Official MLB Playoffs, playoff games to get into playoffs game and games thread

[T Park]

Man Ram makes it 5-2 Dodgers


Why aren't the Cubs fans chanting that re ed song?

[T Park]

As a Cards fan, nothing funnier and more entertaining than a silenced Wrigley Field. Absolute TV magic.

[T Park]

RBI Single by Casey Blake makes it 6-2 Dodgers.



Same ole same ole Cubbies

[T Park]

Home run Russel Martin

7-2 Dodgers.



Jason marquis, thank you Chicago for signing him away from the Cardinals.

[turiaf for president]

The Dodgers will be lucky to win a game in the NLDS let alone get to the world series.

admit u were a bit off here? =D

its still a long series. 3 HR's in a game for the dodgers........wow. ill take it!

[bostonguy]

Nice to see my boy Manny hit that solo home run. Man I miss that mother er!

Dodger fans are seeing the good things Manny can do in the postseason. Go Manny! Go Dodgers. Now this night would be complete if the Angels drop this game.

[T Park]

admit u were a bit off here? =D

its still a long series. 3 HR's in a game for the dodgers........wow. ill take it!

I'll gladly be wrong if it means the Cubs choke and lose again.

[turiaf for president]

Nice to see my boy Manny hit that solo home run. Man I miss that mother er!

Dodger fans are seeing the good things Manny can do in the postseason. Go Manny! Go Dodgers. Now this night would be complete if the Angels drop this game.

his hr was ridiculous. it was on his shoelaces and hit it 450 ft

[turiaf for president]

I'll gladly be wrong if it means the Cubs choke and lose again.

hope you're VERY wrong. =D

bad news for the cubbies, billingsly was the most consistant SP for the dodgers all year and hes going tomarrow. the young kids on the dodgers got a huge boost in confidence after this game one win.

[Purple & Gold]

Again, you show your ignorance. Whether or not the Cubs choked in 2003, that team has zero relevance to this team. That's just common sense.

Bartman = choking? So something totally random in 2003 that didn't directly involve a Cubs' player (otherwise it is interference) is indicative of how the 2008 Cubs will perform. I see our public schools are still letting us down. Can you find Canada on a map?

The Cubs lost that game because of Alex Gonzalez. Anyone who watched the 2003 Cubs could have told you that Alou had no chance at the Bartman ball. (He never left his feet in LF all year.) You can make a damn strong argument that any team starting Alex Gonzalez can't choke by definition, because you shouldn't have very high expecations for a team that has to start Alex Gonzales. The 2003 Cubs had to have near-perfect outings from Prior, Wood, or Zambrano to win games; they couldn't manufacture runs when necessary. (This may be the hallmark of Dusty teams, come to think of it.)

My point is that a lot of this "curse" talk is pure bull . You aren't cursed if you just flat out suck. Cubs' fans use angst as a way of avoiding the ugly truth: the 1989, 1998, 2003, and 2007 Cubs just weren't that good, particularly on offense. Those teams all backed into the playoffs.

1984 was a choke. 2008 is potentially a choke. You can't "choke" if you were just plain lucky to make the postseason. It's called "reverting to the mean," or more commonly "playing to your true potential."

This is just classic. "You can make a damn strong argument that any team starting Alex Gonzalez can't choke by definition, because you shouldn't have very high expecations for a team that has to start Alex Gonzales." Do you really believe that ??

The Cubs choked after the Bartman play. Errors, walks, and giving up timely hits happened right after. The Cubs didn't lose cause of Bartman. The lost because they all choked after that play. No way you can defend it. It went from Cubs winning 3-0 in the 8th, to them losing the game 8-3. But they didn't choke because Alex Gonzalez was a starter.

Classic

[Purple & Gold]

Statistics are "real," because they measure "real" events. Little gnomes don't come along and create them in your computer. Do you think that pitching and defense somehow aren't reflected in run differential?

