The Astros are history

Theo · Post by **Theo** » Thu Oct 14, 2004 11:56 pm

Either the Cards are awesome or the Astros just plain suck. I thought for sure we could win at least 1 in St. Louis. No way we have a chance to win the series now. The Cards are too tough.

cdastros · Post by **cdastros** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:04 am

Clemens and Oswalt on full days rest will swing the momentum back to the Astros.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:31 am

Theo wrote:Either the Cards are awesome or the Astros just plain suck. I thought for sure we could win at least 1 in St. Louis. No way we have a chance to win the series now. The Cards are too tough.

The Astros don't "suck", but their patchwork bullpen is nothing but gas cans right now other than Lidge and Wheeler.

Clemens and Oswalt should do well at home, but the Astros bullpen is likely to keep them from advancing.

Diablo25 · Post by **Diablo25** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:36 am

Stros just don't match up. I have nothing agains them but I really can only see them winning one game in the series. The Cards are the best offensive team in the playoffs. And save the "good pitching beats good hitting" speech. The Astros pitching is adequate at best.

Badgun · Post by **Badgun** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:58 am

As a lifelong Cardinal fan, I don't expect the Redbirds to win either of the next two games in Houston. It would be nice, but not expected. To be quite honest, St. Louis' pitching hasn't been that good, even though they won the games that Williams and Morris started.

Houston's lineup is potent and I expect them to put up some runs the next two games, but the real determining factor is going to be if Clemens and Oswalt can get the game into the 8th and 9th innings because their middle relief is awful. Even with Clemens and Oswalt pitching, I don't expect them to shut the Cardinals down...no one has so far. If Houston can get it to 2-2, game 5 should be very interesting.

Still I expect the Cardinals to win in 6.

sportdan30 · Post by **sportdan30** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:21 am

Here's hoping for an All-Star Game like meltdown from Clemens, but something tells me he'll come out strong. Definitely the next two games frighten me with Clemens and Oswalt. But Suppan is a workhorse on the road, so you can't look past him. Houston's bullpen is weak weak weak. If the Astros somehow win the series, I'll pull for them against the AL, but they almost don't deserve to be in the World Series with that pathetic bullpen.

Pujols for MVP!

tsunami · Post by **tsunami** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 9:53 am

I think it's obvious that the Astros are suffering the consequences of a poorly setup rotation from the Atlanta series. Now, for the last 4 games they haven't been able to get a starter past the 5th and their bullpen has been overused and exposed severely. Now, they absolutely must get great performances out of Clemens and Oswalt and probably 7 or 8 solid innings.

I still don't understand why Garner didn't use Munro in Game 4 in Atlanta and keep the rotation in order. As it turns out, he gave them a good effort against the highest scoring offense in the NL and could very well have done the same against Atlanta. He would eventually have to be used and a crucial game 2 in the NLCS is not the ideal spot.

That being said, Houston still had its chances to win. But Garner is beginning to raise a lot of questions about his managerial decisions.

And can anyone explain why Oswalt was warming up in the 8th?!?!? The ESPN crew seems to think that Oswalt was going to come in in the 9th if the game was still tied and Lidge was coming in if they were ahead. Was he seriously considering using Oswalt then? That is mind boggling. ANd why wasn't Lidge brought in in the 8th with the heart of the order coming up?

Parker · Post by **Parker** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:09 am

The starting pitching has not been the problem for the Astros. It's their awful middle relief.

skidmark · Post by **skidmark** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:16 pm

I have the feeling Clemens is going to get shelled... he wasn't exactly in command of his pitches during the Atlanta series, and the Cardinals will make him pay for that more than the Bravos did.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:22 pm

skidmark wrote:I have the feeling Clemens is going to get shelled... he wasn't exactly in command of his pitches during the Atlanta series, and the Cardinals will make him pay for that more than the Bravos did.

Did you perhaps forget that Clemens was still recovering from a stomach virus? You don't bounce back from something like that in less than a week or two...not to mention the amount of strength something like that saps from you...

Spooky · Post by **Spooky** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:34 pm

Parker wrote:The starting pitching has not been the problem for the Astros. It's their awful middle relief.

Agreed. That's their Achilles Heel.

Parker · Post by **Parker** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 1:11 pm

Even with Backe and Munro starting, along with Clemens and Oswalt, the Astros are not at a disadvantage at all with their starters. The Cards bullpen may have had great regular season numbers, but especially with Kline ineffective, it shouldn't be that hard to match them pitching wise.

This postseason is strange, if Boston doesn't advance, there will be a serious lack of dominant pitching. Not like last year with the Cubs and Marlins.

Sully · Post by **Sully** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm

I wouldn't count the Astros out just yet.
Clemens and Oswalt combined for 38 wins on the year, more than any other pitching combo in the league.

