Master Index of Archived Threads


2006 World Series: Detroit vs. St. Louis

Willets Point Oct 21 2006 07:20 PM

C'mon, you know you're gonna watch. Verlander toes the mound for the Tigers and Reyes counters for the Cardinals in Game 1.

metirish Oct 21 2006 07:21 PM

Yeah I'll watch,it's baseball at least.

OlerudOwned Oct 21 2006 07:39 PM

Rangers v. Leafs, Rutgers v. Pitt. Screw the Cards.

metirish Oct 21 2006 07:44 PM

Eric Byrnes is an asshole....

Zvon Oct 21 2006 08:14 PM Re: 2006 World Series: Detroit vs. St. Louis

Willets Point wrote: C'mon, you know you're gonna watch. Verlander toes the mound for the Tigers and Reyes counters for the Cardinals in Game 1. yea--Ill watch. Cuz after this series Ill be going thru baseball withdrawl. No more baseball till 2007. :(

Willets Point Oct 21 2006 08:18 PM

First matchup of rookie pitchers in a game #1 in World Series history. I thought that happened in 1997 with Jaret Wright and Levan Hernandez, but I guess that wasn't game #1.

metirish Oct 21 2006 08:25 PM

This could be a very short series...

Zvon Oct 21 2006 08:26 PM

Willets Point wrote: First matchup of rookie pitchers in a game #1 in World Series history. I thought that happened in 1997 with Jaret Wright and Levan Hernandez, but I guess that wasn't game #1. ..interesting. Okay--I need to be more interested in this series. Can anyone else say something to make this more interesting? 1-0 Tiggers score 1st, in the 1st of the 1st game.

Zvon Oct 21 2006 08:27 PM

Waht did Belliard do? Stick his finger in an electrical outlet or something? mmm-thats interesting-his new doo. He looks like the fourth stooge.

Willets Point Oct 21 2006 08:31 PM

Ernie Harwell on the Tigers broadcast. Awesome.

Willets Point Oct 21 2006 08:33 PM

The Tigers need Endy Chavez.

Zvon Oct 21 2006 08:49 PM

1-1 as the Cards answer back. Rolin smacks one. Yea WP--Endy wouldnt caught that one.

Zvon Oct 21 2006 08:52 PM

The Ugly Duncan drives in run #2 for St Lou. And Pujols goes yard. Wow. They coulda walked him.Yow. 4-1 Cards

OlerudOwned Oct 21 2006 08:54 PM

That Verlander kid is no Johnny Maine.

Zvon Oct 21 2006 09:13 PM

OlerudOwned wrote: That Verlander kid is no Johnny Maine. :)

Zvon Oct 21 2006 09:34 PM

Tim Mac on Leyland: "You can disagree with pitching to Pujols but you cant disagree with his honesty." HA! Paaaaaleese Timmy. Spare me. And make sense, will ya?

Willets Point Oct 21 2006 09:39 PM

Apparently, it wasn't that the Mets offense that was failing but that the Cardinals pitching made a deal with the devil.

Zvon Oct 21 2006 10:05 PM

Willets Point wrote: Apparently, it wasn't that the Mets offense that was failing but that the Cardinals pitching made a deal with the devil. I hope they did. Cause next season there WILL be hell to pay. Lets see-.....!!!--7-1? 7th? Cards? Whats all this then?

SteveJRogers Oct 21 2006 11:00 PM

Natural and Ivan Rodriguez, words you'd never thought you'd hear ever! BTW Timmy, Ivan's HOF-ness diminished with his "power"

SteveJRogers Oct 21 2006 11:04 PM

7-2 Cards BLooper with the final two outs. Well, he did strike out Aaron Boone in a key spot in 2003

Willets Point Oct 21 2006 11:05 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 22 2006 11:39 PM

Cardinals take the first game 7-2.

Zvon Oct 21 2006 11:07 PM

SteveJRogers wrote: BTW Timmy, Ivan's HOF-ness diminished with his "power" ..and his steroidness. Well, that was boring and sucked. Cards tame the Tiggers in game one, 7-2.

TransMonk Oct 21 2006 11:09 PM

I don't think Pudge's chance of making the HOF has diminished. He's one of the best defensive catchers ever and has had one of the most consistent offensive careers of anyone over the past 15+ years. As for his power, whatever the allegations about him getting "smaller" over the past few years, he's only hit over 30 HRs once in his career and over 20 five times. I've certainly never considered his power to be one of his top three attributes.

MFS62 Oct 22 2006 12:23 PM

Monk, the HOF voters rarely go for defense - at any position. I can think of, um, Ozzie, Mazeroski and...., uh, that' s it recently. Two of the best all-time defensive players at their position - Hodges and Hernandez - would have received more votes if defense were highly regarded. But didn't get enough to get voted in. I agree with others above that it will be his bat that gets, or doesn't get, Pudge into the Hall. Not just his glove. Back to the series. I am so so happy that the Cardinals won. Maybe it will stop the reporters like the one in USA Today who predicted "Tigers in three" because the NL is "so bad". Later

Edgy DC Oct 22 2006 12:53 PM

I don't think he meant to suggest "just his glove." And Hernandez and Hodges are two of the best at the least important, most say, of defensive positions. Pudge is one of the best at the most important.

Willets Point Oct 22 2006 08:44 PM

Just to comment on last night... the National League team after a tightly-contested 7-game series on one day rest pitching an unreliable rookie out of desperation against the well-rested Tigers and their rookie ace in a road game won in dominating fashion. Can we put the AL is better than the NL myth to bed now? The Tiggers have an early lead on a Craig Monroe homer tonight.

soupcan Oct 22 2006 09:20 PM

I tuned in for a second and heard them talking about possibly illegal substances on Kenny Rogers hand that had since been removed. Hmmm, maybe the Gambler's post season renaissance ain't so mysterious after all. Paging Mr. Scott, Mr. Mike Scott.

Elster88 Oct 22 2006 10:08 PM

Seeing the bat bend on contact in super slo-mo is pretty fucking cool.

Iubitul Oct 22 2006 10:12 PM

They had a shot of a close up of his hand that they claimed showed a discoloration - looked more like a shadow to me.

Frayed Knot Oct 22 2006 10:14 PM

]Can we put the AL is better than the NL myth to bed now? No, because the AL beat the NL during interleague this year at rates roughly equivelent to Johnson beating Goldwater. The outcome of this series - and especially one game from the series - shouldn't be used to either erase what's gone on all season. That said, there are various over-generalizations that are going on with various fan and media types on this subject. One is this assumption that this lop-sidedness has been true for years. It hasn't; prior to this season, it was the NL which held a slight edge over the first 9 years of IL play. Another is treating the WS (or, even worse, All-Star games) as a true measure of league strength. Not only does this takes the idea a 'small sample' to an extreme but it's also just one team vs another. In-season IL play is so much better because it's ~240 games/year and pits the good, bad & ugly from each league against each other.

Frayed Knot Oct 22 2006 10:44 PM

Meanwhile, Kenny Rogers is in the midst of dealing a 3rd straight playoff gem - he's 1-hitting the Cards thru 7 - which is 3 more than some thought he had in him.

SteveJRogers Oct 22 2006 10:54 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: ]Can we put the AL is better than the NL myth to bed now? No, because the AL beat the NL during interleague this year at rates roughly equivelent to Johnson beating Goldwater. The outcome of this series - and especially one game from the series - shouldn't be used to either erase what's gone on all season. That said, there are various over-generalizations that are going on with various fan and media types on this subject. One is this assumption that this lop-sidedness has been true for years. It hasn't; prior to this season, it was the NL which held a slight edge over the first 9 years of IL play. Another is treating the WS (or, even worse, All-Star games) as a true measure of league strength. Not only does this takes the idea a 'small sample' to an extreme but it's also just one team vs another. In-season IL play is so much better because it's ~240 games/year and pits the good, bad & ugly from each league against each other. Good point. Can't base a league by say a 100 win team getting clobbered by a "lesser" team in 4 or 5 (see such years as 1988, 2004, ect)

Frayed Knot Oct 22 2006 11:23 PM

Rogers leaves after 8 with a 3-0 lead. Todd Jones gets the first two outs quickly ... then coughs up 4 straight baserunners ... before getting Y.F. Molina to ground out with the bases loaded 3-1 is your final, 1-1 is the series.

