The Best World Series Champ of the Decade Debate – Breaking the Curse, Red Sox Overcame To Be the Best

November 9, 2009

Read the arguments from Loyal Homer and Bleacher Fan about which teams they believe were the best World Series Champs of this decade.



It all ended on October 27, 2004. The best World Series Champion of the past decade – and one of the best in the history of baseball – completed the final out in an unprecedented season. To the chagrin of new TSD contributor and fan persona Babe Ruthless, the 2004 Boston Red Sox are the best World Series Champion of this decade.

The Red Sox finished the 2004 season two games shy of 100 wins, and three shy of the division crown, taken again by perpetual stumbling block, the New York Yankees. After sweeping the Los Angeles Angles in the American League Division Series the Red Sox faced its old foe and curse-perpetuator from the Bronx. We all know the story now, down 0-3 in the series and 4-3 in the bottom of the ninth of the first game in the series where the Saawwwwxx faced elimination, spark plug Dave Roberts pinch runs for Kevin Millar. Millar drew a rare walk from Mariano Rivera, and then Roberts stole second and scored the game tying run in the bottom of the ninth on a Bill Mueller RBI base hit. The rest is an improbable history making event where the Red Sox were the first team in history to overcome a three games to zero hole to win an American League Championship Series, before sweeping through the World Series. This Red Sox team accomplished what few thought was possible in the modern era of sports, winning a series after putting itself in a three game hole. But the amazing feats from this Red Sox team did not stop with a surprising comeback.

Another reason the Red Sox are the greatest World Series championship team of this decade is because each player on the roster exceeded their previously established talent limitations. For example, opening day second baseman Mark Bellhorn set career highs in batting average (.264) and RBI (82). Catcher Jason Varitek hit a career best .296 and even grabbed 10 stolen bases. The usual suspects in the middle of the order, Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz – put up their usual excellent stats. The difference makers for this team were the several players on the Red Sox roster that played above what their career stats indicate as possible. You know the scenario in your favorite team’s context. “I know player X, player Y, and player Z are going to be great this season. But if player A, player B, and player C give us ANYTHING it will be gravy.” The 2004 Red Sox were a team dominated by gravy.

Players that are able to go beyond their limitations are a requisite for any championship team. What makes the Red Sox better than the usual championship team is that they broke a 100 year “curse.” Therefore the players that exceeded their capabilities exceeded them by such a significant amount that the team was able to accomplish something no other team in the history of baseball was ever able to do.

During TSD’s last production meeting Bleacher Fan specifically asked that I not make any mention of the bloody sock. However, it is impossible to research and write anything about the 2004 Red Sox and avoid the bloody sock. Pitcher Curt Schilling pitched hurt during the ALCS and the World Series, and he pitched extremely well. We all know the story. In retrospect the bloody sock is important not because of Schilling’s individual performance but because historic teams – transcendent teams that defeat not only a formidable opponent but vanquish a curse – must have a symbol that embodies the experience and the journey. For the Red Sox the bloody sock was so much more meaningful than a red stain on a baseball sock. The sock symbolized hard work, dismissing frustration, above and beyond effort, and a general disregard for adversity – all characteristics of the team’s personality.

No team built momentum like the 2004 Red Sox, either. After the surprising comeback against the Yankees in the ALCS, the Red Sox were an unstoppable locomotive, sweeping the National League champion St. Louis Cardinals. The team redefined momentum with its beating down of the Cardinals – the team that won more games during the regular season than any other team in baseball in 2004, including the Yankees – 11-9, 6-2, 4-1, and 3-0.

Many great teams exist in baseball’s history. Only ONE broke a curse in a spectacular, unprecedented, and an unavoidably entertaining way.

What ultimately makes the 2004 Red Sox great is not solely what the team was able to accomplish in between the chalk lines. The team had more than just baseball skills. It had history, character, and an unstoppable spirit rivaled by no other team.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share


The Relief Pitcher as a Cy Young Candidate Debate – Ahhh… Sweet Relief!

October 8, 2009

Read the debate intro and Sports Geek’s argument that a relief pitcher should not be considered for the Cy Young award.

The game of baseball, as it is played today, has evolved into a game of specialization. Nowadays, you have starters, middle-relievers, closers, set-up men, sinker-ballers, and knuckle-ballers. Each pitcher serves a purpose, and each is equally valuable to the organization. With that specialization, the evaluation of pitching success has also evolved, and must provide a fair measure of the game by today’s standards.

It is true that pitchers like Walter Johnson and Cy Young were expected to both start AND finish a game. The expectation at the time was that the best pitchers were those that could start a game and pitch nine innings without allowing runs to cross the plate. This arrangement is no longer the reality of baseball. Today, if a pitcher throws just six innings, it is potentially considered a “quality start.” Based on that fact, relief pitchers (even after a quality start) can still be called upon to pitch for the remaining 33 percent of a game!

