Underdog Kaleidoscope

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Never ceases to amaze me how circumstances shape the fabric of the Boston RedSox.

    They were heavily favored in the '46 series and lost.
    They were underdogs vs. ST.Louis in '67, losing Tony C. added to it, and it went 7-game limit.

    They lost Rice in '75 and almost beat a great Reds team.
    They were favorites to beat the '86 Angels, then become huge underdogs after the first 4 games. Look what happened. Then they are favorites to beat the Mets that same year and lose.

    2004 they are expected to go all the way, then become historic underdogs to NY after game 3.

    They put themselves in a poor position against the Tribe in 2007, and turn around, once again the underdog, and plummet them.

    This year they are favored to win it all by many. Again they don't rise to expectation, and may limp into post season play.
    If/when they do, anybody care to bet against this underdog?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    I will bet against them Harness, no matter the odds. Very good team, not a great team. At least that is what I have seen.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Bet against them to make the playoffs?
    Or once they are in?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Without Wakefield and Varitek, this team is a sub-500 baseball team. Expectations were low for these two leaders, and they have proven critics wrong by providing outstanding intangibles which don't appear in the box score. Expect new contract tender offers for these two HOF ers.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Thanks for staying on subject.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]Never ceases to amaze me how circumstances shape the fabric of the Boston RedSox. They were heavily favored in the '46 series and lost. They were underdogs vs. ST.Louis in '67, losing Tony C. added to it, and it went 7-game limit. They lost Rice in '75 and almost beat a great Reds team. They were favorites to beat the '86 Angels, then become huge underdogs after the first 4 games. Look what happened. Then they are favorites to beat the Mets that same year and lose. 2004 they are expected to go all the way, then become historic underdogs to NY after game 3. They put themselves in a poor position against the Tribe in 2007, and turn around, once again the underdog, and plummet them. This year they are favored to win it all by many. Again they don't rise to expectation, and may limp into post season play. If/when they do, anybody care to bet against this underdog?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Actually, harness, I recall the RS being 13-5 underdogs against the Mets; you may recall the Mets in '86 won an astounding 108 Regular Season Games. BTW, I was at games 1,6 & 7; had a friend with season tix.

    Also, I agree the Sox have the pedigree to turn this thing around in the PS.

    Kudos for the thread title.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Underdog Kaleidoscope : Actually, harness, I recall the RS being 13-5 underdogs against the Mets; you may recall the Mets in '86 won an astounding 108 Regular Season Games. BTW, I was at games 1,6 & 7; had a friend with season tix. Also, I agree the Sox have the pedigree to turn this thing around in the PS.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    I wasn't aware of that. Or perhaps forgot it...or chose to.
    Thanks for the correction.

    History tells me if the rotation shows competitive form, Boston again can be a major underdog threat.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    I wasn't aware of that. Or perhaps forgot it...or chose to.

    Or perhaps all 3, at the same time.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Kinda like forgetting which handles you use.
    That's becoming quite a spectrum unto itself.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Do most of us here have cement in our heads? The Rays won 6 out of 7 from us in the lasttwo weeks. The Yankees are now on the dock - the division champs - and we are playing in NYC.

    Hey keep the faith.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    and yes in 1986 the Mets were comsidered one of the most unstopable teams in the history of the game.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Pity we will never get to see the unstoppable '86 Mets...play the 2004 RedSox.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Pity that drivel threads like this one are not subject to EPA regulation and restraint.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    "My next-door neighbor's two dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than Obamanation."  UBP

    Perhaps Theo is good at shovel ready jobs, because he has been shoveling a lot of dung contracts that will constrain the team for years to come.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    Let me break out my violin.
    You may join me with UR 1918 Gibby.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    There's something Soft about this guy.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]There's something Soft about this guy.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    Being this is an odds on underdog thread, what are the odds Softone gets banned before I reach 19K?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    About the same odds as Castro cheerin for Democrats.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    I'll take that bet!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]Bet against them to make the playoffs? Or once they are in?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Playoffs
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope : Playoffs
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]

    I don't blame you. Any bookie would would think thrice before taking it.
    That's why the Sox are now underdogs.
    At the same time, NY might be hard-pressed to meet current expectations.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope : I don't blame you. Any bookie would would think thrice before taking it. That's why the Sox are now underdogs. At the same time, NY might be hard-pressed to meet current expectations.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Like I said before, with Verlander the beast in a 5-gamer, and the Yankees' spotty SP, it likely could be an early exit.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope : Like I said before, with Verlander the beast in a 5-gamer, and the Yankees' spotty SP, it likely could be an early exit.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    Well, right now Tigers/TX in dead-heat. Personally, I think either Boston or NY could beat Detroit. But with Boston's current pitching plight, it's very much in question.

    Think how much pressure will be on Verlander in game one, especially if the game is in NY. If the Tigers don't win game one, they are really up against it as the likelihood is, Verlander will have to come back on short rest.

    Recall when NY played the Twins every year. People were saying the same thing about dominant Santana in a short series. I don't think MN ever got by NY in the ALDS when Santana was pitching for them.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope : Well, right now Tigers/TX in dead-heat. Personally, I think either Boston or NY could beat Detroit. But with Boston's current pitching plight, it's very much in question. Think how much pressure will be on Verlander in game one, especially if the game is in NY. If the Tigers don't win game one, they are really up against it as the likelihood is, Verlander will have to come back on short rest. Recall when NY played the Twins every year. People were saying the same thing about dominant Santana in a short series. I don't think MN ever got by NY in the ALDS when Santana was pitching for them.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Santana was never this good; he's winning the Pitching Triple Crown; has 25 wins in a 5-man rotation, can throw 100 in the 9th inning, and, well,  right now, he's down right Koufaxian.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope

    In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Underdog Kaleidoscope : Santana was never this good; he's winning the Pitching Triple Crown; has 25 wins in a 5-man rotation, can throw 100 in the 9th inning, and, well,  right now, he's down right Koufaxian.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    That term strikes a chord!

    Santana was pretty damn good.
    2004: 20-6  2.61 ERA  0.921 WHIP 10.5 SO/IP ratio.
    2006: 19-6  2.77 ERA  0.977 WHIP 

    Verlander 2011: 24-5  2.29 ERA  0.910 WHIP  9.0 SO/IP ratio

    Surprisingly, Santana had a better whiff ratio (not that it means much).

    IMO, and this is not to take anything away from either, but the competition that both have/will face in the PO's will be much tougher than the majority of teams that they faced during the season.

    Keep in mind, Tigers are 37-32 away from their division. There's a definite class difference.
     

Share