BS: World Series - Between Whom?

Subject: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,Dazbo
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 06:56 AM

So, Will it be between the White Sox or Yankees vs the Astros or Cards?

I'm hoping for the White Sox vs Cards WS as I think this will be the more interesting series to watch (and the Cards are my fav team in my fav league). Cards to win it 4 to 2.

What do you reckon?

Darren

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: kendall
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 07:09 AM

I reckon the very term "World series" is silly.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,Dazbo
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 07:24 AM

I agree but that's what it's called. But I bet if the newspaper it is named after didn't have World in it the name would have been dropped decades ago when the sponsorship ended.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,Pseudolus at work
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 09:53 AM

Well, since the Yankees were eliminated on Monday I'm not thinking they have a chance. The Angels on the other hand might sneak in there if the umpires allow them to play instead of deciding games on bad calls....


Frank

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Peace
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 10:09 AM

Interrogative object case pronoun. Very nice.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,Pseudolus at work
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 10:24 AM

Peace,
   I don't think the Interrogative's are in it anymore either, just the Angels, White Sox, Astros and Cards.

sheesh,
Frank

:)

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 10:37 AM

Whoops, I did of course mean the Angels not Yankees.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,Pseudolus at work
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 01:13 PM

I knew ya did Dazbo, but I saw the bull's eye and couldn't resist. Not to mention typing the words "the Yankees are out of it" feels good!!!

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 01:37 PM

White Sox - Cards, I go for the Cards in 6.

It will always be the World Series, the name may not be truthful but it is far from silly.   When the games were first played, the U.S. was the only country playing professional baseball. The term was first used in the 1880s - well before the American League was even established.

No other country has made any sort of challenge to the title. Event the World Baseball Classic that is scheduled for next March appear to be more of an exhibition then any sort of legitmate contest. The teams will represent countries, not clubs.

Sports fan can grumble about it all they like. Get over it!

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Peace
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 02:10 PM

Cards for sure. But not in six.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 02:39 PM

I'm with Dazbo,
I will root for the White Sox but already know the Cards will win in 5.

I have an official Mr. Peabody "way forward" machine for such occaisions as these.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Peace
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 02:41 PM

Cool. So who loses the 2009 World Series?

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Den
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 02:43 PM

Why do commentators refer to the winners as World champions? Should they not be World series champions? I know the Tournament got its name from a newspaper but insisting that the winners are World champions is a bit of a stretch.

"No other country has made any sort of challenge to the title". Not sure what you mean here Ron but didn't the Toronto Blue Jays win it twice?

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 03:21 PM

It did not get the name from a newspaper - another urban legend.

In case you missed the earlier post, the championship has been called the World Series since the 1880s when the only professional baseball was played here in the U.S. It is simply a term to reflect the winner of professional sports in the U.S. - and of course as you pointed out, Canada is now part of MLB. Has been since 1969.

Of course Toronto won it. When I said that no other country has made a formal challenge, there have been no challenges coming from professional teams in other countries to take on our World Champion of Major League Baseball.   Have the Yomiuri Giants ever thrown down an offer to take on the World Champs? No.

It's just a name. Lets get over it.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 03:25 PM

I want the Cubs to play the White Sox, 'cause it will make Chicagoans happy.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 03:26 PM

I would like the Mets to play anybody, but that won't be happening this month.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Den
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 04:31 PM

Ron, forgive my ignorance but is the World Series an invitational? Or is it limited to teams who have played league baseball in North America and arrive at the World Series as a part of a play off system.

You said, "In case you missed the earlier post, the championship has been called the World Series since the 1880s when the only professional baseball was played here in the U.S". It is simply a term to reflect the winner of professional sports in the U.S".

I read your earlier post and I'm still not sure that it explains why its called the World Series when it was just played in the US by teams from the US.

I'm not trying to yank your chain here. I'm just asking for clarification because I want to know.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 04:45 PM

I apologize Den. I did not realize that you weren't in the U.S. I should have been clear.

The World Series is not invitational. It is the championship series of Major League Baseball.   MLB has 30 teams divided into two leagues(National League and the American League), each with 3 divisions. 29 teams play in the United States, one team plays in Canada.

The two leagues play a 165 game season(I may be wrong with the # of games, I believe it might have changed).    Each division has a winner (the best record of the other teams in the division) and a wild card team is chosen - the team with the next best record in the league.   The 4 teams have a best of 5 game series, and the winners then face each other in a best of 7 game series to determine the league champion.   Then, the two league champions play the "World Series" to determine the champion of Major League Baseball.

