PDA

View Full Version : Leyland said it best



jlw1980
10-07-06, 11:01 PM
Beyond the mindset, though, the series setup may have been a blessing.

"Maybe in some ways the good Lord was looking after us," Leyland said, "because I think it was probably a little bit of a bonus for us to have to only beat the Yankees three times instead of four."


http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/gameday_recap.jsp?ymd=20061007&content_id=1703767&vkey=recap&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb&partnered=rss_mlb

AND don't forget the fact that as the WC, you really have no right to even BE there....

Dang it, though. No matter how hard I try, I can't dislike Leyland, even though it was showboating not to let Bonderman finish the game, because he wanted him to get an ovation.

Steph19
10-07-06, 11:07 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/gameday_recap.jsp?ymd=20061007&content_id=1703767&vkey=recap&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb&partnered=rss_mlb

AND don't forget the fact that as the WC, you really have no right to even BE there....

Dang it, though. No matter how hard I try, I can't dislike Leyland, even though it was showboating not to let Bonderman finish the game, because he wanted him to get an ovation.

I like Leyland too. I don't think it was really showboating so much as it was letting a 23-year old get his ovation after pitching the game of his life.

brosiusbuddy
10-07-06, 11:09 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/gameday_recap.jsp?ymd=20061007&content_id=1703767&vkey=recap&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb&partnered=rss_mlb

AND don't forget the fact that as the WC, you really have no right to even BE there....

Dang it, though. No matter how hard I try, I can't dislike Leyland, even though it was showboating not to let Bonderman finish the game, because he wanted him to get an ovation.

It wasn't showboating. It was rewarding his player with a much deserved ovation.

jlw1980
10-07-06, 11:12 PM
It wasn't showboating. It was rewarding his player with a much deserved ovation.

Personally, if it were me, I'd rather get the complete game than the standing ovation. The fact that I beat the Yankees in the ALDS, and beat them handily, would be reward enough.

cmaff05
10-07-06, 11:12 PM
It wasn't showboating at all. If I was a manager, I would have done the same thing.

jlw1980
10-07-06, 11:13 PM
The point of this thread wasn't about the showboating. That was an aside. The point was that even Leyland admitted they were lucky it was a five-game and not seven-game series. The secondary point was that as the WC, they had no right to be there.

Complete game (in a massacre) > standing ovation

Runan
10-07-06, 11:28 PM
The WC is a valid part of the post season. As the WC winners, I'm not sure why the Tigers didn't "deserve" to be there. :/

It kind of sounds like sour grapes to me...

hunter05
10-08-06, 12:20 AM
Okay, that deserves an explanation. Why doesn't a WC team deserve to be there?

Mattingly Sideburns
10-08-06, 12:54 AM
Leyland is a class act, a hell of a manager, and was being incredibly modest with his comments. Judging from the last few days, I think his team would have had little trouble winning one more out of three.

Window
10-08-06, 01:14 AM
I wish he was our manager.

jlw1980
10-08-06, 01:27 AM
The WC is a valid part of the post season. As the WC winners, I'm not sure why the Tigers didn't "deserve" to be there. :/

It kind of sounds like sour grapes to me...

It's not sour grapes. They outplayed us in this series, plain and simple, in every facet of the game. I'm not saying otherwise. I am saying they had no right to even be playing in the postseason at all.

The Wild Card is a back door into the playoffs. If you can't even win your division, you do not deserve to be in the postseason, and are definitely not legitimate champions should you win the World Series. How can you legitimately be called the "World Champions" when you weren't even champions of your five-team (in most cases) division??

The introduction of the Wild Card into baseball was one of the worst ideas of all-time. I've been saying that for a long time.

ChewieTobbacca
10-08-06, 02:08 AM
The division system and unbalanced system is broken as is, hence the need for a wild card to fix the inherent problems. That being said, if we were to go back to a system of equality or requiring a winning of a division to ensure a playoff spot, we would have to completely retool both leagues and/or remove teh distinction between national and american league to balance it out. Until then, the wild card is the best choice.

