BP Comment Quick Links
November 2, 2001 The Daily ProspectusGame FiveI know I'm supposed to fill this space with cogent analysis about the World Series, but I really don't know what I can say. I'm not operating as an analyst right now, not at 9:49 on Thursday night, not after having watched the most incredible back-to-back World Series games since 1991. I'm just a fan right now, a fan who has spent a lot of time staring slack-jawed at his television over the past couple of nights.In the entire history of the World Series, just 11 teams have even tied games in which they trailed by more than one run in the ninth inning. Just four of those teams won the game in which they came back: the 1911 Giants (Game 5), the 1929 A's (Game 5), the 1939 Yankees (Game 4), and the 1985 Cardinals (Game 2). In the last 22 hours, the Yankees extended that list by half. How do you write about an achievement like that, beyond repeating the word, "Wow," a couple hundred times? After the Yankees won their third straight World Series last October, I wrote a column about the accomplishment, and how difficult it is to rectify the performance of this team with my beliefs as an analyst. It read, in part:
I don't put a whole lot of stock in chemistry or intangibles. Those terms are usually used after the fact to explain away success or failure that came as a surprise. Certainly, groups of people can have good or bad chemistry, and that chemistry can potentially impact the work they do.
That's where I am tonight. I don't know what to say about this team, because
their performance in the postseason--at the most critical moments in the
postseason--is simply incredible.
Kinda cool, isn't it?
The only thing I didn't understand was lifting Morgan at the start of the
11th inning. Morgan had retired seven Yankees in a row, and thrown just 29
pitches in doing so. It's possible that Morgan could not pitch further,
though, so I don't want to make too much of this. Having to use Albie
Lopez, though...that was pretty much the nightmare scenario for Brenly.
The D'backs manager even stopped with the freaky bunting fetish, and was
rewarded with a runner-on-third, no-out situation in the ninth. The D'backs
didn't score, but maybe the positive reinforcement of using the hit-and-run
will hold.
I can't help but think that if it were a different National League West left
fielder who hit a lot of home runs in 2001 having a series like this, it
would be a bigger story.
I guess it pays to not have a Barcalounger.
Truth to tell, I don't know what to say about that. I can understand why you
would use Johnson, given the importance of the game. That said, using
a starter out of the bullpen strikes me as an elimination-game strategy, not
something you do in a situation where you're guaranteed at least one more
game.
With the exception of 1999--the year Bobby Cox decided that he could treat
his best pitchers like Strat cards--starters in the playoff rotation only
generally come out of the pen in dire circumstances. Given that Johnson is
supposed to start in Game 6 in Arizona, I think not using him Thursday night
was the best course of action.
Joe Sheehan is an author of Baseball Prospectus. You can contact him by
clicking here.
Joe Sheehan is an author of Baseball Prospectus. 0 comments have been left for this article.
|