RealGM

dockingsched wrote:

ClipsFanAgain wrote:Go Padres!!! Sick of the Dodgers fans booing the Clippers players at games, so **** em all.

It’s not just dodgers fans my friend, they got booed at the LA Coliseum and SoFi at a Rams games too. What you’re sick of is “los Angeles fans”

For an organization who hasn't had much success in the NBA, it's crazy how rent free Clippers live in "Los Angeles fans" heads

They're trying to enjoy a sporting event and getting booed So much for "Nobody cares about the Clippers in LA", they care enough to emotionally respond to player sightings...

ClipsFanAgain wrote:Go Padres!!! Sick of the Dodgers fans booing the Clippers players at games, so **** em all.

LOL clips have no love in Los Angeles

Is it a fair statement that if the Clips win a championship this year the split will be 50/50 between laker and clipper fans?

In baseball, the best team frequently loses more. It can be for a variety of reasons, but either way, the playoffs are usually a blood bath and sometimes a team can be riding high on an insane amount of momentum, can get hot at the right time or can just matchup better. The Dodgers are actually not the only team the Padres upset in this postseason. Before them came the Mets, who were also an elite team and also won 100 games, and the Dodgers took them out in the opening playoff round.

Hell, the Guardians are one game away from upsetting the Yankees as well. I can't speak on the other two series that I just mentioned, but I can tell you why this one might go the Guardians way: matchups.

In this case, the Yankees powerhouse hitting is struggling to do enough against the Guardians elite pitching to secure victories. Last night was the best offensive outing they've had all series, but the problem is that the Yankees pitching outside a select few players isn't nearly as strong. And thus, they struggled to keep the Guardians bats from eating them up alive (there's also this guy named Oscar Gonzalez who can't seem to do any wrong right now).

Speaking of, why the hell was my thread about Oscar moved to the baseball section but this one wasn't?

azcatz11 wrote:Is it a fair statement that if the Clips win a championship this year the split will be 50/50 between laker and clipper fans?

No. But over 20 years probably. With continued winning, new arena, way more community involvement, less Jerry Springer antics than Lakers.

kinda pleased to see a lot of really intelligent takes on the variance of baseball and also how the structure leads itself to things like these. to me, baseball's an idiotic sport for many reasons, and a format that only lends itself to increasing the variance of playoff results is one of them.

think a lot of posters already nailed it, but fwiw there was a great article on espn a few years ago that dove into this, and if i remember correctly the number of games teams should be playing was well beyond these stupid bo3's and bo5's. like, honestly: once i saw it was 1-1 i pretty much instantly thought you might as well flip a coin, because there aren't enough games to have a team realize its best self going against the best version of the other team, the way you would see in the NBA playoffs.

and to respond to the odd, misplaced tangent: also not surprised to see a lot of unintelligent takes regarding the clips: like you guys seriously don't see the clown shoes you're wearing when you just keep braying "nOboDy WaTns tHm iN lA!`1!" ?

Best of 5 doesn't always lead to the best team winning. Bob Costas described it nice and simple before: their ace can pitch a great game and get a win, the bats can go cold in a game/2nd loss, 3rd game can go down to a bad bounce in a close game. Not being a homer, dodgers just lost, but they were still the "best team."

There's talk about the dodger payroll. These ridiculous 10 year contracts in baseball aren't cheap. Both the phillies and padres are top 5 in payroll. Mets were #1. Yankees always near the top. Yeah there's cleveland, but for the most part you need to spend money to win. Lots of teams spend over 200 million every season and get no where

No and if there was going to be a baseball equivalent it would be the Mariners from about 10-12 years ago who actually set the wins record(117 I think). Even so, upsets happen much more easily in baseball.

Cavsfansince84 wrote:No and if there was going to be a baseball equivalent it would be the Mariners from about 10-12 years ago who actually set the wins record(117 I think). Even so, upsets happen much more easily in baseball.

I think that was way back in 2001 and they ended up losing to the Yankees

they probably would've won a 7 game series. padres, phillies, indians are just hot at the right time. for san diego, hader and soto were blockbuster deadline trades (juan soto being almost certainly the biggest trade in mlb history) and sucked for most of the second half but showed out in a big way vs LA.

if san diego can afford to keep tatis, machado, soto, hader and their starting pitchers (unlikely) they're probably the best team in the NL for years to come.

Lucky Clover wrote:Firstly, my condolences Dodgers fans.

Secondly - question I had for sports fans - Is this just as bad as the 73-9 Warriors and 18-0 Patriots losing in the postseason? I know it's not quite the same since the Dodgers didn't make it to the championship round but they had an all-time great roster, were the clear favorite to win it all, and Dave Roberts went as far as to guarantee a title back in March. This just seems like such an astronomical defeat and upset and it came at the hands of their division rival who they had beaten 16 times this year. One post season win to show for this payroll.

NOT CLOSE

this is the way baseball is.
what is a "dynasty" in baseball. well in baseball you have to go back to the 20s and 30s with the yankees, but generally it's a few WS winners in over a decade. the patriots skewed everything with brady, but generally it's the same in the nfl.

question - how many world series did the braves win again with that pitching crew in the 90s???????

there are more relative dynasties in basketball because basketball is a star driven sport. recruit like duke and kentucky and unc and you have a dynasty. same in the nba

THE WARRIORS BLEW IT. if they played that series over and over again, wouldn't you bet your house on gsw???
but really draymond gifted the ring to the cavs - let's be clear

Downtown SD was electric last night, this is probably the biggest SD sports moment since the Chargers beat the Colts in the 07 Divisional Round. Obviously stoked to send the Dodgers packing but the Phillies are red hot, the next series won't be any easier. As others have said, I wouldn't put the Dodgers losing in the same category as the 2016 Warriors or 07 Pats given the nature of the respective sports.

