User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.5644 seconds
47 querie(s) executed
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Tuesday, January 16, 2018
What Is Baseball’s Equivalent of the Vikings’ Miraculous Victory?
For fabulous finishes in sports history, it’s hard to top Stefon Diggs’s 61-yard touchdown catch on Sunday, as time expired, to lift the Minnesota Vikings over the New Orleans Saints and into the N.F.C. championship game. As my colleague Ben Shpigel noted, it happened on the site of the old Metrodome in Minneapolis, where the Twins won the final two games of the 1991 World Series in extra innings.
Ben would know; he’s a former baseball writer. And as much as I love watching the N.F.L., I try to relate everything to my favorite sport. So when the question of a baseball equivalent to Diggs’s catch arose on Twitter, I tried to think of a precise match….
There’s only one real equivalent, but what is it?
ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick
Posted: January 16, 2018 at 07:28 AM | 101 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags: history, miracle finishes
Tags: history, miracle finishes
Login to submit news.
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: OTP 2018 May 14: Political leadership, fans needed to bring baseball to Portland: Guest opinion
(1298 - 7:39pm, May 20)
Last: Joe Bivens Recognizes the Kenyan Precedent
Newsblog: Robinson Cano Reportedly Suspended for PED
(240 - 7:38pm, May 20)
Last: Mefisto
Newsblog: Weekend OMNICHATTER for May 19-20, 2018
(242 - 7:34pm, May 20)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns
Newsblog: Illini rely on student who geeks out on baseball analytics
(12 - 7:07pm, May 20)
Last: dlf
Newsblog: OT - 2017-18 NBA thread (All-Star Weekend to End of Time edition)
(4542 - 5:46pm, May 20)
Last: tshipman
Newsblog: Pirates set to recall outfield prospect Meadows
(4 - 5:05pm, May 20)
Last: Rennie's Tenet
Newsblog: OT: Winter Soccer Thread
(1979 - 4:27pm, May 20)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther
Newsblog: OT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (April - June 2018)
(2033 - 4:17pm, May 20)
Last: Omineca Greg
Newsblog: How gambling can help make baseball America's pastime again
(102 - 3:20pm, May 20)
Last: Hysterical & Useless
Hall of Merit: 2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(116 - 11:30am, May 20)
Last: Bleed the Freak
Newsblog: Fortnite Addiction Is Becoming a Problem for Major League Basebal
(84 - 12:29am, May 20)
Last: GGIAS (aka Poster Nutbag)
Newsblog: Taking Back the Ballparks - Colorado Rockies
(39 - 7:15pm, May 19)
Last: Omineca Greg
Gonfalon Cubs: Half full or half empty?
(66 - 5:40pm, May 19)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington
Newsblog: A face that could launch a thousand OMNICHATTER! for May 18, 2018
(105 - 11:47am, May 19)
Last: Perry
Newsblog: Primer Dugout (and link of the day) 5-18-2018
(119 - 7:43pm, May 18)
Last: RMc's Unenviable Situation
(1298 - 7:39pm, May 20)
Last: Joe Bivens Recognizes the Kenyan Precedent
Newsblog: Robinson Cano Reportedly Suspended for PED
(240 - 7:38pm, May 20)
Last: Mefisto
Newsblog: Weekend OMNICHATTER for May 19-20, 2018
(242 - 7:34pm, May 20)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns
Newsblog: Illini rely on student who geeks out on baseball analytics
(12 - 7:07pm, May 20)
Last: dlf
Newsblog: OT - 2017-18 NBA thread (All-Star Weekend to End of Time edition)
(4542 - 5:46pm, May 20)
Last: tshipman
Newsblog: Pirates set to recall outfield prospect Meadows
(4 - 5:05pm, May 20)
Last: Rennie's Tenet
Newsblog: OT: Winter Soccer Thread
(1979 - 4:27pm, May 20)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther
Newsblog: OT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (April - June 2018)
(2033 - 4:17pm, May 20)
Last: Omineca Greg
Newsblog: How gambling can help make baseball America's pastime again
(102 - 3:20pm, May 20)
Last: Hysterical & Useless
Hall of Merit: 2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(116 - 11:30am, May 20)
Last: Bleed the Freak
Newsblog: Fortnite Addiction Is Becoming a Problem for Major League Basebal
(84 - 12:29am, May 20)
Last: GGIAS (aka Poster Nutbag)
Newsblog: Taking Back the Ballparks - Colorado Rockies
(39 - 7:15pm, May 19)
Last: Omineca Greg
Gonfalon Cubs: Half full or half empty?