SteveJRogers Oct 22 2006 11:24 PM

Jones nearly pulls a Benitez/Lidge/Wagner but pulls through and the Tigers win, and now its a best of 5

Zvon Oct 22 2006 11:28 PM

What alien race kidnapped Kenny Rogers and replaced him with this animated clone/guy who no one can figure out?

Willets Point Oct 22 2006 11:36 PM

Nymr83 Oct 22 2006 11:37 PM

i am sickened by kenny rogers pitching well.

Willets Point Oct 22 2006 11:39 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: ]Can we put the AL is better than the NL myth to bed now? No, because the AL beat the NL during interleague this year at rates roughly equivelent to Johnson beating Goldwater. The outcome of this series - and especially one game from the series - shouldn't be used to either erase what's gone on all season. That said, there are various over-generalizations that are going on with various fan and media types on this subject. One is this assumption that this lop-sidedness has been true for years. It hasn't; prior to this season, it was the NL which held a slight edge over the first 9 years of IL play. Another is treating the WS (or, even worse, All-Star games) as a true measure of league strength. Not only does this takes the idea a 'small sample' to an extreme but it's also just one team vs another. In-season IL play is so much better because it's ~240 games/year and pits the good, bad & ugly from each league against each other. Your facts are all dead on, but my point was more to the "AL team will win in a cakewalk" type of comments that deny the fact that there are two very good teams competing in a short series and all those interleague results, previous World Series, and All-Star Games are irrelevant. Actually, I think what you've said backs that up as oppossed to contradicting me.

metsguyinmichigan Oct 22 2006 11:45 PM

Had a great time at Game One. Don't get me wrong, there wasn't a moment that passed when I didn't think how much different would be if our boys were there. But there is nothing like attending a World Series game. It was nice to see a bunch of people wearing Mets jerseys. I saw at least two groups of Mets fans -- and I proudly wore my Faith and Fear in Flushing T-shirt! I threw a bunch of photos on the blog, if you'd like to see them.

silverdsl Oct 23 2006 10:20 AM

soupcan wrote: I tuned in for a second and heard them talking about possibly illegal substances on Kenny Rogers hand that had since been removed. Hmmm, maybe the Gambler's post season renaissance ain't so mysterious after all. Paging Mr. Scott, Mr. Mike Scott. I don't understand why the umpires handled this in the way that they did. Apparently they decided without actually examining Rogers' hand that it was dirt and asked him to wash it off, though Rogers claims the umpires never asked him to wash it off and he did so on his own. If the umpires version is correct, why didn't they do their due dillegence and examine his hand to be sure it was dirt? Were they afraid of what they might find and that they would be forced to toss him from the game, thus creating a big controversy in the World Series? Also, why didn't Tony LaRussa make an issue of this? Because of his friendship with Leyland? Additionally, it appears that Rogers gets the same "dirt" on his hand in the same place in multiple games. ESPN has pics here: [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2006/news/story?id=2635538]http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2006/news/story?id=2635538[/url] from Game 3 of the ALCS and last night. I guess it's possible but it seems a little sketchy to me that Rogers has "dirt" there all the time.

metsmarathon Oct 23 2006 10:32 AM

despite all the evidence to the contrary, the one thing that tells me that this is no big deal is the fact that tony larussa isn't today kicking and screaming and jumping up and down about the foreign substance. either that or kenny rogers has some dirt on tony larussa as well as his own hand, and is therefore able to keep him quiet. if the opposing manager has no problem with the smudge, how can i?

metsguyinmichigan Oct 23 2006 10:42 AM

silverdsl wrote: ="soupcan"]I tuned in for a second and heard them talking about possibly illegal substances on Kenny Rogers hand that had since been removed. Hmmm, maybe the Gambler's post season renaissance ain't so mysterious after all. Paging Mr. Scott, Mr. Mike Scott. I don't understand why the umpires handled this in the way that they did. Apparently they decided without actually examining Rogers' hand that it was dirt and asked him to wash it off, though Rogers claims the umpires never asked him to wash it off and he did so on his own. If the umpires version is correct, why didn't they do their due dillegence and examine his hand to be sure it was dirt? Were they afraid of what they might find and that they would be forced to toss him from the game, thus creating a big controversy in the World Series? Also, why didn't Tony LaRussa make an issue of this? Because of his friendship with Leyland? Additionally, it appears that Rogers gets the same "dirt" on his hand in the same place in multiple games. ESPN has pics here: [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2006/news/story?id=2635538]http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2006/news/story?id=2635538[/url] from Game 3 of the ALCS and last night. I guess it's possible but it seems a little sketchy to me that Rogers has "dirt" there all the time. He is SO busted! Guess he'll be back to walking in the winning run after this!

Johnny Dickshot Oct 23 2006 10:59 AM

He's not busted. If he were busted, he'd have been busted. Seeing the Cardinals win Game 1 made me madder than I thought I'd have been, and cognizant of what a rare and wasted opportunity we had here. I'm more down today about the Mets than I was last week. A long way down.

Yancy Street Gang Oct 23 2006 11:09 AM

Four days later I still find myself thinking how incredibly great a three-run homer from Cliff Floyd would have been. It reminded me in a way of that Peanuts strip from 1962 where Charlie Brown is sitting on a curb with Linus and he can't get over Willie McCovey lining out to end the World Series.

MFS62 Oct 23 2006 11:21 AM

The "stuff on the hand" incident last night reminds me of a conversation between The Scooter and Bill White when Gaylord Perry made his first start against the Yankees. It went something like this: Scooter: "Hey White, (Phil never called him by his first name) You know the National League. What does this Perry throw?" White: "He throws a fastball, slider and curve. But when he's in a jam, he comes up with something else." Scooter; "Really?" White: "Yeah. He comes up with it off his glove, his cap or his uniform." Later

Zvon Oct 24 2006 08:02 PM

This "clump of dirt " crap looks like its gonna be a bigger story than expected. Now LaRussa has had to defend his lack of investigatory tactics. Possible desention in the Cards locker room over this? Who really knows, but the press would like to write it up that way. This is the same manager who halted the NLCS for much lesser reasons. And Rogers, the way he's been pitching,......I wouldnt be surprised at all if he sprayed his hands with Fixatif (a spray artists use to spray and fix pencil drawings so they are preserved) before his every outing. Hey.... at least its getting interesting.............

Zvon Oct 24 2006 08:05 PM

Is that Fox field announcer a gnome or something? Is there anyone he doesnt look up to? Give the guy a shoebox or something.

A Boy Named Seo Oct 24 2006 09:14 PM

Jay Howell pulled a similar stunt and was ejected in '88. If it were the Mets out there, I really would've wanted Willie to check it out, especially if it could mean a Rogers ejection and immediate suspension if he was cheating, which, c'mon, he was cheating. That gleaming white superimposed Bank of America ad in the second inning was so horrible I actually wrote to FOX Sports and told them so.

metirish Oct 24 2006 09:23 PM

I have the game on but I couldn't be any less excited about it...

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 10:19 PM

Seeing Carlos receive the award in a suit with a cast is fucking depressing.

metirish Oct 24 2006 10:23 PM

I'm getting a tad more excited now that Joel Zumyia(spell check) is pitching..

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 10:23 PM

Looks like the Tigers can't solve Yadier either. You can only hope to contain him. And here I thought Albert Pujols was the dangerous one in that lineup.

metirish Oct 24 2006 10:34 PM

WOW,, Taco Bell will give everyone in America a free Taco if any home rin is hit tongiht....please hit one.......please...