The World Series has always been official nickname of the championship series since it began in 1903.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,Dazbo
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 06:14 AM

Ron, you said "Event the World Baseball Classic that is scheduled for next March appear to be more of an exhibition then any sort of legitmate contest. The teams will represent countries, not clubs."

The inference I take from this is that you consider internationals to be exhibitions. However, in most sports played around the world international competitions are as competitive as any national league, perhaps more so - just look at India vs Pakistan in cricket or field hockey. Why should the baseball 'world cup' be any less competitive (even if many MLB stars decline to take part)? I don't know whether I'll get to see any of the WBC of here in England, but I'd certainly watch it if it's shown.

Will Piazza still be playing for the Mets next year?

Darren

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,chinmusic
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 08:19 AM

Seems to me there's more parity in the majors than ever before. There's no dominant team in these current round of playoffs, so I think the World Series winner is up for grabs. However, I think Mike Scioscia is the best manager in baseball today, so I'd be tempted to go with the Angels when all is said and done. In order for this to happen though, Vlady Guerrero has to start hitting, and the Halos have to find a way to    overcome the loss of Bartolo Colon in their starting staff.

For the first time in awhile, the Mets finally have some talented kids to hang their hats on in the future. David Wright is a super star in the making and I like Jose Reyes a lot. Alas, the Mets made a terrible mistake in trading pitcher Scott Kazmir, who'll be an All-Star with the Devil Rays. In any case, I'll take the Angels over the Cards in six games in the World Series.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 09:32 AM

"The inference I take from this is that you consider internationals to be exhibitions."

No, I do not mean to infer that. There are "friendlies" and there are "competitions". This baseball "cup" appears to be shaping up as more of a friendly.   From what I have read, Japan was not terribly excited about participating and players in the U.S. do not appear to be enthused. At issues is the timing of the competition, which comes during spring training for both countries.   Baseball is more of a league competition, there is very little interest on a national level - and I am talking about countries like Japan and the United States.

I doubt Mike Piazza will return to the Mets next season.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 09:47 AM

I've always been partial to the St. Louis Blues and the Milwaukee Braves, myself. Not to mention the Washington Senators, the Philadelphia Atheletics, the New York Giants, and the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 09:52 AM

The St. Louis Blues? I think you mean the St. Louis Browns if you are talking baseball.   What about the Boston Braves? Kansas City Athletics? Seattle Pilots? You can also add the Montreal Expos to the list.

As Satchel Paige used to say - "Don't look back, the past might be gaining on you".

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: freightdawg
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 11:28 AM

I find it increasingly difficult to root for any team with consistency any more. As I was growing up my heroes were the Cincinnati Reds and the Los Angeles Dodgers (that way I was pretty much always covered in the World Series). I knew from year to year who was going to be playing what position and even who the backups were.

Now, all kids can say is, "the group of over-paid free agents renting apartments in LA is better than the group of over-paid free agents renting apartments in Phoenix". With very few exceptions (which makes them very striking exceptions, pun intended) there is no team or community loyalty among players these days.

Now before everyone jumps on me for being an old fogey, I know owners treated players like trash in "the good old days", but there was something magical about knowing that the same group of players was going to show up year after year. I didn't have to read the program to know that Johnny Bench was going to be behind the plate, that Pete Rose was playing third, Dave C. (can't spell his last name) was playing short, etc. Kids today don't have that opportunity, and never will. Things change, and time marches on, but sometimes change takes a little bit of the charm out of the game.

Trivia question: who was the last Hall of Fame player to retire having played his entire career with one team? (I ask not knowing the answer) I have a few guesses but I am sure they are all wrong.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 12:08 PM

Freightdawg,

I do agree with you, but player trades have always been around. Babe Ruth played 15 years with the Yankees, but his first six seasons were with the Boston Red Sox and he ended up his career with the Boston Braves. Pete Rose left the Reds.    Free-agency developed because players were being taken advantage of AT THE TIME.   I remember Ralph Kiner's famous story about going to Branch Rickey asking for a raise after having an outstanding season. Rickey told him "we finished last with you and we can finish last without you" - no raise.

Of course, it has gotten out of hand. I blame the owners for that, but even they do not take the full blame.   It is supply and demand, and I don't blame anyone for getting the best offer for their services.

