Heading into the playoffs, the Cardinals, Tigers, and Mets were all cold
while the Yankees, Twins, A's, Padres, and Dodgers were all varying degrees
of hot. While the A's and Twins each put together monster 2nd halves to
capture their divisions, the Tigers infamously bumbled their way out of
their division title on their way to arriving in the postseason stone-cold,
as in corspelike cold.

The Cardinals were arguably even worse, nearly choking away not just the
division but the *playoffs* in hitting a monumental losing streak down the
stretch. The Mets, having clinched early, can at least be excused for
letting off the gas I guess.

Of course, all three of these "cold" teams won their league division
series -- handily. The only "hot" team to get through, the A's, took out
another hot team, so one of em *had* to get through!

And tonight, the erstwhile left-for-dead Tigers are up 7-4 in Oakland
against the "hot" A's, on the doorstep of going 2-0 in the series and moving
ever closer to ensuring that the World Series will be between two "cold"
teams.

I bring all this up because -- as always -- I heard and read a lot of
premature burials of the Tigers and Cardinals... and as always, rumors of
their deaths were greatly exaggerated. They'd "lost their momentum," you
"can't turn it back on," etc etc. Good reminder this year that momentum is
all about who's starting your next game and which team won the last one.

brink

"brink" <brink@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:4p5nguFgvd5lU1@individual.net...


that's all it's ever about.






--
I never read email at the Yahoo address!

brink wrote:

Which though do you think is better to head into the post-season, with
momentum or without momentum?

Getting swept by the Royals probably wasn't what a single Tigers fan
wanted leading into the post-season.

If I had a choice I'd take a team that is playing very well going into
the post-season, and with momentum. As a Sox fan, I've seen the Sox
head into the post-season with little momentum and not playing well and
then last season and you know the results.

Whatever momentum the Twins had at the end of the season was quickly
snuffed out when Santana lost game one of the ALDS. Too bad to 'cos I
would have enjoyed seeing an AL Central ALCS match-up.

"DrCrawdad" <drcrawdad@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1160629955.918094.90150@i42g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...



....and basically, what you've said is that you fail to see what's right in
front of you. EVERY situation you speak of would be an exception, yet you
still accept the ""rule."" There IS no ""momentum."" Every day is a new
game. If you believe in ""momentum,"" would you not have to say that, not
only did the A's have as much as the Tigers coming into this series, but
they also had more rest, AND they had the better pitcher going in game one??
There is NO momentum. The W Sox in '05 only did about 2 games better than
the '06 Tigers in their last 50 games. There is no MOMENTUM. If you were the
Ynakers, would you rather have been facing a team on a five game losing
streak, or a five game winning streak?? There IS no momentum, and I'd take
the team on the winning streak, cuz their luck is gonna change in YOUR
direction. There is NO momentum.
Inside of a game, most often isnide of an inning, there IS momentum. Game to
game, there is no MOMENTUM.





--
I never read email at the Yahoo address!

brink wrote:

Yeah, momentum and trends are wayyyy overrated. Sure it's nice to go
into the series with a win streak, but a 5-game win streak can suddenly
turn into a 5-game loss streak. After a crushing loss, the media loves
to jump on that team and pronounce the series over. This happens all
the time.

When Detroit backed into the postseason, and then got destroyed by New
York in game 1, everyone pronounced the series over. Then Detroit
completely reverses course and dominates New York the rest of the way.

I also remember this year's NBA finals. The Heat lost the first 2 games
to the Mavs, and all the sports media said it was over, there's no way
that the Heat can win 4 out of the last 5 games. I was thinking to
myself, "OK, so the Mavs won their home games. They took care of their
business. If the Heat take care of their business and win the next 2
games at home, it's tied 2-2." The Heat ended up winning 4 straight.

"Bucky" <uw_badgers@email.com> wrote in message
news:1160636584.983530.217020@i3g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...


not to mention, '04 ALCS.






--
I never read email at the Yahoo address!

I agree there is no momentum in baseball. The only place I think
momentum can affect a sport is football, in one game. Even in
basketball, its tempo and defense, but not momentum.

Since pitching defines baseball, one pitcher can derail a batting
order.

Andy
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15228489/

Bill Kawalec wrote:

Skewing the facts to make a point? 50 games is quite a large sample,
31% of the season.

The '05 Sox and the '06 Tigers were close over the last third of the
season but the Sox surely went into the post-season with momentum
(playing well, or choose your term) and finished the season playing
better than the Tigers. The Sox won the division, won 99 games and
stomped the Indians, keeping them out of the playoffs.

Without a doubt examples can be plucked out either way to prove one's
opinion, but IMHO I'd rather have my favorite team(s) playing well and
yes having some momentum going into the post-season.

brink wrote:

I couldn't agree more, but I think that sometimes"playing well" is
mistaken for momentum. Sometimes a team starts playing beyond what
it's history would lead us to expect. The Twins did that this year,
especially in June. They were just playing really well, with a lot of
guys coming around at the same time. It is a beautiful thing to
witness. But the fact that they won on one day, has precious little to
do with whether they will win the next day. It is closer to the truth
to say that you like their chances on the second day becuase they are
playing well, but not because they won on the first day.

Also, and I have never looked this up, but I think I remember John
Gordon saying once that historically, the longest winning streaks have
been followed by long losing streaks and vice versa. If there is
anything at all to say in favor of the momentum argument, I suppose it
would be that players that are confident can sometimes play better than
players who are not, but that seems to be the outer limits of the
claim.

Brian J

On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 02:02:15 -0400, "Bill Kawalec"
<billkawalec@yahoo.com> wrote:



As Jim Leyland says, "momentum is tomorrow's pitcher"
And right now, who's going to argue with HIM?

Brian