Back to the Future: St. Louis vs. Detroit

In a year in which so much baseball history has been called into question, it seems oddly fitting that the Fall Classic will be played by two of the game’s oldest franchises: the St. Louis Cardinals and the Detroit Tigers. It is, in fact, their third match in the World Series, the teams having split the previous two meetings, both 7-game affairs (St. Louis won in 1934, Detroit in 1968). Detroit, curiously, has had a superior regular-season record each time. The Cards managed to get past that first 101-win team, which was stocked with Hall of Famers (Greenberg, Gosling, Gerringer, Cochrane) on the strength of the filial pitching tandem of Dizzy and Daffy Dean, who went 4-1 while allowing but 7 runs in 44 innings. Things pretty much reversed in 68, when Mickey Lolich (3-0, 1.67 era in 27 ip) propelled the Tigers to victory over a Cardinal team spilked with greats (Gibson, Brock, Cepeda, Flood). Tim McCarver caught for that St. Louis team, so you can epect to hear plenty about it during the broadcasts.

Should be fun. We’ll be rooting for our AL bretheren. Go Tigers.

30 comments… add one
  • Go Tigers indeed. YF, how old is the Detroit franchise?

    Sam October 20, 2006, 10:47 am
  • The Tigers were born in 1901, along with the American League. (Actually, they had previously been a minor league club, but were elevated to major status with the advent of the AL.)
    For the Record, the Cards were founded in 1881 as the Browns of the American Association. That league was essentially merged into the NL in the early 1890s, and the team name changed at about that time.

    YF October 20, 2006, 11:01 am
  • I love that the last three AL teams in the Series have been original clubs. That’s a ton of history — and a ton of demons — being exercised year after year. Pretty neat :-)
    It’s especially refreshing after wins by teams like the Marlins, Angels and Diamondbacks.

    Paul SF October 20, 2006, 11:16 am
  • That 68 series had two classic teams. Gibby was tough. The Tigers were tougher.
    9th inning, bases loaded, 2 outs: Carlos “Mr. October II” Beltran strikes out on 3 pitches. Do we still think the Yanks should have given him $100 million?
    Last year he was mediocre. This year he was very good in the regular season. I think we can do without him, unless he develops a great curve ball. Hitting we’ve got.

    alrightythen October 20, 2006, 12:07 pm
  • “Carlos “Mr. October II” Beltran”
    Maybe he should be called Car Rod? :0
    Watching strike 3 go by, with the bags full, to end the season must hurt like hell.

    Andrews October 20, 2006, 1:13 pm
  • guys – the pitch was absolutely filthy. Let’s give credit where it’s due more than blame where it’s not. It was basically unhittable after those fastballs, and it was in a spot that was down and away to boot. One in a hundred ML’ers swing at it, and those are the bad ones chasing pitches. The same can be said for Floyd’s sequence.
    It was a great pitching performance both times.
    Beltran is great, and every team would be lucky to have him – including the Yankees, who feel the need to shit on someone at all times. Or, maybe we’ve started judging players on a “per at bat” basis.

    Brad October 20, 2006, 1:26 pm
  • ….because Carlos Beltran has absolutely no success in the playoffs:)

    Brad October 20, 2006, 1:27 pm
  • I agree with Brad. Wainwright’s curve last night was among the best I’ve ever seen. It was hittable exactly once, when he hung it for Reyes, who nailed it right at Edmonds for an out. If Beltran had swung, he would have been swinging high at a pitch that ended low. Then everyone would be criticizing him for trying to do too much, or some such nonsense.

    Paul SF October 20, 2006, 1:56 pm
  • Wainright’s curve went from all over the place to dominant in the span of an inning.

    Nick-YF October 20, 2006, 2:00 pm
  • How can you blame Beltran for not swinging at that pitch? How about blaming Valentin for not pushing a run across in the 6th with the bases jacked? How about Endy Chavez in the same inning for first pitch hacking with a home run swing and popping out, when he’s clearly a slap hitter with speed?
    However frustrating it is to watch a guy leave the bat on his shoulders (which it seemed the Mets did often), that pitch was fantastic.

    SF October 20, 2006, 2:26 pm
  • I think Yankee fans are looking for someone else to take some heat for awhile when it comes to getting some big hits in clutch situations, but the truth is, a team can’t win without pitching, and the Mets did the best they could with what they had. In fact, they couldn’t have asked for better results with what they fielded.

    Brad October 20, 2006, 2:30 pm
  • it was oh so nice to see pedro and el dookie chummin it up on the bench while their team trotted out guys like perez, maine, and trachsel.
    is it time to start assessing pedro’s 4 year 50 million deal? it looks to me like the mets paid for a year and a half of pedro’s act. minaya has done alot to make the mets the best team in ny, but this deal shall hurt them for years to come (two to be exact).

    sf rod October 20, 2006, 3:01 pm
  • I don’t know about that. I agree that they haven’t gotten value, but signing Pedro, it proved to the other huge signings (Delgado, Wagner and Beltran) that the team was serious about winning and was willing to do what it takes to do so. Maybe signing Pedro was fiscally irresponsible, but for every other reason, it was correct. It wasn’t the right move for Boston, but it did well for NY to step up and do it.
    All that being said, if Pedro was healthy, the outcome of the past series is definitely different, so being hurt was not only no predicted for the Mets, but you can’t really blame them.
    Pedro was the best available at the time, and they did what it takes to get him.
    Nobody has a crystal ball, Rod.

