Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Game Chatter > Discussion
Game Chatter
— Where Thinking Fans Discuss Today's Games

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. villageidiom Posted: September 06, 2005 at 02:58 PM (#1599837)
There is emotional payoff in rooting for Tim Wakefield.

As predicted, the Red Sox went 2-1 vs. Baltimore and 0-1 vs. Chicago. That means the Sox are once again exactly in line with the 6/14 prediction, and are on pace for 94 wins.

That prediction had the Sox taking 2 of 3 in this series against the City of Angels Angels of Anaheim. I'm sticking with it.
   2. SM in DC Posted: September 06, 2005 at 03:26 PM (#1599882)
Taking two of three would be a feat, but is probably doable...

I would guess that Lackey probably beats the BoSox tonight against the enigmatic mystery and wonder of Wakefield's knuckler.

Santana v. Arroyo is a tossup match really.

On paper, the Sox should beat the Paul Byrd and the Angels on Thursday behind Matt Clement.

The onus is on the Yankees to win in the Bronx to keep the pressure on Boston in these games - they'll be quite a bit of scoreboard watching going on in both ballparks.
   3. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 03:28 PM (#1599886)
Santana v. Arroyo is a tossup match really.

I dunno. I gotta give the edge to LAA on that pitching matchup. Arroyo's been getting shelled lately and Santana dominated the Red Sox last time out.

Of course, the Red Sox offense could easily just score 10 runs in either game where they're not the "favorite", so who knows.
   4. Bob Loblaw Posted: September 06, 2005 at 04:28 PM (#1600008)
Santana v. Arroyo is a tossup match really.

All three games are tossup matches, really.

The Angels have the pitching advantage in all three (either because the starter is better or because the starters are even and their bullpen is better).

The Red Sox have the hitting advantage in all three.

If you looked at pitching matchups, you'd conclude the Red Sox aren't favorites more often than not. The fact that only two teams are within a run per game of Boston's offense is why the Red Sox are actually favorites more often than not.

The most likely outcome in this series is that the Red Sox take 2 of 3. The teams are pretty evenly matched in talent, but Boston's the best home team in baseball.

If it were a four-game series, a split would probably be the most likely outcome, but in a three-game set, you've got to expect that the good home team will win the extra game. Might not happen, but it's the smart thing to expect.
   5. villageidiom Posted: September 06, 2005 at 04:54 PM (#1600060)
Taking two of three would be a feat, but is probably doable…

I think Ben has it right in #4. In fact, my earlier predictions are based on exactly what his last paragraph states.
   6. Halofan Posted: September 06, 2005 at 05:33 PM (#1600132)
The Angels strategy: Hang in there until the bullpen.

Red Sox Strategy: Ditto.
   7. villageidiom Posted: September 06, 2005 at 06:03 PM (#1600185)
One more time dwelling on the predictions...

First, BPro also has the Sox finishing with roughly 94 wins.

Second, based on the way it plays out, my old predictions have Boston entering the final series of the year with 92 wins. Doing a similar exercise for the Yankees, I have them entering that series with... 92 wins. Fenway becomes the home of a three-game steel cage match on 9/30.

Put FOX Sports on High Alert! They now have three weeks to come up with a new promotional angle.
   8. 1k5v3L Posted: September 06, 2005 at 06:37 PM (#1600260)
Put FOX Sports on High Alert!

I don't know how many Jeter fist pumps I could live through.
   9. 1k5v3L Posted: September 06, 2005 at 06:38 PM (#1600264)
If that happens, however, and NYY and BOS enter that series with 92 wins each, Fenway would be a freakin' madhouse. And Boston too. I'm guessing prescriptions for antacids would be running at all time high...
   10. deb Posted: September 06, 2005 at 06:52 PM (#1600286)
The teams are pretty evenly matched in talent, but Boston’s the best home team in baseball.

Ah, so you have a sophisticated lighting system.
   11. Bob Loblaw Posted: September 06, 2005 at 07:43 PM (#1600381)
<i>If that happens, however, and NYY and BOS enter that series with 92 wins each, Fenway would be a freakin’ madhouse. And Boston too. I’m guessing prescriptions for antacids would be running at all time high…</i>

The degree of the craziness would depend on how many wins Cleveland and Oakland/Anaheim have going into the weekend.

