Master Index of Archived Threads


White Sox-Angels ALCS Thread

Valadius Oct 11 2005 02:43 PM

Considering the series begins today, you know, we gotta get one going.

sharpie Oct 11 2005 02:44 PM

Thank you, Angels, for defeating the MFYs. Go Sox.

rpackrat Oct 11 2005 03:06 PM

It's complete BS that the ALCS begins just 20 or so hours after the Angels-MFY series ended. The Angels first had to fly cross-country on an overnight flight Sunday night, then nearly cross-country on another overnight flight to get to Chicago for tonight's game. Meanwhile, the Cards have been off since last Saturday, and the Astros had yesterday off (and only have a short flight from Houston to St. Lou anyway). There is no good reason (and no, the convenience of Fox and ESPN is not a good reason) to start the ALCS instead of the NLCS tonight.

Willets Point Oct 11 2005 03:15 PM

What about tickets sales? People who have tix for the game tonight might not be able to make it tomorrow night.

Centerfield Oct 11 2005 03:18 PM

Ticket sales? Since when do the fans matter?

Valadius Oct 11 2005 03:20 PM

They matter to Arte Moreno, as evidenced by his famous beer price slashing. Too bad it's in Chicago, then.

rpackrat Oct 11 2005 03:20 PM

IIRC from my Mets playoff days, the tickets do not specify a date. They are simply for ALDS GAME 1" or "ALCS GAME 3" and so on. So, the games could be scheduled on any date.

metirish Oct 11 2005 07:31 PM

My cable TV is out, service interuption in the area, Cooby any problems with your Suscom?

metirish Oct 11 2005 08:55 PM

Angels are not tired, they lead 3 to nil.

MFS62 Oct 11 2005 09:04 PM

I can't wait for some of the crazies on other Mets boards to realize that Byrd used to be a Met, and start the "why did we get rid of that guy?" threads. Later

cooby Oct 11 2005 09:05 PM

metirish wrote: My cable TV is out, service interuption in the area, Cooby any problems with your Suscom? Not that I know of, unless the Mr. fell asleep watching NCIS and I don't know it

seawolf17 Oct 11 2005 09:27 PM

Paul Byrd is in the starting rotation on the All-Ugly team.

Frayed Knot Oct 11 2005 11:15 PM

Angels steal game 1 when all the factors seemed to line up against them: road game, unfavorable pitching matchup, travel weary, etc. Hey, a sub-3 hour post-season game!! What's up wit dat?

Edgy DC Oct 11 2005 11:27 PM

Not enough quasi-celebs in the house.

holychicken Oct 12 2005 08:36 AM

Was it just me or did Piniella sound like a dope? I turned on the game in the 4th and was thinking "god, who is this third guy, he is WORSE than Tim McCarver, if that is possible." Then when I saw who it was, I was taken back.

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2005 11:17 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 13 2005 10:05 AM

Oh WOW does that SUCK!!!! For those who didn't see it: - 1-1 tie / bottom 9 / 2 outs / none on / AJ Piersynski batting for the Sox - he apparently strikes out swinging on something near the dirt - Angel catcher Josh Paul (the Molinas had been pr'd for) rolls the ball back to the mound and thinks it's all headed for the 10th - But Peirsynski thinks it maybe hit the dirt and heads towards 1st, making it easily because all the Angels are walking off the field - After long discussions, mucho arguing from Scoscia, and a belated consultation with the 3rd base ump, Piersynski is awarded 1st - Pablo Ozuna pinch runs and promptly steals 2nd - Joe Crede lines a 2-strike pitch into the LF corner and the Sox win!!!! The main bone of contention is going to be that the home ump seemed to not only indicate the strike 3 but also a "punch-out" sign and may have been convinced into thinking the pitch was NOT caught cleanly only by the fact that Piersynski's ran. By the time the 3rd base ump was asked he either agreed that it hit the dirt, didn't see it well enough to over-rule it, or was too chicken to make a member of his crew look bad. I was pulling for the Sox and didn't want to see it end like that once AJ got on. This thing's going to be talked about for days inside MLB.

Valadius Oct 12 2005 11:32 PM

That was a bullshit call. Pierzynski was clearly called out by the home plate umpire.

