That Was Amazing
by Jeff Sullivan on Oct 6, 2009 7:28 PM PDT
in Miscellaneous
Email
PrintTo be perfectly honest with you, I didn't really care about this game when it started, and even through the middle innings, I only gave the box score the occasional passing glance. I was still just feeling all baseballed out, and I don't have any particular interest in either of these teams. But when I got into my car to drive home, turned to ESPN Radio, and heard that crowd...crowds suck me in. I don't think that makes me unique, but atmosphere is such a critical part of my enjoyment that in a situation like this it can make it or break it. Today it made it. As soon as I noticed that Dave Campbell had to shout I drove home fast enough to spend the first five minutes back researching the efficacy of red light cameras.
That heart-stopper was just jam-packed with moments that you knew in your heart of hearts meant the game. So many, in fact, that it feels almost ridiculous to suggest that the Tigers were dead as soon as they couldn't score in the 12th, because that was like the eighth or ninth time I thought "oh man that's gonna do it." By that point, who knew? Detroit certainly hadn't done itself any favors, but looking at the batters Minnesota had coming up, odds still pointed to there being a 13th inning. And were it not for Casilla locating his grounder perfectly, there very probably would've been. These things have to end eventually, though, and any team that loses will have its missed opportunities. Detroit now gets to face an offseason of reflecting on theirs, while Minnesota gets a night to forget about their own. They didn't cap off an improbable come back, but they capped off an impressive one. A wonderful day for a team and a fan base that didn't want to see this ride come up one game short.
On the Tigers side, cheers to Rick Porcello for an outing most people by now have forgotten. Cheers to Brandon Inge for coming up with a big hit and a game-saving stop in the field. Cheers to Miguel Cabrera for making people shut up, if only for a few hours. Cheers to Jim Leyland for not keeling over and dying during any one of 11 total pitching changes. And jeers to Ryan Raburn for a godawful dive that he'll be seeing in his sleep. And for the Twins, cheers to making the patented Angels model work for a team not named the Angels. They'll be facing some lousy odds, but five games isn't very long, and even if the get knocked out in three, they'll always have this memory.
I love the one-game playoff.
95 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
yeah...
whatever happened with all that talk? And why did it begin in the first place?
by groovewrangler on Oct 6, 2009 8:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Pohlad always kept payroll pretty low.
He was the richest owner in baseball when he died this year, and payroll is still on the low end. Now of course the Twins are a low-revenue team, and I’m not going to tell a man how to spend his money (they’re a pretty successful franchise without spending a ton), but I don’t think Pohlad or the Twins were ever hurting for money. He was just a businessman.
That was the logic used though.
Or at least I think so. perhaps my memory as an 11 year old at the time is failing me.
Casilla wooooooo
Imagining that comment at the tail end of that chart makes me smile for some reason. Is it Opening Day yet?
by groovewrangler on Oct 6, 2009 8:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I heard talk of having a Wild Card one game playoff.
The teams with the 2 best records that are not division champions go head to head for a one game playoff. I like the idea because a game like this would be played every year.
I hate that idea.
This year those two teams would be a 95 win Boston team and an 87 win Texas team. Boston was clearly better and is clearly more deserving, but anything can happen in a one game playoff. That’s just absurdly unfair.
by Aaron Campeau on Oct 6, 2009 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions
It all hinges on what you think should be the intent of the playoffs
If you want them to more often reward the better team, that’s one thing. If you want to maximize revenue and entertainment, that’s quite another.
by Jeff Sullivan on Oct 6, 2009 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I see your point, but a playoff system that screwy would take a lot of the enjoyment out of the game for me.
I don’t think I’d be alone in that.
by Aaron Campeau on Oct 6, 2009 8:26 PM PDT up reply actions
It would be weird at first and we'd all hate it, but it's not markedly different from introducing the Wild Card in the first place
All bringing in more teams does is reduce the chance of the best team winning the championship. And as things are right now, I’m not real sure that’s even the goal.
by Jeff Sullivan on Oct 6, 2009 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions
With that said, I think forcing a one-game playoff would be a bad move because one-game playoffs are fun because of their rarity
Baseball can’t afford to extend its playoffs anymore than it already has. A lot of people hate that the NHL and NBA playoffs take like two months. We already have three series and that’s pretty long.
by Jeff Sullivan on Oct 6, 2009 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions
It might even raise the odds, under this scenario.
But really, what needs to happen is the elimination of the silly wildcard team cannot play division winner from same division rule.
Would it be fair to say that the only reason that rule exists is to create sexier LCS matchups?
by Aaron Campeau on Oct 6, 2009 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it's way, way different from introducing the Wild Card.