MelmoandMiggy
10-08-06, 02:15 AM
It's not sour grapes. They outplayed us in this series, plain and simple, in every facet of the game. I'm not saying otherwise. I am saying they had no right to even be playing in the postseason at all.

The Wild Card is a back door into the playoffs. If you can't even win your division, you do not deserve to be in the postseason, and are definitely not legitimate champions should you win the World Series. How can you legitimately be called the "World Champions" when you weren't even champions of your five-team (in most cases) division??

The introduction of the Wild Card into baseball was one of the worst ideas of all-time. I've been saying that for a long time.

Wow, so there's been what...2 legitimate champions in the last 5 years? Not to mention that, if not for the Wild Card, the Tigers and Twins would have had a playoff (as would the Yankees and Red Sox last year) so they may very well have been in the playoffs anyway.

Philip Hughes Fan
10-08-06, 03:10 AM
How can you legitimately be called the "World Champions" when you weren't even champions of your five-team (in most cases) division??


Because baseball is about winning the world series, not necessarily being the best team in baseball?

Any WC team is just as legitimate as a division winner. If there's no WC teams are going to play a lot differently down the stretch, and I would be surprised if the Tigers hadn't won the division if the alternative was playing golf in October.

bnorris85
10-08-06, 05:56 AM
The introduction of the Wild Card into baseball was one of the worst ideas of all-time. I've been saying that for a long time.

You were 15 when the wild card was introduced, honestly, how can you have so much hatred twoards it when you probably dont have a lot of memories before the wild card.

I mean i have been watching the sox forever (http://myspace-063.vo.llnwd.net/00101/36/09/101889063_l.jpg), and i cannot remember baseball without the Wild Card......then again i suppose i was 10 when it was introduced not 15...idk im rambling.

pjfan
10-08-06, 06:45 AM
This is a joke. Saying that a wild card team doesn't deserve to be in the post season is horse .................

Who's to say the Yanks wouldn't of lost 4-1 in a 7 game series. C'mon, give the Tigers some credit

Rice14
10-08-06, 07:16 AM
It wasn't showboating at all. If I was a manager, I would have done the same thing.

Right. Don't forget, Bonderman had to suffer through a 19 loss season just a few years ago on one of the worst teams of all time.

I think the kid deserved a moment for applause.

Weg
10-08-06, 07:18 AM
If anyone thinks that we would have beat the Tigers in a 7-game series, is optimistic. Could we have - YES, but likely - NO. We have half ass starting pitching & our offense hides in a clam shell like an oyster come playoff time. Not to mention suspect defense.

montrealer
10-08-06, 07:26 AM
Leyland and his Tigers are a Class Act........with this young staff they`ll be around for a while....get use to it.

DCfan
10-08-06, 07:41 AM
It's not sour grapes. They outplayed us in this series, plain and simple, in every facet of the game. I'm not saying otherwise. I am saying they had no right to even be playing in the postseason at all.

The Wild Card is a back door into the playoffs. If you can't even win your division, you do not deserve to be in the postseason, and are definitely not legitimate champions should you win the World Series. How can you legitimately be called the "World Champions" when you weren't even champions of your five-team (in most cases) division??

The introduction of the Wild Card into baseball was one of the worst ideas of all-time. I've been saying that for a long time.
If they were playing in the pre-Wild Card days, the Yankees wouldn't have made the playoffs in 1996 and 2000 (Cleveland would have won the East both years). I somehow doubt that people would want to throw out those championships.

OneRedSeat
10-08-06, 08:01 AM
If they were playing in the pre-Wild Card days, the Yankees wouldn't have made the playoffs in 1996 and 2000 (Cleveland would have won the East both years). I somehow doubt that people would want to throw out those championships.
Great point.

Beep, Beep, Beep.....everyone watch out, someone is about to start back-peddaling.

ryanthe13th
10-08-06, 08:14 AM
Leyland and his Tigers are a Class Act........with this young staff they`ll be around for a while....get use to it.