Frayed Knot Oct 12 2005 11:38 PM

Umps w/supervisor in live press conference on ESPN - Home ump (Doug Eddings) says that the "out" call was not an indication that he thought the ball was caught but merely his normal strike 3 mechanics. - Ump supervisor: Replays "inconclusive at best" - Piersynski's delay in running toward 1st is NOT the same as being out ... at least until he reaches the dugout (he never made more than a step towards his bench)

HahnSolo Oct 13 2005 09:55 AM

The Catcher (Paul) said in the post game that in situations like that (third strikes in the dirt or that get away) the ump almost always yells something like "no out" or "ball in play" which he did not do on this occasion. That's not a rule, mind you, just something that generally happens. And I second, third, and fourth the motion that Piniella sounds clueless. At some points, I think McCarver and Buck (who I also cant stand) actually felt bad for him, not correcting his mistakes.

86-Dreamer Oct 13 2005 10:10 AM

I think the umpire should be removed from the Series. Whether he ruled correctly about the ball hitting in the dirt is irrelevant, but there is no question that his hand signals were utterly confusing and that is unacceptable. His explanation holds no water in my opinion. If his first signal was to indicate that the ball was not tipped (and therefore a strike), then what could be the purpose of the second signal other than to say that the batter was out?

Frayed Knot Oct 13 2005 10:17 AM

The other thing that 'generally happens' is that the catcher looks to the ump after anything even remotely close just to get confirmation of the fact that he caught the ball cleanly. Paul never did and - as confusing as the strike/punch-out signals may have been - neither he not any of the other Angels appeared to be fooled by that because they were already trotting off the field while Eddings was going through his mechanics. In short they never looked they just assumed, and when you assume ... Piersynski, on the other hand, assumed that it was NOT clean and when he didn't get the expected tag on his butt he simply took off. Run first, ask questions later. I still think it was a bad (though close) call - and it's certainly a sucky way to lose - but the Halos are as much to blame as anyone. Piersynski made sure and they didn't.

86-Dreamer Oct 13 2005 10:21 AM

I agree that the Angels should not have assumed anything and have to accept the loss as their own fault. Does not change my opinon that the umpire did a bad job and should be censured.

Frayed Knot Oct 13 2005 10:34 AM

Eddings' hand signals may have been confusing but; a) that's the way he had called 'strike 3' the entire time and b) the Angels seem to be using that more as an after-the-fact excuse than anything else. The catcher Paul couldn't have been confused by it because he never saw it. Bad call? Probably, but they're not removing or "censuring" an ump for that.

Centerfield Oct 13 2005 11:18 AM

Good point. Paul flipped the ball back immediately and trotted off. I think the rest of the Angels took their cue from Paul. There's blame to be had on both sides...Eddings for the confusing call/signals and Paul for not making doubly-triply sure. On anything close, I've noticed that Piazza holds up his glove waiting for confirmation from the ump. If Paul had done that, all of this could have been avoided. I think maybe we need a rule change where we have a signal/call where the ump rules strike three but it is VERY CLEAR that the batter is not out.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 13 2005 11:36 AM

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2005/columns/story?columnist=caple_jim&id=2189660]Jim Caple offers a good perspective on the play and the call.[/url]

metirish Oct 13 2005 12:37 PM

holychicken wrote.. ]Was it just me or did Piniella sound like a dope? He sounded completely out of place, he has the most annoying voice, where is he from?

Edgy DC Oct 13 2005 12:49 PM

Tampa. Also home to Dwight Gooden, Derek Bell, Dave Magadan, John Hudek, Tony La Russa, Fred McGriff, Tino Martinez, Gary Sheffield, Floyd Youmans, and the greatest of them all, Rich Puig.

Willets Point Oct 13 2005 04:41 PM

Fox cancels ALCS.

Valadius Oct 13 2005 04:44 PM

ROTFL.

Edgy DC Oct 13 2005 04:51 PM

]Antonio Alfonseca Once Again Leads Major-League Relievers In Fingers MLB Promises Next Season Will Be Even More Predictable Reggie Jackson Still Mr. October To His Librarian In the zone. Of course, the headline ususally does it.

