It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Baseball: PLAYOFFS!!!!!!!!

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:26 PM
Okay so who do you think will win the playoffs?
I think the Mets might win. I really hope the Yankees don't win lol. :angry-smiley-034: If only the Red Sox could've made it.............

posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:34 PM
Gut feeling but this might be the NL's year. That being said, I haven't followed baseball in 15 years, until now.

posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 01:28 PM
I am hoping the Mets and the Yankees make it to the World Series, but I must say I really want the Yankees to win. They have done a really good job this year. I suspect a few of the older players won't be back next year.

As for the Mets, they have really had a great season. They have so much young talent, and a great manager (who learned from the best, Joe Torre).

If either of these teams make it I will be a happy camper.

:approve: :approve: :approve:

posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 01:28 PM
The Phils need the Pads to lose 2, and win thier last 2, to get in. There's still a chance.

posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 02:06 PM
Neither the Giants or the Braves made it this year, which this will be the first I've had to endure watching without either team in... Hopefully it's not too boring for me. I'll probably be going for the Cards in the NL and the Tigers in the AL.

posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 02:39 PM

Originally posted by GiantsFan
Neither the Giants or the Braves made it this year, which this will be the first I've had to endure watching without either team in...

As a Niners fan, I can feel your pain.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 06:33 AM
DEAR SULTAN (and others),

I'm not a Twins fan and I LOATHE that ridiculous "ballpark" of theirs, which gave them two b.s. World Series rings. But....

Tori Hunter is one of the best players in the A.L. and would be a mega-star if he played on the Yankees. He makes a lot of spectacular plays, and right now he's a goat because had to make a split-second decision about whether to go for that ball or not. Obviously his decision looks bad in the cold light of the day after, but I'm not a results person. I believe Babe Ruth's decision to try and steal home--and thereby get caught stealing and end Game 7 of the 1926 World Series when he was the tying run, and the winning run was at the plate--was wrong because it was wrong, NOT because it didn't work out.

I'm not sure that's true of Hunter's failed attempt which turned a single into an inside-the-park HR. Both of the current MLB CF's who were on ESPN last night said they agreed with Hunter's play, though they're not likely to trash him for it on national TV. How'd you like to step into the box against Santana next time if you did, lol? Trash the Twins' great everyday player; face their great pitcher; get half-killed. Not an enticing prospect.

Sultan, you're a very accomplished ballplayer. You've played CF in semi-pro ball and you played it in college.


Was Hunter's judgment sound in going for the catch, or should he have held it to a single? He obviously didn't miss it by much, and he just as obviously had no way to be certain, one way or the other, whether he could catch it... until it was too late. Does that make such an obviously high-risk play a bad one?

And what do you think of the criticism of Tim Kurkjian--who, like me, knows a great deal about baseball history but has never played the game at any serious level, that the corner outfielders have to recognize the dangerousness of that situation, and therefore run toward CF in case of such a disaster, thereby prevent the inside-the-park HR? If that criticism is valid, those guys committed a huge error, because it would have been a 1-run game for a couple of innings, and I needn't tell you what a difference that makes.


posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 03:46 PM

I believe Babe Ruth's decision to try and steal home--and thereby get caught stealing and end Game 7 of the 1926 World Series when he was the tying run, and the winning run was at the plate--was wrong because it was wrong, NOT because it didn't work out.
According to Wikepdia, he was trying to steal second, although that probably wasn't a smart move either--especially considering there were two outs.

[Edited on 10/5/06 by BirdstheBest]

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 11:32 PM
Yeah, he was trying to steal second, of course. If I typed "home," that was a late-night colossal typographical error on my part.

Sultan has defended the play elsewhere on the ground nobody had gotten a hit off Alexander since he came in with 2 outs in the bottom of the 7th and K'ed Lazzeri. In other words, his opinion is that the odds TWO players would get hits--and thereby score Ruth from FIRST--were real remote. I don't agree with him, especially in that the batter at the time of Ruth's failed theft, Bob Meusel, was the 1925 AL HR/RBI champ (because Ruth was suspended most of the year, making it the ONLY year from 1918-1931 he didn't lead the AL in slugging).

