October 28, 2007

... and now for 11 months of Tim McCarver detox.

posted by cl at 11:29 PM on October 28, 2007

I don't know why, but this one has me more excited than '04. Maybe it's because this is proof that '04 was no fluke, and that the organization has a sound long-term plan in place.

posted by Howard_T at 02:07 AM on October 29, 2007

My grandfather was still alive when they won in 2004 and hadn't seen them win in his lifetime, so that one will always be more special for me. That said, this made me feel really, really good. I know my grandfather would have been thrilled to see them win it again, and that makes me feel a little closer to him again, you know? That all said, the Rockies are still a great team and what they had to do to get here is absolutely remarkable. They got to the World Series when every other team but one didn't. Congratulations, Colorado, and I sincerely hope to see you back in the World Series next season. That all said, yay Sox!

posted by Joey Michaels at 05:41 AM on October 29, 2007

My thought last night was 'this is what it feels like to be a Yankees fan.' I can't say that excited me.

posted by tieguy at 07:11 AM on October 29, 2007

Congrats to Sox fans. Didn't see much of series , but winning 4 in row against the Rockies is impressive. Red Sox, the superior team this year.

posted by brickman at 07:56 AM on October 29, 2007

I am really looking forward to watching Ellsbury for a full season next year. That kid has the tools to be scary good. Not only that, but someone told me he wasn't in the majors long enough this year for it to qualify as his rookie season. Next year is officially his rookie year. Anyone want to bet he's a top contender for rookie of the year next year?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:43 AM on October 29, 2007

Not that it's possible, but Sox fans, don't start referring to yourselves as a dynasty. "Dynasties" aren't good for the game and they annoy the cr@p out of the rest of the country. Personally, without Torre and the rest of their talent bailing like rats, the Yankees are finally done. Baseball will better for it. For the time being, congratulations, you have the best team in baseball.

posted by Tinman at 09:43 AM on October 29, 2007

My thought last night was 'this is what it feels like to be a Yankees fan.' I can't say that excited me. Seconded (I had previewed that comment and deleted it because it sounds weird). Weird feeling, as TBH also suggests.

posted by yerfatma at 09:51 AM on October 29, 2007

Of course, the phone banks of the Boston sports radio stations are already jammed with callers who all want to tell Theo Epstein how to do his job in the offseason, neatly picking up from the week's worth of calls about how Francona should play Lowell at shortstop, or Youk in right field, etc. etc. Folks - don't you think they know what they're doing at this point?!?! The beauty of this win is that it shows the system installed by Theo and the ownership is working. Almost everyone on the roster came through in this postseason at one time or another - the heroes of '04, the young players grown down on the farm, the studs that the Sox got in exchange for Hanley Ramirez, the Japanese free agents, the carrot-topped outfielder grabbed off the scrap heap, and even those "overpaid bums" Drew and Lugo. Heck, even otherwise-useless Royce Clayton encouraged Jacoby to steal that bag and score us all free tacos. The Red Sox player evaluation and development systems are working terrifically well, which not only explains the team's success in 2007, but presages further success in the future. We'll never match the electric cocktail of relief, disbelief and exhilaration that made 2004 so magical, but I echo Howard T's sentiments - the last one seemed more like a lucky fluke, attributable to good fortune and the accumulated accomplishments of several general managers. This title, however, can be placed in the trophy case of the Henry/Werner/Lucchino/Epstein/Francona brain trust without qualification. In a sense, that makes it even more thrilling than the last title. I can't say enough about Terry Francona, the best possible manager for today's Red Sox, the de facto spokesman for the team at this point, and a guy who is quickly reaching heroic status in my eyes. Hail Tito.

posted by Venicemenace at 10:05 AM on October 29, 2007

Not that it's possible, but Sox fans, don't start referring to yourselves as a dynasty. "Dynasties" aren't good for the game and they annoy the cr@p out of the rest of the country. I've always thought of player carry-over as a key criterion for dynasty. Yes, the Sox still have a core of Manny, Ortiz, Schilling, Wakefield and a few others from the 2004 club, but none of Beckett, Lowell, Daisuke, Okajima, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Papelbon, Lester, Crisp, Drew, Lugo or a number of others were with the team in 2004. This is just a great example of a front office retooling for another run with a combination of farm talent, trades, and international free agents. It also looks like not being sentimental and letting a bunch of guys go after the World Series win and the next two years (Lowe, Pedro, Damon, Nixon) has paid off. Hats off the Red Sox. My only real complaint about this postseason (other than it not being competitive enough -- 5 sweeps in 8 series) is with MLB's scheduling, which I think had too many off-days and created a situation where the Rockies had 8 or 9 days off between the end of the NLCS and the beginning of the World Series.