Willets Point Oct 13 2005 05:07 PM

The Onion's News in Brief are usually funnier than the full-length articles.

seawolf17 Oct 13 2005 09:32 PM

This is hysterical. ]Antonio Alfonseca Once Again Leads Major-League Relievers In Fingers MIAMI—Florida Marlins pitcher Antonio Alfonseca dominated the MLB in appendages for the ninth straight year, finishing the 2005 season with a league-leading 12 fingers. Alfonseca, who made his debut with the Marlins in 1997 and wasted no time making this particular statistical category his own, led the NL for almost the entire season, only falling into a close second during an unusual two-week period in mid-August. Alfonseca's performance will trigger a $1 million bonus, as the Marlins signed him to an incentive-laden, oft-criticized, finger-enumeration-based contract. "Antonio has been through a lot this season, including some elbow problems and a trip to the DL," manager Jack McKeon said. "But in the end, he just went out there and had a lot of fingers." There was once again a tie for second place behind Alfonseca, with 214 pitchers amassing 10 fingers each, followed by Bob Wickman, who finished last with 9.7.

Zvon Oct 13 2005 10:05 PM

I see I put this in the wrong thread, so Il reproduce it here: To my eye it bounced up, but within the catchers glove. It hit the leather pocket and not the ground, and bounced off the ground under the leather and up into the heart of the glove. It was a terrible call, especially since the ump did ring him up. In a play like that the ump should indicate a strikeout and the ball is in play, in that order. So he should have rung him up and then waved safe, as in fair ball, in play. This and the call on Cano in the Yankee series can undermine a game and sometimes a series. Cano should not have been called out, imo, and I was really surprised there wasnt a bigger argument mounted there. That was a crucial play in a crucial inning at a crucial time.

Frayed Knot Oct 13 2005 11:17 PM

The Cano call was absolutely correct and I'm surprised at how much talk there's been about this -- even from non-NYY fans. He was running with his right foot on the fair side of the baseline the entire way down the line (at least 3 full strides worth). I mean if he was at least straddling the line a bit maybe he'd get away with it but that call was a no-brainer IMO. The throw doesn't need to hit him to affect the play.

Zvon Oct 14 2005 01:23 AM

Frayed Knot wrote: The Cano call was absolutely correct and I'm surprised at how much talk there's been about this -- even from non-NYY fans. He was running with his right foot on the fair side of the baseline the entire way down the line (at least 3 full strides worth). I mean if he was at least straddling the line a bit maybe he'd get away with it but that call was a no-brainer IMO. The throw doesn't need to hit him to affect the play. id have to get a closer look at the footage. i only saw what they showed as it happened. I thought his right foot caught line on every stride but one. It was a wierd call to make considering it wasnt an obvious amount (off the line) and it was at such a crucial time. No matter the baseline issue, that throw doesnt get caught at 1st.

Frayed Knot Oct 14 2005 09:57 AM

Well of course the rule is that you're supposed to run entirely in "the lane"; iow, with both feet on the foul side of the line. So even if Cano's foot was touching the line every now and then he's still technically wrong. That both feet spent several strides on the fair side of the line is what made the call so obvious to me (and apparently to Joe West). The idea that the throw wasn't good anyway shouldn't enter into it - especially keeping in mind that the reason for the rule is so that the runner won't affect the throw and/or block the 1st baseman's view. And I'm certainly not buying the argument (put forth from several sources) that the 'importance of this game' means you somehow get more lax on a call like this. MFY fans have this tendancy to think that games affecting their possible ouster from the playoffs are somehow more parmount than those played by mere mortals. If I were going to cry about a call I'd go to the one where Cano jumped off the base a partial second too soon on the force play. That there was no advantage to be gained there (he wasn't leaving early so as to turn a DP) and he was only trying to clear the base for the oncoming runner seems much better justification for letting the letter of the law slide. It's surprising to me that more people seem to have complaints about the play at 1st than about the one at 2nd.

Centerfield Oct 14 2005 10:18 AM

Doug Eddings, the ALCS umpire, regrets not making a stronger call. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2005/news/story?id=2190652 I don't know if anyone saw the interview, but Eddings seems like a genuinely nice guy....certainly nicer than the director of umpiring or whatever bigwig that was sitting out there with him. I feel bad for the guy...and I say it's about time MLB requires umps to signal or call "No Catch".

Willets Point Oct 14 2005 10:32 AM

="Frayed Knot"] And I'm certainly not buying the argument (put forth from several sources) that the 'importance of this game' means you somehow get more lax on a call like this. I agree, it's like the unspoke rule about hockey refs not calling penalties in overtime of playoff games. Gutless.

