Royal-ty

Hail the Royals

Congratulations to the Kansas City Royals on their World Series win. And condolences to all the Mets fans (sorry, Bill). Here’s a few quick thoughts on the Series from someone who had no rooting interest in the outcome.

First, the Mets appear to be a very good team that has a chance to continue in contention if things go right for them (never a given). They have four strong arms that can keep the team in games. Of course that was true of the 1986 version, the last Mets team to win it all, and none of the big names (Darling, Gooden, Ojeda) became dominant starters over a long period of time. As long as the current Mets big four are healthy and signed it’s probably a good thing for New York. They have got to find someone who can catch the ball and who can throw in a straight line. Errors hurt the team and sometimes I wondered if they knew what to do with a baseball once it was hit to them. Hopefully the Series dampened the enthusiasm to give Murphy a ton of money. He had a great pre-Series playoffs and looked poised to make a boatload of cash. Frankly I was afraid some team (my Dodgers need a second baseman and have lots of money so they came to mind) would pay him a lot more than he was worth and be stuck with another awful contract. I did like seeing David Wright get a chance to play in a  World Series and hope he gets another. He’s been a stalwart for a long time (in baseball terms) and I’ve always kind of liked him.

And now Kansas City. I have no idea how to explain this team. They remind me of a Deadball team in so many ways. They string together hits, run rampant on the bases, steal a lot, don’t strike out a bunch, play good defense. All of those things describe John McGraw’s 1912 Giants (with proper deference to the defense of the era). But then the Royals hit for power (but not Ruthian power) and have a less than dominating staff, neither of which describe the 1912 Giants. In some ways they remind me most of the 1996-2003 Yankees. They do many of the same things well and have no genuine superstar (Jeter was a star and became a superstar as the Yanks kept winning–the same can happen to a Royals player if they keep winning). I don’t expect them to have the same staying power because they don’t have the same quality pitching, especially among the starters, but the two teams are much alike (but certainly not exact copies).

All in all I enjoyed the World Series. Kansas City is fun to watch. One of the announcers last night kept comparing their enthusiasm to a youth baseball team. I kinda like that. It’s nice to see a bench excited. Now on to next season and Go Dodgers.

Advertisement

The 49 Greatest Mets

ESPN has come up with another “greatest” list. This time it’s the Mets and it only goes 49 deep (not the usual 50). I suppose that’s because the Mets are only just over 50 years old. But when you consider the bottom of the list, you’d think they could put on someone like Ron Swoboda just to get it to 50.  You can find the list by going to ESPN and finding their New York page. Here’s some quick thoughts on it:

1. The top 10 are (in order) Tom Seaver, Dwight Gooden, Darryl Strawberry, Mike Piazza, David Wright, Jerry Koosman, Keith Hernandez, Jose Reyes, Cary Carter, and Carlos Beltran.

2. To make a team (four pitchers, one of which is left-handed) you get: Hernandez at 1st, Edgardo Alfonso at 2nd (he’s 11th on the list and the first player to spend significant time at second base–although he played at third as well), Reyes at short, and Wright at third. The outfield is Strawberry, Beltran, and Mookie Wilson (who is 15th on the list). Your starters are Seaver, Gooden, Koosman, and Al Leiter (who is 12th on the list). John Franco is the reliever (coming in at 14th), and the highest listed catcher is Piazza with Gary Carter being the highest rated player whose position is already taken. That makes him the DH.

3. I saw no major players left off, but I was surprised that Ron Darling (17 was higher than David Cone (18), but maybe that works for Cone’s Mets career.

4. Tug McGraw (19) finished higher than either Jesse Orosco (22) or Roger McDowell (41), which I liked.

5. I thought Tommy Agee was low at 25 and Ed Kranepool high at 26, although Kranepool had a lot of Mets records for a while. All were longevity numbers.

6. Jerry Grote, John Stearns, and Todd Hundley all made the list. I’d forgotten that Mets catching was reasonably deep.

7. And everybody’s favorite 1962 Mets player, Marv Throneberry was 49th. Ain’t that Amazin”?

Go take a look for yourself. If you disagree, take it up with ESPN.

Game Six: LCS

After a short break, back to game six. This is the final installment of the series.

When baseball went to a playoff system in 1969, the playoff round was a best of five, making it impossible for a game six. That changed in 1985 when the current best of seven format began. It proved immediately successful when Toronto won game four of the 1985 ALCS and took a three games to one lead over Kansas City. In previous years that would have put Toronto into the World Series, but the new format required them to win one more. They couldn’t and the Royals won their only World Series that season.

There have been a few good sixth games in ALCS history, but most of the truly memorable ones occurred in the National League. Ozzie Smith’s home run and the “Bartman” game were both game six. But for sheer drama and length, there’s never been anything quite like game six of the 1986 NLCS.

Kevin Bass in that gaudy Astros uniform

1986

The New York Mets went into game six of the 1986 NLCS up three games to two against the Houston Astros. The game was played on Wednesday afternoon, 15 October, in Houston. The Astros looked like they were going to tie up the series when they jumped on Mets ace Bob Ojeda for three runs in the bottom of the first. With a couple of doubles and a couple of singles, Houston forged ahead. The key play of the game occurred in the first, when Kevin Bass recorded the third out trying to steal home. It ended the scoring for the Astros in the first, and as things turned out one more run would have been critical.

