It's not over until WE say it's over!

No trading Cliff Lee. This isn't over.

In 1951, on August 13, the New York Giants were 12.5 games behind the Brooklyn Dodgers. Now, I have a lot of respect for the Rangers. But the Rangers are NOT the 1951 Brooklyn Dodgers, as fine a team we'll ever see.

On July 24, 1964, the St. Louis Cards were 10 back and had SIX teams ahead of them. A month later, in what must have seemed like a futile chase, they were 11 back with three teams ahead of them. They went on to win the World Series.

On August 13, 1969, the New York Mets were 10 games behind Chicage and in third place. They went on to win the World Series as well, behind two stud pitchers, Seaver and Koosman.

In 1995, on July 14, the Seattle Mariners were 7 games back with three teams ahead of them. On August 2, we were 13 games back with two teams ahead of us. We went and acquired Andy Benes because we thought we had a shot at the wild card. The AL West was out of the question.

C'mon everyone. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?! Yeah, it looks insurmountable. All that means is that it's time to get to work. There's three months of baseball left to play.

Printer-friendly version

Add new comment

Filed Under

Other

Replies

history

I admire the enthusiasm and your knowledge of baseball history. Your American history could use some freshening up, however. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the Asians
that bombed pearl harbor? :)

Yes, the entire continent of

Yes, the entire continent of Asia bombed Pearl Harbor.

Germans bombing pearl harbor

Germans bombing pearl harbor is a Animal House reference IIRC

That should get spoints!

LOL :- )

cpoints and spoints

More like Gilligans Island.

More like Gilligans Island. They've shipwrecked the Minnow.

No...

...it's over. Your analysis of past pennant races is correct, but you neglect the odds. You just pulled out 4 teams with bad records from 60 years of baseball that overcame those odds. If you assume (roughly) an average of 25 teams in the league over that timespan... that's a 0.2666% success rate.

About a quarter of a percent.

If you say you overlooked even 3/4 of the relevant teams in that timeframe with similar stories, at best you can give us a 1% chance of pulling a playoff appearance out at this point. 1% isn't high enough odds to give up the mad payout we would get from a Lee trade.

99% of the time, we'll be thrilled with the inevitable trade. And if that 1% happens, it can happen just as easily with Bedard in Lee's shoes, and RRS being replaced by a Baker/Slowey type that comes back in the Lee trade (or Pineda, anyone?).

I don't think you're being stupid or anything... just overly optimistic. Realistically, we can't bet on the scenario you're putting forward... we have to PLAN for what is likely to happen.

That being said, trading Lee doesn't mean we have to give up all hope... nor does it mean the towel is irrevocably thrown in. This team could trade Aardsma, Lee, and Lopez... and be BETTER down the stretch.

Quality on the field

Tuned in to the postgame show on the radio after the Felix 2-hitter. People were excited about the idea of watching our deuling aces for the next 3 months, and not about the prospect of a great, '95-style comeback.

The .25% shot at the division is a bonus. The real reward of keeping Lee is getting to watch he and Felix - and Bedard - take turns shutting down the opposition.

How many walk-off losses have M's fans suffered, again? M's fans have earned this pleasure.

Yeah, but M's fans don't

Yeah, but M's fans don't deserve the pain of watching him walk for a couple measly draft picks... with no guarantee that the top one is in the first-round proper.

If we knew we could re-sign Lee, that would be one thing. But keeping a guy around for a half season just for the pleasure of watching him play (rather than for a stretch drive, which is not applicable in this case but WOULD be justified)? Doesn't seem worth throwing away the extra talent we could have over the next 5-6 years.