posted by holden at 10:09 AM on October 29, 2007

Not joint custody, DrJohn. Since Canada is America Jr., it's more like one big dysfunctional family.

posted by smithnyiu at 10:17 AM on October 29, 2007

I echo the complaints about the schedule...other than excitement over the victory, the prevailing emotion around here is relief that we can finally get some sleep at night again.

posted by Venicemenace at 10:35 AM on October 29, 2007

Congrats to Sox fans. Joey Michaels for the win. That is what sports are about - the connection with others. Cheers.

posted by geekyguy at 11:03 AM on October 29, 2007

The pitching has every right to be BETTER next year with Lester and Bucholtz Punctuated by the fact that Bucholtz went 3-1 with a 1.59 era, and threw a no-no and he didn't make the post-season roster. That's depth.

posted by smithnyiu at 11:59 AM on October 29, 2007

Not that this would change anything, but, this is the second straight year where a team has clinched the league pennent and had to sit a week or more for the World Series to start. The '06 Tigers and '07 Rockies got steam rolled after being hot and then sitting. With the TV contracts and such, it is probably a necessary evil, but, I think it does a huge disservice to any team in that situation. Just wondering if anyone else thought about this.

posted by drose92264 at 12:06 PM on October 29, 2007

you can't really complain that much about scheduling; if it had've gone the other way, the rockies' rest would've been called a benefit against a "tired" red sox team. the layoff shouldn't mean that much to the best players in the world, who are natural talents with extremely strong workout regiments and people all around them obsessing over their every move. I think I mildly disagree with this. Much of baseball (particularly on the hitting side) is about timing and repetition; while the extra rest may have benefited the Rockies pitchers, I would have to think that it hurt their batters. We are talking about players who have not had more than 3 days off (All-Star Break) for about 7 months or so and now have over a week in which they don't face live pitching. I think on the hitting side, it has more of a chance to hurt than help. (On the pitching side, it allowed Aaron Cook, the Rockies' pitcher with probably the best outing in the Series, to get healthy --so that was obviously a benefit.) My main point is that MLB has tried to make the schedule more TV friendly by having fewer overlapping games, and I believe this hurts the integrity of the competition in some ways. Why oh why was there a break between Game 4 and Game 5 of the ALCS, both played in Cleveland? Why did there have to be a one-day break between Games 1 and 2 of the ALDS series between the Red Sox and Angels? Extra breaks mean extra rest for players, extra rest time to really shorten up on the bench and use the same relievers game in and game out (not to mention having pitchers start games closer together than they might be able to under normal scheduling), and especially, extra time for the fans to lose interest, and extra opportunity for one team to have its rhythm and timing thrown off by an extra long break. I'm not saying that happened to the Rockies here, I'm just saying that I think the scheduling is not optimal for a whole host of reasons. I love those NHL playoff series that play Game 7 in a different city the night after Game 6. Those teams are dead tired yet the games are really exciting and there's a sense of everyone leaving everything out on the ice. Heck, baseball has done this itself in recent years -- I went and saw Boston clinch the ALDS against the A's in 2003 on a Monday night Game 5 in Oakland after Game 4 had been in Boston on Sunday. I just feel the more and more baseball tries to make the experience more friendly for its TV partners, the less fan-friendly it becomes.

posted by holden at 12:24 PM on October 29, 2007

Unless they were a Red Sox fan or a Rockies fan, or vehemently anti-Red Sox or anti-Rockies, or a diehard baseball fan (if there are any left), did anyone really watch the Series this year or care about it? I saw bits and pieces while flipping through channels or if there was nothing else on to catch my interest. But overall, a big yawner. Then again, perhaps I just tuned it all out in game two when it went from Schilling to shillling.

posted by graymatters at 12:36 PM on October 29, 2007

The man with the most rings is Timlin, who won #4 I read today that Timlin is one of only 17 players to have won at least four rings without any of the championships coming with the Yankees, and one of only 10 to have played in each of the four World Series that were won by his team.

