And as the game trickles on, and 7-4 became 7-6, and 7-7, and 8-7, how do you not assign some of those runs—not all, not even most, but some, in a way you never have before—to the people, rather than the players. Was the experience of 2004 and 2007 on one side, and the callowness of the players who lack that experience or any like it on the other—was that a factor in what we saw? Last night’s game is an outlier, the extreme edge of the bell curve, a comeback almost unprecedented given the magnitude of the game. The facile storylines and trite labels that mark post-season coverage in the early 21st century are rightly regarded as meaningless, but when you’re out beyond two deviations, and you’re watching things that no one under 80 has ever seen, it is not only natural to question whether this could be the exception to your rules. It is mandatory.
And after the game, as you stare slack-jawed at the screen, reduced to monosyllabic expressions of awe and the occasional text message, you think about Saturday, and you wonder if there’s going to be an effect. “Momentum is tomorrow’s starting pitcher,” you like to say, quoting a baseball genius. Maybe, though, tomorrow’s starting pitcher is TBD, and momentum’s taking a day to think about whether, maybe just this once, he wants to grab a bat and take some swings.
So maybe that’s the legend of Game Five. It was the game that made a stathead consider chemistry.
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.
1. Kiko Sakata2005 NLCS. Game 5. Albert Pujols, Brad Lidge. Game 6. Roy Oswalt.
Yes, this is true (that James said it; I also think that what he says is true, although it's more opinion than fact).
It goes to the quote above: "how do you not assign some of those runs—not all, not even most, but some, in a way you never have before—to the people, rather than the players". I'm not even sure what this means. The players are people and to the extent what they did is quantifiable, it's quantifiable in the 8 runs that they scored.
What I think it means is that Sheehan is suggesting that perhaps it's not just the Red Sox true talent as ballplayers, but that they have something extra, chemistry, clutchiness, whatever unquantifiable measure we often thumb our noses at, that allows them to summon more in these particular situations than logic and subjective analysis suggests will happen. Or, at least the events of Thursday night were enough to give a numbers-based analyst reason to reconsider those factors.
Strange that it comes a day after that "words-based" columnn that singled out Sheehan in particular.
Yes. This is what will be remembered.
Un, huh. If you want to play that game, then
1985 WS. Game 6. Don Denkinger. Game 7. John Tudor. ERA for 18 prior innings: 0.50. Game 7: 11 run meltdown. Or 1986 WS. Game 7.
I still think it'd be kind of cool to send Beckett out there tonight wearing a conspicuously bloody sock (or a 'bloody' jersey, with the catsup right on the part by his right shoulder), just for the hell of it, and just because every commentator in the world would instantly be noting that "IT WAS JUST 4 YEARS AGO, GAME 6, ON THE ROAD, WHEN THE RED SOX NEEDED A CLUTCH PERFORMANCE BY A PITCHER WHO WASN'T OPERATING ON ALL CYLINDERS...." Just think of the drinking games you could play...
And if Beckett got blasted, they'd blame it on his arm, but if he kept them in the game long enough for the Sox to eke out a win, does anyone not think that the Rays might be a bit less than 100% mentally prepared for game 7? IOW what do the Sox have to lose?
The game?
Seems to me that the extra day's rest would benefit a guy with an arm problem more than it would benefit a pitcher who's perfectly healthy and rested. What's the logic behind Francona's move, other than "Beckett is a big game pitcher"?
In other words, Lou Brock did what he did.
Edited for clarity
The Sox set up the rotation before the playoffs, and they're not inclined to go away from it even if the situation suggests that shifting things around may be more prudent. Considering they resisted the temptation against Cleveland last year, when rejiggering the rotation to get two more starts from Beckett offered more payoff than Lester in Game 6 does, there was little chance they were going to change this year.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main