A differential is defined as "data extracted from the level of difference between two variables." Thus run differential is the difference between runs scored (hitting) and runs allowed (pitching and defense). Ain't science grand?

Some basic points for you to consider:
1) Dodger Stadium is a barn with huge foul territory.
2) Wrigley is a bandbox without much foul territory.

Dodgers’ Team ERA = 3.68 (1st in NL)
BAA = .251 (5th in MLB, 2nd in NL)

Cubs’ Team ERA = 3.87 (2nd in NL)
BAA = .242 (1st in MLB)

By this crude measurement, the staffs are roughly equal. Park effects explain how the Dodgers have a worse Batting Average Against, yet still allow fewer runs. In practical terms, these numbers are functionally identical even without accounting for park effects.

This season, Cubs’ pitching has outperformed Dodgers’ pitching head-to-head. However, the difference is also inconsequential in practical terms.

2008 Dodgers’ ERA v. Cubs = 2.49
BAA = .238

2008 Cubs’ ERA v. Dodgers = 2.47
BAA = .235

Abandoning statistics entirely, my eyes tell me that Ted Lilly, the Cubs’ fourth starter, would be the second-best starter on the Dodgers staff at this moment.

Turning to offense, this is where the Cubs really dominate the Dodgers.

2008 Cubs = .278 BA, .354 OBP, .443 SLG, .797 OPS (2nd in MLB, 1st in NL)
2008 Dodgers = .264 BA, .333 OBP, .399 SLG, .732 OPS (24th in MLB, 13th in NL)

Head-to-head numbers greatly favor the Cubs, because the Dodgers obtained Ramirez after finishing the season series with Chicago. Unfortunately, I cannot find a “Manny Split,” so I will use the Post All-Star Game Split.

Cubs in 2nd Half = .273 BA, .346 OBP, .443 SLG, .789 OPS (8th in MLB, 1st in NL)
Dodgers in 2nd Half = .279 BA, .350 OBP, .434 SLG, .784 OPS (19th in MLB, 8th in NL)

Even with Ramirez, the Dodgers lost eight games in a row in August, including a sweep by the Washington Nationals. During this stretch, LA averaged less than two runs per game. The Cubs played their AAAA configuration for most of September, and the kids scored more runs per game.

The Dodgers should have zero chance against the Cubs. So do the Brewers or Phillies, for that matter. If the Cubs don’t win the NLCS, then I would call this season a “choke.”

First off Dodger stadium doesn't have that much foul territory anymore. You might wanna know what you're talking about before you open your pie hole.

@ you talking about the 4th starter on a team playing in a best of 5 series. News flash for you neither team will start their 4th starter so it really doesn't matter how deep their starting 5 is. Unless you wanna argue that it makes their bullpen that much tougher. I might entertain it, but the Dodgers bullpen is still much tougher and got a boost with Saito's return. Comparing the Dodgers and Cubs head to head matchups this year is just stupid. They haven't played each other since early June. Only an idiot would even try to draw some type of conclusion from it. (BTW Dodgers won the series, but it don't mean in October ). You're basically using stupid stats that have no relevance in a short series, especially this one.

Here's some values you can think of adding to your calculators run differential equation:

1) Dodgers are a new team with Manny and with how Ethier has woken up
2) Dodgers are getting healthy with the return of Furcal and Saito
3) Lowe has been pitching lights out, better than any Cubs starter
4) The Cubs are still the Cubs and they will choke again (is it 100 years yet?)

Next time use some ing common sense and exercise your critical thinking skills instead of being another sabermetric . How about actually watching the game instead of trying to analyze it with a calculator

[Purple & Gold]

BTW the no chance Dodgers all over your guaranteed second round Cubs in game 1 at Wrigley.

[T Park]

BTW the no chance Dodgers all over your guaranteed second round Cubs in game 1 at Wrigley.

Nice

[IronMexican]

This thread is awesome.

[Reggie Miller]

First off Dodger stadium doesn't have that much foul territory anymore. You might wanna know what you're talking about before you open your pie hole.