(66 - 5:40pm, May 19)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington
Newsblog: A face that could launch a thousand OMNICHATTER! for May 18, 2018
(105 - 11:47am, May 19)
Last: Perry
Newsblog: Primer Dugout (and link of the day) 5-18-2018
(119 - 7:43pm, May 18)
Last: RMc's Unenviable Situation
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2014 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
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.
But the Vikes just moved to a conference final, didn't win a SB or anything on the play so I think that brings lots of other baseball moments into play. Any amazing feat that won a WC game or a divsional series comes into play. In terms of likelihood there was that regular season game in the distant past when the Indians(?) scored like 10 in the bottom of the 9th to win.
Technically an issue is that baseball doesn't have a clock so, technically, there never is a "Gibson has to hit a HR here or the Dodgers lose" moment. That also removes or at least reduces the "FFS, all you had to do was not totally F up on defense for another 10 seconds" element. Also dramatic moments like Gibson's HR are just good hitter out-dueling a good pitcher, no obvious screw-up involved. So it almost would have to be something mind-numbingly stupid like Cubs down by 1 with man on second, Bryant doubles, OF thinks the winning run just scored and tosses the ball into the stands allowing Bryant to score the winning run.
So I guess the answer is Buckner.
Nah, the game was already tied, and it wasn't an elimination game for Boston.
The only one that has all of the elements (team that won was actually trailing before it happened), both teams eliminated with loss, playoff but non-championship game was the play that ended the 1992 NLCS.
It gave his trailing team the lead on the last play of the game in the playoffs (but not the final round of the postseason).
In this game balls were dying on the warning track all game long with BTF guys at Wrigley reporting here that the wind was varying between brutal and not too bad, but always blowing in.
So it hasn't been replayed a million and one times on ESPN, et al like Gibson's homer, but it certainly was a game-changing, thrilling moment for Nats fans, an "OH SH!T" moment for Cubs fans, very much the way it played out for the fans of the Vikings and Saints I imagine.
Two out, nobody on and Yankees trailing -- and the Dodgers strike out the batter for the 27th/final out. BUT the ball gets away and instead of out #27, the guy scurries to first on a wild pitch. That kicks off a rally that leads to a bizzaro 7-4 Yankees win. I believe 4 runs scored after the 27th out.
OR
Bill Bevens Game. He was one out from a no-hit victory. But instead, a fly to the wall scored 2 runs and let the Dodgers beat the Yankees, 3-2. 1947 World Series.
I'd guess the Bevens game is the better comp of the two. Walk-off play. Stunner of an ending.
I'VE GOT IT! (except I don't for reasons that will become clear). But Rick Camp's homer in the July 4th game. Technically it was "only" a 49% increase in WE but the actual circumstances considering Camp's poor hitting ability I'd bet the odds of Camp hitting a home run in that moment were about 0%. A career .074 hitter without a home run comes to bat trailing by a run with no one on and two outs the Mets had a 96% win percentage just using the base model not accounting for Camp's poor offensive acumen.
Of course the problem here is the Braves lost the game anyway and the stakes weren't the same but I think the general circumstances are about as close as you could get. Imagine Camp doing that in the bottom of the ninth of the ALDS and I think you have a baseball analogue.
Specifically. With 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th, the Rays were 4% chance to win, with Dan Johnson of the .119 BA up to bat. Johnson's homer only tied the game, but it was a 49% swing in WPA. Meanwhile, with 2 out in the bottom of the 9th in Baltimore, the Red Sox had the same 96% WPA, and lost. So the Rays, needing both a win and a Red Sox loss, had a post season WPA of 2%
That was a great HR, but the Nats were already winning when it happened. It just changed the game from a likely win to one that you didn't have to worry about anymore. Now if he had hit a slam in the 9th inning of game 5, that would be something worthy of being compared to Kirk Gibson. But how much can you ask one man to do? As it stands Taylor drove in 4 runs that game.
