: Anything can happen in a short series.

Pretty much.

I think as awkward as my use of the law of averages might have been, the rampant appeal to history i'm seeing here is worse. Just because we've always beat them doesn't mean we'll beat them this time. That's just silly.

I think we have several advantages. But I was responding specifically to the fallacious appeak to history.

TheKilo · 10-01-2009, 10:07 PM

I agree that applying the law of averages is just as foolish as saying "we have their number".

**yeszir** · 10-02-2009, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dojji

Pretty much.

I think as awkward as my use of the law of averages might have been, the rampant appeal to history i'm seeing here is worse. Just because we've always beat them doesn't mean we'll beat them this time. That's just silly.

I think we have several advantages. But I was responding specifically to the fallacious appeak to history.

I like my fallacious appeaks to history.

Clearly not the end all be all, but it helps to calm fears about the team's poor performance toward the end here.

**Coco's Disciples** · 10-02-2009, 09:54 AM

We don't get the insights of Chip Caray this year. Orsillo is doing play by play for the series.

jacksonianmarch · 10-02-2009, 09:54 AM

The Angels and the sox are a bit different from last few yrs anyway. The sox have seen a significant downturn in defense and a questionmark in the starting pitching category (one of them was answered positively last night in Lester). They have also seen a change from the 1-2 of Ortiz and Manny to a more spread out approach, which has proven less productive than years past. In short, I dont think the sox are as good as they were in 2008 and 2007.

The Angels are completely different as well. Their rotation is essentially loaded with #2's and the addition of Kazmir gives them a sox killer, albeit one who struggled this season. Their lineup still has a ton of speed but they have significantly improved on their power and batting average, even with Vlad having an off yr. The big change for the Angels comes in the bullpen. Losing KRod was one thing, but losing their MVP in the pen in Shields leaves them ripe for the picking. That bullpen with Fuentes at the end should scare nobody.

In terms of the series, it is always difficult since both teams have their pluses and minuses. But I have to think the sox take this in 5. I have a feeling that the sox O goes cold in a few games and the angels pen will blow a very important game in the series, something they were not used to doing over their impressive run since 2002.

**yeszir** · 10-02-2009, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacksonianmarch

In terms of the series, it is always difficult since both teams have their pluses and minuses. But I have to think the sox take this in 5. I have a feeling that the sox O goes cold in a few games and the angels pen will blow a very important game in the series, something they were not used to doing over their impressive run since 2002.

Kinda specific prediction there. What makes you say that?

Emmz · 10-02-2009, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dojji

Pretty much.

I think as awkward as my use of the law of averages might have been, the rampant appeal to history i'm seeing here is worse. Just because we've always beat them doesn't mean we'll beat them this time. That's just silly.

I think we have several advantages. But I was responding specifically to the fallacious appeak to history.

If this is a response to this:

Quote:

We have their number in the postseason, simple as that.

Then, what I was trying to say is that if the law of averages is applicable, then the fact that we have their number is applicable.

I've said this before: It doesn't matter what happened last year, during the regular season, etc etc. The postseason is unpredictable, some teams get better, some teams fall apart. It's the reason why teams like the 1987 Twins, or the 1990 Twins were able to win the World Series. It's just that unpredictable. Same thing with that Cardinals team in 2006. Maybe those are just a few examples, but the best team during the regular season doesn't mean anything but a home field advantage. Remember that Seattle Mariners team that won 116 games, was it in 2001? Yeah, they also had a hard time making it through the ALDS, and they lost in the ALCS to the Yanks. Just goes to show, you can dominate everyone, all year long, and look like one of the best teams in the history of baseball, but then struggle through the playoffs against lesser teams

TheKilo · 10-02-2009, 11:56 AM

^Well said.

And Jacko, if you call the Sox staff a question mark I hope you do the same for the Yanks.

Dojji · 10-02-2009, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKilo

^Well said.

And Jacko, if you call the Sox staff a question mark I hope you do the same for the Yanks.

Of course he won't. CC Sabathia is a true ace, AJ Burnett has some of the best stuff in the league and Andy Pettitte is a veteran playoff warrior after all.