1948 Indians.

Correct, Lou Boudreau and Joe Gordon. :)

And the yankees come back and tie the game!!!!!!!!!!

AAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the Yankees take the lead!!!!!!!


Woooooooooo Hooooooooooooo!

Have hated the Yankees (in a good way) since growing up a diehard National League fan in the late 50's. Can vividly remember walking home from the local elementary school with my friend and listening to Mazeroski's home run put a huge smile on my face and simultaneously bring tears to his eyes. Getting the feeling that this might be one of those years when I'm just gonna have to grin and bear it so to speak. They still have to find a way to beat one of the two Astro big guys however, so we shalll see.

If the Yankees were playing ISIS I would pull for ISIS. If I could hate them more, I would, but I think it is impossible.

another RBI for Judge thus far in game 5 and again ZERO left on base..

starting to look like a Dodgers v. Yankees series...



Edited to add... game over....add another walk for Judge as well. also ZERO left on base yet again for him. Thus the K's all with nobody on base.

The Dodgers have won 7 of the last 8 games in which Kershaw has started. A number of those are against the opposing team number 1's starter.

His team won all 3 of his starts this year. I think the 'bad in the playoff's' moniker is falling off.... a 2.45 era in the cubs series and a .82 whip.. and team won both his starts..

Whats the deal with the Dodgers? No Seager and they still win easily. I guess the deal is they are really good.

The Yankees and Astros have held home field in the Series so far. I am not a fan of the 2-3-2 format. I think the three straight at home for the "underdog" is a bit unfair. I know its worse for the travel but my prefered playoff format is
2-2-1-1-1. I will say im not a fan of either team just my opinion:D

3.64 ERA is not good. It would be a lot worse, but the Dodgers have finally learned he is worthless past the 6th inning. Kershaw is still bad in the playoffs.

Judge has now tied the record for most strikeouts in a single postseason. He still has one game left to break the record and that doesn't even count a potential 4+ World Series games.

What a laugh. Trying to slight Clayton Kershaw and Aaron Judge in the same bilious post.

Seize upon all the cherry-picked snapshots you want; such intentional myopia belies the bigger picture. Nothing you say changes the fact that those are two excellent baseball players, worthy of respect.

I shan't regurgitate for I suffer from bilious myopia.:eek::eek::eek:

Facts aren't a laugh. If you can't handle the truth, that is your problem. The poster I responded to is the king of cherry picking stats. I am just filling in what he is deliberately omitting, so there is a complete picture. I am sorry that it upsets you so much to know the whole truth about your idols.

Oh, I can handle the whole truth. You aren't presenting whole truth, though, are you? You are merely citing specific pieces of the overall picture of two star players that fit a negative narrative.

The salient fact is Kershaw and Judge are fantastic baseball players, flaws and all. I have enormous respect for anyone who even gets drafted. That's how hard the game is, and how good someone has to be to even make it that far. Performing as Kershaw has, or as Judge has his rookie year? Those are enormous accomplishments.

Forget telling the whole picture, it's far easier to be an old, curmudgeonly Internet forum poster that only highlights the negative while leaving out the other side of things. When called on it you can just shake your fist to the sky and scream "You can't handle the truth!" Works every time.

Can the Yankees get 4-5 decent innings out of Sabathia?

Kershaw is great and has a body of work substantial enough to point to (and of a sample size large enough to form conclusions on , unlike his postseason numbers which are pretty much pointless, like all postseason stats)

Judge, however, is a different story, I posted a few pages back a fairly in depth list of reasons why his hitting profile could potentially end badly. It may not! I'm not the type to make guarantees, I'm not Kreskin, but he will need to make some adjustments and improve his contact rate or we could see him crash and burn pretty quickly. Below league avg contact rates combined with a high BABIP and a higher BB% than he ever had in the minors tends to point towards struggles in his 2nd year. Plus, he's no spring chicken as a rookie.

Better that than an ageist young punk who hasn't lived long enough to know much. ;)

It todays era of baseball..if you can put up 2 runs or less in 6 innings in the playoffs and worlds series as a starting pitcher in every start you are worth a 100 million dollar contract. How many starting pitchers this year went 6 innings in a start..and how many of those gave up 2 earned or less. both are hard on their own. Nobody can slight a guy for not going more than 6 innings in the playoffs anymore. Its about as silly as saying a closer sucks now cause he doesn't pitch 3 innings like the old days..

Houston didn't get your memo Jake, about the irrelevance or the third, fourth and fifth starters in the postseason. Morton and McCullers looked pretty good, eh?

Justin Verlander did it all 3 starts and came out of the bullpen in between to get another win. 4-0 1.46 ERA.