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 10:46 PM

Zumaya's hitting 100 on the black again. Where can I get one of those guns so I can impress chicks? Shit never mind...chicks dig the long ball. Guess I'll have to impress them the way I usually do...with my Mets underwear.

metirish Oct 24 2006 10:50 PM

Bad error by him right there.....

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 10:51 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 24 2006 10:58 PM

Oh my god that was hilarious. Zumaya picks up a grounder and throws to third. The radar gun then flashed the speed of his throw to third at 100 mph. I think that puts to rest any argument that the radar guns are not shady.

metirish Oct 24 2006 10:52 PM

McCarver says Inge was tardy covering 3rd....yeah well 100mph will do that Tim..

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 11:03 PM

That Howard commerical looks alarmingly like a Nazi rally. (Yes I realize Howard is Jewish.) It also sounds alarmingly like the beginning of the Kirk/McCoy trial from Star Trek VI.

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 11:06 PM

There's not much that I don't like about Taguchi. He is so Taguchi. That joke will never get old.

Johnny Dickshot Oct 24 2006 11:17 PM

metirish wrote: Bad error by him right there..... Yeah but I'd wish Tim would shut up and admire that Z had the presence of mind to strap 'em on and go for a triple play there. Ever since I was at a game in Philly where Piazza hit into a triple play and I barely realized it, I remind myself to be aware whenever there's at least 2 on and 0 out. As soon as Pujols hit reached Zumaya I was thinking "TRIPLE PLAY!" with the only tough out being Wilson at 2nd. Pujols barely runs and you know he's not paying attention.

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 11:18 PM

Johnny Dickshot wrote: ="metirish"]Bad error by him right there..... Yeah but I'd wish Tim would shut up and admire that Z had the presence of mind to strap 'em on and go for a triple play there. Ever since I was at a game in Philly where Piazza hit into a triple play and I barely realized it, I remind myself to be aware whenever there's at least 2 on and 0 out. As soon as Pujols hit reached Zumaya I was thinking "TRIPLE PLAY!" with the only tough out being Wilson at 2nd. Pujols barely runs and you know he's not paying attention. Huh. I didn't think of it that way. I thought Zumaya was just being a moron. Maybe they'll ask him in the post game.

metirish Oct 24 2006 11:19 PM

Of course tim never mentioned triple play...the play was at second according to him..the safe play really I suppose is what he meant.

Johnny Dickshot Oct 24 2006 11:21 PM

Elster88 wrote: ="Johnny Dickshot"] ="metirish"]Bad error by him right there..... Yeah but I'd wish Tim would shut up and admire that Z had the presence of mind to strap 'em on and go for a triple play there. Ever since I was at a game in Philly where Piazza hit into a triple play and I barely realized it, I remind myself to be aware whenever there's at least 2 on and 0 out. As soon as Pujols hit reached Zumaya I was thinking "TRIPLE PLAY!" with the only tough out being Wilson at 2nd. Pujols barely runs and you know he's not paying attention. Huh. I didn't think of it that way. I thought Zumaya was just being a moron. Maybe they'll ask him in the post game. Don't get me wrong. The TP was/is a high-risk manuever and probably not recommended for that situation, but as a fan I was thrilled for just a second. I think they had a shot.

metirish Oct 24 2006 11:34 PM

Looper.... nah he won't blow this....

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 11:35 PM

I feel that Looper gets unfair treatment from Met fans. Though it doesn't help that his name rhymes with poop. And his explanation of being booed was priceless.

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 11:41 PM

AAAA HAHAHAAHAHAH ROFLLMAO LOL

metirish Oct 24 2006 11:41 PM

of course he gets bad treatment...I never thought he was terrible..just a bad team really...damn but St.Louis are up 2 to 1.....

Zvon Oct 24 2006 11:42 PM

So far this World Series has been about as exciting as viewing hieroglyphical porn.

Elster88 Oct 24 2006 11:44 PM

Zvon wrote: So far this World Series has been about as exciting as viewing hieroglyphical porn. Don't knock it unless you've tried it.

SteveJRogers Oct 24 2006 11:46 PM

Zvon wrote: So far this World Series has been about as exciting as viewing hieroglyphical porn. Wonder how bad the ratings are going to be. FOX was SOOOOOOO hoping for the Mets to pull that one out last week. See Rassiman's column in the News today, basically called out FOX for being too silent and giving LaRussa the pass on the whole Rogers situation, geez way to kill whatever juice this series was to have (save for a Game 6-7 back in Mo-Town this weekend)

metirish Oct 24 2006 11:49 PM

] Wonder how bad the ratings are going to be Oh I am sure Russo will set francesa up for that tomorrow....

cooby Oct 25 2006 08:27 AM

Cardinals condemn toothless Tigers to defeat What a crummy headline

Willets Point Oct 25 2006 08:35 AM

:(

MFS62 Oct 25 2006 08:45 AM

Some of the old time baseball purists must be spinning in their graves at the sight of Granderson (174Ks) and strikeout-prone Preston Wilson batting at or near the top of the batting order. Later

Frayed Knot Oct 25 2006 10:10 AM

- I'm more insulted by seeing Placido Polanco hitting 3rd. - Not that any of the Tigger lineup is known for their patience and count-working. Not only did no one walk, but not one saw a 3-ball count last night, nor did one see as many as 5 pitches in an AB. - Top 3 in the Detroit lineup are 0-for-33 so far - 82 pitches over 8 innings for Carpenter. He really - wait for it ... nailed it down!

cooby Oct 25 2006 10:14 AM

I am hoping tomorrow's headline reads Tigers unsheath claws and go bird hunting Cardinal team in tatters

metirish Oct 25 2006 10:19 AM

That's damn good Cooby.

Willets Point Oct 25 2006 10:24 AM

="cooby"]I am hoping tomorrow's headline reads Tigers unsheath claws and go bird hunting Cardinal team in tatters Kind of reminds me of Sylvester and Tweety in that I always wondered why a big cat went to all that effort for one tiny bird with a big cranium. LaRussa would be the bird with the big cranium by the way.

cooby Oct 25 2006 10:24 AM

Growl....I''m sick of this Cardinals crap!

metsmarathon Oct 25 2006 10:31 AM

i'm kinda curious, since they mentioned it last night that the last 1-5-6/4 double play in the world series was back in the 20's or so, how many real opportunities have there been for such a play? i mean, how many times have there been runners on first and second with no outs? how many times has the ball been hit sharply back to the pitcher, and fielded cleanly? how many times has he thrown to third, instead of to second? how frequently do each of those throws go astray? how frequently does the double play get turned successfully with the throw to third as compared to the throw to second? and does it matter that with slow runners at first and at bat, there's an improved chance of getting the ball to the necessary bags in time for additional outs? just because its rare doesn't make it difficult, tim. it just makes it uncommon. and if zumaya makes a better throw there, we're talking, perhaps, about how uncommonly brilliant that play was, instead of how bad it was. ("Montezuma" is what my firefox spellchecker suggests for zumaya. interesting!)

metirish Oct 25 2006 08:32 PM

Game to start soon..

SteveJRogers Oct 25 2006 09:28 PM

Man, it seems like the NLCS is the only spot where MLB actually CARED about fans at the ballpark for these games JUST BANG THE GAME AND PLAY ON THE DOPEY TRAVEL DAY! This game would have been banged in the regular season, see you for a DH Thursday or something

soupcan Oct 25 2006 09:47 PM

'Bang' the game?

metirish Oct 25 2006 09:51 PM

If for no other reason I want this game to start so that very stupid show"the war at home" is not on....

Nymr83 Oct 25 2006 09:53 PM

="metirish"]If for no other reason I want this game to start so that very stupid show almost any show on FOX is not on.... i fixed your sentence for you.

metirish Oct 25 2006 09:54 PM

Yeah true....

