The Real Mvp Of The Series

[Johnny_RedSox]

Guys the "REAL MVP"

 

1) SCHILLING

2) PEDRO

3) LOWE

 

0 EARNED RUNS combined

 

THAT IS MAINLY WHY WE ARE WORLD CHAMPS!!!

[yeszir]

We are mainly world champs because the yankees choked on their egos and St. Louis's hitting forgot to show up.

[Johnny_RedSox]

thats your opinion not mine!

 

WE ARE WORLD CHAMPS CAUSE WE ARE THE BEST TEAM IN THE WORLD!!!

 

CASE CLOSED

[jlcrss9]

Originally posted by Johnny_RedSox@Oct 28 2004, 07:55 PM

thats your opinion not mine!

 

WE ARE WORLD CHAMPS CAUSE WE ARE THE BEST TEAM IN THE WORLD!!!

 

CASE CLOSED

Cant disagree with that one. 0 earned runs is pretty damn impressive.

[red demon]

Yeah the pitching was sensational. Don't forget Foulke though - he was almost as big a part as those guys.

 

It's strange because pitching won us the World Series yet it's tough to give pitchers MVP. Not only did the starters only play in one game, but who deserves it more - Schill, Pedro or Lowe?

 

Manny played and hit in every game and that makes him the easier choice.

[schillingouttheks]

Originally posted by yeszir@Oct 28 2004, 08:53 PM

We are mainly world champs because the yankees choked on their egos and St. Louis's hitting forgot to show up.

in game 1 when we had our weakest pitcher, arguably, on the mound, he got lit up. i think our pitching was superior to their hitting, and it had somewhat to do with them not showing up. i do think our pitching overpowered their hitting and thats y we are champs.

 

pitching wins championships, something the cards dont have.

 

you cant win a championship with great bats up and down the lineup, u need to make sure u can keep the other team with runs off the board as well. we are well balanced between our lineup and pitching, which is why we are winners.

 

the yankees...well they forgot how to play baseball and they didnt take us seriously enough.

[Beaneater]

Originally posted by yeszir@Oct 28 2004, 07:53 PM

We are mainly world champs because [...] St. Louis's hitting forgot to show up.

I've posted this elsewhere, but I agree with schillingouttheks' assessment that the Cards' offensive woes had more to do with our pitching than their bats. As I review the games in my mind, I see tough pitch after tough pitch coming at Walker, Pujols, Rolen, Edmonds, and Sanders. Sometimes the Cards could do something with the tough pitches -- Walker's (meaningless) HR in Game 3 came off a good Foulke changeup down out of the strike zone, as I recall. Just a good solid piece of hitting, making something good come out of a pitcher's pitch.

 

But more often than not, our tough pitching meant pop-ups, weak grounders, etc. Oh, we got lucky, too, as quite a few balls were hammered but directly at a fielder. But here's an example of what I'm talking about -- you know the NLCS Game 6 walk off HR by Edmonds? Where was that pitch? It was a gigantic meatball, a not-so-fast fastball between the belt and the letters right over the heart of the plate. How many meatballs did their big guns see in the WS? Not very many.

 

We saw some, though. Manny's Game 3 HR -- meatball. Trot's Game 4 RBI double -- meatball (not that the pitcher had any choice given the situation, but, hey, it was his fault for getting into that situation).

 

But their boys got a steady diet of high-and-tight heat, low and away junk, back door breaking stuff, etc. (as well as occasionally being blown away by Schill, Pedro, Embree, and even sometimes Lowe). Just beautiful.

 

In conclusion, yes, the Cards had cold bats in that they were unable (for the most part) to overcome good pitching with opposite field hits or Texas leaguers or Beltran-style "I-don't-care-where-the-ball-is-I'm-going-to-hammer-it" hitting. But in the same way that every team went cold when facing Bob Gibson, this was more about pitching than hitting.