But, I do agree with you. It is harder to feel the compassion for players who are making thousands of dollars each minute.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 12:19 PM

Heck, I feel the same way about most professional sports.

Back in the day, a .300 batting average in baseball was considered the mark of a good batter, something for others to try for. Now the players are considered good if they bat .250.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: freightdawg
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 12:57 PM

Hey again Ron,

I agree that trades have always been a part of the game. In fact, some trades have become a part of the lore of the game - the Babe Ruth trade being a huge example. And I never really forgave Rose for leaving Cincy for Philly. Sometimes there just is not enough tar and feathers for the situation.   : )

I think fans have to shoulder their (our) share of the blame too. If we would just quit going to the parks and turn off the TV, then the players and owners would have to reevaluate their priorities.

But who is going to do that????

So who was the last Hall of Famer to retire after playing for only one team. I know Carl Yazstremski (sp?) did, but surely someone else has retired since he did. Did Cal Ripken Jr. play his entire career with Baltimore? His would be the next name on my list.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 01:18 PM

Ryne Sandberg played his entire career with the Cubs and he was inducted this summer. Other recent inductees (off the top of my head) are Mike Schmidt (Phillies)and Kirby Puckett (Twins.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Pseudolus
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 01:32 PM

Back in the day when .300 was the goal, there were a lot less teams. The player pool has thinned out...


Frank

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,J
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 09:10 PM

Ryne Sandberg played for the Phillies and was traded to the Cubs in a multi-player deal in which he was an 'afterthought'. Can't remember the rest of the players involved in the trade...

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:34 AM

I forgot about that J! Thanks!   Sandberg came up for a cup of coffee with the Phils in late 81 and then was traded in the offseason. Another bad move for the Phillies!   I guess it is harder to find players who stayed with one team!

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:37 AM

So? Is that a good reason to lower the goals?

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: freightdawg
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:09 AM

Pseudolus,

Your theory of the player pool being thinned out has one flaw (although I agree in principle). There are also a lot more average to below average pitchers out there throwing mushballs. It seems to me that it is a lot tougher to throw a curve ball past a major leaguer for a strike than it is for a major leaguer to hit a curve ball thrown by a major leaguer. Batters can take batting practice every day or every other day for however long they want. The arm of a pitcher is time limited. After so many pitches he's done. So managers and coaches have to limit the number of pitches a guy can throw. With all the expansion and the number of AAA pitchers in the major leagues it is amazing to me that there has not been another .400 hitter in the past few years. Of course, if you're pitching to a AAA batter then maybe everything evens out.

Upon further review of this post, I think I know how managers have worked around this problem - the set up guy. When I was a young'un it really was not uncommon to see a pitcher go 8 or 9 innings. Now the starter goes 5 or 6, the set up guy gets a couple of innings of work and the closer comes in for the save. It's pitching by committee these days. That probably is the main reason why averages stay so low.

Thanks to everyone for the names of the long-timers. I had forgotten about Kirby Puckett. I always admired Puckett, even though I was not a Twins fan. He always looked like he was having so much FUN on the field - always with that impish grin on his face. From what I read about him he was that way all the time. I wish more players could be poured in his mold.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Jimmy C
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 02:05 PM

Not knowing a lot about baseball, I think it would be nice if all teams were champions at least one time in their history.
Now that the Yankees are gone I am leaning towards Chicago, because it has been so long they won it.
As I said I don't know much about the game so could someone pleases explain what the difference is between a "perfect Game" and a " No Hitter ".

Thanks

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: freightdawg
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:14 PM

Jimmy,

A "no-hitter" is when no batter reaches first base as the result of a base hit. He might reach because of a base on balls, a hit batsman, etc, but no batter gets a clean base hit.

A "perfect game" requires a no-hitter, but there are also no base on balls, no hit batsmen, etc. In a perfect game there are 27 batters to the plate, and 27 consecutive outs. Technically, although extremely unlikely, a pitcher could actually lose a game in which he pitches a no-hitter. In a perfect game, since no one would reach first base, he could not lose the game.

Finally. A question on Mudcat that I can answer.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: gnu
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:31 PM

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Peace - PM
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 02:41 PM

Cool. So who loses the 2009 World Series?
************************************************************

Almost all of them.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Jimmy C
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:31 PM

Thanks,

That clears it up. Now all I have to figure out is why the managers wear uniforms ?.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:49 PM

Dugouts are dusty, saves on cleaning a suit.