That made me laugh, thanks. Jim Leyland, whose been accused of beating his wife(no I don't have a link), Joe Zumaya who admittedly shows up hitters continously, Roid Head Pudge, Camera Man Boxer Kenny Rogers, and whiney ass Jeremy Bonderman are class acts? They beat us fair and square but give me a break about the 'classy' thing.

keg411
10-08-06, 11:43 AM
I personally like the wildcard. What I don't like is the unbalanced schedule -- because I think that's been the undoing of both the Yankees and the Red Sox in the past few years.

Both teams have built teams to beat each other. Big overpaid sluggers who can beat mediocre pitching. Bringing in mediocre pitchers who know how to beat the other team. Bringing back crappy players as a knee jerk because the other team is in town.

While they may be able to beat each other, it doesn't help them beat the rest of baseball. Sure, it's easy to beat up the Devil Rays and the Orioles of the world, but if both teams had played Detroit or the Angels or Oakland or CWS or the twins in equal to the other teams, it may make it clearer who the actual "best teams" are, rather than just "building a team to win the division" and then can't win the whole thing because of fundamental flaws.

And Toronto is doing it too, now....

stephsamps
10-08-06, 04:00 PM
^ I also like the wild card, and dislike the unbalanced schedule. I also dislike the best of 5 in the first round. I think beating a team 4 times is much more difficult than 3 and doesn't allow for the fluky things. Especially with wild card teams are playing, the first round is key.

JeterRodriguezSheff
10-08-06, 05:07 PM
What I dont like is a 5 game series. One cold streak and a good team could look like ****. That being said the Yankees would have lost to any team in a 7 game series as well. They had a few bad breaks with the rain delay, at em balls in game 3 a bad call, and then they gave up and quit, rolled over and died. Pretty much everybody except for Posada decided it wasnt worth it to battle. There is no doubt in my mind the Yankees had the team to beat if they gave it all, but they didnt, and that is why I dont really care they lost. Hey they didnt care, so why should I?

RhodeyYankee2638
10-08-06, 05:14 PM
Wait wait, the Tigers dont deserve to be in the playoffs? They have a better record than 4 of the other 7 teams by a substantial margin. And if they weren't good enough to win their division, they shouldn't have been good enough to stifle our yankees

jlw1980
10-08-06, 06:46 PM
Great point.

Beep, Beep, Beep.....everyone watch out, someone is about to start back-peddaling.

No back-pedaling from me. I don't care who the team is. I don't like the WC. I never have, and never will. Is that so terrible?

OneRedSeat
10-09-06, 05:58 AM
No back-pedaling from me. I don't care who the team is. I don't like the WC. I never have, and never will. Is that so terrible?
No, not terrible at all. I just wonder, do you use a similar disclaimer when mentioning the 4 in 5?

TheoShmeo
10-09-06, 06:57 AM
Complaining about the wild card is like complaining about the DH. It's part of the landscape unless and until the rules change. Also, many wild card teams, including the Tigers, have had better records than other playoff teams over the years.

As to the fact that it was a 5-game series, I wholeheartedly agree and think it's odd to reward teams that make the playoffs after a 162-game grind with a short series where, I assume, the odds of the better team losing are higher than if it was a 7-game series.

5OClockLighting
10-09-06, 05:06 PM
No back-pedaling from me. I don't care who the team is. I don't like the WC. I never have, and never will. Is that so terrible?How old school do you want to go? No playoffs, or two divisions per league?

Mr. Mxylsplk
10-09-06, 05:35 PM
The Wild Card is a back door into the playoffs. If you can't even win your division, you do not deserve to be in the postseason, and are definitely not legitimate champions should you win the World Series. How can you legitimately be called the "World Champions" when you weren't even champions of your five-team (in most cases) division??

What makes how you finish over 162 games more legitimate than a post-season series? What makes winning a geographical grouping of teams into divisions more legitimate than just winning games (where Detroit finished ahead of Oakland)? And heck, if finishing in front after the regular season is what's legitimate, shouldn't the team with the best record be the champion? Why does winning 3 of 5 or 4 of 7 deserve to be called champion if someone else won more games? If the A's and Twins won fewer games than the yanks, why does winning some geographical grouping of teams mean anything at all? They couldn't win the league, and wouldn't have been in the post-season for most of mlb's existence - why aren't their division titles back doors into the playoffs?

jlw1980
10-09-06, 06:31 PM
How old school do you want to go? No playoffs, or two divisions per league?