    Brad October 20, 2006, 3:22 pm
  • sf-rod, it’s an interesting question you ask. I think it’s still early yet, but, it’s not looking promising for the remainder of the contract. That said, Pedro was one of the big-splash signings that helped launch the Mets network, and during that first year, he did come through.
    Can you judge a contract based on one year of injuries? Look at Magglio Ordonez’s contract. Last year, everyone was scratching their heads about it, but now that he’s playing and they’re on the verge of winning it all, nobody’s complaining.
    And one other thing: The Yanks are still the best team in NYC despite Minaya’s work.

    Nick-YF October 20, 2006, 3:23 pm
  • I’m sorry to come off angry over this, but I’ll defend Pedro until the end no matter what the guys gets paid.

    Brad October 20, 2006, 3:27 pm
  • at what cost, Nick. Let’s say the Mets go get Zito (which is the leading candidate one would think) and another FA like Padilla for someone – who’s better then? I mean, the Mets have a great, young team with power, defense, and flash.
    The Mets are going to be good for years to come with very little money spent on players and if they’re smart very much money spent on pitching. They could be very, very good next year and the year after.

    Brad October 20, 2006, 3:29 pm
  • At this point, it’s fair to say that even the Sox may have been better than the NL Champs. The Yankees certainly were. As for the Mets, I think the Yankees were probably the better team this year, no matter how much the Mets ran away with their own division. The Yankees would have destroyed Maine and Perez in a series, forget about Trachsel: he’d have barely survived even one inning against the Bombers. Remember that the Sox, when they were healthy, completely creamed the team that effectively took the field against the Cardinals.
    It was great baseball these last two nights, but not exactly a couple of murderer’s rows out there.

    SF October 20, 2006, 3:51 pm
  • I agree SF, but I do still think the Mets get over that hump much easier, and will be good for a few years to come with very little changes.

    Brad October 20, 2006, 4:03 pm
  • Brad, I think that you’re right about the future of the Mets. They have a great core of young players (Wright, Reyes and Beltran) to build upon, but for now the Yanks are better. When and if the bubble will burst for the Bombers will be answered in the years to come.

    Nick-YF October 20, 2006, 4:11 pm
  • brad- one wouldn’t need a crystal ball to know that pedro was not going to pitch all four years of that contract. no general manager in baseball was offering him four years. most teams felt comfortable offering him two years with an option for a third. minaya was the only one offering four guaranteed. even if he signed somewhere for a two or three year deal, that team would have gotten ripped off. he shut it down last year with a month left in the season. so this makes two post seasons, if the mets would have made it last year, that he could not appear in. is that what you expect to get for 13 million a year? i get the fact that the signing signified a dedication to winning, but you can’t win when the man isn’t on the field. it seems like everyone but omar saw this comming.

    sf rod October 20, 2006, 4:20 pm
  • “including the Yankees, who feel the need to shit on someone at all times.”
    Brad, could you tone down the hatred and accusations, please? If you don’t some YF will respond in kind and turn the thread into shit slinging.

    Andrews October 20, 2006, 7:06 pm
  • …andrews, get used to it…’04 made it legitimate for sox fans to bust on the yankees for awhile [not sure what the shelf-live of that is, but i sense it’s near], and they’re enjoying every minute of it, even it they get carried away at times…you’re probably right, the comments don’t need to be quite so harsh and mean-spirited, but otherwise, let ’em enjoy…

    dc October 20, 2006, 9:56 pm
  • And Andrews, I’m HOPING Brad’s point was that your remark about Beltran was frankly, incorrect. He batted .278 with a .978 OPS. 3 HRs, 10 RS in the postseason. Was he as good as he was for the Astros? That’d be almost impossible. Was he a big part of the reason the Mets were able to PLAY a game 7? Absolutely.
    Want a target? Wright and his .160 BA in the NLCS. Reyes and his .303 OBP from the leadoff spot. Shawn Green and his awecrap-inspiring defense. Floyd’s insistence that he was healthy enough to play. Beltran was just the last guy in the Mets lineup in Game 7 to put in a bad at-bat. He certainly wasn’t the only one.
    And honestly, I like the way Willie Randolph handled the postgame. No blame. No “if this happened then…”. Just an acknowledgement of the fact that the Cardinals outplayed them this series. Mets were the better team on paper, sure. But then again, according to most experts, so were the Yankees vs. the Tigers.

