|
Post by klaiggeb on Oct 2, 2016 21:13:19 GMT -5
I won't lie.
I gave up on this team 2 weeks ago.
I didn't buy into, nor believe the hype about how they play with their backs to the wall: How they KNOW how to win this time of year, and all the rest of the blather.
But these last 6 games proved me wrong.
When I'm wrong, I fess up.
I don't know where these guys have been in the 2nd half... but it looks as though they showed up, finally, and not a minute too soon.
Now, before anyone starts to get crazy, we need to remember WHOM we're facing.
Syndergaard.
The only guy with more goofy letters in his last name than Samardizja.
And Cespedes...
The Mets are hot, too.
The Cardinals?
Sorry.
Then again, it's MY OPINION, that the Pirates rolled over and played dead the second they were eliminated, so any games played against Pittsburgh were a joke.
Other than Vogey, who NEVER backs down... that's what I saw that team do; stop caring.
Professionals?
Don't think so.
Rest is what the Giants need right now, Mental as well as physical.
Hopefully, Bum and company come to play on Wednesday in NY.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2016 9:56:26 GMT -5
The thing about numbers is that they force us to look at facts.
Question: Did the Pirates roll over as soon as they were eliminated, or was their horrible 1-8 record to end the season simply a continuation of a trend they were already on?
Answer: Of course from the outside it's really hard to know, but we do know that when a team isn't playing well, it tends to look as if they don't care. And we know that the Pirates began falling apart on August 29th, when they lost a close on to the Cubs, 7 to 8. From that point on, they weren't 11-22. Their down cycle began with just over a month to play.
Within that cycle we see three mini-cycles. We see a horrible down cycle in which the Pirates won only 2 out of 14 games. Then we see a strong rebound during which they win 6 out of 7 (very similar to the Giants' 5 out of 6 to end the season). Followed by the horrible 1 out of 9 to end the season.
Did the Pirates give up once they were eliminated? Or did they simply continue a cycle started nearly four weeks earlier? It's pretty darn hard to know from the outside, since losing teams LOOK like they don't care, whether they do or not. But we shouldn't overlook the cycle the Pirates appear to already have been in.
This brings up an intriguing question: Did the Giants suddenly find "it?" We know that in their three championship years they got hot at the right time. Does winning 4 in a row (and 5 out of 6 on the final homestand) mean they have begun the same trend?
Perhaps. In 2014 they had a great start that was similar to this year's. Followed by a horrible stretch -- like this year. Followed by some momentum heading into the playoffs. The momentum to end the season is far briefer than in 2014, but it does exist. Actually, let me reverse that.
In 2014 the Giants did "fall apart" after a great start and then put it back together. But they lost 4 of 9 games as they approached the end of the regular season, and then won their last 2. They carried that "momentum" into the playoffs on Brandon Crawford's grand slam, and they won their final three series 3 out of 4, 4 out of 5 and 4 out of 7.
Did the Pirates give up when they were eliminated? Did the Giants suddenly break their lethargy on their final home stand? Or were these simply a continuation of the ebb and flow of a season?
One can attribute a change of events to the Pirates' slump. Except that their season was already in decline. Or was it in rebound? Depends on the time frame one looks at. Either way, as the Giants have certainly shown this year as well as in 2014 (and just about every other season), teams ebb and flow because that is natural -- not necessarily because the Giants felt at the All-Star break all they had to do was throw their hats in the ring to win games. To what do we attribute that the Giants finally got "it" the last six games of the season?
Sometimes -- almost always -- things simply ebb and flow. What we may see from the outside as an attitude change may simply by change from ebb to flow or from flow to ebb. When teams lose, they look lethargic and like they don't care. When they win, they look peppy and mentally sharp.
Do they lose because they are lethargic, or do they look lethargic because they lose? Given the Giants' long, long losing period in the season's second half, we have to believe that at the All-Star break they suddenly changed their minds about what was needed to win. And then changed them back the final six games.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Oct 3, 2016 12:23:02 GMT -5
There is no way to know for sure... but I think it's an 'odd' coincidence at the very least, that the moment the Pirates were close to mathematically out of it... the starting stinking up the lot.
Say what you will, I think they gave up mentally.
I still say "I don't understand professional athletes."
I don't.
They get upset, angry, they lose focus, so often they won't take coaching..."hey! I've always done it this way!"
You name it.
I watched Jansen on Saturday, and I read his comments afterward.
He DIDN'T have the same fire in his belly, and after the game, he pretty much said so.
"We're already in, and you have to travel anyway, so it really didn't matter."
Whatever the reason, they stop giving it their best shot.
And the problem for fans like me is, I wanted to BE where they are so badly; I worked so hard to get as close as I did... That in all of my LIFE, regardless of how bad a team I played on I NEVER, EVER QUIT or gave up.
Never.
Most fan's who've played would say the same thing.
So when we see professionals do it?
That doesn't sit well with us.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 5, 2016 8:38:34 GMT -5
Noah Syndergaard is really good. His ERA was 2.60, aided by his 0.7 homers per nine given up. He struck out 10.7 per nine innings, leading to a stellar 5.1 walk to strikeout ratio.
Madison Bumgarner has struggled over his last nine starts, but he also has been one of the best postseason pitchers in history.
|
|