Jump to content

baseball3

Tigers: Are they for real or are they really paper Tigers?

Recommended Posts

The Tigers are the hottest team in baseball, but, should fans proceed with caution?

As AL Central teams (the majority of the Tigers schedule down the stretch) call up younger players as 2012 tryouts and the Tigers steam roll over teams out of the playoff race, is this a reality of the strength of the Tigers or not?

Will this momentum carryover into the playoffs and propel the Tigers toward a realistic World Series run?

What are your thoughts about the true strength of this team and their chances to win in the playoffs vs. going 3 and out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I have never seen the Tigers look this confident, they can feel it...they are itching for the big stage.

This run is indicative of a team coming together and feeding off of each other. I think the Tigers will come out firing on all cylinders come October and go to the World Series.

And yes, this year we are winning the world series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the post-season is largely a crap soot.

I don't like this comment. I think it serves to invalidate the team who wins it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't like this comment. I think it serves to invalidate the team who wins it all.

The '06 Cards should be invalidated.

His comment is 100% correct in that the hottest team always wins a series like that. You can't just take the best team and assume they will win. It doesn't work that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Honestly, I have never seen the Tigers look this confident, they can feel it...they are itching for the big stage.

This run is indicative of a team coming together and feeding off of each other. I think the Tigers will come out firing on all cylinders come October and go to the World Series.

And yes, this year we are winning the world series.

Did the '06 Tigers look confident and firing on all cylinders at the end of the regular season?

It's all about getting hot at the right time. It doesn't matter that the Tigers are hot right now. They can suddenly get cold at a moment's notice. Just get to the playoffs and hope your team gets/stays hot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't like this comment. I think it serves to invalidate the team who wins it all.

Well, baseball isn't a sport that can repeatably identify a superior team in a 5-game or 7-game series. What it identifies is which team happened to play well that week.

I don't know if that 'invalidates' the winner, but I don't think that it is really anything new as far as an observation, nor do I think it false. There is a reason why people have been saying anything can happen in a short series for over 100 years.

Edited by Mr. Bigglesworth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did the '06 Tigers look confident and firing on all cylinders at the end of the regular season?

It's all about getting hot at the right time. It doesn't matter that the Tigers are hot right now. They can suddenly get cold at a moment's notice. Just get to the playoffs and hope your team gets/stays hot.

Thats why I said this:

This run is indicative of a team coming together and feeding off of each other. I think the Tigers will come out firing on all cylinders come October and go to the World Series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats why I said this:

This run is indicative of a team coming together and feeding off of each other. I think the Tigers will come out firing on all cylinders come October and go to the World Series.

Well, if you wrote it in bold and size 3 font, your opinion must be fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, baseball isn't a sport that can repeatably identify a superior team in a 5-game or 7-game series. What it identifies is which team happened to play well that week.

I don't know if that 'invalidates' the winner, but I don't think that it is really anything new as far as an observation, nor do I think it false. There is a reason why people have been saying anything can happen in a short series for 100 or more years.

I have just always thought that when you win it all, you have proven that you were the best team when it mattered...the playoffs. 3 game series, 5 game, doesn't really matter, it's a must win...the better team will win.

Edited by T&P_Fan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, if you wrote it in bold and size 3 font, your opinion must be fact.

lol, I wasn't trying to prove my opinion. Yoda just said it doesn't matter how they play now, in which I was trying to illustrate that I agree with him, as I suggested in my original post...in October we will be firing on all cylinders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have just always thought that when you win it all, you have proven that you were the best team when it mattered...the playoffs. 3 game series, 5 game, doesn't really matter, it's a most win...the better team will win.

I dont think anyone is arguing this. What people are arguing, well me anyway, is that the team that wins a series (or a whole postseason) isn't necessarily the best team going into a series or the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have just always thought that when you win it all, you have proven that you were the best team when it mattered...the playoffs. 3 game series, 5 game, doesn't really matter, it's a must win...the better team will win.