Walk off inside the park HR in such a circumstance, with the OF failing to make a shoestring catch on a would be single. Though could the Vikings have stopped the clock if the WR had been tackled inbounds?
Whatever you think about the pass from Keenum and catch from Diggs, were it not for Marcus Williams' boneheaded defense, the Saints win the game.
Whatever you think about Mookie's battle with Stanley, were it not for Bill Buckner's boneheaded defense, the Red Sox win the game.
at the 35 and they still probably would have won.
I haven't watched football in decades. Are 50+ yard field goals considered "gimmes" nowadays?
The game was tied at the time. If Buckner fields it, and he or Stanley manages to beat Mookie to the bag, the Red Sox don't win. The game goes to the 11th.
True, but it's impossible for baseball to get in a situation where one at bat can have that kind of turnaround. The game itself can get to a similar point, but it would then take multiple events by the offense to reverse the expected outcome.
indoors. It seems like the range of kickers just keeps creeping up.
Gimmes? No. But a good kicker at a little over 50 yards inside a dome -- odds are he better than not that he gets it.
In that case, the closest baseball equivalent might be down 1, runners on first and second and a single to right. It first looks like the offensive team might tie the score, but instead the ball scoots by the outfielder and both runners score to win the game.
The Vikings needing to kick an important field goal in the playoffs?
Uh, that doesn't usually end well.
Gary Anderson - 1998
Blair Walsh - 2016
Sadly, with nobody out.
In the baseball game, there are three possible results:
1) If the fielder catches it, the game is over and his team wins.
2) If the fielder doesn't catch it but keeps it from getting by him, the game isn't over but his team still has a chance to win (because it's only tied).
3) If the fielder doesn't catch it AND it bounces past him all the way to the wall, now the fielding team loses the game because it turns into an inside the park home run and the batting team wins.
In the football game, there are three possible results:
1) If the safety simply tackles the Vikings receiver in bounds, the game is over because there is no way the offensive line can get up to the spot for the ball and spike it in 4 seconds to stop the clock.
2) If the safety simply tackles the Vikings receiver OUT of bounds, then the game is still undecided as the Vikings have to hit a LONG (50+) field goal to win the game.
3) If the safety does what he did and misses the receiver entirely, then the Saints lose the game entirely as the Viking receiver runs in for the game winning touchdown.
It gave his trailing team the lead on the last play of the game in the playoffs
But there was only one out when he hit it. The Cabrera walkoff in the final game of the 1992 NLCS is the only true comparison in all respects,** but even that doesn't take into account the odds against his hitting a single vs. the odds that the Vikings could come up with a 61 yard touchdown pass. Of course if it'd been Hoyt Wilhelm at the plate, then that's another story.....
There are also plenty of regular season last strike comebacks, and comebacks in postseason games that weren't game 5 or game 7, but none of them fill all the conditions that the author is talking about.
** Another would've been McCovey's line drive to end the 1962 World Series, with the tying and winning runs in scoring position, but that line drive never made it past Bobby Richardson's glove.
Game 6, 2011 World Series is close but Freese's triple only tied the game. I keep coming back to Cabrera in 1992. That play could have been Pirates win, tied, Braves win with very very very little change to the actual events.
That's right, and the only difference is that while a better throw by Barry Bonds might have sent that game into extra innings, it would've been impossible for the Vikings game to wind up tied after the final play. This ending was about as improbable as the deciding game of a basketball tournament being decided by a 4-point play at the buzzer by a player whose team trailed by 3 points before the shot.
Since these days I consider football to be that filler that takes me closer to Spring Training I have no idea what other possible outcomes existed with penalties, so y'all will have to debate them among yourselves; I watched it live and was as stunned as everyone. All I know is I'm gonna go on a 3-state killing spree if I don't get some baseball injected directly into my veins pretty soon now.