If either the Red Sox or Yankees can lose the series and still make the playoffs, it'll be an intense atmosphere, but not anything close to the ALCS meetings.

In fact, in that scenario, I might prefer (although I certainly wouldn't root for it) if Boston lost so they could face the White Sox in the first round instead of the AL West winner.
   12. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 08:08 PM (#1600435)
The degree of the craziness would depend on how many wins Cleveland and Oakland/Anaheim have going into the weekend.

Yeah, Ben beat me to that statement.

I'm looking forward to seeing Bellhorn's first game back at Fenway. He better get cheered, at least before his first at bat.
   13. Sean McNally Posted: September 06, 2005 at 08:10 PM (#1600438)
I’m looking forward to seeing Bellhorn’s first game back at Fenway. He better get cheered, at least before his first at bat.

His first at-bat might be a pinch hit homer... would you still cheer?
   14. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 08:20 PM (#1600457)
His first at-bat might be a pinch hit homer… would you still cheer?

I did say "before" the at-bat, McNally.
   15. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 08:36 PM (#1600486)
What is Mendoza, a triple agent or something?
   16. Sean McNally Posted: September 06, 2005 at 08:38 PM (#1600492)
The chances that the triple-double-agent throws a pitch in anger in either series is roughly the same as the chances that kevin gets asked to pinch hit for Manny in extra innings.

Slim and none. And slim just packed his #### and left town.
   17. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 08:59 PM (#1600540)
The chances that the triple-double-agent throws a pitch in anger in either series is roughly the same as the chances that kevin gets asked to pinch hit for Manny in extra innings.

Slim and none. And slim just packed his #### and left town.


Yeah, the 17-1 blowout has already happened twice this season, so what're the odds of it happening again?
   18. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: September 06, 2005 at 09:00 PM (#1600548)
Mendoza could get into a game, but I doubt he will get into one in a meaningful spot unless we're into the teens innning wise
   19. Curse of the Graffanino (dfan) Posted: September 06, 2005 at 09:06 PM (#1600558)
I guarantee you that the biggest round of applause Bellhorn could possibly get at Fenway would come from him striking out.
   20. villageidiom Posted: September 06, 2005 at 09:49 PM (#1600658)
The degree of the craziness would depend on how many wins Cleveland and Oakland/Anaheim have going into the weekend.

I have Oakland out of it by then, and Cleveland ending the season with 93 wins (lots of KC, Tampa, and Detroit in their schedule). With that, a series sweep by either team would knock the other out of the playoffs.

What's the wild card tiebreak now? Do they start with head-to-head? Both Boston and NY won their season series against Cleveland.
   21. Bob Loblaw Posted: September 06, 2005 at 09:58 PM (#1600680)
If two teams are tied for the wild card, they play a one-game playoff, don't they?
   22. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: September 06, 2005 at 10:03 PM (#1600689)
If two teams are tied for the wild card, they play a one-game playoff, don’t they?

Yes, they play a one-game playoff, mainly because going with head-to-head records would make too much sense.
   23. Danny Posted: September 06, 2005 at 10:10 PM (#1600711)
Yes, they play a one-game playoff, mainly because going with head-to-head records would make too much sense.

It would be pretty unfair if 6 or 7 of the 10 head-to-head meetings were in one team's home park.

Of course, the coin toss decides homefield advantage for the one-game playoff...
   24. villageidiom Posted: September 06, 2005 at 10:25 PM (#1600755)
If two teams are tied for the wild card, they play a one-game playoff, don’t they?

That's what I'd thought, but I also recall they'd revamped the tiebreak a number of years ago, and I can't for the life of me remember what they did. You're probably right, though.
   25. Danny Posted: September 06, 2005 at 10:31 PM (#1600771)
If a playoff spot is at stake, they play a one game playoff (more if there are multiple teams tied). If Yankees and Red Sox are tied for the division lead and ahead of all Wild Card challengers, they would simply choose the division champ based on head to head record.

The change they made this year is that if the Yankees, Red Sox, and A's are all tied at the end of the season, NYY would play BOS for the division and then the loser would play OAK for the Wild Card. Previously, OAK would get the Wild Card and the NYY/BOS loser would go home. The new system is much better.
   26. More Dewey is Always Good Posted: September 06, 2005 at 10:32 PM (#1600775)
I also recall they’d revamped the tiebreak a number of years ago, and I can’t for the life of me remember what they did.

