Series Thread: Sox Vs KC

[richig07]

One worry is since the Sox are going to coast to the division, are they lacking intensity when playoff time happens?

The NL West for example is basically playing playoff ball now. AL East too.

Eh... there doesn't seem to be much of a correlation with "momentum" and playing well in October. I just don't get caught up in that stuff. Overthinking.

Also, this is for all of those fans worried about our record vs winning ball clubs.

Do good records vs. good teams matter for WS?

In October, only the best are still playing. Every playoff game is a matchup against a strong opponent. But there are plenty of such tests throughout the year, too. Can we look to those contests for clues to how the postseason will unfold? In other words: Does a team's performance

www.mlb.com

Let's look back at the Wild Card era of postseason play, which began in 1995. Here are the top five teams ranked by performance against winning teams in the regular season: the 2001 Mariners, the 2016 Rangers, the 1999 Braves, the 2002 Braves and the 2013 Braves. You might notice something they have in common -- none won the World Series.

In fact, in the Wild Card era, only one of the 10 teams with the best results against winning opponents, and only three of the top 25, have brought home a championship:

• 1995 Braves (.610 winning percentage, tied for ninth-best)
• 2009 Yankees (.598, 16th)
• 1998 Yankees (.594, tied for 20th)

But what about how each World Series champion stacked up to its postseason peers? Does being the best against strong competition in a given year deliver an advantage against your particular playoff field?

As it turns out, only two of the 24 World Series champions in the Wild Card era have had the best record among their own playoff field against winning teams: the 2009 Yankees and 1995 Braves. Expand it to the top two playoff teams against .500-plus competition in a given year, and you add the 2013 Red Sox, 2004 Red Sox and 1998-99 Yankees.

Extend it to the top three, and you add the three latest World Series champs: the 2018 Red Sox, 2017 Astros and 2016 Cubs.
On the other hand, there have been seven Fall Classic winners since 1995 with losing records against winning teams, most recently in 2014: the 2010 Giants (.446 winning percentage), 2006 Cardinals (.447), 2014 Giants (.466), 2002 Angels (.475), 2008 Phillies (.483), 2000 Yankees (.494) and 2001 D-backs (.494).

 

[ChiSoxFan]

One worry is since the Sox are going to coast to the division, are they lacking intensity when playoff time happens?

The NL West for example is basically playing playoff ball now. AL East too.

Yes, I think playing AL Central teams does not help prepare for playoff baseball. Concerning.

 

[Mingo]

why can't cease maintain that level of pitching? ........... kind of a rhetorical question.

With Cease - it is a question of how often he can be excellent -vs how often he loses control of his pitches and the game. I think what we are seeing out of Cease is a gradual shift into more constant excellence (this season - anyway).

 

[msgkings322]

I doubt it...This franchise starves for playoff appearances and wins and we'll be at home to start as a division winner. The atmosphere will be electric.

If they are the 3 seed they start on the road vs the 2 seed...

 

[msgkings322]

Eh... there doesn't seem to be much of a correlation with "momentum" and playing well in October. I just don't get caught up in that stuff. Overthinking.

Also, this is for all of those fans worried about our record vs winning ball clubs.

Do good records vs. good teams matter for WS?

In October, only the best are still playing. Every playoff game is a matchup against a strong opponent. But there are plenty of such tests throughout the year, too. Can we look to those contests for clues to how the postseason will unfold? In other words: Does a team's performance

www.mlb.com

Let's look back at the Wild Card era of postseason play, which began in 1995. Here are the top five teams ranked by performance against winning teams in the regular season: the 2001 Mariners, the 2016 Rangers, the 1999 Braves, the 2002 Braves and the 2013 Braves. You might notice something they have in common -- none won the World Series.

In fact, in the Wild Card era, only one of the 10 teams with the best results against winning opponents, and only three of the top 25, have brought home a championship:

• 1995 Braves (.610 winning percentage, tied for ninth-best)
• 2009 Yankees (.598, 16th)
• 1998 Yankees (.594, tied for 20th)

But what about how each World Series champion stacked up to its postseason peers? Does being the best against strong competition in a given year deliver an advantage against your particular playoff field?

As it turns out, only two of the 24 World Series champions in the Wild Card era have had the best record among their own playoff field against winning teams: the 2009 Yankees and 1995 Braves. Expand it to the top two playoff teams against .500-plus competition in a given year, and you add the 2013 Red Sox, 2004 Red Sox and 1998-99 Yankees.

Extend it to the top three, and you add the three latest World Series champs: the 2018 Red Sox, 2017 Astros and 2016 Cubs.
On the other hand, there have been seven Fall Classic winners since 1995 with losing records against winning teams, most recently in 2014: the 2010 Giants (.446 winning percentage), 2006 Cardinals (.447), 2014 Giants (.466), 2002 Angels (.475), 2008 Phillies (.483), 2000 Yankees (.494) and 2001 D-backs (.494).

Thanks for this. It reflects the almost random nature of baseball playoffs. The 'best' or favorite team has almost the same chances as any other team because of the short sample size. The 2001 Mariners famously won 116 games and lost in the first round. The recent Giants champions were underdogs in every series they played in the playoffs all 3 years.

One thing the Sox have going for them is pitching and specifically a lockdown bullpen. That matters more in the playoffs than even the regular season. The Royals won in 2015 basically because of their '3 headed monster' bullpen arms (they would have won in 2014 too if Ned Yost wasn't such a dumbass)

 

[Jiddy]

If they are the 3 seed they start on the road vs the 2 seed...

