<$BlogRSDURL$>
Proceeds from the ads below will be donated to the Bob Wuesthoff scholarship fund.

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Maine Event: Mets 4, Cardinals 2

I have a lot of unrelated thoughts going through my head right now, a good number of them having to do with Jon Weisman's post of this afternoon, itself a discussion of whether Billy Beane was right — and for what reasons — about the postseason being a crapshoot. May-be; had the Cards met the Mets in the first round instead of the second and the games gone as they did in the NLCS, we'd be talking now about an NLCS featuring St. Louis, seeing that they won three.

But I still don't entirely agree with Will Leitch when he says "It’s not that his approach in particular didn’t work; it’s that nobody’s does. It’s almost entirely luck." It's that much harder, in a best-of-seven contest, to fool the oddsmakers, though that is in fact what the Cards have done so far, beating their numerical superiors in the NLDS (the Padres, after all, had 88 wins to the Cardinals' 83), and coming close to advancing to the World Series in the NLCS.

The short series, no doubt about it, is a mystery; however much we want it to be about competence, morality, and a hundred other virtues and vices, the truth is that the 1988 Athletics were worlds better than the Dodgers, as were the 1988 Mets; we make room for luck because we have to, and because miracles do happen in short series.

And yet, I can't bring myself to forget that the Mets won 97 games and the Cardinals won 83. If the Mets win tomorrow — an outcome that now looks all but assured — we can say with some confidence that the best team won. And I think we can say that without taking anything away from the mystery part of it.


Tonight's game was almost an anticlimax, as Chris Carpenter, not looking sharp of late, continued his unimpressive pitching, while rookie John Maine kept the Cardinals at bay for long stretches. The Cards had only two hits off Maine through five and a third, threatening in each of the first three innings but never getting the big hit; only in the ninth, against a very flaky Billy Wagner, did the Cards finally break through, and by then they discovered anew that two-out rallies in the ninth inning tend to be short-lived.

How will they fare against the Tigers in the World Series? I really can't say, but one interesting factoid is that for the nine teams that had five or more days of rest going into the World Series, seven of them won it all. Certainly, I'm rooting for a Kittycat victory, anyway.

ESPN Box


Coda: Not that I have anything seriously wrong with me — well, nothing serious enough that it can't be controlled with the right kinds of medication — but the results of today's doctor's appointment has reminded me that I need to spend more time maintaining my own health, and spend less time in front of a computer. (In short, the horrifying things that happen to people who get full-on diabetes include limb amputation. That's an incentive right there.) As much as I enjoy raving here, this blog is the easiest thing to cut back on. I know I've said I would slow down posting before, but I really need to make an effort to get back into an exercise routine, and if it comes at the expense of this blog, well, so be it. I certainly plan on continuing the minor league stuff until the AFL ends, but cutting down on some of the other posts, well, if it keeps me from having to shoot up on a daily basis (at a bare minimum), it'll be worth it and then some.

Comments:
A Game 7 Mets’ win almost a certainty? C’mon, 3-13 Oliver Perez is pitching. If I could ever make a case for the Cards to steal a win, there it is. You make it sound like Pedro circa-1997 is pitching.
 
Love your blog, and wish you the best.
 
Best of luck, from your International Readership.
 
Feel better, Rob.
 
This is Mark Watkins, and although I often disparage your pro-Angels blogging, I wish you all the best with your health concerns.
 

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.



Newer›  ‹Older
This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
Google

WWW 6-4-2