    Quo October 21, 2006, 4:25 am
  • Andrews:
    I am with you on comments that aren’t carefully worded leading to sh*t-slinging. Blogging is hard, since if you don’t write really clearly (and frankly almost none of us do, myself included) then intent can be hard to gauge. Brad’s comment came off to me like Quo hopes above: that the crapping on Beltran was totally off-base. That he felt he needed to make that about Yankees fans was, IMHO, unnecessary, but I believe it was an attempt at humor that didn’t quite make it. Which is why it was left untouched for about 15 comments and had basically been ignored in the discussion before you came back to it. This is one of the nice self-policing things about blogs: unfunny or unclear comments are often simply ignored, and that’s comment enough on them. But I understand your point. On the other hand, you made a comment in the Ortiz Video thread about my being a “poor little rich kid”, and even as you followed it with a smiley-face icon it still came off as kind of nasty, and I tried to respond to it fairly and in a controlled manner, but I don’t really think it was either funny (as intended, I think) or fair. So none of us are immune to this, and it might be better, in the long run, for all of us to try to get clarifications from commenters (if they will offer it up) before starting a flame war. And that’s not to blame the respondent: the initial commenter is the one responsible for starting things, they should also be required to clear things up if asked.

    SF October 21, 2006, 6:43 am
  • …guys, this is what i mean about trying not to get personal…we use time and space explaining and apologizing to each other…and sf’s right, it’s hard to say what you mean in a few cryptic sentences, leaving things wide open to interpretation…i’ve misunderstood, and been misunderstood a bunch of times here, but the more personal barbs i’ve seen on this site are not so subtle…on the other hand sf, i don’t think andrews meant any real harm on the ortiz video thread, although i agree with you that it felt like a cheap shot…it was obvious that he was annoyed with what he perceived as the “rub our noses in it” spirit of the thread…ironic that paul, who started the thread, was angry that a yf reacted, although eliciting a reaction was clearly part of his motive, and i think he was really just bummed out that the reaction was so minimal…the ortiz video failed to get much of a reaction because, some of us have already moved on…i know i’m done crying in my soup over ’04…i learned to cope by ignoring it, enjoying the downfall of the sox since then, or occasionally firing a good-natured shot back [which has gotten me in trouble with some sf’s, but what the heck]…i’ve said all along that you guys have earned the right to kid us about ’04, just like yf’s wore out all the dent and boone stuff…by the way, i’m jealous as hell about sf’s season tickets, i don’t care what team they’re for, and i’m free to go any time buddy, my friend, my pal…

    dc October 21, 2006, 10:05 am
  • OK, let me clarify a couple things.
    First, SF. Sorry that you percieved the rich kid comment as nasty – it was an attempt at humor, albeit to assuage my envy
    at your good fortune.
    Secondly, I meant the Beltran remark to be humourous as well – Iam aware of his postseason success. You have to admit it must have hurt to end the season like that though.

    Andrews October 21, 2006, 10:54 am
  • Since I introduced Beltran to the thread, let me say that my point was not to shit on Beltran or make him a goat.
    My point was that I’m glad the Yankees didn’t tie up $100 million in Beltran. There have been times here when sox fans have dumped on Cash as an idiot for not signing him.
    BTW, it wasn’t “one pitch.” Beltran did nothing in the whole at bat, the biggest at bat of the Mets season.
    It reminds me of when Gary Carter came up in 1986 and said to himself, “I don’t know if we can win this game, but I’m not going to make the last out” and made something happen.
    Maybe all three pitches were so good that Beltran couldn’t do anything. But did he do all he could? Would Papi have looked so bad while going down?

    alrightythen October 21, 2006, 11:27 am
  • dc, Sometimes I post to get a reaction. Sometimes I post because stuff is important to me. Or because something is really cool.
    I do feel that this being a Sox-Yanks blog, something should be mentioned on the anniversary of the last significant event to occur in our rivalry. Whether it got any reaction at all wasn’t the point to me. I did expect a yf to say something to the effect that Andrews did because yfs here have made those comments before when discussing 2004. I find those comments hypocritical, but even figuring that someone would make those comments, I still got angry because I experienced two decades of heckling from yfs about stuff (Ruth, Dent, Buckner) that was far more removed than 2004 is to today. So I responded harshly and immediately apologized, and that’s the end of that.
    Once again, however, I find my motives for doing or saying certain things presumed in the worst possible light by those who find it rhetorically convenient to do so — which also is hypocritical, imo.

    Paul SF October 21, 2006, 4:25 pm
  • …paul, i assume you were referring to me, as well as andrews, as a hypocrite for questioning your motives for posting the ortiz video…i did say that i only partly thought it was to provoke yankee fans…this rather sensitive nerve keeps being exposed on this site, and i’ve consistently said sf’s have the right to continue to celebrate…i’ve also admitted that some of my posts are expressly intended to provoke and challenge…therefore, i’m no hypocrite…

    dc October 21, 2006, 7:50 pm
  • The first pitch to Beltran was a semi-hanging breaking ball that was very hittable. The K pitch was completely unhittable.

    Tom sf October 22, 2006, 10:34 am

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.