SteveJRogers Oct 25 2006 10:11 PM

soupcan wrote: 'Bang' the game? Thats a general word for cancel right? Bag, bang, right? Maybe?

cooby Oct 25 2006 10:55 PM

Bang the game slowly

MFS62 Oct 26 2006 09:41 AM

The rainout reminded me of something Jim Bouton talked about in one of his books. In a section talking about "Greenies" (Amphetamines), a rain delay has the players making a tough decision, "to pop or not to pop". Later

MFS62 Oct 26 2006 10:26 AM

Zumaya-Gate - from Jayson Stark: ]posted: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 ST. LOUIS -- If there's one thing this World Series needs, other than emergency dome-implant surgery, it's a controversial story line that doesn't involve Kenny Rogers. Well, voila. Welcome to Zumaya-gate. Unlike Dirtgate, you probably missed Zumaya-gate on Tuesday because the Fox crew never picked up on it. But here's the deal: A very peculiar thing happened inside Busch Stadium in Game 3 when the hardest-throwing human being on our beloved planet, Tigers reliever Joel Zumaya, entered the game. All night long, the stadium radar board and the Fox TV radar-gun readings had been virtually identical. Oh, a mph apart every now and then, maybe. But nothing noticeable. Then Zumaya showed up, machine-gunning his usual assortment of 99s, 100s and 101s all over your TV screen. But if you were listening at home for the oohs and ahs those gun readings usually elicit, you might have noticed there were none. Why? Because, in Busch Stadium, the 46,000 folks watching all this live kept seeing a radar board showing mostly 95s and 96s. Pitch after pitch. On one particularly weird occasion, Zumaya launched a heaterball that Fox showed at 101 -- and it came up at 95 in the ballpark. "Really?" gulped Tigers closer Todd Jones on Wednesday. "Maybe it was 95 Canadian. ... Or metric." Sure. Or Celsius. Or -- if you're a conspiratorial kind of reader -- La Russius. Yes, friends. There were some idle suspicions being voiced anonymously in that Tigers clubhouse that the Cardinals asked the radar-board gang to deliberately devalue Zumaya's gun scores. So why would they even think to do that? Who knows? To mess with Zumaya's head? So their hitters wouldn't be terrified by seeing such scary numbers up there? So they could pretend the guy was more hittable than he normally is? Tell us that makes any sense. "Oh, it's 102," Jones said. "And if you don't believe it, just get a bat and helmet and stand in the box, because I've seen it too many times to doubt his fastball." Hey, excellent point. It's not as if those radar boards have sci-fi-ish, radar-board-over-matter powers, where, by displaying a slower pitch speed, they could actually slow the ball down to make it travel at that speed. Right? And if they could, wouldn't they show it puttering along at 75 -- not 95? Not that you should ever trust any radar-gun readings, you understand. Especially if they involve steering wheels, flashing lights, gas pedals and your right foot mysteriously attached to those gas pedals. But this was one disparity that seemed especially odd, given that it existed only for Zumaya -- not for anyone else who pitched. And, in our continuing efforts to provide you only the most journalistically sound radar-gun information possible, we even veered away from our own spectacular Web site and double-checked Zumaya's readings on MLB.com's GameDay log. They jibed with Fox's numbers -- not the stadium board's. Hmmm. So what's up with that, anyway? Zumaya, for one, had no idea. He told Booth Newspapers' Danny Knobler, the only writer to write about this strangeness Tuesday night, that he normally checks the board to monitor his gun numbers, but he didn't in this game. His teammate, Justin Verlander, did, however. And he was so alarmed by what he saw -- and worried Zumaya might be hurt -- he told Knobler he ran up to the clubhouse just to check Fox's readings. He felt a lot better afterward. A day later, the Tigers weren't ready to convene any Congressional Zumaya-gate hearings, though. If anything, they were highly amused by the whole deal. "It's a great day," Jones quipped, "when you can lose eight miles an hour -- and still throw 95." Later

Johnny Dickshot Oct 26 2006 11:16 PM

The Cradinals could use a few breaks, huh? Ugh.

Frayed Knot Oct 26 2006 11:18 PM

JEEEEE-ZUS!!!! - Tiggers take an early 3-0 lead as they got to Soupbone early. - The Cards then peck away with two seperate 2-out RBI hits. - Now in the 7th, Eckstein leads off with a lazy fly to CF, but Granderson falls down and it goes for a double, then pitcher Rodney throws away Taguchi's sac bunt (and he had all kinds of time: Cue Fountains of Wayne) and the game is tied. That's the 4th error so far in this series just by Detroit pitchers

Zvon Oct 26 2006 11:28 PM

Johnny Dickshot wrote: The Cradinals could use a few breaks, huh? Ugh. I guess "ugh" works as a sarcasm meter.

Frayed Knot Oct 26 2006 11:30 PM

Cards grab the lead on yet another 2-out hit - one that should never have happened in this case cuz of the error. 4-3 heading for the 8th, Looper in for StL

cooby Oct 26 2006 11:31 PM

Damn it I'm sick of the Cardinals!!!! Come on Tigers!

Johnny Dickshot Oct 26 2006 11:39 PM

Brandon Inge comes up with some fuckinge huge hittinge to tie the game -- off Wainwright in for Loopy -- in the 8th.

Edgy DC Oct 26 2006 11:39 PM

That's OK. Detroit is doing a good job beating themselves without the Cards.

Edgy DC Oct 26 2006 11:40 PM

And then Inge blows my mind...

Zvon Oct 26 2006 11:42 PM

Grandersons gotta make up for playing slip and slide in center.

Zvon Oct 26 2006 11:43 PM

...or horribly not.

Willets Point Oct 26 2006 11:57 PM

The wife asks: "Why is Ivan Rodriguez called 'Pudge'?" I looked on Wikipedia and it said that it was a comparison to Carlton Fisk. The entry for Carlton Fisk says that "Pudge" is a common nickname for catchers, but it still doesn't explain why? Any knowledge on this from our esteemed baseball experts? PS - I f-in' hate the Cardinals!!!!

Frayed Knot Oct 26 2006 11:58 PM

Cards go ahead again in an inning extended by a 3rd strike/3rd out passed ball followed by -- say it with me -- another 2-out RBI hit, this one by Eckstein off the glove of a diving Monroe in LF

Frayed Knot Oct 27 2006 12:02 AM

Re: Pudge Well catchers with short, squat "pudgy" bodies aren't exactly uncommon. That name got hung on Fisk, IIRC, as kind of a joke since his young self was anything but the stereotyped backstop's build.

metirish Oct 27 2006 12:06 AM

yeah,I'm an NL guy..yeah right, I fucking hate the Cards...

Johnny Dickshot Oct 27 2006 12:06 AM

ah, fuggit. Stupid lucky Cardinals

Zvon Oct 27 2006 12:07 AM

Crap. Cards go up 3-1. Tiggers cant take 3 in a row---- That would be really kool if they did tho. Looks like this show is all but over.

Elster88 Oct 27 2006 12:08 AM

This just reinforces that the Mets would've won the whole fucking thing. And that makes me hurt.

metsmarathon Oct 27 2006 12:09 AM

go, reflected glory, go!

Frayed Knot Oct 27 2006 12:14 AM

Eckstein had 4 hits tonight and they figured into most or all of the StL runs ... and every one of them could have, or even should have, been outs, yet none were errors. In the next 20-some hours somebody (or numerous somebodies) are going to point out that the last two times the Cards had 3-1 leads in World Series play they wound up losing the series in 7 ('68 vs Detroit, '85 vs KC). What's going to be interesting is to see which idiots (cough * Russo * cough) will actually see this as a predictable pattern that has some sort of bearing on this one.