I think they changed the rules for what happens if more than two teams are tied for the wild card or a division title. In fact, maybe they added the rules in the first place - as I recall, there was a bunch of confusion surrounding the 2003 NL Wild Card - there were something like four teams with a shot at it with a week or so left, IIRC.
   27. villageidiom Posted: September 06, 2005 at 10:32 PM (#1600778)
One more "one more note" on the projections. For the Yankees my projections assume they'll play at the level of a "good" team. That would give them a 15-8 record from now to 9/29. But based on 2005 win % vs. the opponents on their remaining schedule, they'd project out to 11-12 - or, four games out with three to play. Most of this is dismal performance vs. Tampa: they need to go 5-1, as a good team should, but their 2005 pace is more like 2-4.

I have tickets for 10/1 and 10/2, and I'd like those games to mean something. But I'm hoping what they mean is that the Sox have won the division and could knock NY out of the wild card.
   28. covelli chris p Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:06 PM (#1600854)
CHONE!
   29. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:06 PM (#1600856)
I have tickets for 9/30, and if that game means something, I'll be very disappointed.

I also have tickets for 9/26, and would love to see the Sox clinch the playoffs that day.
   30. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:07 PM (#1600859)
That Chone taunt never gets old.
   31. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:08 PM (#1600860)
Not much of a welcome for the OC just then. I'm kind of surprised, given the reaction at the Meetup game.
   32. covelli chris p Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:13 PM (#1600873)
methinks erstad wouldn't be a horrible replacement for johnny damon if he decidese to sign elsewhere.
   33. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:15 PM (#1600884)
Methinks he would be.
   34. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:25 PM (#1600909)
CHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONE
   35. Mikαεl Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:28 PM (#1600920)
I see that CHONE struck out earlier.

That's really too bad for CHOOONNNE.
   36. Mikαεl Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:33 PM (#1600936)
Much as I love freedom, you can't really quibble with the guy hitting .417 over the last couple weeks.

Go Olderdude!
   37. Mikαεl Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:35 PM (#1600946)
Yankees start with three straight hit. ####### Fossum.
   38. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:35 PM (#1600947)
Olderdude OPS watch: .893.
   39. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:36 PM (#1600953)
SWING AND A HIGH DRIVE TO RIGHT FI...and Guerrero has room and makes the catch.
   40. Darren Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:37 PM (#1600958)
I was going to make this the game of the night, then I realized that there is no emotional payoff in rooting for the Red Sox, so what would be the point.

But there's a huge emotional payoff in rooting against bandwagonesque Yankee fans.
   41. Darren Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:38 PM (#1600960)
Much as I love freedom, you can’t really quibble with the guy hitting .417 over the last couple weeks.

Go Olderdude!


Yeah, but what about blonderdude?
   42. Darren Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:40 PM (#1600964)
Maybe Sean will treat us with some hysterical stories about how highly Sox fans valued Fossum. Where are you, Sean?
   43. Darren Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:41 PM (#1600968)
Fossum appears to get out of the inning but a Green error lets it continue. Great.
   44. Answer Guy, without side hustles. Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:43 PM (#1600982)
Let's face it - Tampa Bay has done a lot of the Red Sox' dirty work regarding holding off the Yankees, but the Sox can't count on the D-Rays continuing to do so indefinitely. (Sort of the opposite of what the Orioles have did in 2003 and 2004.)
   45. Mikαεl Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:43 PM (#1600985)
Blonderdude works for me as Olderdude's platoon partner. Yesterday was dumb, but I guess with Schilling pitching you can concede the game.
   46. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:48 PM (#1601001)
Kevin woulda had that.
   47. Phil Coorey. Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:49 PM (#1601005)
finley gets that...

:)
   48. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:49 PM (#1601006)
Did Figgins pull a Finley there? Or did he actually get to the ball?
   49. Phil Coorey. Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:50 PM (#1601014)
No WAY that was a strike!!
   50. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:50 PM (#1601015)
He got an error, so I guess he got there.