Yep, that's the way it's determined so that's the way it is, case closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have just always thought that when you win it all, you have proven that you were the best team when it mattered...the playoffs. 3 game series, 5 game, doesn't really matter, it's a most win...the better team will win.

Clearly the 2006 Cardinals were the best team in baseball.

The shorter the series, the more likely an inferior team will win. The difference between baseball team effectiveness within the context of a single game is small enough that it isn't that unusual for a clearly worse team to take 3 out of 5 or 4 out of 7 from a clearly better team. And by clearly worse and clearly better, I mean pairing something like a 70 win team against a 90 win team.

Now imagine if the teams involved are a 92 win team against a 95 win team. As a practical matter, it is possible the 92 win team is actually better because of strength of schedule or happened to play teams all year when they were healthy whereas the 95 win team played opponents when they were missing top players. And what is 3 wins over 162 games, anyway? 1 extra win per 54 played? I play 162 games and I can't be certain which team is better in many (most?) instances, but I can tell it with certainty after a 7 game series with a weird travel schedule that enables me to work my rotation in a way that isn't practicable in the regular season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep, that's the way it's determined so that's the way it is, case closed.

Nobody is arguing the team that wins the World Series is the team that won it.

What is being argued is whether or not it is possible to identify which team will win it, and whether the best team in MLB that season will win the World Series, as opposed to the team that played the best for a 3 to 4 week stretch in October.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have just always thought that when you win it all, you have proven that you were the best team when it mattered...the playoffs. 3 game series, 5 game, doesn't really matter, it's a must win...the better team will win.

There's a difference between best and hottest. You will never convince me that the '06 Cards were a better team than the Tigers. Not even close. The Tigers got cold and the Cards got hot. If they played the series 10 times, I bet the Tigers would have won 7 of them. They were the better team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask Phillie fans or Yankee fans if they think the Giants and Rangers were better than their respective clubs last year.

And if it were possible to tell which team was going to do well based on their recent play, why did so many many pick the Yankees and the Phillies to make the series last year when neither did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The '06 Cards should be invalidated.

His comment is 100% correct in that the hottest team always wins a series like that. You can't just take the best team and assume they will win. It doesn't work that way.

The 06 Cardinals were the best team in baseball in 06.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, baseball isn't a sport that can repeatably identify a superior team in a 5-game or 7-game series. What it identifies is which team happened to play well that week.

I don't know if that 'invalidates' the winner, but I don't think that it is really anything new as far as an observation, nor do I think it false. There is a reason why people have been saying anything can happen in a short series for over 100 years.

Which is EXACTLY why only the top teams make the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is EXACTLY why only the top teams make the playoffs.

Sure, but that doesn't mean how they parse out which of the top teams IS the top team is logically sound.

Setting that aside, my larger point / my initial point, was that just because a team is hot going into the post-season means little to squat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clearly the 2006 Cardinals were the best team in baseball.

The shorter the series, the more likely an inferior team will win.

There's a difference between best and hottest. You will never convince me that the '06 Cards were a better team than the Tigers. Not even close. The Tigers got cold and the Cards got hot. If they played the series 10 times, I bet the Tigers would have won 7 of them. They were the better team.

Can't agree with either of this. The cards won the world series, they were clearly the better team. They won 4 out 5 games when it mattered the most. They proved that they were the best team in baseball. They played well enough to make the playoffs, and then beat everyone they played in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 06 Cardinals were the best team in baseball in 06.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ask Phillie fans or Yankee fans if they think the Giants and Rangers were better than their respective clubs last year.

And if it were possible to tell which team was going to do well based on their recent play, why did so many many pick the Yankees and the Phillies to make the series last year when neither did?

Who cares what Yanks or Phils fans thought, and who picked who to win. What mattered was that was the Rangers and Giants proved they were better than the Yanks and Phillies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

July 28-31: 2-2 against Angels

Aug 2-4: 2-1 against Texas

Aug 22-25: 3-1 against Tampa

I think they're for real. You don't win 10 games in a row even against bad teams unless you are a really good team and have everything going right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,577
    • Total Posts
      2,901,996
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...