The WC winner is at least given their playoff berth based on their record over 162 games and if you’ve got a situation like you do this year (8 more wins a much tougher division) forcing that team to play a lesser team to get into the playoffs just seems so clearly unfair that I don’t see the point.
by Aaron Campeau on Oct 6, 2009 8:34 PM PDT up reply actions
In the olden days, today's WC winners wouldn't have made the playoffs
The WC gave more teams a chance and therefore diluted the pool. They’re obviously not equivalent situations, but it’s all about determining the intent of the whole thing.
by Jeff Sullivan on Oct 6, 2009 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I get what you mean, but at least the WC winner gets into the playoffs based on their performance in the regular season.
by Aaron Campeau on Oct 6, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I think we both want the same things
My big problem right now is divisions.
by Jeff Sullivan on Oct 6, 2009 8:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes
Even with the wild card, you still end up with situations like Texas being better in the regular season than everyone from the Central, but sitting at home regardless. Three divisions is a bit too much.
It's tough for me to believe the goal is to have the best team win the championship
A five-game first round series tells me that much. Unless they either A) don’t realize that the fewer games you play the better the chance the best team loses due to randomness or B) realize this but also realize the playoffs go on long enough as it is and if they are going to have four playoff teams something has to give.
I don't necessarily think that the current goal of the playoffs is to have the best team win.
You attempt to succeed in the regular season so you have a shot at the playoffs, and I tend to look at them as two separate things; the regular season tells you who the best teams were, while the playoffs don’t really tell you all that much, but they’re fun and exciting and everyone wants to be in them so they can win the WS.
by Aaron Campeau on Oct 6, 2009 8:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, a team shouldn't be able to pitch their best starter three times over the course of seven days.
by Aaron Campeau on Oct 6, 2009 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions
That and superior teams tend to have stronger reserves
so its harder to nurse injuries etc., bullpen wouldn’t have as much chance to rest and so on
Sure the best team doesn't always win, but playoff series are exciting, and the best team does win a good percentage of the time
also, with more teams, it’s just not economically viable to only have the league champs get to play in the postseason like the (pre-…1969?) era. Under that system, the Mariners would have only been to the playoffs one time in their history.
I'm with AC on this one
if the race was close enough to be exciting, virtually every game down the stretch is a one-game playoff. If it’s like this year where one team ran away with the wild card, why give the worse team a chance to luck into the playoffs?
The worst point about this I can see is how much it would screw the winning wild card team against its eventual DS opponent.
Both teams would be throwing their best pitchers at their Wild Card rival, thereby exhausting them and creating uneven match-ups in the division series.
So I can't believe Leyland stuck with Rodney so long
That was pretty clearly a situation where Leyland didn’t care that Rodney was losing velocity and effectiveness and just felt comfortable with the name.
Their bullpen is awful and you have to ride your best guy as long as possible
That said, I was really surprised Verlander didn’t pitch
They were probably saving him for Game 1 tomorrow or something
Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.
by pdb on Oct 6, 2009 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions
No, today was his throw day
My thinking is either he just wasn’t capable of pitching today, or they were protecting his arm.
A scrub pitcher, probably
Verlander, not so much.
Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.
by pdb on Oct 6, 2009 8:58 PM PDT up reply actions
He's a horse
Not that he’s Randy Johnson, but Randy started the one game playoff on three days rest, threw a CG, started on three days rest again, then threw three innings in relief a day later. So guys are built differently and can handle a little extra strain.
This game pretty much encapsulated everything I love about baseball
it had plays at the plate, fielding miscues, baserunning mistakes, and a couple teams, for lack of a better cliche, leaving it all out on the field. If I were a fan of either of these teams I would be exhausted and/or hammered right now. What fun.
Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.
The Twins can't really send too many pitchers to the mound tomorrowday
by Dewey N on Oct 6, 2009 9:05 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Right about now
Gardenhire’s going up to Mauer and saying “So, uh, Joe…when was the last time you pitched? You can throw a couple innings tomorrow, right? Sweet. Thanks.”
Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.
by pdb on Oct 6, 2009 9:07 PM PDT up reply actions
If you actually need help with a red light ticket, let me know
thank goodness for trial by written declaration
If you get a red light ticket in CA can you pay with an IOU?
seems only fair.
Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.
by pdb on Oct 6, 2009 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions
They should have played this game yesterday.
Oh but Monday Night Football. Who are the Twins going to have available tomorrow, in good shape?
Except it was raining cats and dogs, their new stadium is going to be brilliant.
Where is this dose of curmudgeon coming from anyway, must be futility of starting the series against the Yankees behind the eight ball.
Except in April, October and November.
Check out the temperature spread. It’s like they’re banking on global warming to heat their stadium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_the_Twin_Cities – About a 1/3 way down the page.
It's hard to convince people to let you eat them if you're an asshole. - Thingray
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
- Have you criticized Hanley Ramirez on Twitter? Your name may be on his bat!
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