I'd prefer to contract a few teams -- the ones that consistently don't perform well, and go to two divisions per league. (Contraction would also lead to only the highest quality players being in the majors.) Either that, or contract them and then scrap the divisions altogether, and the teams in each league with the two best records play in the LCS. I like that idea best. Of course each team would play each other team in the league an equal number of times. And OF COURSE interleague play, which was another of Idiot Bud's bullsh*t ideas, should be tossed out the window. It's just WRONG. I hate it.

I'm cool with the LCS, just not the LDS. Anyway, that's just my view of it. Of course others are free to disagree. It's America, after all. :gulp:

edsamm44
10-09-06, 06:41 PM
wild card is ok-but lets make it tougher on the wild card team-such as giving them only one home game (game 3)-then instead of a team like the twins resting santana (because there simply is no advantage to win the division)-teams would put more effort into winning the division because 4 home games out of a possible 5 is a "real'' advantage

5OClockLighting
10-09-06, 09:40 PM
I'd prefer to contract a few teams -- the ones that consistently don't perform well, and go to two divisions per league. (Contraction would also lead to only the highest quality players being in the majors.) Either that, or contract them and then scrap the divisions altogether, and the teams in each league with the two best records play in the LCS. I like that idea best. Of course each team would play each other team in the league an equal number of times. And OF COURSE interleague play, which was another of Idiot Bud's bullsh*t ideas, should be tossed out the window. It's just WRONG. I hate it.

I'm cool with the LCS, just not the LDS. Anyway, that's just my view of it. Of course others are free to disagree. It's America, after all. :gulp:Well none of that is going to happen, you should make peace with the current set up. It gives (95, 96, 97, & 00) and takes away (02, 04, & 06).

jlw1980
10-09-06, 11:42 PM
Well none of that is going to happen, you should make peace with the current set up. It gives (95, 96, 97, & 00) and takes away (02, 04, & 06).

I will never make peace with the current set-up. It is incredibly stupid. I hate it, and hope it will be revamped once Bud is gone...Selig the Jakovasaurus has f*cked up baseball. He needs to be booted out.

My ideas are good ones, if I do say so, myself. I didn't notice any objections from you. Maybe you were just being polite, and if that is the case, I appreciate it. It is more than most people have been. If you think they're good ideas, I appreciate that, as well. (I'm being serious.)

I really just want the WC to go (no business being part of baseball); the LDS to become a bad memory (another incredibly stupid idea that doesn't even give the winner another championship, i.e. division winner or league champ); some bad teams to be contracted (thereby raising the talent level in the game -- which is a great thing for the sport); interleague play to be kicked to the curb (what an idiotic thing ever to have begun!); the two best teams in each league to compete for the league championship and the winner of each LCS to go on to the WS; and the All-Star game NOT to determine home-field advantage (no explanation necessary -- stupidity at its finest). That sounds like a lot to ask, but all of it would be good for baseball, IMHO.

At any rate, no matter how much I abhor Bud the F*cktard Moron and the pure idiocy he has imposed on our beloved sport, I will continue to watch baseball because I adore it. I will continue to root for my Yankees for the rest of my life, no matter what, because it is in my blood. And I will continue to hope that Bud either retires very, very soon, and that the next Commish brings some sense of history and sanity back to this beautiful game that we all love so much.

Hey, I can dream, right? Baseball is all about dreams. :)

OneRedSeat
10-10-06, 06:54 AM
I like the idea of going back to two divisions per league. I don't like the idea of getting rid of the WC. In the pre-strike setup there were several situations where an inferior team made the postseason over a second place team in the other division.

I say go back to two divisions via contraction, which will increase the overall quality of available talent, dump IL play, and dump the unbalanced schedule, so that makeup games are easier to coordinate. Have two representatives from each division with the #2 from one playing the #1 from the other and vice versa in the LDS.

Oh, and in the interest of fairness, instate a cap (and floor).