Sultan has pointed out, however, that Meusel apparently had looked pathetic against Alexander earlier in the Series, in Games 2 and 6. He thus says that hoping for more than a single might've been a pipe dream.

So, Sultan's not necessarily wrong and I'm not necessarily right. But I disagree with him and think Ruth's decision was wrong... NOT because he got caught, but simply because I think it was a bad decision by a guy whose career success rate was under 50%.

ANYWAY... believe me, I know he was thrown out at second, and not at home. I'd be royally embarrassed if I had THAT big a hole in my knowledge of baseball history.

Sultan can tell you we've been around and around on this one quite a bit, and that I know which base Ruth was thrown out at.


posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 07:50 PM
BHN, if there's any fact about Babe Ruth, I'm sure you know it. I wasn't doubting you; in fact, I'd probably take your word over Wikipedia when it comes to Ruth. I just wanted to know for my own personal memory which base he was trying to steal.

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 02:44 AM
link'd be better off asking either me or BHN a question on Ruth, rather than going to Wiki for an encapsulated answer. If I need to prove my knowledge of George Herman, please feel free to ask away. And if I need to improve my knowledge of Mr. George Herman, rest assured I'll do so through meticulous research and detailed reading, not at Wikipedia. Chances are though, that I've already covered any and all bases regarding the greatest baseball player quiz away
A few things off the top of my head that you might not find on Wiki...his favorite robe was a red silk one...his favorite radio show was the Lone Ranger... he named his Sudbury farm "Home Plate"...a yellow or white butterfly had superstitious meaning to him but the meaning depended on his mood...after the '26 series he went barnstorming in Canada where he played shortstop, first, pitched and even umpired. He hit over thirty homers out before the game to entertain the crowd and the game ended I believe in either the eighth or ninth inning because they ran out of baseballs. I'll say the ninth, but that can be looked up if needed

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 04:15 PM
Now, THERE is a Babe Ruth expert.

I thought I was one. I mean, I really did. Then I met Sultan. 'Twas a humbling experience.

I have caught him on one thing, though. :bounce: He said Ruth never smoked a cigarette in his life--an odd misstatement, in that he has Robert Creamer's legendary Ruth bio, widely viewed as the greatest bio of any American sports figure, as nearly committed to memory as I do. I had the petty-malicious pleasure of pointing out that according to Creamer's source, between the time Ruth got the news and the time Ruth got home, he was in a "pitiable condition of nerves" and "smoked cigarette after cigarette."

Compare that to the 1,000 things he's taught me about Ruth and, well, it don't count for a whole lot, Huck. But it's something.


posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 10:35 PM
In all fairness, you stated that he had a lifelong cigarette habit, and I responded by saying that he was not a smoker; never smoked them...which is actually true. BUT it appears he was understandably beside himself on that one occasion, so technically "he never smoked" is indeed wrong. Point for you buddy.


Oh yeah, about Meusel swinging through that pitch....

Big Bam -

Alexander retired the Yankees one-two-three in the eighth, then took care of the first two batters in the ninth. This set up a confrontation with Ruth. Working carefully, Alexander took the count to 3-2, then walked the Bam. Bob Meusel came to the plate, swung at a pitch, and Ruth tried to steal second.

The Life That Ruth Built -

We know now that the hit-and-run play was not on, that Ruth was on his own. None of the Yankees ever blamed him. O'Farrell was curious enough to ask Ruth in 1928 what he had had in mind. Ruth said he thought Alexander was paying little attention to him; furthermore, as long as he stayed on first it would take two singles to score him. The way Alexander was pitching they probably wouldn't get two hits in a row, so it would be well to be where he could score on one hit.

Luckiest Man -

Ruth took a few steps away from first base, clawing at the dirt with his cleats. Meusel stood tall at the plate, legs wide apart, bat back and pointed straight to the sky. As the pitch came, he shifted his weight forward and began to swing. That's when Ruth took off, trying to steal second.

[Edited on 10/7/06 by Sultan]

top topics


log in