Here’s some perspective:

Over the course of any season, the teams in Major League baseball will combine for at least 43,740 total innings of baseball played (that is before extra innings, play-in games, etc.). If a starting pitcher only throws for six innings per game, then relievers will throw for more than 14,580 innings of baseball every year (that is 486 relief innings for EVERY team in the league). That is a lot of pitchers over a lot of innings to exclude from consideration for determining who the best pitcher in the league is, just because they did not pitch in the first inning of the game.

The Cy Young award is supposed to be given to the best pitcher in baseball. It is not for the best starter, or the best pitcher who throws for more than 200 innings in a season. It is simply awarded to the best pitcher.

The candidate that many expect to win the American League award this year is Zack Greinke of the Kansas City Royals. Greinke definitely had a tremendous 2009 season, but compare his numbers to Mariano Rivera, the closer for the New York Yankees.

The first measure of a pitcher’s success is their ERA. Greinke, in 2009, pitched with an ERA of 2.16, which is extremely impressive. Rivera’s ERA, though, was only 1.76, which is 0.40 runs BETTER than Greinke.

As for the other vital statistics that a pitcher is measured on, compare Greinke and Rivera’s 2009 statistics based on an average of instances per nine innings -

  • Hits per nine innings: Greinke – 7.7; Rivera – 6.5
  • Walks per nine innings: Greinke – 2.0; Rivera – 1.6
  • Strike outs per nine innings: Greinke – 9.5; Rivera – 9.8

When comparing these two pitchers by equal standards Rivera actually has a better ERA, and gives up proportionally fewer hits, fewer walks, and strikes out more batters than does Greinke.

Relief pitchers are the go-to guys. When the starter cannot handle the mess, it is the reliever that is called upon to clean things up. Starting pitchers are like drivers in golf. They exist for a big production early, and hopefully put a golfer on the path towards a successful result. Relievers, on the other hand, come into play on the green. They are the guys who bring everything home. Whether the drive landed in the fairway or the rough, the putter ALWAYS comes out to finish the deal, and as Bobby Locke once said, “You drive for the show, but you putt for the dough.”

In a game that requires so much participation and production from relief pitchers, many of whom are required to perform under moments of extreme pressure, it is unfair to summarily exclude them from consideration when you are trying to evaluate who the best pitcher in the league was.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!


The Reliever Winning a Cy Young Debate – Relievers Should NEVER Win the Cy Young Award

October 8, 2009

Read the debate intro and Bleacher Fan’s argument that a reliever should win the Cy Young award.

No reason to beat around the bush on this topic. A reliever should not be eligible to win the Cy Young award, the award reserved for the best pitcher in baseball every season. While I could write all day about the myriad reasons giving the Cy Young award to a reliever makes no sense, I will try and limit my points to a select, impactful few.

The most important point to consider with this debate topic is the 30,000 foot view of how baseball has evolved in the modern era. Baseball is now a specialized sport. Back in the days of yore (that is a real thing), when pitchers were pitchers and hitters were hitters, the relief pitcher did not exist. Why? Because starting pitchers pitched complete games. Missing out on a complete game was rare, in fact.

Now, before the debate devolves into a, “it is impossible to compare yesteryear’s pitchers to modern pitchers” conversation, consider the Cy Young award’s name. The pitcher, his name was Cy Young (yea, it is a real dude), has an award named after him because he pitched for 22 seasons and recorded a whopping 511 career wins. He made a total of 815 starts, and completed 749 games. Think about that. Let it synch in. It is obvious this player deserved an award – no matter how many games he lost (also an admirable 316). Here is another stats to ponder: Cy Young pitched a total of 7,354 (and two thirds) innings in his career. He was an impressive pitcher by win total, effectiveness (his career ERA is just 2.63), and stamina. The award with his namesake should embody the pitching principles of his career. For that reason, a relief pitcher should not win the Cy Young award.

Relief pitchers toss 65-80 innings per year. Even impressive relief pitchers like Eric Gagne (who WRONGLY won the award in 2003), only pitched 82 and a third innings during the season. His ERA was very impressive (1.20) and his 55 total saves were a record at the time. But Gagne embodies the evolution and specialization in baseball. The game has changed and the pitching staff has been carved up into specialized roles. However, relief pitching specialists, like closers, do not achieve or embody the characteristics Cy Young did. Therefore, relief pitchers should not be allowed to win the Cy Young award. The award is conceived, designed and modeled after a starting pitcher.