Maybe I should be more pissed off about Lopez getting innings then...

 

[msgkings322]

Maybe I should be more pissed off about Lopez getting innings then...

Is that even possible?

 

[Jiddy]

Is that even possible?

Yes...If it actually costs us something for or in the playoffs. There's always another notch to raise up in this corner baby.

 

[Lake Shore Drive]

Yes...If it actually costs us something for or in the playoffs. There's always another notch to raise up in this corner baby.

Good lord Jiddy. You're actually projecting a scenario where Lopez and Lopez alone can cost us some form of a playoff position. I sense the newest version of Moncada/Kopech-for-Sale trade and Grandal Signing type of obsession coming our way.

 

[Jiddy]

Good lord Jiddy. You're actually projecting a scenario where Lopez and Lopez alone can cost us some form of a playoff position. I sense the newest version of Moncada/Kopech-for-Sale trade and Grandal Signing type of obsession coming our way.

I will never be a proponent of sh*tty players taking the field for the White Sox...If anything, you're the one out to lunch wanting to keep him...so I'm all good with being VERY VERY opposite of that.

 

[Lake Shore Drive]

I will never be a proponent of sh*tty players taking the field for the White Sox...If anything, you're the one out to lunch wanting to keep him...so I'm all good with being VERY VERY opposite of that.

Find the post where I say let's keep him at all costs or that he needs to be on the roster when it's time for the playoffs. Go ahead, I triple dog dare you!!

All I've said is for the time being there's no reason to dump him, as he's been pretty effective coming out of the pen. That's all - nothing more, nothing less. If he has an outing or two where he stinks up the joint, fine - demote him, cut him, whatever. No sweat off my toes. Now that's a huge difference between this attitude vs obsessing over an anticipation that he's gonna screw up and cost us, as if he and he alone would be responsible. THAT's the very definition of obsession and sadly, past obsessions from you don't surprise me that you've developed a new one.

 

[Trudem]

If it comes down to 2-3 games the blame could be on TLR. He single handedly cost us multiple games early with his decision making

 

[Jiddy]

Find the post where I say let's keep him at all costs or that he needs to be on the roster when it's time for the playoffs. Go ahead, I triple dog dare you!!

All I've said is for the time being there's no reason to dump him, as he's been pretty effective coming out of the pen. That's all - nothing more, nothing less. If he has an outing or two where he stinks up the joint, fine - demote him, cut him, whatever. No sweat off my toes. Now that's a huge difference between this attitude vs obsessing over an anticipation that he's gonna screw up and cost us, as if he and he alone would be responsible. THAT's the very definition of obsession and sadly, past obsessions from you don't surprise me that you've developed a new one.

There are plenty of players through sports history that have cost their teams dearly and to extents that it has cost said teams excruciating defeats that cannot be undone. It sounds nice to say "We win as a team. We lose as a team." I don't need the pleasantries/etiquette. There is a high likelihood Lopez will cost us dearly if put into a situation where we NEED him to perform. So I'd prefer that he not ride the coattails of a few performances after countless chances to put him in that position again.

Dump him yesterday and let your toes be happy and athlete's foot free going forward.

 

[Jiddy]

I mean...It's not like we don't have arms that literally anybody else could be given a similar leash...So why this bustout?

 

[Lake Shore Drive]

I mean...It's not like we don't have arms that literally anybody else could be given a similar leash...So why this bustout?

Fair enough buddy, we'll just leave it all at that. You know I still luvz ya. Plus you remain the wittiest poster on this board (altho that rascally ChiSoxfan gives you a run for the money).

 

[Mingo]

You have to realize @Lake Shore Drive that @Jiddy would have flushed Sandy Kofax down the tubes - and Nolan Ryan and not to mention it, but Mickey Mantle started his pro career off 3-52.

Personally - I can take no talent ballplayers, but I can't take little effort ball players.

 

[Jiddy]

You have to realize @Lake Shore Drive that @Jiddy would have flushed Sandy Kofax down the tubes - and Nolan Ryan and not to mention it, but Mickey Mantle started his pro career off 3-52.

Personally - I can take no talent ballplayers, but I can't take little effort ball players.

Hold the phone...I'm on record here at some point getting annihilated for pumping up the "overrated" Nolan Ryan during the Sale debates...If Reynaldo Lopez became the next James Baldwin I'd be amazed...The chance that dude has a household name attached to him is so small that zero isn't good enough.

 

[ChiSoxFan]

 

[ChiSoxFan]

Hold the phone...I'm on record here at some point getting annihilated for pumping up the "overrated" Nolan Ryan during the Sale debates...If Reynaldo Lopez became the next James Baldwin I'd be amazed...The chance that dude has a household name attached to him is so small that zero isn't good enough.

Back in the day, a few Sox players did a signing at the Hickory Pit restaurant in Bridgeport. Wish it was there still. Anyway, Baldwin was one of the guys there and one of my fav players when I was a kid. My father always reminds me I asked Baldwin what kind of car he drives.

 

[Jiddy]

Back in the day, a few Sox players did a signing at the Hickory Pit restaurant in Bridgeport. Wish it was there still. Anyway, Baldwin was one of the guys there and one of my fav players when I was a kid. My father always reminds me I asked Baldwin what kind of car he drives.

Well...What kind of car?