Centerfield Oct 14 2005 10:45 AM

People complain more because the baseline play occurred in Game 5 where the Yanks were threatening to come back. The second base play resulted in tack-on runs in a game most MFY fans had written off as a loss. Of course, you're absolutely right...and that play at second base was by far the more questionable call. I mean, considering the "neighborhood" standard normally applied around second base (esp. on DP's where there is actually an advantage to be gained) it's that much more surprising. But to recognize that, MFY fans would need to be intelligent and, well.... This is what's so cool about baseball. I've been watching this game for 20+ years...and in the span of a month or two, I've seen three plays (the Cameron transfer ruled no catch, the Cano 2nd base play, and the Pierzynski/Paul 3rd Strike) that I have never seen before.

Frayed Knot Oct 14 2005 10:51 AM

The argument for a more lax style of ump/ref-ing in crucial situations has always been that they should "let them play" and "not decide the game with a call". But hell, you do that and instead of deciding the game with a call you're helping to decide the game with a NON call -- which is even worse since it benefits the team that was skirting the rules.

Edgy DC Oct 14 2005 10:56 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 14 2005 11:21 PM

Just about every World Cup overtime soccer game that doesn't go to a penalty kickoff ends with a foul call and a penalty kick. Sometimes it's almost merciful.

rpackrat Oct 14 2005 03:14 PM

It seems to me that the only clear mistake by Eddings was not vocalizing "ball in play" of "no catch." The repalys were inconclusive on whether the ball bounced -- it clearly changed direction, and there is no way to tell whether it did so because it hit the ground or the catcher's glove. People keep talking about Eddings' closed-fist "punch out" sign, but neither Pierzynski nor Paul could have seen that because both had their backs to Eddings. The confusion came because Eddings did not make a vocal call alerting the players to the fact that the ball (in his reasonable opinion) bounced.

Johnny Dickshot Oct 14 2005 11:13 PM

Sox win Game 3, 5-2. Garland: 9 IP, 4 H, 2 ER, 7 K, 1 BB. Nuthin but a Cabrera HR. Lackey gave up 3 in the first and as Warner would say "you coulda turned your sets off there."

Frayed Knot Oct 15 2005 09:26 AM

Angels continue to run the bases poorly. This time it was Erstad who - down by 4 runs at mid-game - decides to try for a 2-out triple and was thrown out by about 8 feet. For all the talk of small-ball* going on with these teams, the Angels and ChiSox have gotten to where they are DESPITE the way they're executing little ball, not because of it. * -- and while we're on this subject, I'm getting a huge kick out of listening to MFY fans who think the reason they didn't go further is because they don't bunt enough. If I'm on the opposing side I'm BEGGING for Sheff, ARod & Giambi to start laying them down.

Zvon Oct 15 2005 07:18 PM

="Frayed Knot"] And I'm certainly not buying the argument (put forth from several sources) that the 'importance of this game' means you somehow get more lax on a call like this. MFY fans have this tendancy to think that games affecting their possible ouster from the playoffs are somehow more parmount than those played by mere mortals. point taken. Tho i was more referring to the importance of the situation.\ Im no Yank fan. I just dont hate them like your typical met fan. When it comes to post season (with no Mets) I not only want to see good games & good baseball,.... I hate for it to end. So Im always rooting for maxed out series's, extra innings,....anything to keep the baseball season alive. Either way we did get the most games out of that series, so im not complaining. Just talkin. ] If I were going to cry about a call I'd go to the one where Cano jumped off the base a partial second too soon on the force play. Your right,...this was more of a surprise call than the play at 1st, and was, imo, not of a consistant nature. They always give the 2nd baseman that call. I guess my feeling is a good game for an umpire is when he goes totally unnoticed. And this applies only to the call at 2nd base, cuz the call at 1st did require more involvement. It still was nitpicking. Id bet donuts to dollars that if Cano was ruled safe at 1st, there would have been not even a hint of argument from the Angels bench. So the ump ended up making a big play there, not the players. But if the rule says both feet had to be totally in that zone, I guess he had every right. Im just sayin I just didnt like it. Lets face it,.....this all goes back to JC Martins bunt in the '69 series. Ever since umps have been looking to balance out that non-call,...lol.

seawolf17 Oct 16 2005 07:39 PM

Neat stat -- three consecutive CGs by White Sox pitchers in this series... the first time that has happened in the postseason since: [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1948]October 6, 1973 - Seaver[/url] [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1949]October 7, 1973 - Matlack[/url] [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1950]October 8, 1973 - Koosman[/url]