C. Bellinger
10-10-06, 08:01 AM
If the Tigers had to win the division to get into the playoffs, I'm pretty certain they would have started Verlander the final weekend. Whether that would have made a difference, I don't know.

SODM
10-10-06, 08:17 AM
A little off topic but since it came up let me opine about the playoff structure.

I like the wildcard.
It does more good than harm by allowing a deserving team in.
When was the last time the wild card team wasn't better than one of the division winners?
It also keeps meaningfull September baseball alive in at least 6 or 7 cities every year.

The problem with the current playoff structure that I have is not so much the fact that the division series is only a best of 5 (although I would prefer it to be a best of 7).
Does anyone really think the Yankees would have won the series should it have been a best of 7?

The real problem are all the off days in between the games.
I agree in a couple of days off before the playoff starts so that teams can align their rotations, but after that it should be just like it is in the regular season, t.v. schedules be damned.
The off days change the game too much by eliminating your back of the rotation starters and middle relievers from the game.
IMO it's the equivalent of taking the two best basketball teams and having them play a 3 on 3 halfcourt game for the championship.
A starting pitcher can dominate a game already so I think it's ridiculous to allow one to dominate a series (especially a short one).

(BTW, my opinion is clearly not why the Yankees lost as Detroit threw 4 SP at us and beat us fair and square)

Mezmerize
10-10-06, 11:10 AM
It's not sour grapes. They outplayed us in this series, plain and simple, in every facet of the game. I'm not saying otherwise. I am saying they had no right to even be playing in the postseason at all.

The Wild Card is a back door into the playoffs. If you can't even win your division, you do not deserve to be in the postseason, and are definitely not legitimate champions should you win the World Series. How can you legitimately be called the "World Champions" when you weren't even champions of your five-team (in most cases) division??

The introduction of the Wild Card into baseball was one of the worst ideas of all-time. I've been saying that for a long time.

Thanks for the chuckle... heh heh heh

bostonyankeefan
10-10-06, 11:53 AM
Detroit would have beat us in a best of 9 after the way that we fell apart.

I love the wildcard. The regular season is too long to have only 4 teams make the postseason. The pennant races have been much more exciting with many more teams in the hunt in September.

I would like to see the schedule cut to 154 games, with a 7 game ALDS.

BigCheese
10-10-06, 12:08 PM
I just think the Wild Card needs a penalty for not finishing first in your division, much like the NFL's "wildcard weekend." The idea of having two wild cards that play a one day "winner takes all" game the day before the division series intrigues me; it would eat up the best pitcher from the Wild Card team for the Division series, and hopefully would tire them out some. Something like that.

CoyoteYankee
10-10-06, 01:20 PM
I just think the Wild Card needs a penalty for not finishing first in your division, much like the NFL's "wildcard weekend." The idea of having two wild cards that play a one day "winner takes all" game the day before the division series intrigues me; it would eat up the best pitcher from the Wild Card team for the Division series, and hopefully would tire them out some. Something like that.

I agree. There should be a bigger penalty for being a wild card than 1 less home game.

C. Bellinger
10-10-06, 02:01 PM
I can see the benefits of a wild card penalty, but if the wild card team has a better record than other division winners? Usually in the NFL the wild card teams have fairly average records. In baseball, it can be a superb team that happened to be in the same division as a great team (like the 2001 Athletics).

Hitman23
10-10-06, 02:05 PM
what a load of crap.

you know at home, in the locker room and wherever he can't be quoted he's talking sh*t about how his team beat the big bad Yankees.

And he should. I would do it. Hell, I'd be doing a f*cking happy dance on the field.

Mr. Mxylsplk
10-10-06, 04:35 PM
I just think the Wild Card needs a penalty for not finishing first in your division, much like the NFL's "wildcard weekend." The idea of having two wild cards that play a one day "winner takes all" game the day before the division series intrigues me; it would eat up the best pitcher from the Wild Card team for the Division series, and hopefully would tire them out some. Something like that.
Of course that nfl wildcard round includes division winners as well, so what it really does is provide a penalty to everyone but the top 2 division winners, rather than just a penalty to the 2 wildcards. The weaker division winners do get to host the wildcard, which is obviously significant, but they are forced to play the extra round.

