October = Baseball Heaven

[sperry]

The Gibson homerun is the second most incredible thing I've ever seen in Baseball history... (second only to the day Cal broke the iron-horse record). It's just a shame that it happened against my childhood hero, Dennis Eckersley. I was seriously disturbed for like 3 weeks after that game... it took about 10 years before I started to realize how unbelieveably amazing that Dodger's victory was. It was like The Natural, but for real. I almost feel bad that I'll never truely appreciate it like Dodgers fans did, but I'm an A's far for life, and forever a Dodger hater.

[skimonkey30]

Originally Posted by Mr. Xevious

BEAT LA

BEAT LA

[Ezdno]

Originally Posted by sperry

I'm an A's far for life, and forever a Dodger hater.

amen!

[sperry]

Originally Posted by skimonkey30

BEAT LA

BEAT LA!

[MattR]

Well, it looks like the Dodgers are in trouble, so you A's queens are getting your way.

[skimonkey30]

Originally Posted by MattR

Well, it looks like the Dodgers are in trouble, so you A's queens are getting your way.

A's queen? KMA

[sperry]

Originally Posted by MattR

Well, it looks like the Dodgers are in trouble, so you A's queens are getting your way.

What are you talking about? Haven't the A's lost 3 of their last 5 post-season series losses in game 5? Weren't they up 2-0 against the Yankees, then got swept 3 in a row in Oakland?

It could be 15 to 1 A's, top of 9, two outs, two strikes, game 3, in Oakland, and I'm still scared of a Minnisota come-back.

But yeah, it's looking bad for them Dodgers.

[MattR]

Sorry, Giants queens too.

[MattR]

I'm just saying all your negativity towards the Dodgers is paying off, they are not playing well at all.

As far as teh A's go, they are nowhere near in the clear, a 2-0 lead for the A's means nothing given their recent experience.

[Ezdno]

The dodgers will probably win tonight with Maddux, I never bet against Maddux. I have refocused my negative chi towards the Yankee's the only team I hate worse than the Dodger's is the Yankee's. That is a big injury to Nomar, him not being in the line up changes the whole dodger dynamic, even though his replacement did produce the only spark for the Dodger's.

[Mr. Xevious]

Originally Posted by sperry

The Gibson homerun is the second most incredible thing I've ever seen in Baseball history... (second only to the day Cal broke the iron-horse record). It's just a shame that it happened against my childhood hero, Dennis Eckersley. I was seriously disturbed for like 3 weeks after that game... it took about 10 years before I started to realize how unbelieveably amazing that Dodger's victory was. It was like The Natural, but for real. I almost feel bad that I'll never truely appreciate it like Dodgers fans did, but I'm an A's far for life, and forever a Dodger hater.

1. fuck Gibson (I think I covered that before)

2. Ripkins ironman record is a fucking sham. He did not play every inning of every game like Lou Gehrig did. Cal would play the 7 innings to get the full game in the books and pull himself out. He would even DH just to make sure to keep his streak running.

Gehrig played every inning of every game for that entire streak.

[Mr. Xevious]

8-2 Oakland

YES !

[MattR]

Way to go A's

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Mr. Xevious

1. fuck Gibson (I think I covered that before)

2. Ripkins ironman record is a fucking sham. He did not play every inning of every game like Lou Gehrig did. Cal would play the 7 innings to get the full game in the books and pull himself out. He would even DH just to make sure to keep his streak running.

Gehrig played every inning of every game for that entire streak.

Ripken = 2,632 games (1st), 8,234 consecutive innings (1st)
Gehrig = 2,130 games (2nd)
Buck Freeman = 5,342 consecutive innings (2nd)

I'd say Cal was the real deal... 502 more games than Gehrig, and almost 3,000 more consecutive innings over the 2nd place more than makes up for the DH position. And Gehrig certainly didn't play every inning of every game in his streak. Plus Ripken did it in the modern era with more games per season (meaning less down time to recover), and a higher level of competition. Remember Cal didn't just "show up", he also contributed (not to say Gehrig didn't). Even if the last few years when he moved to 3rd base and he wasn't producing as he had in the 80's, he was still more than just going through the motions.

IMO, Ripken's record is the last true record before all this current steroids nonsense. There's no friggen way you can try to asterik that one.

[Mr. Xevious]

Originally Posted by sperry

Ripken = 2,632 games (1st), 8,234 consecutive innings (1st)
Gehrig = 2,130 games (2nd)
Buck Freeman = 5,342 consecutive innings (2nd)

I'd say Cal was the real deal... 502 more games than Gehrig, and almost 3,000 more consecutive innings over the 2nd place more than makes up for the DH position. And Gehrig certainly didn't play every inning of every game in his streak. Plus Ripken did it in the modern era with more games per season (meaning less down time to recover), and a higher level of competition. Remember Cal didn't just "show up", he also contributed (not to say Gehrig didn't). Even if the last few years when he moved to 3rd base and he wasn't producing as he had in the 80's, he was still more than just going through the motions.

IMO, Ripken's record is the last true record before all this current steroids nonsense. There's no friggen way you can try to asterik that one.

As far as I can remember when the argument started when Cal beat Lou for the title, there was proof that Gehrig did play all 9 innings of every game he was in. I cannot find it so maybe it does not exist, but I ask you to disprove it as well

didn't Conseco go 40/40 before Ripkin got his ironman title?

I honestly think thats when the steroid era began

[Mr. Xevious]

Originally Posted by sperry

Ripken = 2,632 games (1st), 8,234 consecutive innings (1st)
Gehrig = 2,130 games (2nd)
Buck Freeman = 5,342 consecutive innings (2nd)

and just to point out, there were 23,688 innings total in Ripkens' record. he only played 34% of his games consecutively. This of course is not counting extra innings which no way in hell I am going to research that

I still believe that Gherig played all his 2130 consecutively.