Willets Point Oct 27 2006 12:53 AM

Elster88 wrote: This just reinforces that the Mets would've won the whole fucking thing. And that makes me hurt. Just reinforces that the Cardinals are that good. I don't buy that St. Louis is the underdog. A team that wins 2 of the last 3 pennants, a team that plays in 3 consecutive NLCS's, a team that plays in 5 of the last 7 NLCS's, a team that has been in the playoffs 6 of the last 7 seasons is no underdog. Especially when they're playing a young team that hasn't had a winning season since before the Republicans took control of Congress. The 83 regular season wins mean nothing. No one called the Yankees underdogs when they won 87 games in 2000.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 27 2006 07:03 AM

My 13-year-old is pleased to wake up to the news that his team won last night, despite Looper's appearance.

Johnny Dickshot Oct 27 2006 07:03 AM

I agree with WP. Redbird watchers would tell ya that the Cards certainly were capable of being very good -- they just did an inconsistent job of it during the year, due to injuries and all. In the postseason, they've been fortunate to be healthy at the right time, catch the baseball, and catch opponents (Mets, Tigers) when they werren't playing their best. They are also getting a huge boost from a closer who wasn't even supposed to be there and is ungodly hot and a mystery to most hitters, sorta like Papelbon for the Sox early in the year. Sucks, but that's the way it's gone.

MFS62 Oct 27 2006 07:46 AM

How much help do pitchers in that other league need? After this series, they'll probably want to institute a designated fielder rule, too. Later

Frayed Knot Oct 27 2006 09:40 AM

They'd still be the worst WS winner in history ... by a significant margin.

HahnSolo Oct 27 2006 10:05 AM

Win tonight, St. Louis. Why? Because road teams have not fared well in WS Games 6 & 7. Since the last team to win a World Series Game 7 on the road (the 79 Pirates), there have been 23 WS Games 6 or 7. The home team has gone 19-4 in those games. Seven times (in 10 chances) since 1979 a team has come home trailing 3-2 and won both to take the series. The road winners? 1981 Dodgers won game 6 in Yankee Stadium 1992 Blue Jays won game 6 in Atlanta 1997 Indians won game 6 in Florida (then lost game 7) 2003 Marlins won game 6 in Yankee Stadium

MFS62 Oct 27 2006 12:16 PM

I like David Eckstein. He is a true catalyst. He is the kind of pain-in-the-ass player who the fans of every opposing team love to hate and the managers of opposing teams would love to have on their squad. I recall the year when the Halos won it all. We didn't see many of the Angels' games during the regular season. But when they showed the highlights of their games on ESPN it seemd like Eckstein was in them, making a key contribution at bat, in the field or on the bases. He reminds me of another player I saw a lot of - Phil Rizzuto. Both are listed at 5'6". Both had a mediocre throwing arm. I heard an interview yesterday in which an ex-player told us that even his own teammates make fun of Eckstein's arm. And that reminded me of comments about Rizzto's arm. It was said his throws would enfuriate batters by always beating them to first by only half a step. When I looked at both their career numbers today, I was amazed to find that Eckstein has better BA and fielding numbers than Phil had. But when you look at both their games, the numbers don't tell it all about what kind of players they were. Later

ScarletKnight41 Oct 27 2006 09:26 PM

The Cardinals take a 1-0 lead thanks to a bad throw from the third baseman Inge on what should have been the final out of the 2nd inning. Inge further hurt his team by being picked off on a bad running decision in the top of the 3rd.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 27 2006 09:37 PM

A Jim Edmonds error followed by a Sean Casey homer give Detroit a 2-1 lead in the 4th.

Zvon Oct 27 2006 09:47 PM

UGH! Verlander error. This is rediculous. Am I watching the little league World Series by mistake?

ScarletKnight41 Oct 27 2006 09:49 PM

Can't anyone here play this game?

Johnny Dickshot Oct 27 2006 10:15 PM

Leland should fine Rodriguez for that bad a turn at bat. 3-2 Cardinals

SteveJRogers Oct 27 2006 10:30 PM

6 outs away...

cooby Oct 27 2006 10:50 PM

Crap :(

ScarletKnight41 Oct 27 2006 10:52 PM

4-2 Cardinals after 7.

Valadius Oct 27 2006 11:12 PM

This is so painful.

metirish Oct 27 2006 11:16 PM

Yeah this is horrible..it should be us having fucking fun tonight...

Zvon Oct 27 2006 11:17 PM

I tuned in to Dr Who for an hour. Did I miss any errors?

metirish Oct 27 2006 11:18 PM

Fair fucks to Sean Casey..he has done the biz ....keeps the Tigers alive right now...

Frayed Knot Oct 27 2006 11:20 PM

]Did I miss any errors? Several, including more from Detroit pitchers.

Zvon Oct 27 2006 11:21 PM

Pudge has had absolutely the worst at bats in this series that i have ever seen in post season play.

Zvon Oct 27 2006 11:24 PM

everyone in the stands is either on the cell phone or taking pictures with their cell phone. Welcome to the 21st century.

Frayed Knot Oct 27 2006 11:25 PM

Pudge has never been a discliplined-type hitter. He's just usually good enough to get away with it. Not this week. Took a pair of brass ones for Polanco to take that 3-2 pitch!!

metsmarathon Oct 27 2006 11:28 PM

bask in the warming glow of the reflected glory.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 27 2006 11:30 PM

Inge should probably take the Greyhound back to Detroit instead of the team charter after the game he had tonight. Striking out for the final out was just icing on the cake.

Frayed Knot Oct 27 2006 11:34 PM

Well, those were the Tigers I had been complaining about all season. Every time I saw them they were stinking up the joint with undisciplined hitting & pitching and shakey defense ... and they continued that right up until the moment they won 7 straight vs the Yanx & A's and suddenly looked unbeatable. They weren't.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 27 2006 11:37 PM

Is this the first time that a team has won the World Championship in their first season in a new ballpark?

metirish Oct 27 2006 11:41 PM

] Striking out for the final out was just icing on the cake. Like Beltran?

Valadius Oct 27 2006 11:46 PM

It should be us out there celebrating...

ScarletKnight41 Oct 27 2006 11:48 PM

metirish wrote: ] Striking out for the final out was just icing on the cake. Like Beltran? Inge gave this game away with his poor fielding and baserunning in the early innings. The strikeout was on top of that.

metirish Oct 27 2006 11:51 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 27 2006 11:51 PM

Yeah I know SK,I'm just pissed that we are not celebrating tonight....we should be..

Zvon Oct 27 2006 11:51 PM

Valadius wrote: It should be us out there celebrating... ....we'd look kinda silly,... being Met fans and all.

Johnny Dickshot Oct 27 2006 11:53 PM

Inge also hit a little, so he's well down the list of goats if anyone's compiling one. Dumb to get caught on the basepaths, but physical errors happen and better hitters than Inge have made the last out in a playoff series.

metirish Oct 27 2006 11:56 PM

Sean Casey has no reason to hide....no one else showed up...

Valadius Oct 28 2006 12:01 AM

Fucking Looper is having the last fucking laugh tonight...

metirish Oct 28 2006 12:02 AM

I'm happy for Looper..good for him to have a laugh...

Zvon Oct 28 2006 12:16 AM

Valadius wrote: Fucking Looper is having the last fucking laugh tonight... In light of the Cardinals taking the series, Looper is the last thing on my mind. Actually, he's not on my mind at all. Congrads to the redbirds. I tip my Met hat to em. (did you hear how Selig had to mention the Cards getting thru the Mets? What a dork. But that was clearly the best series this post. He knows it. Saying Mets aint gonna help your WS ratings commish. Nice try tho)

Johnny Dickshot Oct 28 2006 12:27 AM

Don't feel bad. We'd have been rained out tonight.

Edgy DC Oct 28 2006 12:39 AM

ScarletKnight41 wrote: Is this the first time that a team has won the World Championship in their first season in a new ballpark? Well I recall the 1923 Yankees. Like it was yesterday. The Cards also did it in 1967.