Only 26 more days until the first pitchers report, and only 33 more days until all the players are in camp. Just park your guns in storage and get yourself a good countdown clock.
OK, thank goodness "Blue Monday" doesn't qualify then. Because that was a 3-1 count, and a game tied in the 9th, and the Dodgers were the visiting team, and it was a five game series. Although the Expos put two on and chased Fernando Valenzuela in the bottom of the ninth, well, the Dahhgers just sent in no-slouch-Bob-Welch, and the Dodgers won that series in 1981.
No one was expecting a home run by Rick Monday. He's probably a fine person, and a deserved member of the College Baseball HOF, and the first overall pick in the 1965 draft...but by 1981 he was a 35YO part-timer, and I would have been a happier 11YO that day if he'd still been with the Cubs, or out golfing or something.
That's what others thought as well.
If he draws the penalty, whether the receiver caught the ball or not, the Vikings would have had a free play (or one with a couple seconds left) from the point of the foul. The Vikings would have tried a field goal which would have won them the game if they converted from 50 yards (not a sure thing).
The defender simply shouldn't have leaped at the receiver at all. If he stays on the ground and simply waits for him to catch it, then he tackles him in bounds and it's over.
Exactly. To avoid drawing the PI flag, just don't commit PI. Wait until the receiver touches the ball, then wrap him up with your arms and tackle him.
There is simply no way to excuse that play. The safety botched it as profoundly as a play can be botched.
Williams, the safety, came in too fast. No excuses, it's a standard safety play. They have to track their approaches and Williams simply blew it. If Williams comes in properly, really if he just stands under Diggs, Diggs will probably fall down and the game will be over.
The Saints did not make a good choice of coverage either. They kept two men in the middle of the field, at the 50, doing nothing. One of them was supposed to guard McKinnon, the RB, who stayed in to block. The other one was... apparently guarding the middle, which is where you would want the Vikings to throw.
That left two Saints to cover the three Vikings receivers on the right. They chose to cover Rudolph, the TE, who did about a six yard out, and the 3rd WR, Wright, who also ran a shorter route. Williams, the safety, was really the only one guarding Diggs, even though Diggs is the Vikings' second leading receiver, and ran a pattern exactly where you'd expect the Vikings to throw the ball. Someone should have been fronting Diggs with Williams helping in back.
Or the Saints could have rushed just three or even two, since they didn't get to Keenum anyway. Let him stand back there all day, let the time click off and have him try some heave or goofy lateral play. Or be more devious, hold all of the Vikings receivers after the ball is snapped. It's a 5 yard penalty, but the Vikings needed 25 at least and there's only two plays left.
And, yes, the sports aren't really comparable. In football you can have literally a 0% chance of winning (1 second on the clock, on the wrong 1-yard line, down by 9+). In baseball the chances are never 0% until the final out. Which, by the way, is one of the reasons it's such a great game.
The probability of being in an equivalent situation is much lower in baseball. If it has to be elimination for both teams, right away you're talking about a game 7 (or 5) of the playoffs--I guess the very last game of the season could happen. How many times do playoff series even go the full distance? Then to be the definite last play of the game, you need it to be the bottom of the 9th, and to be a low-probability event it has to be the home team behind with two outs and enough men on base to put them ahead--because it has to be a single play, stringing together a bunch of singles to come back from 4 runs down is highly improbable, but wouldn't fit this exact definition.
Different sports. I'll take baseball and the seemingly always-present tension rather than a game that has a higher chance of a single exciting play, but that you can't really fully enjoy it when you see it anyways because in the back of your mind you're always watching/waiting for a flag.
But it wasn't a hail-mary in the normal sense: the offense sends multiple receivers into the end zone, and the QB heaves one up there for a jump ball. Odds are the pass won't be completed, but, yes, once in a while it is.
This pass wasn't thrown anywhere close to the end zone, and not even really into field goal territory. There was one and only one way this play wouldn't end the game with the Saints winning, and that was for the Saints defense to blow it on an epic scale. Obligingly, the Saints defense blew it on an epic scale.
