Great ballgame, potential turning point for both teams. I'm sorry to see the A's hitting the skids lately, as they are a very good club with a solid staff and fun to watch. They clearly came into this series determined to atone for being swept in their last series, but the Indians were equally playing with a fire, possibly even moreso, having relinquished the division lead. I feel that it was crucial to have a come from behind win at this point. They had a bunch early in the year, but that '95ish spirit waned a bit in June. The A's will really have to battle to make the playoffs, with two teams in the central that will win 90-100 games, one of whom will account for the wild card unless Oakland can have a stellar second half.
As added bonuses, the middle of the lineup looked like the force that it is, even against Haren, whose first mediocre start of the year (6.2 IP, 3 ER, 8 H) may have pushed him out of the frontrunner position for starting the all-star game, especially after Sabathia's brilliant complete game win the night before (9IP, 2ER, 9 H). He could still get the call I guess, but probably not. Jim Leyland, while clearly not a nice man, surely wields enough Greatest Generation righteousness that he wouldn't snub C.C. on the basis of a division rivalry.
Speaking of the Tigers, Magglio couldn't muster the heroics of Hafner or Shoppach, and D-town lost an embarrasing second straight to the Rangers, who - fact - deliberately employ Kevin Millwood as a baseball player, for $8 million a season no less. Credit the loss to your prick uncle with the mustache who doesn't hate gay people as long as they don't play baseball.
So we're tied again, and the race continues to already feel exciting.
9 comments:
There is no doubt in my mind that Jim Leyland will select Verlander over CC as the AL's All-Star Game starter. Mark my words. Sabathia will likely start twice more before the break. He needs two wins to make up Leyland's mind for him.
In actuality, I don't care about the All-Star Game one bit. In my perfect world, CC would be recongized as a 2007 All-Star but not pitch. He needs the rest.
And Ben, be careful about bashing Detroit for losing twice to Texas. The Indians did just lose four of six against Washington and Cincinnati.
Verlander? Yeah, I guess so. Shouldn't a manager be humble, though? I was more worried about Beckett. It's not that I care, really. I've just never seen an Indian start the all-star game and it would be cool. I also just want Sabathia to be recognized as an ace.
You're right, I admit that the Indians did look terrible in those series and they need to catch fire to make up for that interleague bullshit.
Remember when we saw Todd Jones get tossed from that spring training game? Ha.
Yeah I am sorry to say I don't think Sabathia is going to be starting the all-star game either. Based on performance to this point, it's got to be either Verlander or Haren - with Sabathia and Beckett both a ways off - and since Verlander pitches for Leyland you have to assume Jimmy will give the job to his guy.
You are correct though that the AL Central is going to be a good race. Now that the Red Sox appear to have the East in the bag and the Mets have become teh suck, it's all that's really keeping me engaged with baseball right now.
Charles Nagy started the 1997 All-Star Game. And he got touched up for three runs in the first.
Beckett and Sabathia both a ways off compared to Verlander and Haren? How do you figure, Greg? Verlander and Haren may have edges on Beckett and CC when it comes to ERA. However, Beckett and CC have strong edges in wins, k's, and innings pitched. I think it's a dead heat and Verlander gets it because he's Leyland's guy.
But lets not pretend there's any sort of rhyme or reason to the All-Star teams. First, every team must have a representative, which is bullshit. Second, Joe Torre threw out the idea that the All-Star game is a meritocracy in the 90's when he routinely picked his own guys over more deserving players. The trend was set and Leyland will probably follow it.
Well yeah I consider ERA is the most important indicator of how well a pitcher has done, so I look at that first.
All four of them have pitched great and there's an argument to be made for each of them to be the starter. I hadn't realized Sabathia has pitched 122+ innings, that's a big point in his favor.
The more I think about it though, the more I believe it should be Haren. His ERA is far below everyone else's and he's won nine for the A's, who aren't providing him with the run support the other candidates have gotten.
But as you say Dan, the thing that's really most important is that Verlander is Leyland's pitcher.
Yeah, it's at least a tight enough race at this point that CC or Beckett could make up the difference in the starts they have left. Anyway, who cares.
I completely forgot about Nagy, Dan. In my mental rear-view mirror I think of him as more of a workhorse than an ace, which I think is true.
Regarding the AL, Tony Gwynn said something transcendentally dumb on espn.com, specifically that the Yankees are his pick for the wild card this year. It's one thing to maintain, as I do, that the Yankees are a threat to have a second half resurgence, and with a combination of great play AND lots of luck they could indeed make the playoffs. But to predict that they will outright? That's patently disrespectful to the A's, Indians, and Tigers, if not the Mariners and Blue Jays, all of whom presently lead the Yankees in the standings. It's not like the entire league is going to fold, even if the Yankees happen to kick it into gear, which I do not think is a foregone conclusion anyway. Chances are Cleveland and Detroit will keep playing about .600 ball, in which case the Yankees would need to go 61-27 (that's .700 ball) to catch up. Seem likely?
If I managed the AL team, I'd rank the starters like this:
1. Haren
2. Santana
3. CC
4. Verlander
5. Beckett
6. Escobar
7. Lackey
Santana at number two, really? Sure, he's having another great year, and the 8-6 record isn't totally his fault, but the overall numbers are off from his last three seasons - more walks, more homeruns surrendered, less Ks. Whereas you've got two 11-game winners and a guy with a no-hitter, all with comparable ERAs, behind him.
i haven't followed santana super closely, but for all of the distance that he's "fallen," the numbers still look outrageously good. i also have been trying to underplay the no-hitter in my mind, because haren has like 5 shutouts or something, and in terms of winning and losing, a shutout is just about as effective as a no-hitter. . . .
Post a Comment