Couple that with the fact that they've only lost one game in their last twenty at home....it's far from over.

tsunami · Post by **tsunami** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:25 pm

BigBerthaEA wrote:
skidmark wrote:I have the feeling Clemens is going to get shelled... he wasn't exactly in command of his pitches during the Atlanta series, and the Cardinals will make him pay for that more than the Bravos did.
Did you perhaps forget that Clemens was still recovering from a stomach virus? You don't bounce back from something like that in less than a week or two...not to mention the amount of strength something like that saps from you...

It also didn't help that he was forced to pitch on short rest either.

tsunami · Post by **tsunami** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:27 pm

Parker wrote:The starting pitching has not been the problem for the Astros. It's their awful middle relief.

The middle relief is getting exposed because the starting pitching is not able to give them more than 5 innings. Alot of that has to do with pitching on short rest.

Clemens and Oswalt pitched on short rest, Backe started this series on short rest, and Munro pitched because he wasn't allowed to pitch Game 4 so that Clemens could do it on short rest.

Their bullpen is getting overused and put into spots that they aren't accustomed to .

tsunami · Post by **tsunami** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:32 pm

Parker wrote:This postseason is strange, if Boston doesn't advance, there will be a serious lack of dominant pitching. Not like last year with the Cubs and Marlins.

First it was a foregone conclusion that Boston would win. Because of fact and reason remember? Now, you aren't even sure they will win. But, you've setup your excuse already with the payroll thing. Nice.

Secondly, as it stands now, how is Boston's pitching dominant? Schilling is not going to pitch again this year and was injured from the start of the postseason. Martinez is not a truly dominant starter anymore. And don't even try to convince anyone that the three headed monster of Arroyo/Wakefield/Lowe is scaring anyone. Plus, their bullpen is no better shape than anyone else. Timlin, you're best setup man is being hit and Foulke is not a complete shutdown closer.

Boston, right now, does not have starting pitching. You can now remove your Red Sox colored glasses.

And before you bring it up...NO...the Yankees do NOT have dominant pitching (except for Rivera). I never said they did and we all recognize that.

Parker · Post by **Parker** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:18 pm

And I am the one who always turns these threads into a Yankee/Sox battle? 6 games for the Yankees (particularly when 4 were against the mighty Twins offense) and 5 for the Sox is enough to suddenly determime Boston doesn't have dominate pitching? Our pitching numbers were dramatically better than the Yanks in the regular season and I'm confident this will show up before the postseason is over.

"Boston, right now, does not have starting pitching. You can now remove your Red Sox colored glasses."

LOL, we don't have starting pitching? Even with Schilling injured, we have 2 starters with ERAs below or at 4, and statistically we are still comparable if not better than the Yanks or Cards in that area. There may be not many dominant starters left, but I'd still take Pedro and Arroyo over anyone except Clemens and Oswalt. All of our starters have at least 10 wins. Wakefield has great postseason numbers, I'm sure Torre would rather start him instead of Vasquez, especially considering his success against NY.

I must have missed the memo that said Schilling is done for the year. It is quite possible he will pitch later in the postseason if some of the outer swelling goes down. No he will not be fully healed until surgery, but they are trying to find a brace that will work in the meantime.

Parker · Post by **Parker** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:23 pm

"The middle relief is getting exposed because the starting pitching is not able to give them more than 5 innings. Alot of that has to do with pitching on short rest."

Yes to a certain extent. But the Angels for example, usually only kept their starters out there for 5 innings before going to their great bullpen in 2001 and they won it all.

tsunami · Post by **tsunami** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:45 pm

Parker wrote:And I am the one who always turns these threads into a Yankee/Sox battle?

This isn't a Red Sox/Yankees battle. But, you bring this upon yourself when you constantly boast about the Red Sox and berate the Yankees any chance you get. And, after all the incessant bragging about the Red Sox and your lack of recognition for any other team in the postseason, you are now back tracking all that bravado (as we all knew you would) with "if they win" and cries of "well the Yankees spend more money". That's what this is all about.

Perhaps if you displayed even a shred of objectivity about your team then people would't be so willing to jump all over you. But you insist on your mantra of "die-hard" fan and try and spin every discussion in your favor whether it makes sense or not. How about just saying, "You know what, as much as I wanted the Red Sox to win, they are getting beat. And they might get beaten by a better team"? That is exactly what we'd all be saying if our teams lost. I know it's what I've been saying about the Yankees for the last few years and all those years before the run of championships. But you don't do that and that's why we all pile on.

Parker wrote:6 games for the Yankees (particularly when 4 were against the mighty Twins offense) and 5 for the Sox is enough to suddenly determime Boston doesn't have dominate pitching? Our pitching numbers were dramatically better than the Yanks in the regular season and I'm confident this will show up before the postseason is over.

The regular season has nothing to do with the situation right now. The bottom line is that Boston does not have dominant pitching. You can try to spin that any way you like. Comparing them to the Yankees is irrelevant. They are not dominant RIGHT NOW!!!! Get it?