Clayton Kershaw is generally recognized as having one of, if not the best curveballs in the game. in an injury shortened season he gave up by FAR the most home runs of his career this year. Not sure if it's this simple.

and verlander has been the #1 pitcher in the playoffs and deserving of a 100 million dollar contract and being that good has got his team to the world series. How many others?

and Verlander has been the best #1 pitcher in the playoffs. Nothing is so basic obviously. But again the Astros were a huge favorite considering their regular season and adding verlander but i thought you said regular season means nothing. Plus the comment about #3-#6 starters meaning very little was due the 'whats the deal with the dodgers thread' and their late 'losing' streak which meant nothing to me.

Now the dodgers i believe are an underdog in the world series or at least not a clear favorite....we will see how they do in the final test....but just getting to the world series was big for them with the Cubs/Nationals also in NL.'

Plus its always harder being the guy with predictions then the guy that just says 'everything is random' or going with clear favorites.

Aah, so if your ace is Kershaw, #3, 4 & 5 don’t matter, but if your ace is Verlander, they do matter. ........ Got it.

Clarity is often the result of a retrospective analysis of the games “played”. The rear view mirror doesn’t predict where the car will end up. Enjoy the series. I’ll buy you a drink if either of your favorites wins.;)

Final thought: Isn’t it ironic that both cities, Los Angeles and Houston, have been the victims of their own “Hurricane Harveys” this year? :eek:

Two very good teams in the WS. Will be great baseball but the ratings will no doubt be off. Houston is largely unknown to most casual fans. Yankees had a good run. To all their fans saying we will set for years to come and will be back repeatedly I say say hello to the 2015 Mets. Nothing guaranteed. One of their sluggers goes down in May for the year and a few of their other guys under achieve and they will be struggling to make the playoffs.

So Verlander is better than Kershaw? How about Kluber with his postseason performance last year? Bumgarner? Ect. Postseason games are really the only ones that count. Regular season performance is worthless if you choke when a championship is on the line. The game is played to win championships for the team, not to accumulate regular seasons stats for the player.

Both sure picked a good time to have their best stuff. Proof of the maxim that good pitching beats good hitting, I guess.

the postseason is what is worthless. It means nothing because it has been diluted with too many teams and is pretty much a random crapshoot because of it.

The best teams win the most games over the long season, winning 3 series in a row hardly means a thing. playoff baseball is for suckers

Great run from the Yanks. Sad to see it end.

+1 Now I have to wait till next year to watch baseball.:(

Im glad they are out though cause i still think they were a greater threat to beat the dodgers than the astros are.

Kershaw's last 9 playoff starts have resulted in the Dodgers winning 8 of those games.

If the Dodgers were up 8 runs...maybe he gives up 4..who really cares.......he does what he has to do win.....if dodgers score 3...then he gives up 1..

he just won game 1 of the worlds series with tons of Ks......its looking really silly to talk about a 6.1 inning 4 run performance in a WIN now.

Time to stop.

And he got a W in that game easily even with the 4 homers......didnt need to do what he did in Game 1 of the World Series...another dodger victory... Dodgers have won 8 of his last 9 playoff starts.......i guess the 'blah blah blah' means something now..

He is a legend.

He pitched very well last night obviously and good for him. He did not pitch so well in the game he was taken deep 4 times. The logic of your claim that it's ok to give up 4 HR with a big lead is that it's not OK to give up 1 run in a scoreless game.

He also pitched well last year. There was one bad inning with the cardinals many years ago as you are aware.

and correct, i am ok with giving up 4 runs with a 7 run lead...its not like he was down 4-0...his team was up....better than walking people and preventing a big inning...i think they were all solo shots or close to it? His whip has been outstanding. Plus when you need a stud outing, he gives it.

His team has won 8 of his last 9 PLAYOFF starts....how is that not great. It cant be all dodgers offense. When your team wins that many games and you are closing on 90%, you have to figure he must know what he is doing. Stats arent everything, but even they are starting to get really good for him in terms of Whip and era is coming down. (era under 3 in this years playoffs thus far) You made a point it was 4.6 etc but 'short sample size, blah blah' just silly...

Your playoff era will never be like it is in the regular season because you dont get to pitch against 90 loss and more teams for a large chunk of your games.

Kershaw has also been pitching against many #1 or #1A starters in the playoffs yet his team is approaching a 90% winning percentage in their last 9 playoff games. The bad in the playoffs narrative is silly as well now. So if loses the next game his team only wins 80% of the last 10 Kershaw starts....yeah thats terrible

Really need to wait the playoffs out..to jump on him after his frst start n the playoffs that resulted in a 'win' no less, just strange....

Wins are rarely an indicator of how well a person pitches. Felix Hernandez won the Cy Young with only 13 wins. ERA will tell the story and his ERA is objectively bad.

Not getting team W's or individual 'W's i agree doesnt mean much if your stats are great. However if you ARE getting W's and team Ws, i think those W's matter more than just looking at stats. Your team is not going to win much when you are blasted in the first 3 innings and leave your start. In the event you get a lucky win or 2....it will be really hard to get 9 out of 10 team wins in your starts unless you are pitching winning baseball

Giving up 4 runs when your team is up 7 in the late innings is not much of a negative as the stats would say. Especially when you are winning 2-0 games as part of the streak etc.