John Lackey has the worst defensive support in the world.
   51. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:50 PM (#1601016)
He overran it, if anything. It bounced off the top of his glove.
   52. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:51 PM (#1601019)
CHONE!
   53. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:52 PM (#1601026)
Awesome.
   54. Bob Loblaw Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:53 PM (#1601029)
Well, that wasn't clutch.
   55. Phil Coorey. Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:56 PM (#1601033)
Was every batter there first pitch swinging?
   56. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:57 PM (#1601036)
Everyone except Anderson put the first pitch in play. 5 pitches, 4 at-bats.
   57. Bob Loblaw Posted: September 06, 2005 at 11:57 PM (#1601042)
No, 5-pitch inning.
   58. Answer Guy, without side hustles. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:00 AM (#1601052)
Wow, that's hacktastic. None of those guys are exactly terrible hitters, and Vlad of course is one of the best, but none of them are known for patience at the plate.
   59. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:01 AM (#1601057)
Every time they play Tom Sawyer to introduce Mueller, my respect for him drops a little bit.
   60. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:01 AM (#1601060)
Our "offense" is teh lame.

The Angels would kick arse in 1968, what with all the pitching and stealing and just having one good hitter in the lineup every day and everything.
   61. Answer Guy, without side hustles. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:02 AM (#1601068)
Rush songs always bring back memories of my teenage days driving down I-290 in my semi-beat up Buick station wagon, and drumming on the steering wheel. :)
   62. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:02 AM (#1601069)
Every time they play Tom Sawyer to introduce Mueller, my respect for him drops a little bit.

Rush > Fly
   63. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:05 AM (#1601081)
When was the last time Olerud got an IBB?
   64. Phil Coorey. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:05 AM (#1601084)
No love for Rush young fly?? Harsh but fair
   65. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:08 AM (#1601095)
You missed last week's progrock discussion, Phil.
   66. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:09 AM (#1601100)
Kaiser's commercials are getting creepy.
   67. Phil Coorey. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:09 AM (#1601105)
You missed last week’s progrock discussion, Phil.

I'm devastated.

:)
   68. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:10 AM (#1601110)
<I>I’m devastated.</i.

As well you should be.
   69. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:11 AM (#1601113)
Kotchman by himself took more pitches than everyone last inning.
   70. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:12 AM (#1601116)
Why did MLB Audio just go on the fritz? How am I supposed to "work" without having a game to listen to? Boo.
   71. Answer Guy, without side hustles. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:12 AM (#1601118)
Of course, I know prog rock fans that despise Rush.
   72. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:12 AM (#1601124)
Ok, my complaining has caused MLB Audio to commence operation. Well done, me.
   73. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:13 AM (#1601125)
Refresh often, John.

Wakefield is making the Angels look like little leaguers.
   74. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:15 AM (#1601135)
Wakefield isThe pitchers of the American League are making the Angels look like little leaguers.
   75. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:18 AM (#1601155)
This game is moving awfully quickly.
   76. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:24 AM (#1601185)
This has all the makings of being the ballgame right here.
   77. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:25 AM (#1601197)
Hmmm. Bases loaded, Manny up. I should turn the TV off before something bad happens.
   78. Phil Coorey. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:26 AM (#1601201)
C'mon Manny...
   79. covelli chris p Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:26 AM (#1601203)
hey angels fans, kevin doesn't believe lackey has the stuff to be putting up as many k's this year as he has. somebody set him straight.
   80. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:29 AM (#1601214)
Okay, chris p.

Lackey has the stuff to put up as many K's as he has.
   81. Phil Coorey. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:29 AM (#1601215)
Manny did well there
   82. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:30 AM (#1601221)
Goddammit mother ####### bull #### ####.
   83. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:33 AM (#1601232)
That's it. No way the Angels get two runs in this game.
   84. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:34 AM (#1601237)
Lackey's lost it.

hey angels fans, kevin doesn’t believe lackey has the stuff to be putting up as many k’s this year as he has.

He does. What was frustrating the previous two seasons was knowing that he had the stuff to put up a bunch of Ks, but wouldn't trust his breaking stuff when he was behind in the count.
   85. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:40 AM (#1601250)
It seems like he did pretty well there to only escape with two runs allowed. Unfortunately, the way Wakefield's going, I think that's two runs too many.
   86. Rough Carrigan Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:43 AM (#1601261)
Tim Wakefield is The Returner.

For god's sake. Does he EVER not give the runs right back if the Sox score and give him a lead. Okay, that's hyperbole. But he seems to have an amazing frequency of giving up runs in the innings after the Sox score.
   87. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:44 AM (#1601265)
That was an embarassing AB for Erstad.
   88. Los Angeles Waterloo of Black Hawk Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:51 AM (#1601280)
Whoa, The OC homered. (I was away from my desk there. Stupid job.)