And sure, the Saints blew it in spectacular fashion, but the question was what the equivalent baseball game ending would've been.
OK, thank goodness "Blue Monday" doesn't qualify then. Because that was a 3-1 count, and a game tied in the 9th, and the Dodgers were the visiting team, and it was a five game series. Although the Expos put two on and chased Fernando Valenzuela in the bottom of the ninth, well, the Dahhgers just sent in no-slouch-Bob-Welch, and the Dodgers won that series in 1981.
No one was expecting a home run by Rick Monday. He's probably a fine person, and a deserved member of the College Baseball HOF, and the first overall pick in the 1965 draft...but by 1981 he was a 35YO part-timer, and I would have been a happier 11YO that day if he'd still been with the Cubs, or out golfing or something.
Well, the Monday game doesn't quite meet all the criteria, but it was absolutely one of the most underrated and forgotten decisive home runs in history, especially since the Dodgers had trailed in both the game and in the Series, and since they then went on to win the World Series.
No, but it was the WS. The Vikings still have to win two games to take the championship.
The tied game issue is relevant but nothing's perfect.
I guess Hosmer's dash home with Duda's horrible throw is in the ballpark but that just tied the game in a series the Royals were leading 3-1 anyway.
In hockey or soccer, there can be no direct equivalent -- a shot can be game-tying or game-winning but not both.
Also, very very very technically, rugby games don't have to end (as I understand it). As long as the ball stays live, the game continues. (In practice of course once the winning team gets the ball, they play it out not to mention penalties and other stuff that kills the ball.) I also discovered a quirky little rule I didn't know (no rugby expert me) -- team scores a try before time has expired but they would not have time to kick the conversion before time expires (within 40 seconds of the end of game). If they want, they can decline the conversion kick in which case they are guaranteed a restart (in which the kickoff is back to them so they have a chance to score another try, penalty kick, etc).
Not baseball but my favorite (only?) ESPN Sportcenter memory comes to mind ...
Some high school kid, team down by 1 or 2, a couple seconds on the clock, other team at the foul line. Guy misses the free throw, kid grabs it, throws it the length of the court into the basket for a game-winning 3-pointer. Somebody actually has a video of it (from the kid's end no less) and sends it to ESPN.
SC Top 10 plays of the day
The play comes in at #9 ... and #7 and #5 and #3 and #1. Kid's probably still bragging about that one.
Some high school kid, team down by 1 or 2, a couple seconds on the clock, other team at the foul line. Guy misses the free throw, kid grabs it, throws it the length of the court into the basket for a game-winning 3-pointer. Somebody actually has a video of it (from the kid's end no less) and sends it to ESPN.
Was this the game you're talking about? The shot and the surrounding circumstances pretty much match your description.
The objective was to find baseball's equivalent to the play. That just makes it less like it.
This one from last year also matches it, but it happened in a sectional game, so the loser's season was over.
Replay. You can't forget about the all-hallowed replay. Because we **MUST** get everything absolutely perfect every time, without exception no matter how long it takes!!
One of the obvious reasons why the Vikings play is regarded as such a stunner is because the score had swung so many times in the fourth quarter already. In fact, the Vikings had squandered a huge lead and it looked like they were going to lose an embarrassing heartbreaker; instead they won in incredible fashion. Some of the posts above seem to miss that point.
As for crazy finishes in h.s. basketball games, this New Rochelle-Mount Vernon game is hard to beat. And like the Vikings game, it required a bone-headed play by the defense for it to be possible.
The finish to the recent Stanford-USC game was also a great one.
And if ever there's been another football game to top Sunday's insane finish, even though the stakes weren't all that high, I defy anyone to top the 1982 Cal-Stanford "Big Game", whose final play was straight out of a Marx Brothers movie, with Harpo leading the band.
Reminds me of one of the only NHL highlights I know of. Except that didn't end the game - just sent it into OT.
Hard to do more than that in hockey, at least until they invent the 2-point goal.
Freese came up with runners on first and second, 2 outs, bottom of the 9th, and the Cards down by 2. And he crushed it to deep right. And as the ball was flying through the air there were 3 possibilities that were all amazing to consider:
1) It goes over the fence for a walk-off 3-run homer
2) It hits the wall and both runners score to tie the game
3) Nelson Cruz makes a spectacular, World Series-saving catch.