SalmonsSuperfan wrote:they probably would've won a 7 game series. padres, phillies, indians are just hot at the right time. for san diego, hader and soto were blockbuster deadline trades (juan soto being almost certainly the biggest trade in mlb history) and sucked for most of the second half but showed out in a big way vs LA.

Not sure about that. The Dodgers jumped out 5-0 after three innings in Game 1, after that it was 15-7 Padres with three straight wins. The bullpen dominated the supposed best lineup in recent memory. Hard to see the Dodgers winning three straight the way we've been playing.

Lalouie wrote:

Lucky Clover wrote:Firstly, my condolences Dodgers fans.

Secondly - question I had for sports fans - Is this just as bad as the 73-9 Warriors and 18-0 Patriots losing in the postseason? I know it's not quite the same since the Dodgers didn't make it to the championship round but they had an all-time great roster, were the clear favorite to win it all, and Dave Roberts went as far as to guarantee a title back in March. This just seems like such an astronomical defeat and upset and it came at the hands of their division rival who they had beaten 16 times this year. One post season win to show for this payroll.

NOT CLOSE

this is the way baseball is.
what is a "dynasty" in baseball. well in baseball you have to go back to the 20s and 30s with the yankees, but generally it's a few WS winners in over a decade. the patriots skewed everything with brady, but generally it's the same in the nfl.

question - how many world series did the braves win again with that pitching crew in the 90s???????

there are more relative dynasties in basketball because basketball is a star driven sport. recruit like duke and kentucky and unc and you have a dynasty. same in the nba

THE WARRIORS BLEW IT. if they played that series over and over again, wouldn't you bet your house on gsw???
but really draymond gifted the ring to the cavs - let's be clear

I agree that Green's hasty actions hurt their chances, but people need to remember that he played in game 7- a home game- and they still lost.

heezyo2o wrote:Best of 5 doesn't always lead to the best team winning. Bob Costas described it nice and simple before: their ace can pitch a great game and get a win, the bats can go cold in a game/2nd loss, 3rd game can go down to a bad bounce in a close game. Not being a homer, dodgers just lost, but they were still the "best team."

There's talk about the dodger payroll. These ridiculous 10 year contracts in baseball aren't cheap. Both the phillies and padres are top 5 in payroll. Mets were #1. Yankees always near the top. Yeah there's cleveland, but for the most part you need to spend money to win. Lots of teams spend over 200 million every season and get no where

For the best team of the season to win, it would be best to go back to AL best record vs NL best record, best of 9.

Way back in the day, that's what they would do.

However, MLB would never go for it because of lost playoff revenue.

When the '06 Cardinals won with the 13th best record in baseball, they should have reformed the set up in some way- but they never did and instead expanded how many teams get in.

What's the point of playing 162 games?

Roscoe Sheed wrote:

Lalouie wrote:

Lucky Clover wrote:Firstly, my condolences Dodgers fans.

Secondly - question I had for sports fans - Is this just as bad as the 73-9 Warriors and 18-0 Patriots losing in the postseason? I know it's not quite the same since the Dodgers didn't make it to the championship round but they had an all-time great roster, were the clear favorite to win it all, and Dave Roberts went as far as to guarantee a title back in March. This just seems like such an astronomical defeat and upset and it came at the hands of their division rival who they had beaten 16 times this year. One post season win to show for this payroll.

NOT CLOSE

this is the way baseball is.
what is a "dynasty" in baseball. well in baseball you have to go back to the 20s and 30s with the yankees, but generally it's a few WS winners in over a decade. the patriots skewed everything with brady, but generally it's the same in the nfl.

question - how many world series did the braves win again with that pitching crew in the 90s???????

there are more relative dynasties in basketball because basketball is a star driven sport. recruit like duke and kentucky and unc and you have a dynasty. same in the nba

THE WARRIORS BLEW IT. if they played that series over and over again, wouldn't you bet your house on gsw???
but really draymond gifted the ring to the cavs - let's be clear

I agree that Green's hasty actions hurt their chances, but people need to remember that he played in game 7- a home game- and they still lost.

but anything can happen in 1 game. you have to consider that there was a cumulative momentum by the time game7 rolled around

KnicksGadfly wrote:

chuck_wagon44 wrote:Where is the respect for the Houston Astros, America's team!

They keep winning no matter what star(s) they lose (i.e. Correa, Springer, Cole) and they get no credit.

They have been winning since 2017 and been to the world series 3-4 times now in a short period of time.

They lost their America’s team title a while back but they’re really friggin good. Verlander is an immortal vampire

Yeah, this was funny. Someone thinking the Astros are “Americas Team?”

Nobody but Astro fans route for them. They’re the opposite of Americas Team

azcatz11 wrote:Is it a fair statement that if the Clips win a championship this year the split will be 50/50 between laker and clipper fans?

1 chip isnt going to do much.....they would need 3 in a row to even get the conversation started.

This makes the Mets loss a little less embarrassing so I'm all for it.