posted by holden at 01:22 PM on October 29, 2007

Unless they were a Red Sox fan or a Rockies fan, or vehemently anti-Red Sox or anti-Rockies, or a diehard baseball fan (if there are any left), did anyone really watch the Series this year or care about it? Uh, well, I did. I'm not a fan of either team, I don't know if you would call me a "diehard baseball fan" -- I've watched it and enjoyed it all my life, but I finished dead last in the fantasy game because I wasn't interested enough on a day-to-day basis to follow it -- and I watched all four games. A "big yawner"? I guess mileage varies. I loved it when Matsuzaka got a hit (and two RBIs!), when Papelbon got that perfectly executed pickoff, when Ellsbury did the leadoff-guy thang in textbook fashion to get on the board last night and then robbed the Rockies of a (tying) home run in the outfield. I loved seeing Lester come back from cancer and throw the ball like he was never sick. I didn't really like the game 2 blowout, but apart from that, I really wish the Rockies had put up a better fight, but apart from that, this was a great Series to watch.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 01:32 PM on October 29, 2007

Then again, perhaps I just tuned it all out in game two when it went from Schilling to shillling. I didn't really like the game 2 blowout Um...are we all talking about the same 2-1 ballgame?

posted by Venicemenace at 01:55 PM on October 29, 2007

I agree with kirk. I found the sweep disappointing. There wasn't really any incentive to stay up to watch the rest of game four (partially the fault of crappy scheduling). The ease at which Boston dominated the Rockies also detracted from the excitement of the series. That said, congrats to the Red Sox on a stellar season.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 02:16 PM on October 29, 2007

Here's a great photo of Todd Helton after the game last night. Seems to capture that wistful "maybe that was my one chance/last chance" vibe.

posted by holden at 02:43 PM on October 29, 2007

I think the city of Boston is in for a treat. The Sox win, the Pats look like they are in a different league, the Celtics are coming, though they seem to be built for a year, but that stuff works in NBA (1999 Spurs and 2000 lakers, hough continued to roll. It is does not work in the MLB for some reason (06 Tigers, 06 Mets, 02 Angels, though they won, the 07 Angels).

posted by SFValley_Dude at 02:47 PM on October 29, 2007

"Guess between this, the Patriots, and what I'm going to assume will be a pretty damn strong Celtics team, now Boston is the evil empire... we'll see how that plays out for us New England fans in the coming years. posted by Hal Incandenza at 2:39 AM CST on October 29" Hal; Don't fret your noggin anymore. As long as Boston fans have middle fingers, they will be ok :-))

posted by Cave_Man at 06:05 PM on October 29, 2007

Maybe if the Red Sox allow Shilling to move on, the Rockies pick him up. I assume you mean Mike Lowell, as Youkilis could move to 3B and Helton to 1B. Schilling moving on wouldn't free up a spot for Helton as Youkilis and Ortiz would occupy the 1B/DH spots.

posted by grum@work at 07:02 PM on October 29, 2007

"Maybe if the Red Sox allow Shilling to move on, the Rockies pick him up. I assume you mean Mike Lowell, as Youkilis could move to 3B and Helton to 1B. Schilling moving on wouldn't free up a spot for Helton as Youkilis and Ortiz would occupy the 1B/DH spots. posted by grum@work at 7:02 PM CST on October 29" I was not clear. The Rockies have a lot of good young pitchers, a presence like Shilling in their clubhouse would make a world of difference to them. They would be better at cruchtime. Rockies' hitters are good enough to win the WS, if their pitchers can keep games close.

posted by Cave_Man at 07:39 PM on October 29, 2007

lil_brown_bat: I am really looking forward to watching Ellsbury for a full season next year. That kid has the tools to be scary good. Not only that, but someone told me he wasn't in the majors long enough this year for it to qualify as his rookie season. Next year is officially his rookie year. Anyone want to bet he's a top contender for rookie of the year next year?