Frayed Knot Oct 16 2005 10:16 PM

"Id bet donuts to dollars that if Cano was ruled safe at 1st, there would have been not even a hint of argument from the Angels bench." There damn well SHOULD have been and Scoscia hardly seems like the type who would sit back and let something like that slide. "So the ump ended up making a big play there, not the players." I disagree. It's the umps job to jump in there if a player not following the rules (Cano) affects the play (which he clearly did IMO). Again, the idea that umps/refs shouldn't 'decide a game' with a call leads to them possibly deciding games with NON-calls which is at least as bad. Anyway, on to new games; Angels FINALLY get a call to go their way here in game 6. Adam Kennedy on 1st when Figgins (finally a hit!!) laces a hit-n-run double to RF. A fan (presumably a local LAA fan) reaches over the low wall to snag the bouncing ball which clearly would have stayed in play (I hope stadium security is currently in their 20th minute of beating him under the stands). The umps initially ruled Kennedy to stop at 3rd, until a brief protest from Scoscia and an ump confab led to them awarding him home (he was running on the pitch remember). He likely would have scored anyway as the Halos actually put a few hits together and took a 3-2 lead here as they attempt to stave off elimination.

Zvon Oct 16 2005 10:21 PM

seawolf17 wrote: Neat stat -- three consecutive CGs by White Sox pitchers in this series... the first time that has happened in the postseason since: [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1948]October 6, 1973 - Seaver[/url] [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1949]October 7, 1973 - Matlack[/url] [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1950]October 8, 1973 - Koosman[/url] ya gotta love anytime the Mets come up :)

Zvon Oct 16 2005 10:25 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: Anyway, on to new games; Angels FINALLY get a call to go their way here in game 6. Adam Kennedy on 1st when Figgins (finally a hit!!) laces a hit-n-run double to RF. A fan (presumably a local LAA fan) reaches over the low wall to snag the bouncing ball which clearly would have stayed in play (I hope stadium security is currently in their 20th minute of beating him under the stands). The umps initially ruled Kennedy to stop at 3rd, until a brief protest from Scoscia and an ump confab led to them awarding him home (he was running on the pitch remember). He likely would have scored anyway as the Halos actually put a few hits together and took a 3-2 lead here as they attempt to stave off elimination. Ive missed alot of this game. Thanks for fillin me in on that^. Crede just tied it with a kaboom in the 7th. Good game here.

Zvon Oct 16 2005 10:58 PM

="seawolf17"]Neat stat -- three consecutive CGs by White Sox pitchers in this series... the first time that has happened in the postseason since: [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1948]October 6, 1973 - Seaver[/url] [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1949]October 7, 1973 - Matlack[/url] [url=http://www.ultimatemets.com/gamedetail.php?gameno=1950]October 8, 1973 - Koosman[/url] Three cards from my MetSet about that playoff series: Collect em all! (just right click and save to a file)

Frayed Knot Oct 16 2005 10:59 PM

And speaking of umps' calls, Posednik just got away with what Cameron couldn't earlier this year. Y'know the one where he catches the ball yet drops it on the transfer even though no further throw/play was in order. No hint of a call from the men in blue nor a mention from those in the booth. That's probably one of those rules that dates back to the day when gloves snagged things only slightly better than kids winter mittens and just has never been taken off the books. I was shocked when that got called this year on Cammy. And now another bad call as I'm typing!!!! Pitcher Escobar tags the runner with his glove as the ball is clearly in his bare hand. He even threw it after the tag as an indication that HE knew it wasn't legit but the 1st base ump doesn't see it. They've now reversed the call after a conference. Scoscia's arguing about it but I think it's more from accumulated frustration more than anything else.

Zvon Oct 16 2005 11:14 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: And speaking of umps' calls, Posednik just got away with what Cameron couldn't earlier this year. Y'know the one where he catches the ball yet drops it on the transfer even though no further throw/play was in order. No hint of a call from the men in blue nor a mention from those in the booth. That's probably one of those rules that dates back to the day when gloves snagged things only slightly better than kids winter mittens and just has never been taken off the books. I was shocked when that got called this year on Cammy. And now another bad call as I'm typing!!!! Pitcher Escobar tags the runner with his glove as the ball is clearly in his bare hand. He even threw it after the tag as an indication that HE knew it wasn't legit but the 1st base ump doesn't see it. They've now reversed the call after a conference. Scoscia's arguing about it but I think it's more from accumulated frustration more than anything else. yea,...good thing they got together and reversed that call. It was so apparent from a different view than the umps. If they didnt reverse that you would never hear the end of it (from me,lol). Scoscia wasnt nearly as livid as laRussa this afternoon. Id never seen Tony so wide eyed and P.O.'d b4.

metirish Oct 16 2005 11:29 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 16 2005 11:32 PM

It looks like curtains for the Angels, Sox up 5 - 3 with no outs and men on 2nd and 3rd in the ninth..Piniella is a major bore, his agent needs to tell him that the TV booth is not for him.

