The more I think about it, the less I buy into it. If you play well,
you have a shot at winning. If you don't, you don't. The "which team
will show up?" question just indicates an incomplete team.

On Oct 12, 10:55 am, TheDave© <n...@no.com> wrote:

C'mon, it's pretty clear that luck will tend to even out over a 162
game season. But how often is Torii Hunter going to misplay a single
into a home run? A-Rod clearly isn't the judy hitter that he looks
like in the playoffs.

The better team is _probably_ going to be better in a short series, but
MLB playoff teams aren't that far apart. Somebody has a good day,
somebody has a bad day and the underdog wins.

And, in a short series, a team's depth is likely to be a lot less
important (especially in the American League) than it is over a whole
season.

The playoffs aren't a crapshoot, but aren't a complete test of who's
teh better team over a season, either.

> Louis Cohen wrote:

Twice in four years now. ;-)

Even at that, it doesn't necessarily doom a team. In 2002 the Twins
still won the series anyway, in 2006 they didn't.


No, but I think that's an entirely different subject. That has more to
do with him, and his mindset, and his insecurities, and so on. I'm
sure a pshychologist could write a book on Arod.


I don't disagree with you at all. The hot team quite often wins, and
the hot team at the moment isn't necessarily the best team. 1988
Dodgers, anyone? Hell, the next spring, even Orel Hershiser admitted
in an interview that they weren't the better team, they just played
better that week.

My point is that the whole "crapshoot" thing has been taken too far.
It's become an excuse. Almost a pre-emptive "it's not my fault" excuse
just in case it doesn't go well. It implies too much "random chance".