SteveJRogers Oct 28 2006 08:22 AM

4/2/2007... Time to ruin someone's ring ceremony!

Yancy Street Gang Oct 28 2006 08:35 AM

I thought this was the second year for the Cardinals in the new park? Well, the World Series is over and, at the risk of pissing off Tom Lasorda, I didn't see a single moment of it. The last pitch I saw this year was the one Beltran looked at.

SteveJRogers Oct 28 2006 08:59 AM

Maybe not-so-interesting tidbit, since 2003 the team in the series with the longer "drought" has won

SteveJRogers Oct 28 2006 09:42 AM

Has anyone confirmed that David Eckstein is a Jewish ballplayer or is it like Mike Jacobs/David Cone where the name/spelling sounds jewish but the person isn't? Just looked at a list and he isn't on it, and I thought I heard that he was.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 28 2006 09:50 AM

Irish - I know where you're coming from. Yancy - this was, most certainly, the first year of Busch II.

MFS62 Oct 28 2006 09:54 AM

SteveJRogers wrote: Has anyone confirmed that David Eckstein is a Jewish ballplayer or is it like Mike Jacobs/David Cone where the name/spelling sounds jewish but the person isn't? He is not Jewish. Nobody's perfect. Later

Frayed Knot Oct 28 2006 09:58 AM

SteveJRogers wrote: Has anyone confirmed that David Eckstein is a Jewish ballplayer or is it like Mike Jacobs/David Cone where the name/spelling sounds jewish but the person isn't? David Eckstein: NOT the subject of any Adam Sandler songs ]Well I recall the 1923 Yankees. Like it was yesterday. The Cards also did it in 1967. Busch II opened in 1966. The '23 Yanx were the last team to christen a new park with a title.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 28 2006 10:05 AM

Sportsman Park was only known as Busch for such a short time that I never think of it that way. But [url=http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/nl/BuschStadium.htm]Busch III[/url] opened this season.

Yancy Street Gang Oct 28 2006 10:07 AM

On the UMDB, I labeled the current stadium as Busch II, since I'm referring to the the place where the Cards were playing in 1962 as Sportsman's Park. But this stadium-name stuff is confusing in so many ways. When the Yankees get their new ballpark, I'm leaning towards calling it Yankee Stadium III, and relabeling the current park Yankee Stadium II.

SteveJRogers Oct 28 2006 10:11 AM

Yeah, I crigne everytime I hear "Rogers Centre" for the Bluejays' home. Not that I don't mind the plugs, but ITS SKY FREAKING DOME! And allways will be!

Frayed Knot Oct 28 2006 10:16 AM

What was 'Sportsman's Park' for the longest time was re-named Busch Stadium at some point after the A-B people bought the team in the early '50s or so. The replacement was new for the '66 season and was either Busch I or Busch II depending on your POV, making this one either II or III. Not sure which version prevails 'mongst the locals.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 28 2006 10:20 AM

The locals just refer to the stadia as Busch. They don't need no stinkin' Roman numerals!

smg58 Oct 28 2006 10:23 AM

So the Cards dominate the NL for two years, and are postseason disappointments. The next year they squeak by with 83 wins, and take the World Series. Funny game, this baseball. To be fair, the Cardinals dealt with injuries all year, and played September without Rolen, Eckstein or Edmonds and spent most of the month with Looper trying to close. Give LaRussa some credit for giving the kid Wainwright the ball in the 9th. Don't ask me what happened to Suppan and Weaver, especially Weaver. They were really the keys. I can remember all the statheads talking about how foolish the Cardinals were for settling for Eckstein at short. He now has two more rings than A-Rod ever will.

SteveJRogers Oct 28 2006 10:29 AM

BTW, I feel bad for Izzy. Was there with the Cards since 2002 and is DLed with the possiblity of a career ender for the championship ride. [url]http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/pics/jason_isringhausen_autograph.jpg[/url]

Rockin' Doc Oct 28 2006 12:49 PM

The Cardinals completely outplayed the Tigers in the Series. Of course, that wasn't all that hard to do since Detroit was busy choking, gagging, and throwing the series away. In the five games, Detroit scored 11 runs while committing 8 errors that led to 8 unearned runs by the Cardinals. That doesn't even factor in the Tigers' poor plays and miscues that weren't actual errors. Detroit played as if someone had turned back time and suddenly it was 2003 all over again. Congratulations to the Cardinals, they were clearly the better team.

Elster88 Oct 28 2006 01:06 PM

I guess I'm the only person here who thinks that the Cardinals are/were a garbage team? A lot of people are giving them way too much credit. This is the worst WS champion in history.

Rockin' Doc Oct 28 2006 01:53 PM

Well, they played well enough (or maybe the Mets poorly enough) for them to advance to the World Series. Once there, the Cardinals won almost by default as the Tigers played horrendously bad baseball for the five games of the World Series. I don't think the Cardinals are a great team, but they had people (Suppan, Weaver, Wainwright, Molina, etc.) step up and produce when it mattered most. Do I think they are the best team in MLB? No, but the Cardinals won when the games mattered most, so I give them their due. Elster - "This is the worst WS champion in history." I think that's some rather extreme hyperbole, but you're entitled to your opinion.

Nymr83 Oct 28 2006 01:58 PM

the '87 Twins might be close, i'm not sure who else won it all that was this bad, at least in the last 30 years.

SteveJRogers Oct 28 2006 06:50 PM

Teams under 90 wins that won the World Series in a non-shortened season: 1945 Tigers 88-65 slight caveat for WWII 1959 Dodgers 88-68 and they needed Games 155 and 156 to do so! 1987 Twins 85-77 2000 Yankees 87-74 2006 Cardinals 83-78 Also making it to the World Series: 1926 Cardinals 89-65 1938 Cubs 89-63 1944 Browns 89-65 slight caveat for WWII 1973 Mets 82-79 1997 Indians 86-75

Elster88 Oct 29 2006 12:53 AM

Rockin' Doc wrote: Elster - "This is the worst WS champion in history." I think that's some rather extreme hyperbole, but you're entitled to your opinion. If you've got one that was worse I'm all ears. Or eyes, rather.

Willets Point Oct 29 2006 01:16 AM

ScarletKnight41 wrote: Is this the first time that a team has won the World Championship in their first season in a new ballpark? The Pittsburgh Pirates won the 1909 World Series after moving into Forbes Field midseason. The 1912 Boston Red Sox won the World Series after a full first-season in Fenway Park. Oh, and I hate the Cardinals.

smg58 Oct 29 2006 09:31 AM

Going by records, Elster is absolutely right. But October was one of the few months where they had their full lineup in place, so the team that played in the playoffs was better than the team that played the regular season (and certainly better than the one that finished it). That certainly doesn't explain how Suppan and Weaver pitched this month, though. This Cardinals team, even at full strength, doesn't match the Mets or Tigers on paper. But playoff series aren't decided on paper. They were the better team when it mattered most.

Elster88 Oct 29 2006 09:56 AM

smg58 wrote: But playoff series aren't decided on paper. Agreed....but I think everyone already knew this. My opinion still stands unchallenged. I'm willing and eager to hear opposing arguments regarding other past champions. Let's have them.