Willets Point Oct 16 2005 11:30 PM

3 outs are all that stand between Chicago and the city's first pennant celebration in 46 years.

Zvon Oct 16 2005 11:36 PM

metirish wrote: Piniella is a major bore, his agent needs to tell him that the TV booth is not for him. agreed.....I always thought of him as intelligent. ....not any more.

Zvon Oct 16 2005 11:37 PM

Willets Point wrote: 3 outs are all that stand between Chicago and the city's first pennant celebration in 46 years. i have the bubbly on ice

metirish Oct 16 2005 11:37 PM

And Contreras is back to try and finish the job, would that be a first that four pitchers pitched complete games in the modern era? of course that would be complete games in the ALCS/.NLCS.

Willets Point Oct 16 2005 11:40 PM

Things that may no longer be considered truisms: -It never rains in Southern California -Chicago teams never win baseball championships

Willets Point Oct 16 2005 11:43 PM

Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye He'll never love you, the way that I love you 'Cause if he did, no no, he wouldn't make you cry He might be thrillin' baby but a-my love (my love, my love) So dog-gone willin' So kiss him (I wanna see you kiss him, wanna see you kiss him) Go on and kiss him goodbye Na na na na, hey hey-hey, goodbye Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye Listen to me now He's never near you to comfort and cheer you When all those sad tears are fallin' baby from your eyes He might be thrillin' baby but a-my love (my love, my love) So dog-gone willin' So kiss him (I wanna see you kiss him. I wanna see you kiss him) Go on and kiss him goodbye Na-na na-na-na na na na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye Hey hey-hey, goodbye Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye [repeat many times and fade out]

Zvon Oct 16 2005 11:44 PM

another complete game win for a Sox pitcher,,,thats pretty awsum.

Edgy DC Oct 16 2005 11:45 PM

A World Series in Chicago. Wow.

metirish Oct 16 2005 11:46 PM

Congratulations to the ChiSox, and did I hear right form Joe Buck, the last winning pennent manager for the Sox Al Lopez is alive at age 97?..if so he should join that new thread.

Zvon Oct 16 2005 11:54 PM

Willets Point wrote: Things that may no longer be considered truisms: -It never rains in Southern California -Chicago teams never win baseball championships lol,,yea,..and both shot down on the same night.

Willets Point Oct 17 2005 12:04 AM

The Sox pen should be rested for the Series.

SI Metman Oct 17 2005 12:17 AM

and the funny thing is that Contreras can still pitch Game 1 of the World Series with an extra day of rest.

Willets Point Oct 17 2005 01:07 AM

Guillen used only five pitchers and 15 players overall in the entire ALCS!

Valadius Oct 17 2005 02:02 AM

That's just how Guillen does it, I suppose...

Rockin' Doc Oct 17 2005 07:49 AM

A truly amazing performance by the White Sox starting rotation in this series. They pitched four consecutive complete games to close out the series. Overall, they pitched 44 1/3 of the 45 innings in the 5 games. They completely stifled the Angels offense. All of this from a team considered to have one of the deepest bullpens in the majors. They should be quite fresh and rested for whoever awaits them for Game 1 of the World Sreies on Saturday.

Frayed Knot Oct 17 2005 09:28 AM

Willets Point wrote: Guillen used only five pitchers and 15 players overall in the entire ALCS! Some managers will do anything to keep Timo out of the game I suppose.

Carnac the Metnificent Oct 17 2005 09:50 AM

A: The 7th inning Q: When does Tony LaRussa use 15 players and 5 pitchers?

Elster88 Oct 17 2005 10:08 AM

Carnac! Good to see you.

smg58 Oct 17 2005 11:02 AM

The Astros bullpen, by contrast, has worked very hard. That might actually work to their advantage if they can wrap the NLCS up quickly, because the Sox pen will have gone nearly two weeks without any meaningful innings.

Centerfield Oct 18 2005 11:29 AM

One thing I wanted to say about this series, was that I was impressed by the Angels fans for not booing Guerrero. After each groundout, I was waiting for them to come raining down. Good for the Angels fans. Maybe some of us can learn something from this...