Post Season 2019

Let's start with a little honesty:

It is my hope that the Dodgers and Yankees embarrass themselves so badly in the post-season that the Florida Marlins are considered a good team in their stead, and the American League headquarters offers to re-play the first round, replacing the Yankees with my Cleveland Indians.

There.  Also, if the World Series ends up being Dodgers v Yankees--I will refrain from watching the Series for the first time this millennium.

Onward!

I saw an article on ESPN that I figured I'd enjoy, but also that I would play along with.  First, that article: THIS.

If you want to take a moment (or three or five) to read it first, have at it.   I'll wait.

[insert elevator music here]

Alright, that's enough.

Obviously, if you've read the article, you can see that these writers:

1. Think Houston will win it all
2. Know about even minor players
3. Get paid to know about even minor players, so there's that.

Equally obviously, I don't... well I do #1, but not #2 of #3.

I'd be good with Houston winning.  Actually got to one of their games in the middle of a business trip in Houston.  Ticket only cost me 14 bucks, but even the nose-bleed section was a great view.

My loathing of both the Yankees and the Dodgers has already been touched upon.  I'd be willing to have the Dodgers get to the World Series, but only if they were demolished there, losing for the third year in a row.  That would be awesome.

But, honestly, I'd rather see Atlanta there.  Or Milwaukee.  Or Saint Louis.  Or Washington.

But, if the Dodgers get there, I hope they get blasted by someone not rhyming with Pew Jerk Hankees.

Go Indians!

deGrom for NOT Cy Young (and other awards (with 5 days left))

When it comes to baseball awards, I may be running an irregular "Get Off My Lawn" baseball blog here.  Haven't posted in quite a while (and just deleted a Post I'd begun writing last September about my Indians, but had never published...), but I have a tendency to come on here and say ugly things about the people who do all the talking and voting.

For example, ESPN talking heads are, once again, selling deGrom for the NL Cy Young.

And, what ESPN sells, they get.  They got it last year, and deGrom didn't deserve it.

Yes, I'm "old school", but not completely.  While I think there's good value in WAR for position players (although I'd consider the numbers for 1B broken, at least partly), I think WAR for pitchers is severely broken.  Any time you take a guy like deGrom and tell me he has a WAR of 9.6, but won only 10 games for a team that was 77-85... you're selling me land in the swamps.  That 77-85 record, by the way, is significantly better than the 59-97 team that Steve Carlton pitched for back when he won 27 games for the 1972 Phillies... and deservedly won the Cy Young award.  

Now we have the talking heads (the same people who keep talking about how boring baseball is, so how in the heck are they getting paid for covering the greatest game in the history of the world?!?!?!?!?!... [deep breaths]... okay) pushing to give the Cy Young to this guy again.  He would have 20 wins... OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS.

Pathetic.

Personally, I would throw out the WAR number for pitchers, and choose someone who makes more sense.  

When it comes to the AL, things get far more interesting.  The same goobers who keep talking deGrom (because of pitcher WAR) are ignoring two Rangers who have higher pitcher WAR than Cole--Mike Minor and Lance Lynn, the alliterative pitchers of Texas.  Cole comes in 4th.  

I'd vote Verlander, although I'd be likely to put Cole in a close 2nd.

Rookie of the year seems obvious in both leagues--Alonso in the NL, Alvarez (who has played half a season) in the AL.  Maybe I'll dig around on this sometime later.  But for now that's what I'd write.

Biggest disappointment: The Indians.  
Biggest surprise: The Twins.
Biggest nuisance: The Twins.
Biggest irritation: The Twins.
Biggest pain in my back side: The Twins.

You get the idea.

MVP?  Sheesh.  This is painful.  I am a Mike Trout fan.  Enjoyed tracking him on BaseballReference.com all year... until mid-September.  SO disappointing.  And, since he went for surgery midway through the month, he may lose the MVP which was easily in his grasp.  I hear some talking about voting Trout anyway, because he is still the best player in baseball.  I can understand that, and almost hope he wins.  He should have 4 or 5 by now, but some people thought other players of lesser value were better than him in the last several years (and, with the exception of Betts last year, none were).  

I think I'd vote Bregman.  It would be easy to argue Trout as the most valuable, and, as of this moment, he still has the higher WAR, but part of value is staying on the field.  With that in mind, I think Bregman should win.

In the NL, the same thing could be said to bump the best player in the NL from winning for the second year in a row.  I think the award was his until he also went out for the year--Yelich.  SUCH a tremendous year... and then he ends up playing in only 130 games.  I'd vote for Bellinger, even though he is from the loathsome Dodgers, who I hope lose in 3 straight in the first round.  I don't think any other player comes close.  And I will never endorse a pitcher, unless he pitches in at least 125 games.

My favorite baseball stat is, and probably always has been, doubles.  

This year's leader may still get to 60, which would be awesome.  I would love that.  I would look for a bobblehead of Castellanos, or at least a baseball card, to put on my shelf if he pulled that off.  As it is, he already has the 10th best single season number of doubles in the history of MLB--58.  If he hits one more, he ends up tied with 3 other guys for 7th best all time--Todd Helton (loved that guy), Chuck Klein (whatev), and Tris Speaker--who hit his 59 in his age 35 season.  What a stud.

Fun stuff--60 doubles.  Get 'er done!

Honorable mention goes to the Boston Red Sox--for having 2 guys with 50+ doubles, and two more guys with 40+ doubles!  

GO INDIANS!