SteveJRogers Oct 29 2006 09:57 AM

Elster88 wrote: ="smg58"]But playoff series aren't decided on paper. Agreed....but I think everyone already knew this. My opinion still stands unchallenged. I'm willing and eager to hear opposing arguments regarding other past champions. Let's have them. Does coming 27 outs away count as worse? SC=1973

Rockin' Doc Oct 29 2006 07:44 PM

Elster88 wrote: ="Rockin' Doc"]Elster - "This is the worst WS champion in history." I think that's some rather extreme hyperbole, but you're entitled to your opinion. If you've got one that was worse I'm all ears. Or eyes, rather. Upon closer inspection, I must admit that your claim regarding the Cardinals lack of strength is not nearly as extreme as I initially thought. If they are not the worst team to win the World Series, they are definitely in contention for the dubious title. I think a decent case can be made that the 1987 Minnesota Twins were a pretty weak team for World Series Champions. The 1987 Twins allowed went 85-77 during the regular season. They scored 786 runs while allowing 806 to their opponents. Kirby Puckett was great in centerfield, but the remainder of their line up was pretty non-descript. Their pitching consisted of Frank Viola and an aging Bert Blyleven in the rotation and Jeff Reardon as closer. The 2001 Arizona Diamondbacks who thrilled us all when they defeated the Yankees in 7 games were a rather motley collection. Their line up consisted of Luis Gonzalez, who had a monster season, with some support from Mark Grace, Reggie Sanders, and Steve Finley. This team though wasn't about hitting, it survived on the strong arms of Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling. The two combined to go 43-12, the remainder of the pitchers combined to post a record of 49-58. Any team that featured a double play tandem of Tony Womack at shortstop and Jay Bell at second base is on shaky ground in my mind. The 2006 Cardinals featured the preeminant slugger in the game today. He received offensive support from Scott Rolen and David Eckstein. Beyond Chris Carpenter, their was no one in their rotation that opposing line ups would be too concerned over. I'm sure there are a few contenders going back into the annuls of World Series histroy, but I tried to limit it to teams that I could actually remember watching. All these teams found a way to step up and perform under the pressure of the postseason spotlight. The timeliness of their performances enabled them to prevail over more talented teams.

Edgy DC Oct 29 2006 08:24 PM

I think of the 1985 Royals. I picked them that year, but gracious. The 1987 Twins should have been the end of the road for both Steve Carlton and Joe Niekro, but they each came back to pitch less than a dozen innnigs for the 1988 Twinks and each got shellacked. But those Twinks had a lot of power on the corners.

Willets Point Oct 29 2006 08:52 PM

Elster88 wrote: I guess I'm the only person here who thinks that the Cardinals are/were a garbage team? A lot of people are giving them way too much credit. This is the worst WS champion in history. On the other hand, I find it deliciously ironic that in the year that all the hype was for the American League and that the World Series title would go to an AL team by default that a team the could only win 83 games in the lowly NL won the series in a dominating fashion. I mean, I still hate the Cardinals, and I don't buy that reflected glory crap, but ... go NL!

Edgy DC Oct 29 2006 10:03 PM

The 1988 Dodgers were a ghost-rider champion, riding a hot pitcher to the end of the line. They had about two and half hitters on that team. I'll acknowledge that Mike Scoscia was pretty OK for a catcher and make it three.

MFS62 Oct 30 2006 09:15 AM

Willets Point wrote: On the other hand, I find it deliciously ironic that in the year that all the hype was for the American League and that the World Series title would go to an AL team by default that a team the could only win 83 games in the lowly NL won the series in a dominating fashion. I mean, I still hate the Cardinals, and I don't buy that reflected glory crap, but ... go NL! I agree wholeheartedly. And I also get some satisfaction in knowing thatthe Mets gave the Cards a tougher struggle than the Tigers. But still, a Tiger victory would have given us something we've missed for a while. We haven't seen a good old fashioned car-burning type Detroit celebratory street riot in years. Later

metsmarathon Oct 30 2006 09:53 AM

the 87 twins would have to be the worst world series winner, at leat based on my estimation. they are the only WS champ with a sub-.500 pythagorean record, and they are the only WS champ ever with below league-average offense AND defense (they were 8th of 14 teams in runs scored, and 10th of 14 teams in ERA) now, the cards might be the second-worst WS champion ever, but i think that the 85 royals might have a thing to say about that...

Frayed Knot Oct 30 2006 10:22 AM

Either way, Cards fans can take in the fact that they either [u:531e0db64f]were[/u:531e0db64f] the worst WS winner of all time, or [u:531e0db64f]they lost to[/u:531e0db64f] the worst ever.

Yancy Street Gang Oct 30 2006 10:25 AM

St. Louis was just named the most dangerous city in America. (Taking the title from Camden, NJ, which has held it for the past two years.) Coming in second place this year: Detroit, Michigan. So the city of St. Louis wins bragging rights over Detroit in two categories during the course of a single month.

metirish Oct 30 2006 10:33 AM

It's official,this WS had the worst TV ratings ever...seems to me that every year is the worst ever...

Willets Point Oct 30 2006 10:38 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: St. Louis was just named the most dangerous city in America. (Taking the title from Camden, NJ, which has held it for the past two years.) Coming in second place this year: Detroit, Michigan. So the city of St. Louis wins bragging rights over Detroit in two categories during the course of a single month. I just logged in to post this interesting coincidence. Yancy has bragging rights over me. Maybe that explains the low ratings. Everyone in St. Louis & Detroit had their tv's stolen and are too scared to walk to a bar.

ScarletKnight41 Oct 30 2006 10:57 AM

I've been in St. Louis. I've been in Camden. St. Louis is no Camden.

Willets Point Oct 30 2006 11:04 AM

ScarletKnight41 wrote: I've been in St. Louis. I've been in Camden. St. Louis is no Camden. Yes, it's more dangerous.

Yancy Street Gang Oct 30 2006 11:14 AM

Scarlett, I think the part of St. Louis that you saw was probably the nice part, where the tourists go. The rest of the city may be something else entirely. A few years ago I had an assignment in the ghettos of Baltimore. I'm sure that there are a lot of people who can say that Baltimore is a nice town, based on the Aquarium, the Inner Harbor, and Camden Yards. But I've been to the parts of Baltimore that you see on The Wire, and if Baltimore had won the most dangerous contest, I wouldn't have been the least bit surprised. It may very well be the same with St. Louis. Just because part of it is nice doesn't mean the rest isn't dangerous.

Johnny Dickshot Oct 30 2006 11:19 AM

Only been to St. Louis once but in a limited sample the Panhandler-to-Pedestrian ratio was higher than anyplace I'd ever been but for downtown Tampa.

Yancy Street Gang Oct 30 2006 11:21 AM

And I've never seen more homeless people in any American city than I did in Seattle in 2003.

Edgy DC Oct 30 2006 11:36 AM

I visited Seattle much earlier --- 1993 or so. What I took note of was that their homeless populations was so non-black, mostly white and Native Americans.

Willets Point Oct 30 2006 01:20 PM

Philadelphia & San Francisco have the largest homeless populations I've ever seen, although homeless does not equal dangerous.

MFS62 Oct 30 2006 01:23 PM

According to a friend who was there recently, there are a lot of homeless people on the streets of Salt Lake City too, drawn there by the charitable reputation of the Mormons. Later

metirish Oct 30 2006 01:25 PM

I think we can conclude that it's a major problem in this Country...

soupcan Oct 30 2006 01:41 PM

Not many homeless in Westport, CT.

metirish Oct 30 2006 01:44 PM

Portland apparently attracts a lot of young runaways and the like.

Elster88 Oct 30 2006 11:05 PM

metirish wrote: It's official,this WS had the worst TV ratings ever...seems to me that every year is the worst ever... Every year there's more and more other stuff to do. And other stuff on TV.

SteveJRogers Oct 31 2006 05:23 PM

True, only the NFL and March Madness seems to keep it's mega audience of the pre-cable/dish explosion days

SteveJRogers Oct 31 2006 05:24 PM

But that still means baseball IS a dying sport nationally! =;) Semi-kidding, I do think that, but no need to travel down that road

sharpie Oct 31 2006 05:37 PM

Not only a national problem, the most homeless people I've ever seen was in Vancouver, BC. (on edit): When I clicked on my new player, Willie Montanez, it brought me to Bruce Boisclair.

Willets Point Oct 31 2006 05:44 PM

sharpie wrote: (on edit): When I clicked on my new player, Willie Montanez, it brought me to Bruce Boisclair. How do you think Willie Montaņez feels about that?