For eight innings the Astros held New York in check. Starter Bob Knepper threw eight shutout innings to bring the game to the top of the ninth and bring Houston within three outs of a game seven. He got one. A triple, a single, and a double gave the Mets two runs and chased Knepper. A sacrifice fly tied the game and Bass’s base running blunder now brought on extra innings.

And it brought on extra inning after extra inning. The game went on for 4 hours and 42 minutes. Not being a particular fan of either team, I was, by the end, beginning to root for it to go 18 so I could get in a strange double-header. I thought the Mets were going to mess it up for me when they scored a run in the 14th, but Billy Hatcher homered in the bottom of the inning to give me another chance at my hoped for double-header.  

The fifteenth was scoreless, then the Mets scored three on a double, two singles, two wild pitches, and a sacrifice fly. Up 7-4 it looked like World Series time for the Mets. Houston decided not to make it easy. On a couple of singles and a walk, the Astros got two runs back, then Kevin Bass came to the plate with two outs. He struck out to end the game, the series, and my shot at a double-header. The Mets went on to win the World Series.

It was more an interesting than exciting game for most of the time. There was the drama extra innings always gives, but for much of the game it looked like the Mets were in trouble. They made it exciting finally in the ninth, then it became a long drama through a 14th inning tie then the finale of the Astros getting within one run to send it to sixteen. The game had some individually good performances. Jesse Orosco picked up the win, his third in the series, Knepper threw eight shutout innings before losing it in the ninth. Ray Knight had two critical RBIs, and Glenn Davis and Billy Hatcher both had three hits for the Astros, one of Hatcher’s being the game’s only home run. Then there was Kevin Bass who went one for six with the out at home and Astros manager Hal Lanier who left Knepper in to start the ninth.

It was a heck of a game, and a heck of a game to end this series on. I still wish I’d gotten that double header out of it. Oh, well.

Home Field Advantage

Dome, Sweet, Dome

I’m something of a hockey fan. I watch a little when I get the chance and I’ve really enjoyed this year’s Stanley Cup. So far the home team has won each game. That makes for a real “home field advantage” (or ice in this case). I’ve watched a lot of sports over the years and I’ve noticed that the so-call “home field advantage” is kind of an uneven thing. It seems to me that it holds for hockey pretty well, less well for both football and basketball, and is something of a joke in baseball. I’ve always found  that a little strange. Baseball, after all, is the only one that doesn’t have a standardized playing surface. In every hockey match the ice is the same length and width. Same in football and basketball. But in baseball outfields differ greatly. So you’d  think that would give a team used to the outfield an advantage, wouldn’t you? And that doesn’t even begin to address the idea of a domed stadium versus open-air parks.

I decided to test this just a little, without trying to determine why. I went back to 1961 with the first expansion since 1901 and began looking at who won games at home and away in the World Series. Because the pre-World Series playoffs didn’t begin until 1969, I concentrated strictly on the Series. I also determined I wasn’t going to take the time to go through every team. So I picked five teams that played about the same number of World Series’ in the period: the Giants, Mets, Red Sox, Reds, and Twins. Here are the results.

Giants: The Giants appeared in four World Series (1962 and ’89, and 2002 and 2011) winning one (2011). They played 11 games at home, twelve on the road. Their record was 5-6 at home and 5-7 on the road. No advantage either way for them, they do equally poorly at home and away. And to be fair, there are two parks involved as the Giants home field.

Mets: The Mets appeared in three World Series (1969, 1973, 1986) winning two (’69 and ’86). They played 10 games at home, nine on the road. Their record was 7-3 at home and 4-5 on the road. A definite advantage for the Mets to play at home, but  one game under .500 is not a bad record on the road.

Red Sox: The Red Sox appeared in five World Series (1967, ’75, and ’86, and 2004, ’07) winning two (2004 and 2007). They played 15 games at home, 14 on the road. Their record was 9-6 at home and 8-6 on the road. Both are winning records, but are almost exactly alike. There seems to be no advantage for Boston to play either location.

Reds: The Reds appeared in six World Series (1962, ’70, 72, ’75, ’76, and ’90) winning half (1975, ’76,’ and ’90). They played 15 games at home, 16 on the road. Their record was 7-8 at home and 10-6 on the road. Cincinnati actually benefitted by playing on the road. Like the Giants, the Reds’ World Series games occur in two different parks.

Twins: OK, you knew there would be a kicker didn’t you? This is it. The Twins make three World Series (1967, ’87, ’91) winning two (1987 and 1991). They played 12 games at home and nine away. Their record is an  astonishing 11-1 at home and 0-9 on the road. Tell me the Metrodome didn’t make a difference? And again, there are two parks involved. BTW the lone home loss was game 7 of 1965 when they lost a three-hit shutout to Sandy Koufax. Things like that happen.

The Twins number is so outlandish, I decided to check something else. Between 1901 and 1960 the Twins were the Washington Senators, who just happened to also make it to three World Series’ (1924, ’25, and ’33), winning one (1924). They played 10 games at home, nine on the road, with different results. They were 6-4 at home and 2-7 on the road. For anyone curious, the only Senators/Twins pitchers to win a World Series game on the road were George Mogridge (who?) and Walter Johnson. Bet you had the second one figured.

Now this is  only a partial sample and I’m willing to admit that a fuller look might yield different results. But it seems that “home field” isn’t all that big a deal in the World Series (unless you’re the Twins). So maybe making “home field” reliant on the All Star Game isn’t such a big deal either.

‘