I could never figure out why coaches in other sports get so dressed up when their players are wearing not much more than undewear.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: freightdawg
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 06:32 PM

Doesn't it also have to do with the fact that in years gone by that the manager would (or at least could) on occasion insert himself into the game? Kind of why I have always thought they were called "managers" instead of "coaches." Still, all the coaches on the team wear uniforms too.

Lots of funny rules, like if a pitcher wants somebody on first base, he has to go through the process of throwing 4 straight balls, as opposed to just telling the ump - "hey, we give this guy a pass."

The infield fly ball rule still has me completely confused, as do the myriad of ways a pitcher can balk a player to first base or advance a runner.

And why do the players wear those funny little stirrups over their socks? Talk about arcane customs.

Still, there are few things that can bond son and father like an evening at the ball park and a couple of hot dogs.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 06:53 PM

"Doesn't it also have to do with the fact that in years gone by that the manager would (or at least could) on occasion insert himself into the game?"

That is true. I was making a joke about the dust.

It is actually just a custom. Connie Mack wore a suit and tie. So did Burt Shotton. I believe the only "rule" that Major League Baseball has is that the coaches, not the manager, need to be in uniform if they appear on the field.


"Lots of funny rules, like if a pitcher wants somebody on first base, he has to go through the process of throwing 4 straight balls, as opposed to just telling the ump - "hey, we give this guy a pass." "

The idea is that anything can happen. There could be a wild pitch or a passed ball. I remember a story, but I can't recall the pitcher, instead of throwing four balls, he simply hit the batter with the pitch.


"The infield fly ball rule still has me completely confused, as do the myriad of ways a pitcher can balk a player to first base or advance a runner."

Not as difficult as it looks. If there are runners on first AND second, or the bases are loaded - AND - there are less than two outs, the infield fly rule is in effect. If the batter pops the ball up in the infield, the umpire can make the call declaring an out. The reason behind it is to prevent the fielder from purposely dropping the ball to set up a double play.   Frankly, I think the rule is stupid. Baseball is a game of fate and fast thinking.


"why do the players wear those funny little stirrups over their socks? Talk about arcane customs."

Well, customs are usually a respectful way of remembering the past. The story I read about why they had those "funny little stirrups" in the first place is because teams used the colors as part of the identifying uniform. Unfortunately, earlier color dies could often be posionous when mixed with sweat or blood. They would wear a white sock underneath and the stirrup was part of its uniform. Today it serves no purpose, but it is something that quickly forms an image of a baseball player.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 01:34 AM

Red Sox in 4 over the Cardinals.
No, wait! That was last year.
Shit...
White Sox in 4 over the Astros.

Seamus

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 03:43 PM

WHITE SOX are IN THE SERIES !!!

Against the Angels---FOUR COMPLETE GAMES BY 4 DIFFERENT PITCHERS !!!

Absolutely amazing !!!

Art

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: freightdawg
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 06:26 PM

With a frightening sense of clairvoyance, I predict the Dodgers will beat the Yankees, 4 games to 1.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Matt R
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 01:51 PM

Man, the 'Stros really blew it last night!

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Charley Noble
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 09:09 PM

I've been a White Sox fan for years, probably in reaction against all the Red Sox fans here in Maine. However, they only win if I'm not watching. So I'll have to videotape the whole thing and enjoy watching it after everything is settled.

I was amazed that the White Sox had the best record from the beginning of the season almost up until the end. They never seemed to have the heavy hitters or even the best pitchers. Maybe they just work the best as a team!

Of course there was never any coverage of their games in our local newspapers. So I'm left with a whole lot to imagine. Maybe I'll compose a song, before reality settles in.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Oct 05 - 01:23 AM

who won the last olympics there are some very good amature players in the game .do america invite other countries to have a go or are they so self centred that no one else matters

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: Matt R
Date: 19 Oct 05 - 02:04 AM

Learn how to spell, punctuate and speak like a normal human being first, dillweed.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Oct 05 - 09:26 AM

Wake up and smell the coffee Guest.   The World Series has nothing to do with your rantings about nationalism. No one is denying the Olympics, or even the upcoming World Championships.   Get with the program.

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: GUEST,guest
Date: 19 Oct 05 - 10:21 AM

I always thought rounders was a girls game...

Subject: RE: BS: World Series - Between Whom?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Oct 05 - 11:01 AM

You are ancient!