Frayed Knot Oct 31 2006 11:06 PM

]only the NFL and March Madness seems to keep it's mega audience of the pre-cable/dish explosion days Even the mega-audiences of MNF were are fraction of what they were from the days fo the 1970s & '80s by the time it was finally dropped from network television. No network show has anywhere near the pct of viewing world that they had back then.

SteveJRogers Oct 31 2006 11:15 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: ]only the NFL and March Madness seems to keep it's mega audience of the pre-cable/dish explosion days Even the mega-audiences of MNF were are fraction of what they were from the days fo the 1970s & '80s by the time it was finally dropped from network television. No network show has anywhere near the pct of viewing world that they had back then. I was referring to the NFL in general. I mean Super Bowl Sunday is like an unofficial holiday for crying out loud. And every week it's gotten to the point where each game is like a mini-Super Bowl the way the media generates hype these days. Example, listen to the Jets and Giants radiocast, for a 1pm game the Jets start right around 10:30-11 for their pre-game. The Giants would as well if Mike Francesa didn't host a national NFL show until 12. Heck for the important games the station pushes the official start time of Jet pregame untill 8! Also, after both the Jets and Pats won the first game, never mind of course that most prognosticators had the Jets in the Brady Quinn sweepstakes the local radio was treating their game two matchup as "Battle for First Place"

Frayed Knot Oct 31 2006 11:43 PM

The Super Bowl is a different animal, but TV ratings for ANY event (sports or otherwise) don't come close to what they would have been years ago when there were fewer others options for viewers.

Willets Point Nov 01 2006 12:25 AM

I'm still having trouble accepting that the Cardinals are the World Series Champions. I mean the White Sox, Red Sox, and even the freakin' Marlins, I comprehended immediately, but for some reason this just does not compute.

Willets Point Nov 02 2006 01:05 PM

The Cardinals apologize.

Elster88 Nov 02 2006 02:12 PM

cooby wrote: I guess I'm just not following your thoughts there. Don't bother trying. There isn't much there.

cooby Nov 02 2006 02:29 PM

I did figure it out though

SteveJRogers Nov 02 2006 05:30 PM

Elster88 wrote: ="cooby"]I guess I'm just not following your thoughts there. Don't bother trying. There isn't much there. So you want the 50 cents for a case beer after the Huskies escape Hartford with a win? The point was that the NFL is at a point where the media and fan reaction is so game to game more than any other sport. The point was that the Jets before the season opened were picked to be one of the truely horrid teams of the league. They win Game 1, so do the Pats and all of a sudden the same folks who thought the Jets would vie for a top 5 draft pick were hyping the fact that the Jets were now battling for first place in the Week 2 hype. Any other sport you don't get that kind of hysteria. A team has a hot (or even cold) first month and there is only guarded optimism, if they were picked across the board to be a bad team. Usually it will be "yeah, they are doing fine now, but how will they hold up the rest of the regular season?" In the NFL, a team wins it's first game and fans and the media hype machine start making plans for January!

SteveJRogers Nov 02 2006 05:42 PM

That points to the overall success and popularity of the NFL as opposed to baseball. Even if it's not your team, the media hype machine will drill hope the fact that the games are all must see events. Do you get that in baseball? No, usually the local coverage shuts down once the Mets and Yanks make their respective final outs. With the NFL coverage, you still regular coverage even if the Jets and Giants long since cleaned out their lockers. Big case in point towards that fact: See that, last year, the White Sox end their long drought and win the championship. What does SI put on the cover? A preview of the upcoming tilt between the Colts and Patriots on Monday Night Football. Turned out to be a good game, and while not the AFC Championship preview that everyone thought, but still the football game got the cover. Oh there is a nice insert featuring the celebration, but the fact of the matter is football has been ingrained in the nation's conscience as a weekly event that is Must Pay Attention To while baseball is a nice little sport who no one cares about after their particular team's season ends. Tommy Lasorda be damned!

SteveJRogers Nov 02 2006 07:02 PM

BTW, more to the point, notice that the NFL is the only pro sport, and the only sport save for March Madness that local media and fans follow even if their team's season essentially ended by Thanksgiving? Straight through the Super Bowl, there is no need for some sort of gimmick featuring an ambassador saying "So your team lost, watch the playoffs anyway! Its your duty! JUDY!"

Edgy DC Nov 02 2006 10:27 PM

Well, how many sports are there in which a season can end by Thanksgiving?

SteveJRogers Nov 02 2006 10:48 PM

Watch that sarcasm meter Edgy! You know I mean half way through a season or thereabouts. In baseball, its June/July In hockey and basketball its in February.

patona314 Nov 02 2006 10:50 PM

SteveJRogers wrote: Tommy Lasorda be damned! lasorda is funny. like abbot and costello funny.

Edgy DC Nov 02 2006 11:03 PM

SteveJRogers wrote: Watch that sarcasm meter Edgy! You know I mean half way through a season or thereabouts. In baseball, its June/July In hockey and basketball its in February. I follow baseball to the end. So do a lot of people, as evidenced by the thread you're posting in. If not enough do to get the sport better TV ratings, I don't care.

MFS62 Nov 03 2006 02:19 PM

From Gammons' blog... Some baseball and media officials groused when the Cardinals opened the gates in the eighth inning and allowed thousands of fans to come in off the street to see the Cardinals -- those Cardinals most of their grandparents loved -- win. Two years earlier, in the fourth (and final) game of the 2004 series, that same management opened the gates at the old Busch Stadium so more than a thousand Red Sox fans could finally see their team win the World Series. That's a franchise that respects the game, not just their own fans. Kinda' cool. Later

metirish Nov 03 2006 02:22 PM

Where did the thousands of fans sit/stand....it's cool and all but I imagine it would have some safety issues

Rockin' Doc Nov 03 2006 09:26 PM

Edgy - "I follow baseball to the end. So do a lot of people, as evidenced by the thread you're posting in. If not enough do to get the sport better TV ratings, I don't care." Unfortunately, we comprise the minority. Hence, the declining viewership of the World Series. It is a shame that so many have fallen away from the great game that is baseball.

metirish Nov 03 2006 09:34 PM

It's not just baseball and not just over here, in England the Premiership attendence is down, only a few teams sell out,rating on SKY TV are down,in Italy attendence has hit an all time low,this after they won the World Cup,I think people just have more to choose from these days.

Yancy Street Gang Nov 03 2006 10:05 PM

And I've become part of the majority that bails before the end. Fifteen years ago I never would have predicted that I wouldn't be a World Series watcher, but it's the legacy of 1994.

Rockin' Doc Nov 03 2006 10:22 PM

I have a few friends that have basically bailed on baseball altogether for the same reason Yancy.

SteveJRogers Nov 03 2006 10:28 PM

="Edgy DC"] ="SteveJRogers"]Watch that sarcasm meter Edgy! You know I mean half way through a season or thereabouts. In baseball, its June/July In hockey and basketball its in February. I follow baseball to the end. So do a lot of people, as evidenced by the thread you're posting in. If not enough do to get the sport better TV ratings, I don't care. Like Kevin Bacon in Animal House huh? "All is Well!"

Edgy DC Nov 03 2006 11:13 PM

No.

patona314 Nov 03 2006 11:17 PM

uh guys... it's over and NYG are 13 point favorites this week.

Frayed Knot Nov 03 2006 11:34 PM

]England the Premiership attendence is down, only a few teams sell out, rating on SKY TV are down, in Italy attendence has hit an all time low Except that baseball attendance is at an all-time high, both major league and in the minors. WS TV ratings are down for any one of a number of reasons, but uniquely so in baseball because so much of the viewing is focused on the in-season local games. It never has been the nationwide/network kind of ratings-buster that football is, but that's also not the source from where they derive the main part of their income. I just read where MLB revenues are up over 50% from just 4 years ago. So let's hold off on the funeral procession, OK?