[Mr. Xevious]

I believe this is the nail in the coffin



lol.. I have one of those in a safe deposit box along with all my other good cards

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Mr. Xevious

and just to point out, there were 23,688 innings total in Ripkens' record. he only played 34% of his games consecutively. This of course is not counting extra innings which no way in hell I am going to research that

I still believe that Gherig played all his 2130 consecutively.

I'm pretty sure Ripken played 100% of his games in his consecutive game record consecutively. Or it wouldn't be a record.

And if you ment to say "34% of the innings consecutively", you're wrong again, because you're only looking at the consecutive innings from his record for consecutive innings. 34% implys that before and after that record, he *never* played two innings back to back. I'm sure there were plenty of games in the iron man record where Cal played all 9. Far more than 34%.

And there's no way Gehrig played every inning of every game in his record. I'm even willing to bet that he missed a game or two in there, but in that era records weren't 100% accuratly kept, but who would come forward to say otherwise? Now I'm not implying that Ripken's the better ball player than Gehrig... Gehrig is probably one of the top 5 players in the history of the game... I'm just saying Ripken's record is the most fanstatic thing I've ever seen. Partly due to what it meant to baseball, which at the time was at a low-point due to the '94 strike. You could say Ripken saved baseball with that record.

As far as Canseco's 40/40... Ripken's record started in '82, Canseco's 40/40 was in '88. Also, I don't believe the 40/40 was all that influenced by 'roids. You don't steal 40 bases when you're all loaded up on juice... you lose too much flexibility/speed on that stuff. '88 was probably more like the 1st year people started getting into 'roids, which is why 40/40's don't happen any more even though 40 homeruns aren't even special anymore.

Finally, what does Cal's brother's rare Fuck Face card have to do w/ the scale of Cal's record?

[Ezdno]

There is no way Gehrig played every inning of every game, the last years of his career he was in constant pain. Cal played with pain also, and playing one inning in a game is still playing in a game.

40/40 is still a pretty amazing feat. Count how many people have done it, with or without steriods.

My anti-yankee mojo seems to have worked, and I should have bet against Maddux this time.

[Ezdno]

Originally Posted by sperry

Dodgers/Yankees WS? I'll kill myself before watching that... those are the two teams I hate the most in Baseball.

In my fantasy world:

OAK def. MIN
DET def. NYY
SD def. STL
NYM def. LAD

OAK def. DET
SD def. NYM

OAK over SD in the World Series.
(

3 of 4 so far....not bad

[Mr. Xevious]

Originally Posted by sperry

I'm pretty sure Ripken played 100% of his games in his consecutive game record consecutively. Or it wouldn't be a record.

And if you ment to say "34% of the innings consecutively", you're wrong again, because you're only looking at the consecutive innings from his record for consecutive innings. 34% implys that before and after that record, he *never* played two innings back to back. I'm sure there were plenty of games in the iron man record where Cal played all 9. Far more than 34%.

And there's no way Gehrig played every inning of every game in his record. I'm even willing to bet that he missed a game or two in there, but in that era records weren't 100% accuratly kept, but who would come forward to say otherwise? Now I'm not implying that Ripken's the better ball player than Gehrig... Gehrig is probably one of the top 5 players in the history of the game... I'm just saying Ripken's record is the most fanstatic thing I've ever seen. Partly due to what it meant to baseball, which at the time was at a low-point due to the '94 strike. You could say Ripken saved baseball with that record.

As far as Canseco's 40/40... Ripken's record started in '82, Canseco's 40/40 was in '88. Also, I don't believe the 40/40 was all that influenced by 'roids. You don't steal 40 bases when you're all loaded up on juice... you lose too much flexibility/speed on that stuff. '88 was probably more like the 1st year people started getting into 'roids, which is why 40/40's don't happen any more even though 40 homeruns aren't even special anymore.

Finally, what does Cal's brother's rare Fuck Face card have to do w/ the scale of Cal's record?

I guess the problem I have with this record is its considered the "ironman" award, but you only need to play 7 innings of the game for you to be considered playing the entire game.

when I was talking about Canseco's record, I was talking about when the end of the record took place, not when Cal started it. Canseco was ripping huge home runs when he first started (anyone remember that shot in Toronto that went to the upper upper deck in the sky dome in 88??) so we have no idea if/when he started the roids. Check is picture from his 86 1/2 rookie card to his 88 card with the A's. he got pretty darn big fast.

and with the card.. I was making fun of the Ripkin family

and just a FYI.. I am a huge fan (is/still is) of the Bash Brothers

[Ezdno]

Originally Posted by Mr. Xevious

I guess the problem I have with this record is its considered the "ironman" award, but you only need to play 7 innings of the game for you to be considered playing the entire game.
(

You only have to play 5 1/2 for a game to be considered complete. Say it rains or something and the game gets canceled.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Ezdno

You only have to play 5 1/2 for a game to be considered complete. Say it rains or something and the game gets canceled.

But you only have to be officially added to the lineup and on the field for one millisecond to have "played" in a game.

[Kevin M]

I remember reading about a theoretical way to extend the "streak" without playing. Bat him leadoff, and once the PA announcer says his name he's officially in the game. Then you pinch-hit for him. At home you do the same thing, but he has to DH.

[Ezdno]

Yes I know, and actually all you have to do in the Pro's is be announced, you might not ever even get in the game to be considered having played. How many times have you seen the strategy of a manager announce a pinch hitter to force the hand of the opposing manager and change pitchers then have the manager replace the pinch hitter with someone else.


Also best quote of the day....."its official the Yankees will not be firing Joe Torre, he will remain as the manager and finish out his contract....The Yankees are alot like the Democrats" Rush Limbaugh