PDA

View Full Version : Will the Red Sox Sweep?


Zeno
10-25-2004, 01:48 AM
Putz Pedro is Pitching next. Will the Cardinal pitching continue to be lackluster and their hitting aucmen to slumber? Will the mighty Cardinals be swept under the rug of baseball history?

The Red Sox have won SIX games in a row. Are they just hitting their stride or been unreasonably lucky?

Will Manny soon be playing left field in a motorized wheelchair?

Are the Red Sox running on fumes and doomed or fated to slam into a brick wall?

-Zeno

Sooga
10-25-2004, 01:49 AM
The Red Sox going up 3-0 then losing the next 4 is really the only reasonable outcome of this series.

nolanfan34
10-25-2004, 01:54 AM
It won't be a sweep. This series is going 6 games or 7, and I'll stick with 6, since that's what I predicted to begin with.

Cards will sweep at home, and the Sox, without Schilling in game 6, will see Arroyo get shelled instead.

Dynasty
10-25-2004, 02:21 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The Red Sox going up 3-0 then losing the next 4 is really the only reasonable outcome of this series.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder if Yankee fans would think it was worth losing only to see the Red Sox top their collapse in the World Series.

Neil Stevens
10-25-2004, 06:43 AM
Home field seems to have been very very important to the Cardinals this year. I wouldn't start talking sweep until the Cardinals lose at home, since they haven't yet.

The Dude
10-25-2004, 11:02 AM
No.

Dynasty
10-25-2004, 07:26 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Home field seems to have been very very important to the Cardinals this year. I wouldn't start talking sweep until the Cardinals lose at home, since they haven't yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems all Cardinal fans are talking about this big home field advantage of theirs. So, I looked up the regualar seaon sats to see how much merit it has.

Cardinals:
Regular Season: 105-57 .648
Home: 53-28 .654
Away: .642

Based on the regular season, the Cardinals don't appear to play any better at home than they do on the road.

lastchance
10-25-2004, 09:14 PM
The Home field advantage comes from the NL rules. The Cardinals don't have a crappy DH anymore vs. the Red Sox DH, and the Red Sox lose a lot of defense as well, if they want to keep a bat in.

andyfox
10-25-2004, 09:41 PM
Didn't the Red Sox/Yankees series learn you nothing?

Kurn, son of Mogh
10-25-2004, 09:51 PM
1986 taught me to not celebrate being up 2-0 /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Dynasty
10-25-2004, 09:53 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The Home field advantage comes from the NL rules. The Cardinals don't have a crappy DH anymore vs. the Red Sox DH, and the Red Sox lose a lot of defense as well, if they want to keep a bat in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you just making this up as you go along? Kevin Millar isn't that good of a defensive first basemen. He had a .989 fielding percentage. Ortiz is basically the same. People are so down on Ortiz. It's as if they expect him to forget to bring his glove on the field with him.

As far as losing a better batter in the lineup, doesn't that also give the Red Sox an even stronger bench?

The Cardinals home field advantage is no bigger or smaller than the average team's home field advantage.

Zeno
10-25-2004, 10:56 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Didn't the Red Sox/Yankees series learn you nothing?

[/ QUOTE ]

Dear Andy,

Us republickcans is slow on the lernin.

You're Friend,

Zeno

Neil Stevens
10-25-2004, 10:57 PM
I meant in the playoffs, where they're 6-0 at home (2-0 against the Dodgers, 4-0 against the Astros).

I really don't care what they were doing in April, or even before they acquired Walker.

andyfox
10-25-2004, 11:08 PM
And 2004 has taught me not to celebrate being up 3-0.

sublime
10-25-2004, 11:33 PM
I really don't care what they were doing in April, or even before they acquired Walker.

funny, since they were winning quite a lot of ballgames before they got walker. unless his orange cleats somehow improved StL's homefield advantage.

dude, the sox have lost 1 game at home in the playoffs, StL being "undefeated" in 6 attempts is not a huge deal.

rgreenm90
10-25-2004, 11:34 PM
Is it just me, or are their an inordinate amount of New Englanders on 2+2?
As far as predictions go:
Petey beats Suppan--6-4
Lowe gets shelled, so does Marquis--cards win, 9-7
Wakefield/Arroyo duo beat Williams--Sox win, 7-5
Everyone in Boston becomes catatonic as they have nothing left to live for. David Ortiz reveals that he has been injected with Ted WIlliam's blood.

sublime
10-25-2004, 11:38 PM
dynasty, i dont think you are quite understanding the predicament the sox will be in when the enter bush stadium and deal with the notoriously savage cardinal fans. no way has boston been in a situation quite like this one. boston will be so overwhelmed that they will make 4 errors that the deadly StL lineup will make them pay for.

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

andyfox
10-25-2004, 11:44 PM
Losing Millar at first base loses virtually nothing. Forget about his fielding percentage, he's just not a good fielder. His range and his hands are average at best. So they won't lose much with Ortiz over there. Both players are replaced by Mienticiwjhkewiczxwc (or whatever his name is) at the end of the game anyway.

Besides, the Sox made eight errors the first two games. How much worse can their fielding be?

Neil Stevens
10-25-2004, 11:46 PM
Yeah, so the way these two teams are going, I would expect the series to go 7 games.

To seriously talk of a sweep at this point is ridiculous.

lastchance
10-25-2004, 11:49 PM
You guys are right. Red Sox fielding sucks so much that I shouldn't even be talking. However, the bat point is somewhat relevant. Who cares if Boston has a stronger bench? Losing that bat still hurts.

sublime
10-25-2004, 11:50 PM
Yeah, so the way these two teams are going, I would expect the series to go 7 games.

how can you say that? StL offense has been rather medicore the first two games and thier pitching has been bad. how you "see" this going 7 at this point is beyond me.

To seriously talk of a sweep at this point is ridiculous.

i agree with you 100%

Neil Stevens
10-25-2004, 11:58 PM
Mediocre? They score 9 runs in game 1. How much must they score before it's good? 22?

Sure, Curt Schilling held them down in game 2, but that's to Schilling's (and his surgeon's) credit.

sublime
10-26-2004, 12:07 AM
Mediocre? They score 9 runs in game 1. How much must they score before it's good? 22?


sorry neil, i was combining BOTH games. how about I just say that thier offense has not been as good as bostons? fair?

Sure, Curt Schilling held them down in game 2, but that's to Schilling's (and his surgeon's) credit.

luckily they get to face a rested pedro martinez /images/graemlins/confused.gif. again, what do you "see" that says this series is going 7?

Dynasty
10-26-2004, 12:07 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I meant in the playoffs, where they're 6-0 at home (2-0 against the Dodgers, 4-0 against the Astros).

I really don't care what they were doing in April, or even before they acquired Walker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see. Well, then I guess the Red Sox have an Away Field advantage since they're 4-2 on the road in the playoffs. I guess that locks up two games in St. Louis for the Red Sox.

Neil Stevens
10-26-2004, 12:08 AM
That's a fair position to take, and that's why they play the games.

nolanfan34
10-26-2004, 12:09 AM
Man these threads are crowded. I liked it better when you guys were down 3-0, and you all disappeared for a bit. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif