Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - Not a prediction -- a preference. Who are you rooting for?

Not a prediction -- a preference. Who are you rooting for?

Angels	10 (5.35%)
Cubs	28 (14.97%)
Diamondbacks	10 (5.35%)
Indians	42 (22.46%)
Phillies	16 (8.56%)
Red Sox	4 (2.14%)
Rockies	60 (32.09%)
Yankees	7 (3.74%)
Nobody!	10 (5.35%)

View other poll questions

187 votes | 11 featured comments

Not a prediction -- a preference. Who are you rooting for? | 11 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

HaloBrad - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 01:25 AM EDT (#174934) #

My Dad took me to the first Angel game at the Big A in 1966 and I have been a fan since. Mostly tough years but the last few have been sweet. Always an Angels' fan no matter what, and I sure would love to see the Rockies meet us in the Series.

Leigh - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 08:02 AM EDT (#174937) #

This question appeared, verbatim, in a poll at ESPN on the Red Sox/Angels series:

7) The Angels use a ''Moneyball'' approach to the game, trying to manufacture runs. The Red Sox are primarly a team allergic to giving away outs and thriving on the big inning. Which approach is better in the postseason?

Is this question so wrong that it's right?

AWeb - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 09:09 AM EDT (#174938) #

It may actually be correct now. The Moneyball approach was to exploit inefficiencies and under-rated skills. Is the ability to "manufacture" runs possibly something that can be exploited in this way now? The Angels top 4 base stealers have 106 SB, with only 28 CS, and managed the 4th best offense (not park adjusted) despite not being a slugging team. Their main offensive skills are not striking out, high BA, and stealing/taking extra bases. These might be the undervalued skills these days.

I'd bet on it being a typo on ESPN though, likely supposed to read anti-"Moneyball", or something like that. Because most media outlets never quite grapsed Moneyball wasn't about building a team to walk, never steal, and hit HR's (unless others are undervaluing those skills).

Mike Green - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 10:46 AM EDT (#174939) #

Laughable. The Angels were third in the league in on-base percentage. The ability to reach base is the single most important aspect of an offence, and many offences have succeeded without tremendous power in bringing runners around, with the Cardinals of the 80s being the classic example. It is the case, however, that power is generally more efficient at the secondary job of bringing runs around than speed, and there is nothing about the 07 Red Sox and Angels that sheds any light on this.

Besides, the Angels' offence isn't exactly monolithically focused on batting average and not striking out. When they ditched the 'sabermetric anti-hero' Hillenbrand for Reggie Willits, some improvement was noted!

rpriske - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 11:24 AM EDT (#174942) #

My order of preference:

Rockies

Angels

Red Sox

Diamondbacks

Cubs

Phillies

Yankees

Cleveland

John Northey - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 12:07 PM EDT (#174944) #

Current personal order of preference...

Rockies by a landslide

Phillies - one WS win in over 100 years? About time for them to catch up the Jays.

Diamondbacks

Angels

Cubs - would rather their curse continues, just for the fun of it, but prefer them to the 3 below.

....big spread....

Red Sox

Yankees

Cleveland

At least one of the Yankees or Cleveland will be knocked out in round one, and no matter what I'll have someone to cheer for in the World Series.

Chuck - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 04:14 PM EDT (#174953) #

The ability to reach base is the single most important aspect of an offence, and many offences have succeeded without tremendous power in bringing runners around, with the Cardinals of the 80s being the classic example.

I've often thought -- though have never studied the matter -- that long sequence offenses (high OBP, low SLG) are more vulnerable in the post-season, where the quality of opposition pitching is better than the league norms. A good pitcher, my theory goes, can more readily interrupt would-be long sequences.

Mike Green - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 06:06 PM EDT (#174957) #

The suggestion that hits allowed by the team's pitchers and defensive efficiency are particularly important would jibe with this.

FanfromTheIsland - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 06:18 PM EDT (#174958) #

D-backs. My favourite jersey in baseball plus O-Dog is making it hard for me not to root for them.

Lugnut Fan - Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 10:24 PM EDT (#174962) #

I am two hours from Chicago so I have to go with the Cubbies all the way. However the Colorado Vs. San Diego tie breaker game is probably the best game I have seen in a very long time and makes me want to root for the Rockies because they are such a scrappy bunch.

Mike Green - Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 12:31 PM EDT (#174970) #

In the course of my piece on starting pitcher fatigue, I noted that John Lackey had a particularly poor record from 76-100 pitches. So, it got me to wondering how he had fared against the Red Sox (who work pitch counts as well as any team) over his career. As you might have guessed, not well. The Sox have hit like Edgar Martinez against him in 11 games (.340/.403/.553). If my last name was Scioscia, I'd have chosen Kelvim for Game 1...

Not a prediction -- a preference. Who are you rooting for? | 11 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.