It was about the most tense 3 seconds of baseball possible. And I didn’t care who won!
Spectacular for Nelson Cruz, I guess.
DUDE!!! Trigger warning, please!
For a NHL game -- what about the Stanley Cup Finals game between Chicago and Boston where Boston had a one-goal lead with about a minute left -- but then the Blackhawks scored twice in 17 seconds? It wasn't Game 7. But it did clinch the title for Chicago. In a few seconds Boston fans were feeling decent - gotta chance to extend the series and maybe win it - and then, boom, no. Done. Gone. Bye.
Also, looking at the replays, Gordon's chances of scoring on that play were about what you'd expect from a 65 yard Hail Mary with time expiring.
The best game I've ever seen in person. The contrast between blowing the game in the top of the inning and winning it in the bottom of the inning was huge.
Also, looking at the replays, Gordon's chances of scoring on that play were about what you'd expect from a 65 yard Hail Mary with time expiring.
Now that really would have been a perfect comparison,** except that it would've only tied the score, since nobody was on base when Gordon came up to the plate.
** And in fact even better, since it was the World Series, and not the Division Series.
If it's any consolation, the finish of that Orioles-Red Sox game was ranked by WFAN as the #1 schadenfreude moment in baseball history.
Is there a historical reason football games don't end the minute the clock hits 0:00, and allow the snap to play out? No other sports are like this.
In basketball, if a shot is launched before the clock hits 0:00 and goes in afterwards, the shot counts.
edit- coke to Nate
Hockey too I believe. And since no one knows when a soccer match is supposed to end, include that too.
Hockey games end the instant the clock hits zero.
Even if the puck is on the way to the goal?
In soccer, my guess is they will officially tell you that the ball must cross before the ref blows the whistle. However, no ref is going to blow the whistle with a ball on the way to net. Probably not even with a play developing near the goal.
I like misirlou's 2011 games 162 analogy. To me, because the nature of the sports are so different, a really good comparison just can't be made. The juxtaposition of two wildly unlikely scenarios in two different games at about the same moment in time (especially today when someone could have theoretically been watching them side by side) is a good mirror for the emotion of seeing what we saw in the Vikings-Saints end.
I didn't see the Immaculate Reception live but I assume it had about the same feel. I remember reading the account of a Steeler - maybe Bleier? - who said when the ball was batted, he turned around and spiked his helmet and went on a cursing jag and got very irritated with his teammates for acting happy.
I love baseball more than all other sports but, as has been alluded to, that sort of desperate turnaround can't really happen. Any scenario in which a lead turns into a loss has obvious indicators. If you're down three, you can win a game on a swing of the bat but the bases must be loaded, which takes time and makes you anticipate the batter who wins it. The football analogy would be a late, short FG or game winning TD off 1st and goal. There is simply no way to win a baseball game at the equivalent of 4th and long from your own end of the field.
Absolutely. Recounting that late 4th Q sequence:
3:01 SAINTS TAKE THEIR FIRST LEAD! OUT OF A 17-0 HOLE!
1:29 VIKINGS FG RETAKES THE LEAD!
0:25 IT'S GOOD!! GAME-WINNING FG FOR NEW ORLEANS!
0:00 oops
After the way the Bosox played in Sept that year, this Boston homer considers it a mercy killing (and did so at the time.)
At FIFA level. At the NCAA and many other lower levels, the referee does not keep time the same way (he informs the clock operator each time he wants it stopped). And in those instances, the rule is the same as hockey. When the clock hits zero - the half/game is over.
And if it just happened a year later, that night would have guaranteed HFA for the Rays in the play-in game against the Sox (and the Cards, against the matching choking-dog Braves).
FTR, your choice is the closest parallel on an emotional level (though honestly, the Vikings winning Sunday wasn't nearly as unlikely as the Rays capturing the wild card outright when the Sox-O's game reached the ninth). I thought the exercise was to find the closest parallel of a play, and, in that sense, the 1993 NLCS game-ender is the best fit.
