Diamondbacks: Real Fangs or just empty rattling?

[Wondercall]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW...

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/ar...ge-in-arizona/

[/ QUOTE ]

Good article, thanks for the link.

[Zeno]

One bad pitch by Livan pretty much decided the first game. Too bad, because the big man did have a quality outing against Jake, who pitched a gem of a game and deserved the win.

-Zeno

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW...

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/ar...ge-in-arizona/

[/ QUOTE ]

Good article, thanks for the link.

[/ QUOTE ]

here's a counterpoint to the article

http://resultsdisoriented.blogspot.c...uccess-by.html

[HajiShirazu]

They've luckboxed all season and now they'll go to the playoffs, where even if they really are bad they'll only be like a 46/54 dog in each round anyway.
I don't know though, it just seems like a crazy +4 SD event that a team could outperform their run record by so much. Maybe there's some crazy voodoo black magic going on here. Or maybe "clutch" is real.

[Kos13]

[ QUOTE ]
Or maybe "clutch" is real.

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[Kos13]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW...

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/ar...ge-in-arizona/

[/ QUOTE ]

Good article, thanks for the link.

[/ QUOTE ]

here's a counterpoint to the article

http://resultsdisoriented.blogspot.c...uccess-by.html

[/ QUOTE ]

Good response. The most interesting part (at least for me) is that it's all meaningless if/when they make the playoffs. Unlike the 2006 Cardinals, this is actually a 90ish-win-talented team. While they might end up a below .500 (expected win percentage) team, they are still talented enough to be the at their actual record, so they could fall back to Earth while still maintaining their same winning percentage due to the growth/"rising to the mean" from their underperforming young hitters.

Coming from someone who has been extremely high on the Diamondbacks since January, I think that's a [censored] scary team in October, even if they've completely over-won (?) for five months.

[34TheTruth34]

[ QUOTE ]
TheTruth,

The 2005 Indians had the best bullpen in the majors.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't know what you're getting at.

[THAY3R]

They had the best run differential in baseball, and the best bullpen in baseball and did not make the playoffs.

[34TheTruth34]

[ QUOTE ]
Good response. The most interesting part (at least for me) is that it's all meaningless if/when they make the playoffs. Unlike the 2006 Cardinals, this is actually a 90ish-win-talented team. While they might end up a below .500 (expected win percentage) team, they are still talented enough to be the at their actual record, so they could fall back to Earth while still maintaining their same winning percentage due to the growth/"rising to the mean" from their underperforming young hitters.

Coming from someone who has been extremely high on the Diamondbacks since January, I think that's a [censored] scary team in October, even if they've completely over-won (?) for five months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree.

I think this thread is kinda evolving into the people who were real high on Arizona coming into the season arguing that they're actually a good team and those who thought they would just be mediocre arguing that they suck.

I picked them to win the NL West prior to the start of the season. But, like most people, I felt they would crush the ball and that the pitching would be the glaring weakness. Bizarre season they've had so far.

[tuq]

[ QUOTE ]
One bad pitch by Livan pretty much decided the first game. Too bad, because the big man did have a quality outing against Jake, who pitched a gem of a game and deserved the win.

[/ QUOTE ]
When I saw that matchup I pretty much thought they would have to exhume Eric Gregg for Livan to have any chance of beating Peavy. Livan on the mound gives me the same shudders that I bet Eck did to Cards fans at the end of his career. So I was utterly prepared for him to lose, which of course he did. But I wasn't prepared for it to be that close.