So, my aforementioned best mate who is a red sox fan e-mailed me congrats yesterday. And I e-mailed him back saying a) I didn't think lester and beckett could have two bad games on the trot, so I figured they'd go to game 7 but also b) I'd prefer to play the red sox in a WS.

it's really dumb. I know if we play them, we have our work cut out for us. But as I said to this guy, the fuck you potato plot on my shoulder wants to hear no comebacks from anyone if we win this world series. And even though the Rays put up a great regular record, and even if they do win against the red sox and therefore will have totally tanned their hides, I can see some stupid little fuck wit sneer that 'it was only the rays.' (if we win, obviously)(not forgetting if).

It's really stupid. But I want to play the red sox in the world series. I trust this phillies team to not give up and die in four straight. I have a feeling that whoever we play, it's going to 6 or 7. I have no rational reason for believing any of this.

Emotionally I'd rather play the Sox, too. But I worry about a team coming back with 3 straight wins, inc. last night's amazing comeback. Plus, they won't have had the time off the Phils will have, which I find it hard to believe is going to be good for the Phils.

JFLNYC wrote:Emotionally I'd rather play the Sox, too. But I worry about a team coming back with 3 straight wins, inc. last night's amazing comeback. Plus, they won't have had the time off the Phils will have, which I find it hard to believe is going to be good for the Phils.

I just keep thinking time off for cole hamels is good time off.

Since the beginning of the wildcard era, ie, 2 playoff rounds before the WS

2007: ALCS (7 games), NLCS (4 games), AL in 4
2006: ALCS (4 games), NLCS (7 games), NL in 5
2005: ALCS (5 games), NLCS (6 games), AL in 4
2004: ALCS (7 games), NLCS (7 games), AL in 4
2003: ALCS (7 games), NLCS (7 games), NL in 6
2002: ALCS (5 games), NLCS (5 games), AL in 7
2001: ALCS (5 games), NLCS (5 games), NL in 7
2000: ALCS (6 games), NLCS (5 games), AL in 5
1999: ALCS (5 games), NLCS (6 games), AL in 4
1998: ALCS (6 games), NLCS (6 games), AL in 4
1997: ALCS (6 games), NLCS (6 games), NL in 7
1996: ALCS (5 games), NLCS (7 games), AL in 6
1995: ALCS (6 games), NLCS (4 games), NL in 6

The NLCS has gone fewer games than the ALCS 3 times, in 2 of those 3 occasions the AL team won. The Braves in 1995 were the exception. But the broader question, do the longer series build momentum?

We have 13 years here. In 6 of those years, the LCS went the same amount of games in both leagues. In the 7 other cases, 3 times the team that played the longer LCS won the WS. 4 times, obviously, the more rested team won.

I don't think it means much at all.

Two schools of thought on this.

One: after last night, I want no part of the Red Sox. Granted that Tampa probably doesn't have relievers as good as Madson or Lidge, granted that the Phils are a more veteran team--if you think that sort of thing matters, and I'm not convinced it doesn't at this stage--than the Rays... but Boston's winning a game like that just scares the hell out of me. If they get there, they'll be riding an unbelievable wave of momentum and feeling like they just beat a far superior team to the one they'll face for a second straight championship and the opportunity to cement themselves as the first true dynasty of the 21st century.

Two: something about this series is beginning to remind me of the 2003 ALCS. That one is remembered mostly for Pedro's running out of gas in Game Seven and Aaron Boone one-upping Bucky Dent. But the way it played out, I'm convinced that the victorious Yankees were entirely out of gas by the time they got to the World Series and lost to a probably inferior Marlins team. It took everything they had to beat the Red Sox; after that, they were done. I could see Boston (or Tampa, I guess) expending themselves in this round.

One advantage is that either way, we probably won't see the AL pennant winner's ace in Game One. If it's Boston, they'll start with Dice-K since Beckett and Lester are going this weekend. If it's Tampa and they win on Saturday, I guess they could come back with Kazmir--but I'd expect the Phils to do okay against him and at worst drive up his pitch count early, getting him out by the 6th. If it goes seven and they win, there's a chance Kazmir shows up in relief, and we get Sonnastine or Jackson (depending on how completely Maddon empties out his staff to win that game--see my #2 scenario, which in '03 included Mike Mussina extending himself to keep the Yanks close in Game Seven).

Probably my preferred outcome is the Rays winning in seven, using every pitcher on their staff to outlast Boston in a 14-inning thriller.

Wizlah wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:Emotionally I'd rather play the Sox, too. But I worry about a team coming back with 3 straight wins, inc. last night's amazing comeback. Plus, they won't have had the time off the Phils will have, which I find it hard to believe is going to be good for the Phils.

I just keep thinking time off for cole hamels is good time off.

Hamels is getting the same time off regardless of what happens in the other series.

dajafi wrote:Probably my preferred outcome is the Rays winning in seven, using every pitcher on their staff to outlast Boston in a 14-inning thriller.

