the world series

by lboros on Oct 21, 2005 9:35 AM EDT in News

this'll be quick n dirty.

we have an unusual matchup this year. to begin with, both teams have pedestrian scoring differentials; the sox were +96 (they outscored their opponents 741-645), the astros +82 (693-609). all of the departed playoff teams had better differentials except one -- the padres at minus 40. what's more, two teams that missed the playoffs had better spreads, the athletics (+114) and indians (+147; cleveland missed the playoffs despite having the al's highest run differential).

expect some tight contests.

i think the white sox have a better offense, but not by much. houston ranked 11th in the league in runs scored, chicago 9th. the white sox hold the edge in most of the important stat categories: they were even with houston in obp (.322 each) but outslugged them .425-.408, outbatted them .262-.256, outhomered them 200-161, and outscored them 741-693. it is likely however that most of the sox's statistical advantages are entirely explainable by the existence of the dh in the al; take that away and the teams are essentially even. but then, the astros' figures are inflated by their ballpark; take that away and the edge swings ever so slightly back to the white sox. looking at the lineups, chicago has better on-base ability at the top of the order and more thump in the middle; that makes them the more dangerous of two pretty bad offenses.

but it's pitching that got both these teams here. houston's top trio is formidable, as the cardinals found out. the sox rotation will match up with them better than the cardinals' did, however; they also will have a bigger rotation-pairing mismatch in game 4, the backe gimme, than st louis did. chicago's bullpen appears to be the equal of houston's; no closer like lidge, but they have power arms who strike people out and keep the ball in the park. you have to give the edge to the astros here because their 1-3 guys are the best we have seen since maddux smoltz glavine; but chicago's pitchers are damn good; they have already stymied two offenses (angels and red sox) that are better than the one they will now face. clemens labored against the cardinals and may be ripe; backe is not very good and probably loses his start.

the sox were a tremendous road team (52-29) while the astros were bad (36-45). the sox should win at least one game at minute maid -- likeliest game 4, the backe start. if we assume the stros take the other two home games, they have to go 2-2 in comiskey to win the series. i don't think they can do it; their offense is simply too inept away from minute maid, and the white sox' pitching is just too good. i don't think houston wins a single game on the road; make it the white sox in 6.

your assessments?

0 recs | Comment 13 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The only thing I'm really wondering

is whether Bagwell will be the DH tonight. I hope so--I want to see him and Biggio do well, they are the only thing I like about the Astros.

Berkman, however, IS a DH, regardless of what the lineup card says. So, I think this creates an interesting situation for Phil Garner.

but yeah, I don't see the Astros winning this either. Not with the ChiSox rotation nice and rested, and the enitire Houston team having to play three extra games. But then again, I really didn't see how Houston possibly could have beaten StL.

by Valatan on Oct 21, 2005 9:57 AM EDT 0 recs

orlando palmerio is a better hitter

but how can you leave bagwell out of the lineup after he's waited this long?

buerhle (a left-hander) starts game 2; bags will surely start vs him. but i would also start the old geezer in game 1. he's not a liability; just not quite as dangerous as palmeiro

by lboros on Oct 21, 2005 10:32 AM EDT up 0 recs

Well ...

My brother was one of the lucky few to get tickets, and he has four to a possible Game 7. As much as I want a total annhiliation of the Astros, it would be most awesome to go to a game seven as my first playoff baseball game. Plus, do you really want to have a game six where you're forced to pull for an Astros win just so you can go to a game?

My dream of seeing a Cards-Sox series having been shot, I'll take anything I can get. As Ron Burgundy might be prompted to say, "Go Sox?"

"You spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time." - Jim Bouton

by WillieMcGeeModelingCompany on Oct 21, 2005 10:56 AM EDT 0 recs

a Chicago thing

Is anybody else outrageously annoyed by the sudden claims of brotherhood over in Chicago? I have just written a long post about the phenomenon that is the South Side bandwagon, and was wondering it others felt the same. Mike Bauman over at mlb.com says this is a good, admirable thing for Cubs fans to do; I say it's cheap and despicable.

by ers on Oct 21, 2005 11:05 AM EDT 0 recs

The Caubs fans realize

this may be the closest they will get to a WS in many years. :D

by CincyCard on Oct 21, 2005 11:42 AM EDT up 0 recs

It may be a CFB-only phenomenon

Check this out:

Poll at Bleed Cubbie Blue from last week.

