2025 Major League Baseball Thread

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by bruceames

That's the main thing that turns me off about baseball. Six months of baseball and 162 games and the best team usually doesn't win the WS. There is so much luck involved in the playoffs that it's almost a crap shoot. At the very least they should make the first round a seven game series. The NBA, which only plays half the regular season games, has seven game series throughout. Why not MLB? More TV revenue as well and would increase the odds (although admittedly not by a lot) that the better team advances.

Something tells me this post wouldn't exist if the Dodgers won. Also, chalking it up to luck is such a sore loser thing to say. No, the Nationals won because they were the better team at the time they faced the Dodgers. Has zero to do with luck.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Something tells me this post wouldn't exist if the Dodgers won. Also, chalking it up to luck is such a sore loser thing to say. No, the Nationals won because they were the better team at the time they faced the Dodgers. Has zero to do with luck.

I can see how it may come off that way, but actually I've always felt that way about baseball. The best team in the regular season seldom win the World Series and to say that luck has nothing to do with it is totally ridiculous.

And oh yeah, the Nationals were really the better team in this series, outscoring the Dodgers by a total of one run.

[ex-beldvd man]

In fact LAD scored 22 runs, WAS 21...

[bruceames]

To be clear, I don't think Washington won because they got lucky (meaning fewer hard hits but balls landing in the right spots). They deserved to win and the Dodgers deserved to lose.

[MifuneFan]

The Nationals won, the Dodgers lost. Sure sounds like they were the better team in series to me . It really doesn't matter if the Dodgers scored more runs in the series, what a completely silly and irrelevant measure of which team is better.

Also, I can't believe anyone is actually talking about luck in any serious manner. Luck isn't real. Any professional baseball player can hit a home run off a star pitcher at any time, has shit all to do with luck. Kershaw gave up 2 monster home runs because he didn't put the balls in the right place. That's bad luck? No it's bad pitching, and the Nationals took advantage. Anyone who believes luck is a factor must believe in unicorns too.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by ex-beldvd man

In fact LAD scored 22 runs, WAS 21...

Thanks for the correction. Was close in any case, no team really being "better" in the series.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

The Nationals won, the Dodgers lost. Sure sounds like they were the better team in series to me . It really doesn't matter if the Dodgers scored more runs in the series, what a completely silly and irrelevant measure of which team is better.

Also, I can't believe anyone is actually talking about luck in any serious manner. Luck isn't real. Any professional baseball player can hit a home run off a star pitcher at any time, has shit all to do with luck. Kershaw have up 2 monster home runs because he didn't put the balls in the right place. That's bad luck? No it's bad pitching, and the Nationals took advantage. Anyone who believes luck is a factor must believe in unicorns too.

Whatever. Be the troll if it pleases you. No sense arguing with stupidity.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by bruceames

Whatever. Be the troll if it pleases you. No sense arguing with stupidity.

How is anything I said remotely trolling? And really nice of you to personally attack me, rather than actually providing a response. I guess that says it all.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by bruceames

Thanks for the correction. Was close in any case, no team really being "better" in the series.

Runs alone do not mean anything. Suppose the Nats blew out Gm one 22-4, mostly off one or two pitchers. But then lost the next three games 0-1. That would mean the Nats outscored the Dodgers 22-7, yet it proves absolutely nothing in of itself of who the better team was.

[ex-beldvd man]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

It really doesn't matter if the Dodgers scored more runs in the series, what a completely silly and irrelevant measure of which team is better..

That’s just analytics 101

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by ex-beldvd man

That’s just analytics 101

See my post above.

[ex-beldvd man]

The best 1-run team this year with a 38-16 record (114-48 in a full season)... the juggernaut, the team everybody fears..... The San Francisco Giants....
Second on the list.... the Twins (swept in the first round by a team with a losing record in 1-run games).... 3rd team: the Braves (eliminated too).
BTW, WAS has a losing record in one-run games...

But hey you’re right, luck has nothing to do with it
Run differential IS a good indicator of one team strength...

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by ex-beldvd man

The best 1-run team this year with a 38-16 record (114-48 in a full season)... the juggernaut, the team everybody fears..... The San Francisco Giants....
Second on the list.... the Twins (swept in the first round by a team with a losing record in 1-run games).... 3rd team: the Braves (eliminated too).
BTW, WAS has a losing record in one-run games...

But hey you’re right, luck has nothing to do with it
Run differential IS a good indicator of one team strength...

So you believe the Nats won because of luck? Was it good luck for them, bad luck for the Dodgers, or a combination of both? Like I said, when it comes down to it, I think everything can be explained without relying on something as unmeasurable as luck, but I'm open to hearing your (and Bruce's) argument for luck.

Do you just mean in the sense that something very unlikely happens?

[ex-beldvd man]

By luck I mean there’s no such thing as a “hot hitter” for exemple, just a random succession of events... arranged in a favorable order...
It has been proved that winning one run games is luck not talent. Same in football with fumble recovery... So in a large sample size, run differential DO matter.
By luck, I mean that this series could be replayed and give an entirely different result (incl. a LAD or a WAS sweep). Not luck in the sense they didn’t deserved it. They have talent and they played well but if no luck is involved it would mean that WAS would win everytime. If not then luck is involved...
In case of baseball, you have the stats. A .333 hitter batting 4 times in a decisive game, will he go 0-4 or 1-4, 2-3-4/4? He can’t go 1.333/4. It’s like flipping a coin 4 times... Luck does play a role in the playoffs...

[Samus Aran]

Teams come back from 2-0 deficits all the time, but these were home games. The Nationals are in the driver seat now.

[DanTheMan]

ALCS Game 1: Yankees take it 7-0.

Pretty damn impressive given the bats that the Astros have and their home field advantage. Never saw that type of score coming.

Keep it up, Yanks.

[Bigdog]

Poor Astros about to get run over again for the second year in a row, the Yanks look unstoppable right now imo. Clearly this championship is being played right now because who ever wins it is going to roll the weak NL teams left imo.

[Hoke Moseley]

LOL @ that foul tip call.

edit: aaaaaaand... the game is over.

[DanTheMan]

That game was exhausting to watch.

How many mound trips did Aaron Boone make? Lol

NYY could’ve possibly gone back 2-0 if it wasn’t for Boone bringing in Ottavino too early. That, and their was a dry spell for the Yankees’ bats heading into the crucial later innings. Can’t be doing that with Cole on the mound in Gm 3.

[MifuneFan]

Not surprising that Happ gave up the home run. He's been mostly garbage the whole year, and has given up so many. Definitely some questionable calls by Boone as far as pitching changes go. The Astros have a very strong rotation, and with Cole pitching Game 3, I'd say odds are more in their favor.