Jasbro
10-10-06, 10:05 PM
If you are going to have a wildcard, then you need to have two. Have a play-in three-game series to see which one makes the actual postseason.

This way, the penalty is a depleted pitching staff and an extra round to survive. This would restore the accomplishment of winning a division, and dilute the chances of a second-place team winning it all.

edit: Just realized that Big Cheese already proposed a similar idea....

DCfan
10-10-06, 11:23 PM
If you are going to have a wildcard, then you need to have two. Have a play-in three-game series to see which one makes the actual postseason.

This way, the penalty is a depleted pitching staff and an extra round to survive. This would restore the accomplishment of winning a division, and dilute the chances of a second-place team winning it all.

I really don't understand why the wild-card needs to be punished at all. Do you know how many times in the last 10 years that the AL wild card had the worst record of the playoff teams? Once (1999 Red Sox). Every other year, the wild card was as good as or better than at least one of the league's division winners, and in four of those 10 years, the wild card had the second-best record in the league ('97 Yankees, '98 Red Sox, '01 A's, '04 Red Sox).

If you want to reward the best team over the season and to "punish" the mediocrities, there's a better way. Get rid of the divisions and play a balanced schedule. Have five teams make the playoffs from each league. #5 plays a 3-game series at #4. (I mean ALL THREE GAMES at #4's park). The winner plays #1. #3 plays #2 with #2 having the traditional home field advantage. Lots of teams make the playoffs, and each rung of the playoff ladder has a decided advantage over the rung below it. It won't happen of course, but it seems to me a fairer system than one in which an 87- or 88-win team is potentially rewarded for being in a crappy division while a 94- or 95-win team is punished for playing in a good division.

Or, if the concern is REALLY about fairness, go back to the old system. No divisions. No playoffs. The best AL team goes to the World Series. Once you introduce divisions at all, you're allowing for the possibility that a worse team will beat a better team in a short series.

Mezmerize
10-11-06, 11:11 AM
MLB should just use the BCS system, its far superior to any playoff format. In fact, they should just take the 3 division winners and the wild card, whichever has the worst record is out automatically and the best record gets a bye! Perfection!

gold23
10-11-06, 11:18 AM
The only thing I might change is that you re-seed immediately upon making the playoffs. WC gets you in, but once everyone is in you go strictly by record. That penalizes a team that wins a weak division, and allows the WC team (generally not the team with the worst record of the four playoff clubs) to be seeded according to their actual worth.

jlw1980
10-11-06, 07:35 PM
The only thing I might change is that you re-seed immediately upon making the playoffs. WC gets you in, but once everyone is in you go strictly by record. That penalizes a team that wins a weak division, and allows the WC team (generally not the team with the worst record of the four playoff clubs) to be seeded according to their actual worth.

That is an interesting (and, I think, great) idea.

donniesrecordholdsup
10-12-06, 03:58 PM
If they were playing in the pre-Wild Card days, the Yankees wouldn't have made the playoffs in 1996 and 2000 (Cleveland would have won the East both years). I somehow doubt that people would want to throw out those championships.
the yanks wouldve won 4 more games in 2000 if they had to. dont forget they went on vacation the last 3 weeks of the season. but in 96 youre right. maybe they never win from 98-2000 if they didnt get the experience of winning in 96.

but its not so much that the wc is bad. its not. its the no reward for winning your division.

Dynasties R Forever
10-12-06, 10:21 PM
Right. Don't forget, Bonderman had to suffer through a 19 loss season just a few years ago on one of the worst teams of all time.

I think the kid deserved a moment for applause.

Good point. Good for the kid.

SecretChiSoxFan
10-13-06, 11:10 PM
I like Leyland's style. When Leyland kicked Young off the team in a pennant race, that was a beautiful thing. The AL Central has some no nonsense managers in Minnesota, Chicago and Detroit. Their players all play the game the right way, that's how you beat teams with higher payrolls than yours. It's good for the game.