Parker wrote:"Boston, right now, does not have starting pitching. You can now remove your Red Sox colored glasses."

LOL, we don't have starting pitching? Even with Schilling injured, we have 2 starters with ERAs below or at 4, and statistically we are still comparable if not better than the Yanks or Cards in that area. There may be not many dominant starters left, but I'd still take Pedro and Arroyo over anyone except Clemens and Oswalt. All of our starters have at least 10 wins. Wakefield has great postseason numbers, I'm sure Torre would rather start him instead of Vasquez, especially considering his success against NY.

That is my bad...I meant to write "dominant" not "starting". Even so, as a whole, the Red Sox do not have dominant pitching. At this point, I don't think any of the playoff teams has dominant pitching.

And, again, this has nothing to do with any other team. Why do you always compare them to the Yankees? Boston is not dominating. Period. Whether you would take them or not doesn't matter. And don't claim to know what Torre would or would not do. You should be worrying what your manager is going to do and how many blunders he is going to make before they are done.

I could just as easily say that Francona would trade the way the Yankees have been pitching and hitting in this series over anything the Red Sox have done so far. Does that make any sense? Of course not, because it's a stupid comment.

Parker wrote:I must have missed the memo that said Schilling is done for the year. It is quite possible he will pitch later in the postseason if some of the outer swelling goes down. No he will not be fully healed until surgery, but they are trying to find a brace that will work in the meantime.

I think that's wishful thinking on your part. Until they officially announce it, of course there is a chance he will play (if it gets to Game 7). But, I don't think there is a chance in hell that he pitches again. As important as this series may be, he's got a career after this to think about and can not risk further injuring himself or any parts of his body (hip, shoulder). He even said that if he can't be himself, then he won't even go out there.

Parker · Post by **Parker** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:51 pm

"I could just as easily say that Francona would trade the way the Yankees have been pitching and hitting in this series over anything the Red Sox have done so far. Does that make any sense? Of course not, because it's a stupid comment."

Of course Francona would like us to have performed like the Yanks so far in this series. But the point is he would rather keep all the players we have, because he isn't illogical enough to conclude that 5 or 6 postseason games means the Yanks have the better team. It's stupid to rather not have the team with better stats over 162 games or the one that went 11-8 against the Yanks. And there haven't been enough games to determine which is the better postseason team.

tsunami · Post by **tsunami** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:13 pm

Parker wrote:"I could just as easily say that Francona would trade the way the Yankees have been pitching and hitting in this series over anything the Red Sox have done so far. Does that make any sense? Of course not, because it's a stupid comment."

Of course Francona would like us to have performed like the Yanks so far in this series. But the point is he would rather keep all the players we have, because he isn't illogical enough to conclude that 5 or 6 postseason games means the Yanks have the better team. It's stupid to rather not have the team with better stats over 162 games or the one that went 11-8 against the Yanks. And there haven't been enough games to determine which is the better postseason team.

But it is logical to conclude that the fact that the Yankees finished ahead of the Red Sox means Boston is the better team? And if head to head matchups are what you look at, why were you so surprised the Yankees won the ALCS last year? They were the better team in the regular season in head to head.

I know the postseason is new you...but there is a saying "Throw the regular season out the window. The postseason is a whole new game."

You should learn that.

sportdan30 · Post by **sportdan30** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 8:40 am

This thread has been hijacked again by two teams that get wayyyyyyy too much pub. One team is forever cursed and the other team spends at will, they'll pick up Beltran without a second thought.

Who cares????

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 9:12 am

sportdan30 wrote:This thread has been hijacked again by two teams that get wayyyyyyy too much pub. One team is forever cursed and the other team spends at will, they'll pick up Beltran without a second thought.

Who cares????

Come on, Dan. The kids are having fun! This reminds me of the constant arguments I had with my friends in middle school who were either Laker or Celtics fans (I am a Sixers fan). At least my Sixers actually *beat* those other teams every now and again in the post season to make it interesting.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 9:22 am

Leebo33 wrote:
sportdan30 wrote:This thread has been hijacked again by two teams that get wayyyyyyy too much pub. One team is forever cursed and the other team spends at will, they'll pick up Beltran without a second thought.

Who cares????
Come on, Dan. The kids are having fun! This reminds me of the constant arguments I had with my friends in middle school who were either Laker or Celtics fans (I am a Sixers fan). At least my Sixers actually *beat* those other teams every now and again in the post season to make it interesting.

ahhhh................... Fo Fo Fo

Alas, Moses was off by one.

That was back in the days when I watched the NBA.
My favorite part of the 82-83 season was how the Celtics got swept by the Bucs in the playoffs. ....

so they wouldnt have to face the Sixers in the next round...at least it seemed that way.

EDIT : Oh yeah.....I dont think the Stros are dead yet. They got two in Houston with Clemens ond Ozwalt pitching. I can see it going back to Stl at 2-2.

Digital Sportspage

The Astros are history

The Astros are history

Re: The Astros are history