@ you talking about the 4th starter on a team playing in a best of 5 series. News flash for you neither team will start their 4th starter so it really doesn't matter how deep their starting 5 is. Unless you wanna argue that it makes their bullpen that much tougher. I might entertain it, but the Dodgers bullpen is still much tougher and got a boost with Saito's return. Comparing the Dodgers and Cubs head to head matchups this year is just stupid. They haven't played each other since early June. Only an idiot would even try to draw some type of conclusion from it. (BTW Dodgers won the series, but it don't mean in October ). You're basically using stupid stats that have no relevance in a short series, especially this one.

Here's some values you can think of adding to your calculators run differential equation:

1) Dodgers are a new team with Manny and with how Ethier has woken up
2) Dodgers are getting healthy with the return of Furcal and Saito
3) Lowe has been pitching lights out, better than any Cubs starter
4) The Cubs are still the Cubs and they will choke again (is it 100 years yet?)

Next time use some ing common sense and exercise your critical thinking skills instead of being another sabermetric . How about actually watching the game instead of trying to analyze it with a calculator

Nice how you ignore anything that doesn't reconfirm your preconceived notions.

I mentioned quite con uously that the Cubs hadn't played the Dodgers since getting Ramirez. I went on to say that this was a problem with the stats. If the Cubs had been playing better, they intentionally walk Ramirez in every plate appearance.

You bring nothing to the table but smack talk and generalizations. I don't worship stats. I DO expect for people to back up a baseball argument with something more than,

"ZOMG, Manny is da ballzz. "

Congratulations to the Dodgers for not getting swept. I picked the Cubs in 4. Razz me when they lose two games. (Since you are obviously developmentally disabled, I'll use small words. That's when I would have to worry about eating crow.)

[Purple & Gold]

Nice how you ignore anything that doesn't reconfirm your preconceived notions.

I mentioned quite con uously that the Cubs hadn't played the Dodgers since getting Ramirez. I went on to say that this was a problem with the stats. If the Cubs had been playing better, they intentionally walk Ramirez in ever plate appearance.

You bring nothing to the table but smack talk and generalizations. I don't worship stats. I DO expect for people to back up a baseball argument with something more than,

"ZOMG, Manny is da ballzz. "

Congratulations to the Dodgers for not getting swept. I picked the Cubs in 4. Razz me when they lose two games. (Since you are obviously developmentally disabled, I'll use small words. That's when I would have to worry about eating crow.)

Nothing but smack and generalizations?? How about points 1-3 (i'll even ignore point #4 for your convenience). Waiting for you to address them and tell me how your mathematical equation took that into account. And I debunked all your stupid assertations (4th starter, foul territory, run differential )

[Purple & Gold]

Also don't ever say that blowing a 3-0 lead in the 8th and losing 8-3 is not choking. It makes us all dumber. Be a man and realize your Cubbies choked in 2003 like they have for the last century.

[Reggie Miller]

Nothing but smack and generalizations?? How about points 1-3 (i'll even ignore point #4 for your convenience). Waiting for you to address them and tell me how your mathematical equation took that into account. And I debunked all your stupid assertations (4th starter, foul territory, run differential )

Wake me when Chicago loses the second game.

Your "points" are crap. They are all projections of what might happen, with no correlation to 2008 performance. Show me some reason WHY I care about Furcal, just for example.

The Dodgers backed into the playoffs. Your team didn't even win 90 games in the weakest division in baseball. You may have the greatest team since Abner Doubleday started wearing store-bought clothes. You haven't proved , yet.

As I said, if the Cubs lose this series, it will be a monumental choke. IMHO, the Dodgers have zero chance of winning the NLDS. I never said they wouldn't win a game. I said they wouldn't win TWO games.

Are you re ed? 1+1 =2. Also, 2>1. You can call me everything except a white man when the Dodgers win two. Until then, bite me.