Mine too, Rays in 7 would be great. The Rays would be relieved and just excited to have escaped the ALCS after blowing the 3-1 lead. Phillies would win in a walkover at that point.

One of the reasons I don't mind the red sox is that rotation has beckett, and my memory is we could usually get to beckett.

But something else here (and this is just dumb-guessing-at-what-goes-on-in-players-heads-which-may-or-may-not-affect-their-play) - I don't really care that the sox if they made would be thinking of bona fide dynasty and that we're only the pansy NL team, or that the Rays would be thinking about bright young darlings of the meeja's eye (just like the rockies last year, but anyhow) and their first ever world series.

I'm probably rubbing out all the bad bits from both series we've just played, but judging the way this team went out and went 2-0 up twice, then in both cases, lost a game, then got right back in the saddle and settled it . . . well, maybe I'm believing Jimmy's post NLCS cool aid, but I swear the way he looked in that interview, that team doesn't have a mental chink in it's armour. We may get beaten by a team that plays better than us, and most every team wants to win the big prize, but I don't think we're going to blink in the headlights or get overawed by the other team's aura or any of that bull.

lethal wrote:

Wizlah wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:Emotionally I'd rather play the Sox, too. But I worry about a team coming back with 3 straight wins, inc. last night's amazing comeback. Plus, they won't have had the time off the Phils will have, which I find it hard to believe is going to be good for the Phils.

I just keep thinking time off for cole hamels is good time off.

Hamels is getting the same time off regardless of what happens in the other series.

doh. idiot.

(me, obviously)

OHMIGOD WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL WEDNESDAY

I don't know which team would be easier to beat, and from reading the comments from you intelligent people, it's clear no one else does either.

So, I propose we think about this in terms of which team would be more fun to beat.

And in my mind, the answer is clear--it would be way more fun to beat the Red Sox. The Fox guys will be fellating Tito and the rest of 'em, there will be constant talk about the amazing come back, blah, blah blah. Meanwhile, Cole, Jimmy, Chase, and the rest of the boys will be sweeping their sorry asses, and there will be much weeping among the national media.

I really like an "us against the world" story line. We're despised, hated, unlovable Santa Claus booers who never win anything. And we're taking this fucking series. Serious.

Uts?

He's crisp like a pretzel! (Not a soft pretzel, a hard pretzel.)

TenuredVulture wrote:the answer is clear--it would be way more fun to beat the Red Sox.

it'll be way fun beating either, but

Anyone order "Why Can't Us?" gear?

TenuredVulture wrote:So, I propose we think about this in terms of which team would be more fun to beat.

And in my mind, the answer is clear--it would be way more fun to beat the Red Sox. The Fox guys will be fellating Tito and the rest of 'em, there will be constant talk about the amazing come back, blah, blah blah.

My take is this: If I knew the Phillies would win the Series, I'd prefer to face the Red Sox -- it would be much more gratifying to beat them. If I knew the Phillies would lose the Series, I'd much rather play the Rays -- it would be kinda interesting to have the Rays win especially given their history and at least they are "someone different".

So, given that, I think I'm rooting for the Rays to go. Not that I don't hope or think the Phillies will win, but simply because it would insulate me from feeling as crappy from losing. I guess that just makes me a negadelphian, huh?

Also, it can't hurt to get all the Red Sox-Dodgers promoters to be completely wrong.

Rays in 7, please.

Eskin looks so creepy

no "looks" about it

TenuredVulture wrote:I don't know which team would be easier to beat, and from reading the comments from you intelligent people, it's clear no one else does either.

So, I propose we think about this in terms of which team would be more fun to beat.

And in my mind, the answer is clear--it would be way more fun to beat the Red Sox. The Fox guys will be fellating Tito and the rest of 'em, there will be constant talk about the amazing come back, blah, blah blah. Meanwhile, Cole, Jimmy, Chase, and the rest of the boys will be sweeping their sorry asses, and there will be much weeping among the national media.

I really like an "us against the world" story line. We're despised, hated, unlovable Santa Claus booers who never win anything. And we're taking this $#@! series. Serious.

I like your spirit but -- F that. Let the Rays win in 7 the hard way. Exhausted, bullpen spent and emotionally wiped. Let the Phils, rested, calm, cool and anxious to finish it off -get in to it. I don't care about who is more satsifying to beat, becasue when history looks back they only remember who won, nto who lost. They will pump the Rays as the best team in Baseball, the under-dog for a maligned org. There's no scenario that the Phils get the props. Despite 2 almost 3 MVP players, and a now highly ranked ace - we will never get the props. Natl always wants Phila. teams to lose as you say. I beleive there the Sox and their experience is valuable. Thus, I'd prefer to take on the new-comer and hopefully the newcomer has to expend eveyrthing to get there.

I know that 'rest" has backfired at times, I'm just hoping that it won't -- THIS time.