Royals open at -120 WORLD SERIES Discussion
- Thread starter emg2525
- Start date
T
tipyerbartender1
Guest
I'm feeling back to KC, just can't ignore Harvey at home vs. Volqy on the road. Mutts have some pluck to 'em. Not super-size, balloon-balls pluck like KC, but enough pluck to not lay down. Think Cleveland down 3-1 in '95, sending it back to Atlanta to bow out in 6.
BetCrimes1984
CTG Big Brother
Of the Mets 3 aces, Harvey is the one I buy into least. But still, these things can't be ignored about KC
- They're 3-4 SU on the road vs. 7-1 SU at home.
- Volquez was the pitcher for G5 at Toronto after KC lost G3 then won G4 at that venue: same sequence sets up here.
As the stats in my previous post suggest from history, I think who scores 1st tonight should go a long way to telling us the final result (barring, of course, an immediate response by the other team in their very next AB).
- They're 3-4 SU on the road vs. 7-1 SU at home.
- Volquez was the pitcher for G5 at Toronto after KC lost G3 then won G4 at that venue: same sequence sets up here.
As the stats in my previous post suggest from history, I think who scores 1st tonight should go a long way to telling us the final result (barring, of course, an immediate response by the other team in their very next AB).
nbafan88
Pretty much a regular
Lol Emg. Yes we certainly can. But the mets pitching carried them all the way to the WS. The talent discrepancy outside of the pitching staff was through the roof. Fun series. The right team won. That's all. The only thing mets fans should be upset about is how The Dark Knight gets whatever he wants.
L
Lareux
Guest
Ugh. The better team won. If experience is the only thing that matters, or is that important, the Mets wouldn't have been in the WS. The Pirates, Dodgers, or Cardinals would have been, you know, the teams with playoff experience coming into this playoffs. Easy to make things fit into arguments if you only look at one side and only talk about the things that fit your argument.
Nobody ever said it's the only thing that matters or even that it's overwhelming important. That being said, it's absurd to say it's not a factor at all.
Absolutely the best team won. But experience played it's role here and that can't be denied.
nbafan88
Pretty much a regular
If the royals experience from the previous year wasn't there they wouldn't fight as hard as they did all regular season and all postseason
This entire discussion is stupid. Nothing can be said that will alter anyone's view. The only reason it started was because you guys used the word overrated without any basis to do so. If you think it's overrated, prove it. Don't spin it back on those who don't think it's overrated. Last year's loss was part of what made the Royals who they are today. I don't understand how you can think otherwise.
This playoff run will make the mets players better. I don't see how you can think otherwise.
This entire discussion is stupid. Nothing can be said that will alter anyone's view. The only reason it started was because you guys used the word overrated without any basis to do so. If you think it's overrated, prove it. Don't spin it back on those who don't think it's overrated. Last year's loss was part of what made the Royals who they are today. I don't understand how you can think otherwise.
This playoff run will make the mets players better. I don't see how you can think otherwise.
TheHbomb
Pretty much a regular
How has experience made Pittsburgh better? They're a bigger dissapointment now is all. People only use experience when it "fits." How did experience help the 88 mets beat te dodgers? It didn't because the more experienced team lost. Do I have to list a thousand more examples?
nbafan88
Pretty much a regular
Again, you used the word OVERRATED. One single trait does not make a team a winning team. Its a mixture of everything. Experience matters and you cant just overlook it when capping a matchup. That's all i was saying.
TheHbomb
Pretty much a regular
Why can't you overlook it? Talent wins. Not experience. Sure, if two teams are similarly matched, experience gives them the advantage, but to say the royals won because of experience is foolish. They won because they played superior defense, ran the bases better, made productive outs as opposed to striking out, and worked pitch counts in their favor.
The 2003 Yankees were far more experienced than the 2003 Marlins...just not as talented.
The 2003 Yankees were far more experienced than the 2003 Marlins...just not as talented.
L
Lareux
Guest
No one said experience doesn't matter. Being overrated, again, doesn't mean it doesn't matter, it means people put too much stock in it. This was already discussed almost word for word in this thread. Seems you still don't understand the concept of "overrated." I think it means something other than you think it does....clearly.
L
Lareux
Guest
No one is over looking it by saying it's overrated. It IS overrated. If it wasn't overrated, then every year, the most experienced team would win because it means that much. It doesn't though, so it's pretty clearly overrated. Sure it matters, but it's nowhere near the top of the list of reasons that a team wins....that's what we mean by it's overrated.
G
Gyno
Guest
I definitely think experience had something to do with it. KC made less mistakes, that's the bottom line as to why they won.
L
Lareux
Guest
I don't think anyone is saying that experience didn't have anything to do with it.
DaRaiders
Pretty much a regular
Wrong....KC did this to everyone all playoffs...NO team has EVER come from behind in so many games in a postseason. Mets had the lead in 3 games at the 8th inning and lost all 3. KC kept games close, hit in the clutch late in game, had faith in each other "passing the bat" "moving the line" by moving baserunners late in games to scoring position. agressive baserunning...and the relief pitching was LIGHTS OUT!
The Mets couldn't finish...Flatout!
L
Lareux
Guest
Agreed, but how was he wrong in his comments? He said KC made less mistakes....they did. Yes KC had clutch hits, no disputing that, but the mistakes the Mets made made it all possible to begin with. KC was the better team.
L
Lareux
Guest
It was. KC's experience had something to do with it for sure. Not saying it was monumental, but it definitely had something to do with their win. I'm on the side that experience is overrated, so I'm certainly not putting too much stock into it. But saying that experience had nothing to do with it is just as foolish as stating experience is THE reason they won and that it's importance cannot be understated.
:shake:
Similar threads