I now feel much better about this game.
   89. Schilling's Sprained Ankiel Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:55 AM (#1601295)
I sure hope the Sox can pull out a Florida State tonight. I keep expecting one or the other to explode with 100 runs (or points, like last night).
DB
   90. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 12:58 AM (#1601310)
Tie game! Figgins with the reverse switch hit!

Man, a good throw would have gotten Kennedy by plenty.
   91. Phil Coorey. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:00 AM (#1601315)
Man, a good throw would have gotten Kennedy by plenty.

Agree, the throw sucked
   92. Answer Guy, without side hustles. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:02 AM (#1601320)
Crap. This may become a bullpen war.
   93. Paul S Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:08 AM (#1601345)
I take solace in the fact that Donnelly and Yan are the first two in. The Sox can get to those guys.
   94. Paul S Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:09 AM (#1601350)
I'm sorry I jinxed you, Papi.
   95. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:09 AM (#1601351)
That was ungood, David.
   96. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:12 AM (#1601371)
Kelvim Escobar?!?!
   97. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:15 AM (#1601379)
Oh what the )(&#%*@)(%*@!)(*%)(!*)(%*!%*#!)(
   98. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:15 AM (#1601380)
What a play by Quinlan!
   99. Answer Guy, without side hustles. Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:17 AM (#1601385)
Too bad a perfectly good Wakefield start is being totally wasted.
   100. Schilling's Sprained Ankiel Posted: September 07, 2005 at 01:20 AM (#1601395)
Ugh.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt!
for his generous support.

Hot Topics

Cubs (7-16) @ Brewers (18-6), Sunday, April 27, 2014, 2:10pm
(1 - 6:16pm, Feb 09)
Last: frannyzoo

Tigers (12-9) @ Twins (12-11), Sunday, April 27, 2014, 2:10pm
(1 - 8:19pm, May 30)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

Yankees (12-8) @ Red Sox (9-12), Wednesday, April 23, 2014, 7:10pm
(3 - 8:14pm, Apr 23)
Last: simon bedford

Cardinals (7-5) @ Brewers (10-2), Monday, April 14, 2014, 8:10pm
(1 - 7:56pm, Apr 14)
Last: cardsfanboy

Athletics (4-3) @ Twins (3-4), Wednesday, April 9, 2014, 1:10pm
(1 - 4:02pm, Apr 09)
Last: LargeBill

Braves (2-1) @ Nationals (3-0), Friday, April 4, 2014, 1:05pm
(3 - 11:46am, Apr 06)
Last: The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s

Reds (1-3) @ Mets (1-3), Saturday, April 5, 2014, 1:10pm
(1 - 4:02pm, Apr 05)
Last: A Dying Soul

Phillies (1-2) @ Cubs (1-2), Friday, April 4, 2014, 2:20pm
(1 - 4:41pm, Apr 04)
Last: SteveM.

Yankees (85-77) @ RedSox (97-65), Thursday, March 20, 2014, 7:05pm
(1 - 7:15pm, Mar 20)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

RedSox (97-65) @ Yankees (85-77), Tuesday, March 18, 2014, 1:05pm
(2 - 2:19pm, Mar 18)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

Cardinals (97-65) @ RedSox (97-65), Wednesday, October 30, 2013, 7:30pm
(1 - 7:10pm, Dec 27)
Last: tfbg9

Cardinals (97-65) @ RedSox (97-65), Wednesday, October 23, 2013, 7:30pm
(1 - 8:55pm, Oct 23)
Last: Paul D(uda)

Dodgers (92-70) @ Cardinals (97-65), Friday, October 11, 2013, 8:30pm
(1 - 6:03pm, Oct 11)
Last: Gamingboy

Pirates (94-68) @ Cardinals (97-65), Wednesday, October 9, 2013, 8:00pm
(1 - 1:08pm, Oct 09)
Last: tfbg9

Athletics (96-66) @ Tigers (93-69), Monday, October 7, 2013, 1:00pm
(1 - 10:07pm, Oct 07)
Last: Buzzards Bay

Page rendered in 0.4907 seconds
58 querie(s) executed

Page rendered in 0.4907 seconds
58 querie(s) executed