There are at least some cub fans that hate the White Sox still.

by Valatan on Oct 21, 2005 12:00 PM EDT up 0 recs

Well,

I think it's just another example of how thin the "devotion" really is of this hoard of newbie Flubfans (who've jumped on since 03 thinking a World Series was imminent). Most of the fans jamming the Sacred Pile Of Bricks these days are looking for a winner (or mostly a place to get drunk in the afternoon sunshine), not a "tradition". Thus, if the Sox look like a winner, then hey, let's put away the blue hats for awhile and wear black ones. There are a lot of diehard Flubfans who deserve respect, but the vast majority I've come across lately wouldn't know Ernie Banks if he was standing right next to them. I usually know far more about the history of their team than they do. So, while I agree with you, I don't think it's surprising in the least.

by rockin redbird on Oct 21, 2005 12:01 PM EDT up 0 recs

Sounds familiar

The [Cardinals] should win at least one game at Minute Maid -- likeliest game 4, the Backe start. If we assume the Astros take the other two home games, they have to go 2-2 at Busch to win the series. i don't think they can do it; their offense is simply too inept away from Minute Maid, and the [Cardinal's] pitching is just [good enough to stymie them on the road]. i don't think Houston wins a single game on the road; make it the [Cardinals] in 6.

On the other hand, the Sox are rested, and possibly complacent. They handled the Red Sox and Angels with comparative ease whereas the Astros had to fight hard against the Braves and the Cardinals. I, too, am pulling for Biggio & Bagwell. I hate Bagwell's bat-twirling stance, it smacks to me of showmanship - but Biggio is the kind of guy that would've been a perfect fit to wear the birds on the bat. One other factor in the Astros favor is the fact that Pettite will likely shut down the Sox running game in at least two games, and it's not all that easy to run on Oswalt when he's hitting 97 on the radar gun like he was two nights ago.

I'm picking the Astros in 5.

by STLEdge on Oct 21, 2005 11:44 AM EDT 0 recs

only diff'nce is

the astros clearly had a better rotation and a better bullpen than stl did. i don't think they hold those advantages over chicago.

by lboros on Oct 21, 2005 12:04 PM EDT up 0 recs

White Sox Pitching

I think we're hagiographing a rotation and bullpen that pitched lights out last week.

Buehrle 16-8 3.12 1.18
Garcia 14-7 3.87 1.25
Garland 18-10 3.50 1.17
Contreras 15-7 3.61 1.23

Carpenter 21-5 2.83 1.06
Mulder 16-8 3.64 1.38
Suppan 16-10 3.57 1.38
Morris 14-10 4.11 1.28

I don't have easy access to more accurate stats, but those are not all that disparate. Carpenter's clearly better than anyone on the Sox staff, and Morris is clearly worse than anyone on their staff. The Sox WHIP #s are a lot lower than I expected based on their ERAs, but that may be an American League thing - I have no idea what game they play over there with that DH-thing.

The Cardinals' bullpen was the best in the NL this year. The Cardinals' team ERA was 3.49 (1st in MLB), the Sox was 3.61 (4th in MLB). The Cardinals team WHIP was 1.27 (7th in MLB), the Sox was 1.25 (5th in MLB).

Yes, the Cardinals' pitching was not good enough in the NLCS to beat the Astros, and it was not even close to what the Sox did in the ALCS, but that's just a snapshot of a season. One other bit that's relevant in the playoffs - the Sox gave up 167 HRs (16th in MLB) in the regular season, the Cardinals gave up 153 (7th in MLB).

If anything, I would argue that the Astros' pitching is more dominant over the Sox than it was over the Cardinals. Still - we can agree to disagree - more recent performance is more indicative of present performance than is the regular season and the Sox pitchers are clearly hotter than the Cardinals pitchers were.

by STLEdge on Oct 21, 2005 1:11 PM EDT up 0 recs

but because the sox have to face a dh

their stats don't correspond directly to the cards'. buehrle's 3.12 era in a dh league is more like 2.80 in a non-dh league. garland's 3.50 is more like 3.20; etc etc. and their 3.61 team era translates into roughly 3.30.

it's true carpenter had the best year of any pitcher on either staff, but he wasn't at his best in october. he's not a 9-inning pitcher. and the rest of our guys ---- well, look at the WHIPs. chicago's worst WHIP guy would be #2 on our team.

i'm not knocking our pitchers at all, but when you account for the dh factor and look at the peripherals, i think the white sox have better pitchers.

by lboros on Oct 21, 2005 1:30 PM EDT up 0 recs

Could be

Like I said - I really have little concept of what the DH means - even though I grew up as an Orioles fan in Virginia. I'd be curious to see different stats to determine how good these White Sox pitchers are.

Another interesting point will be to see how the Astros' pitchers handle having DHs in the first two games. Never having pitched in the majors before, I don't know whether pitchers subconsciously look forward to facing other pitchers so they can relax somewhat (or if this is complete nonsense - see Mulder, Game 2), but having to face 9 real bats must be different in some respect.

by STLEdge on Oct 21, 2005 2:01 PM EDT up 0 recs

Houston in 7

I think the White Sox (or the Angels, Braves, Cardinals, Indians, Red Sox and Yankees for that matter) are clearly better than the Astros, but that doesn't mean much in the post-season.

Like the Cardinals series this will be all about pitching and umping. Ther is no way the Astros will pitch as well against the Sox as they did the Cardinals, but they will pitch good enough to win.

by Zubin on Oct 21, 2005 8:41 PM EDT 0 recs