Livan Hernandez won MVP of the world series with an above 5 era in the world series so era doesnt matter that much when you get Ws. You can have the best stats in the world, but if your team loses every one of your starts, you arent going to be MVP..... Era doesnt tell the whole story, plus Kershaw's era continues to go down and is under 3 in this years playoffs..

Kershaw's regular season MO has been to dominate rather than to pitch merely well enough to win. His post season history does not mirror that. So, something has certainly differed for him in the post season (last night excepted). Perhaps he had tired by season end, perhaps the competition was better and more focused, or perhaps the pressure of having to carry a team was too great? is the pressure greater trying to get to the World Series as opposed to playing in the World Series? Dunno... but, he'll likely get another opportunity or two to further define his post-season personna.

I just don't think that's true at all. In 2006 Randy Johnson went 17-11 for the Yankees, just two less wins than Johan Santana, who won Cy Young that year. But Randy had a 5.00 ERA. It didn't matter if the Yankees won his games. He was bad.

Let’s face it. The only thing that can keep Kershaw from walking on water is a drought.:eek:

Let’s face it. The only thing that can keep Kershaw from walking on water is a drought.:eek:

By Jake's illogic, a guy could pitch for a team that scored 10 runs a game, give up 9 a game himself and go 20-0 with a 9.00 ERA and he would be a phenomenal pitcher.

Kershaw is really darn good, not super great. He has helped the Dodgers to a heck of a year probably ending in World Series ring. Last night was a classic battle of Aces - Kershaw vs. Keuchel, fun to watch as Dodger fan. Side note - the hitters are standing soooo far back in batters box, makes it tough to sometimes determine ball/strike. Shouldn't the strike zone start at the front edge of home plate? There is quite a distance between front edge of home plate to all the way back where hitters are standing.

thats not my logic....when you see a guy give up 10 runs a game and his team win 9 out of 10 starts let me know. My argument is you have to pitch 'winning' baseball to have your team win 9 out of 10 starts. I will make a wild guess that if you give up 9 runs in 10 straight games in the PLAYOFFS, you arent going to win 9 out of 10 games.... Its also hard to give up 9 runs when you have 11ks in a game.

by your logic if a guy gives up 3 runs a game and his team loses all of his starts, he is great. You are going to need to win some games 3-1 as well to win 9 out of 10 games. Kershaw pitched a better game in the playoffs last year then he did yesterday. He has a bunch of great starts mixed in.

So basically if a guy wins 90 out of 100 games with your logic, that guy sucks if his era is 4+ Eventually the wins matter and the starting pitcher is only giving up non meaningful runs in the 'bad' games that he still winning....and on the few losses he is giving up the majority of the runs..

Lots of pitchers pitch great and find ways to lose.....Kershaw wins... 8 out of the last 9 playoff games his team has won.....not sure what you arguing about..

Whether a team wins is a function of two, independent things -- how well they hit and how well they pitch. A pitcher is judged by how well he pitches, not by how well his team happens to hit, or not hit, that day. I am not sure what YOU are arguing about. And to be clear if (let's just assume a complete game for a hypothetical) if Clayton wins 7-5 and another dude loses 3-2 then yeah the other dude pitched much better assuming no weird stuff like many unearned runs.

Thats a short sample size. If the dude loses 19 out of 20 games and has an era of 3.5 and Clayton's teams wins 19 out of 20 games and has an era of 4.00. There is more to just what your teams scores. Clayton has to be winning many low scoring games as well as some games with some better scoring. Clayton could of given up 3 runs in 7 innings yesterday which would of been better than his current playoff era and his team could of lost 4-3. The games he needs to hold the runs down he does obviously. You cant win 8 of 9 games in the playoffs without that happening.

Plus the guy with the 3.5 era, maybe gives up more runs if his team would have scored more runs for him. You cant punish Clayton for giving up 4 runs when his team has a 7 run lead in the late innings. Plus he has so many other wins as well. Giving up some runs in exchange for no big innings has value for W's. Its not like the dodgers were down 4-0.

Just silly, i not sure what you are arguing about.

But ERA would tell you the guy with a 3.50 ERA pitched better than the guy with a 4.00 ERA independent of any other information.

Disagree completely. Depends on your defense. Lots of defenders dont make 'error's but they are still plays they should of made. Or errors are wiped away but add to the pitch count. Yesterday Kershaw had a sure double play booted by Seager resulting in more pitches and maybe could of led to scoring that should of never happend.

Plus if your team is up 7 runs you tend to give up more runs than you would if you are up 1 run. Many more other factors as well (ie. ballpark parameters/al/nl.etc.)

If era is 9.00 versus 2.00..then i agree assuming same amount of innings etc. But when era is in the 2.5-4.5 in sample size of only 15-20 games...a few earned runs changes your era a ton.