[Reggie Miller]

4) The Cubs are still the Cubs and they will choke again (is it 100 years yet?)

I hope your mother is dying of cancer and draws a doctor who believes in curses and vitreous humours.

Maybe he'll sacrifice a goat.

After all, if it's not baseless supers ion when it comes to baseball, then it isn't supers ion in medicine, right?

Curses are real, right?

[ducks]

bay>manny today

[IronMexican]

bay>manny today

Look at this sucker. You're team would be in the playoffs if we didn't have Manny.

[Purple & Gold]

Wake me when Chicago loses the second game.

Your "points" are crap. They are all projections of what might happen, with no correlation to 2008 performance. Show me some reason WHY I care about Furcal, just for example.

The Dodgers backed into the playoffs. Your team didn't even win 90 games in the weakest division in baseball. You may have the greatest team since Abner Doubleday started wearing store-bought clothes. You haven't proved , yet.

As I said, if the Cubs lose this series, it will be a monumental choke. IMHO, the Dodgers have zero chance of winning the NLDS. I never said they wouldn't win a game. I said they wouldn't win TWO games.

Are you re ed? 1+1 =2. Also, 2>1. You can call me everything except a white man when the Dodgers win two. Until then, bite me.

@ the total meltdown by pacerfan here. Classic

Aren't we all just speculating and predicting what will happen. You are predicting what will happen because of the Cubs whole 2008 year. I am predicting due to matchups, momentum, cir stances. You are just looking at 2008 stats.

Why should you care about Furcal returning? Well because he's a very good shortstop and means we don't have to play Angel Berroa anymore at short. So undoubtedly the Dodgers will be a much better team even if he plays below his career average.

You: But he's been hurt all year how can you even possibly know what he will do without 2008 stats to go by?

Me: Don't need to answer to your stupid little 2008 criteria. I've seen and understand enough about baseball to be able to accurately predict many things. I don't need to sell my soul to the sabermetric devil like you did. Use your noodle from time to time Einstein.

Dodgers haven't proved , but the Cubs have. Another gem by you. Keep them coming haven't had this good a laugh in a long time.

BTW your type of thinking is what led the pacers to the house. JO for Odom and Bynum because Bynum hasn't proven anything Get the out of here with your weak .

[T Park]

bay>manny today

Shut the up already.

[Purple & Gold]

I hope your mother is dying of cancer and draws a doctor who believes in curses and vitreous humours.

Maybe he'll sacrifice a goat.

After all, if it's not baseless supers ion when it comes to baseball, then it isn't supers ion in medicine, right?

Curses are real, right?

Who brought up a curse?? Not me. I brought up that the cubs are chokers. It permeates throughout the franchise and their pitiful fan base.

So answer me:
Did the cubs choke after the Bartman play? (went from 3-0 to 8-3)

Shouldn't they have been able to back into a Championship in 100 years? (or have they always not had a chance to win except for 1984?)

[Reggie Miller]

@ the total meltdown by pacerfan here. Classic

Aren't we all just speculating and predicting what will happen. You are predicting what will happen because of the Cubs whole 2008 year. I am predicting due to matchups, momentum, cir stances. You are just looking at 2008 stats.

Why should you care about Furcal returning? Well because he's a very good shortstop and means we don't have to play Angel Berroa anymore at short. So undoubtedly the Dodgers will be a much better team even if he plays below his career average.

You: But he's been hurt all year how can you even possibly know what he will do without 2008 stats to go by?

Me: Don't need to answer to your stupid little 2008 criteria. I've seen and understand enough about baseball to be able to accurately predict many things. I don't need to sell my soul to the sabermetric devil like you did. Use your noodle from time to time Einstein.

Dodgers haven't proved , but the Cubs have. Another gem by you. Keep them coming haven't had this good a laugh in a long time.

BTW your type of thinking is what led the pacers to the house. JO for Odom and Bynum because Bynum hasn't proven anything Get the out of here with your weak .

Wake me when the Dodgers win that second game.