Ellsbury is eligible for the RoY in 2008. The cut-off is 130 at-bats and/or 45 days on the active roster (not including after September 1st when the rosters expand precisely for late-season callups). He had 116 regular season at-bats, and 25 post-season at-bat. I'm pretty sure but not certain that post-season at-bats won't count, since they don't count for any other records. In 2008 he'll probably get lots of playing time, and if he's even halfway decent he'll be a strong candidate: lots of voters will remember his October performance, especially in the World Series, although I guess there's a chance they'll discount him for it. He's got a supportive team, enough experience that he can come out swinging, and the likely starting CF job in 2008 unless he implodes during spring training. But let's not count our chickens before they're hatched; Ellsbury was great in October, and strong in September, but anyone can and does look great for two months. For all we know, a full season might reveal that he has serious holes in his strike zone that major league pitchers will use to push him below the Mendoza line. He did have 116 at-bats in the regular season, which, while not a large sample size, project to this line for a 162-game season:

AB____R___H__2B__3B__HR__RBI__SB__CS__BB__SO___BA__OBP__SLG 569__98_201__34___5__15___88__44___0__39__74_.353_.394_.509

The average is gaudy at .353, which he maintained in the post-season with .360 hitting but which isn't typical of his past minor-league performance, and that boosts his OBP and SLG. If his 2008 projects to anything like that, a 200 hit centerfielder with 30 doubles, 40 stolen bases, and an OPS of .900+ would probably win the RoY in a cakewalk. But you don't know that someone else might put up rookie numbers akin to A-Rod (his almost-rookie 1996), Pujols, Howard, or even Nomar. Worrisome to me in making any bold predictions about Ellsbury's future success is that he seems to lack plate discipline- his OBP is marginally higher than his BA, and he has half as many walks as strikeouts. But plate discipline is teachable if he's willing to spend the offseason and 2008 learning, and he's on the best team in the majors for that! He's very fast, has a great glove, and has been rated a top prospect (#1 in the Sox organization). He'll probably be fine in 2008, but let's not give him the RoY just yet.

posted by hincandenza at 09:54 PM on October 29, 2007

Congratulations to the Red Sox. Boston won two games by one run in a series that will be considered lopsided because of the sweep. I hope the rest of the majors do not emulate the Red Sox in the amount of spitting that they do.

posted by Newbie Walker at 12:11 AM on October 30, 2007

I'm a schilling fan, but you're way overstating his effect on younger pitchers. Let's not talk about any personal 'Schilling effect' and look at the value of keeping a pitcher with his methodology tied to the organisation. He's worth the extra year for that alone. Why? Because the chances are that you get him to stick around in a coaching role after that year, at a discount. I don't think it's really a fair comparison to Clemens in that regard. I do feel sorry for the Rockies, especially Helton, who's kept at his task during the franchise's many lean years. The layoff didn't help, and it was always going to be a question of whether they could take anything from Fenway. But I also get the feeling that there's a long-term strategy in place in Denver, and that's a good thing.

posted by etagloh at 08:43 AM on October 30, 2007

Can we all call you Verfatma?

posted by jerseygirl at 09:06 AM on October 30, 2007

Would he want a position where he could lecture those around him and let them know how brilliant he is? I think so. He learned Japanese just so he could bend more ears in the clubhouse.

posted by yerfatma at 10:27 AM on October 30, 2007

Like I said on the A-Rod thread, I don't see Schilling as a coach per se. (And I don't need persuading that he's a self-regarding asshole.) But the Moneyball treatment might worth having around, at a safe distance from the pitchers themselves. If the Sox can replicate Schilling's nerd methodology in its coaching staff (or get a computer to do it) I'd be fine with that. Otherwise, give him a nice retainer to pore over the film and stats at home and send long missives by email.

posted by etagloh at 12:08 PM on October 30, 2007

Otherwise, give him a nice retainer to pore over the film and stats at home and send long missives by email. He'd do that for free.

posted by justgary at 12:37 PM on October 30, 2007

But only 3 out of the 7 teams that spent over 100 million made the playoffs. This year, yes, but has anyone done a longitudinal study? Did the four teams that didn't make it this year, make it last year? Will they make it next year? The Rockies tried going big for a few years (Hampton & Neagle), it backfired, and the franchise nearly went bankrupt -- they had to squeeze investors to give them more money. A similar mistake in New York or Boston you might get a lot of negative publicity and angry calls to talk radio, but they have enough $$$ that they don't have to consider selling the team. That's what the lack of a salary cap buys teams like the Sox and Yanks -- the ability to recover from mistakes. Playoffs are just the result of making fewer mistakes than other teams.

posted by drumdance at 02:28 PM on October 30, 2007

The World Series parade was fun. I know no one asked, but it was. Someone decided to give Manny a microphone and a speaker. Good times.

posted by jerseygirl at 03:06 PM on October 30, 2007

They are the '96-00 Yankees of today. Or at least as close as it comes these days...

posted by Jzsteinm at 06:36 AM on November 02, 2007