This doesn't work perfectly, because they didn't happen at the same time, but the both the Rays and the O's were down by a run with 2 out, no one on, in the bottom of the 9th. The WPA for both was 4%. The chances of both of them winning, which is what happened, was 0.16% , or 625 to 1.
WFAN can eat me. The real answer is Johnny Damon's grand slam in Game 7 of the 2004 ALCS, the point at which it becomes clear even to the meatheads at WFAN that the MFY have indeed choked away a 3-0 LCS lead over the Red Sox and are going to lose the series. Ortiz's first inning HR had more WPA, but Damon's slam was the coup de grâce.
WFAN can eat me. The real answer is Johnny Damon's grand slam in Game 7 of the 2004 ALCS, the point at which it becomes clear even to the meatheads at WFAN that the MFY have indeed choked away a 3-0 LCS lead over the Red Sox and are going to lose the series.
I guess I should've added a (smile) to my #68. AFAIK WFAN took no such poll, and anyway the giveaway should've been that few WFAN listeners would've even known what schadenfreude meant.
The real answer is Johnny Damon's grand slam in Game 7 of the 2004 ALCS
Those games involved stakes and teams that were competing to advance, and one team definitionally didn't, to the delight of another team's fanbase.
For pure schadenfreude and nothing but, the answer is the sixth-place 1934 Dodgers eliminating the Giants in their park on the last two days of the "Is Brooklyn still in the league?" season.
that really was an unbelievable moment. starter-turned-reliever Javier Vasquez enters the game with the bases loaded, and Damon hits his first pitch over the fence to give the Red Sox a 6-0 lead - and at Yankee Stadium, no less. later, Pedro in relief.
that was one long wake they held there that night.
Well, don't forget Charlie Dressen's "The Giants is dead", which he sung to the tune of the "Beer Barrel Polka" after the Dodgers had opened a 12 1/2 game lead in August of 1951. Schadenfreude was an equal opportunity employer during the halcyon days of city baseball.
But at some point, some guy had a watch. But it made sense not to be too exact. Instead of "you've got 49.6 seconds left!", a ref might say "you've got time for one last rush, then it'll be over".
The spirit of that is still there with soccer in that the ref has an official clock, but he's always going to fudge it so as not to end the game in the middle of an attack on goal. The same spirit is in basketball and football, where they keep an exact clock, but let you finish up whatever it is you're doing at the bell.
Hockey refs seem to be the major sticklers.
Not even close. The game was tied and there were no outs. It was one of the greatest World Series games of all game, but that's not the category under consideration.
Greatest series comeback other than the 1937 Little World Series. But again, that's a different category. You should first read the article and see what the author is talking about.
1941 All-Star game.
For an individual game, but the All-Star game is at bottom just an exhibition game. And there have been hundreds of individual games with 2 out, walkoff come-from-behind home runs.
What position did you play?
What position did you play?
Actually my playing career ended in 1913 when Hal Chase was traded for a bunion and an onion. I was the onion.
Yeah, but the 1951 Giants came back to win the pennant win the pennant, which is something they wanted for themselves, not merely as an excuse to stick a shiv in the Dodgers.
The 1934 vengeance was purer. The equation was 100% uncut schadenfreude.
The other shoe version of that was the final game of the 1993 season, when Tommy 10 Dogs giddily celebrated his fourth-place Dodgers' 12-1 victory over the 103-win Giants.
Yeah, but the 1951 Giants came back to win the pennant win the pennant, which is something they wanted for themselves, not merely as an excuse to stick a shiv in the Dodgers.
The 1934 vengeance was purer. The equation was 100% uncut schadenfreude.
Good point. I guess if you had to rank the two years for schadenfreude you would have to go with '34. But then in 1951 it wasn't just the manager with a big mouth, it was the entire Dodgers team. After the Dodgers had swept the Giants in Ebbets Field in early August, the Jints could hear the Dodgers mocking them and laughing at them through the thin clubhouse walls. Two games later, they began the 16 game winning streak that started Dem Bums on the road to Wait Till Next Year.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main