Also, there IS an award for relief pitchers. It is called the Rolaid’s Relief Man Award. This award was created based on the changes and natural evolution of baseball. It accommodates specialized roles the closer, a role that has emerged as an official role only in the last 45 years (give or a take a few). Eric Gagne rightly won the award in 2003 – an award specifically designed to appreciate the value of a specialized, role-playing pitcher.

Baseball is a game of history. It is unique among sports in the world because records from the 1800s can be compared with records of the 1900s and 2000s. Baseball is working on its third Century! Over time, the game naturally evolves, and awards and achievements have also. To shoehorn new roles into an old award structure is an affront to baseball, and to history.

Now, a relief pitcher potentially winning the MVP award… that is a completely different debate.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!


The Reliever Winning a Cy Young Debate – Two Different Kinds of Dominance

October 8, 2009

Read Sports Geek’s argument that a reliever should not win the Cy Young Award and Bleacher Fan’s argument that a reliever should win the Cy Young Award.

The Major League Baseball playoffs kicked off yesterday with three games and will continue with three more games today. Hopefully, Tuesday’s scintillating winner take all game between the Twins and Tigers was enough to create excitement for the playoffs. It sure got me pumped! But, while the Sports Debates keeps one eye on the playoffs, we are taking a look at the Cy Young award. As we often say in our production meetings, “we aren’t in the prediction business.” So, TSD is not going to write about who we think will win the Cy Young award. If you want to see who we think is the best pitcher in baseball, please check out a debate we did a couple of weeks ago.

What TSD is going to debate today revolves around the credentials of the Cy Young award. There have been a handful of relievers who have won the award, with Eric Gagne being the most recent in 2003 with his 55 saves. Seemingly, Mariano Rivera is in contention for the American League Cy Young award nearly every year.

The Cy Young award is given to the pitcher who has had the best season in each league, respectively. It can be debated all day long about whether or not a reliever should be eligible to win the award. But, who has time to debate something all day, especially when my colleagues are more than willing to duke it out on this very website!

That leads me to the question: Should a relief pitcher be eligible to win the Cy Young award?

Bleacher Fan will argue that a reliever should be in consideration for the award while Sports Geek will argue that the award should be strictly for starting pitchers.

The ball is yours. Present your cases and the real closer, Loyal Homer, will come in during the ninth inning to decide the outcome of this debate!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!


The Best Pitcher of 2009 Debate – “The Freak” Freaks Out All Of Baseball

September 21, 2009

Read Bleacher Fan’s argument that Zach Greinke is the best pitcher of 2009. Read Sports Geek’s argument that Chris Carpenter is the best pitcher of 2009.

The 2009 Major League Baseball season is entering the last two weeks. While it sadly looks like all the division and wild card races will be settled before the last day (unless the Twins can get hot and catch the White Sox in the American League Central), there are some interesting battles going on in individual competition. As Bleacher Fan pointed out, the writers at The Sports Debates are going to assess the top pitchers of 2009.

There have been some standout performances by pitchers this year. Chris Carpenter, Zach Greinke, Mariano Rivera, C.C. Sabathia, and Adam Wainwright all deserve consideration, but to me, one guy stands out as “King of the Mound” – Tim Lincecum.

Yesterday, Lincecum took the lost against the Dodgers in a very important game, putting the Giants into an even deeper hole in the NL wild card race (4.5 games back of the Rockies). Lincecum struggled with his command, and was never really able to get on track. Despite the loss which dropped him to 14-6 overall, though, he has a 2.47 ERA with an astonishing with 247 strikeouts in 211.1 innings pitched on the season.

It’s true that Lincecum’s Giants have stayed in postseason contention the vast majority of the season, but it can be argued that Lincecum has had to be spot-on in his pitching to get his wins. It is no secret that the Giants’ offense leaves a lot to be desired. As a team they rank 13th in the National League in runs scored at 4.04 runs a game, a stat magnified even more by the .257 overall team batting average.

Obviously, Lincecum needs to have a quality start in order to give his team a chance to win.

When you think of the Giants pitching staff, which is the strongest point of the team, you think of “The Freak.” He and Matt Cain are the anchors of the Giants rotation, and as long as those two stay healthy, they will be a contender in the National League West and in the National League.

Lincecum is not a physically imposing guy. He is listed at 5’11 and 172 lbs officially, though that may be pushing it a little. What adds to his effectiveness, though, is his long pitching stride. It’s hard enough hit a mid 90’s fastball, but with that long stride it appears to be coming much faster. He also has a near unhittable pitch that is referred to as a “12-6 curveball”.

A lot of guys have had great years in 2009. No one is disputing that. However, when determining the best pitcher in 2009, look no further than the 2008 Cy Young winner. If you think someone else is better, then I challenge you to stand in the batter’s box and see if you can come close to hitting his curve ball. I bet you can’t!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.