Who hurt you?

Why do facts and truths hurt you so much?

Steroids don't improve your raw ability to hit for power; they affect how far the ball will go when you hit for power. Is Dee Gordon a HR machine now that he took steroids, including testosterone? You don't go from those numbers to his numbers this year without putting in a ridiculous amount of work with your hitting coaches in the offseason on improving basic fundamentals from the swing itself to pitch recognition to opposite field hitting, which translates into better play on the field. If you think steroids are some magical pill that makes you a baseball god, you obviously don't understand steroids, or even baseball for that matter.

" If you think steroids are some magical pill that makes you a baseball god, you obviously don't understand steroids, or even baseball for that matter. "

And yet a lot of people, including baseball writers, dumb down the HR surge of the late 90's to just that.

If steroids gave no significant benefits then why was their use so prevalent ? I understand the point Bo Sox makes, steroids alone will not make a great batsman, but I think he trivialises their impact/effect. Most professional sports are concerned about the image of their game, advertising revenue is linked to that image, so if a sport portrays itself in certain ways, setting or embracing values that are acceptable, desired by the society in which it operates then any divergence from those values exposes it to loss of reputation and revenue.. Eg, if baseball portrays itself as honest, "clean" athletic competition, then "drug cheats" and drug use are inconsistent with the portrayed image.

"If steroids gave no significant benefits then why was their use so prevalent"

Eye black that players wear doesn't give significant benefits to performance yet many players use it.

Players will use anything they think (keyword think, not proven) to give them an advantage.

The placebo effect in sports ?

I don't know, but athletes, at least here in N. America, can be very superstitious. So anything that helps them think they have an advantage could actually give them an advantage.

I just think that if steroids had as significant an impact on the game as people claim, we wouldn't see the yearly total HR record smashed this year like it is.

One thing I've noticed about American sports ranging from NASCAR to NFL, is the overt "religious" influence. Sports people constantly referring to "having God's help to score that touch down, win that car race etc etc"

Can we get to the real issue? Which is:

How hard do the Astros play the Red Sox in this series? If the Astros win the series and the Yankees win out, Yankees take the AL East and Houston gets to play them, not Boston. But try too hard, and Boston most likely gets a little preview of the ALDS

If I were the Astros, this is the first year that anyone but Verlander has had serious postseason aspirations in a long time. I wouldn't give them an excuse to let up by resting anyone or going easy at all.

This is the first year that anyone but Verlander on the Astros had serious postseason aspirations in a long time?

LOL!!!

They were six outs from advancing to the ALCS in 2015 and only an incredible comeback by the Royals in Game 4 of the ALDS and 8 innings of two hit ball from Cueto in Game 5 prevented that from happening.

Altuve, Correra, Springer, Gattis, Marisnick, Keuchel, McCullers, McHugh and Gregerson were all key contributors on the 2015 team right off the top of my head.

The biggest reason for them to not let up or go easy is that they are only one game behind Cleveland for best record in the AL and home field advantage in the AL playoffs.

I don't remember it being that close but you're probably right. Were they anything close to favorites, though?

I just remember that because they beat the Yankees in the Wild Card game.

But man, I don't know which would be worse - going up against the Astros or the Indians in the ALDS. I was hoping the Twins would win yesterday though, so Houston could pull even

bo_sox, no they were not the favorites. The Royals had the best record in the AL that year and were the defending AL Champions.

The Astros were up 6-2 going into the top of the 8th and had a 97% win probability at that point in the game. The biggest play of the game was with the Astros leading 6-4 in the 8th with the bases loaded, a double play ball was hit to Carlos Correa who missed it allowing two runs to score and tie the game. The Royals added another run in the 8th and 2 run HR by Hosmer in the 9th put the game out reach.

I wouldn't say they are the favorites this year either.

Cleveland is by far the most complete team in baseball and are playing the best baseball right now.

They have two aces at the top of the rotation, the best bullpen in baseball and three big time hitters in Lindor, Encarnacion and Ramirez.

Plus the Indians have to be hungry after the heartbreak of losing a 3-1 game lead and a heartbreaking extra inning Game 7 last year.

Makes me wish I had paid attention to the playoffs last year. It was a good story. But if the Yankees and Sox are out, my attention wanes.

I would also add "arguably" the best bullpen in baseball. Several other teams have ones that are just as good.

Cleveland has the best bullpen ERA in baseball and the highest save percentage.

The only bullpen I would personally say is close is Boston because of Kimbrel, but I think Miller is a bigger weapon out of the pen being able to pitch multiple innings.

He dominated the playoffs last year till he got worn out at the end of the WS.

Those are some stats, yes. But the Yankees bullpen has more wins, has pitched 50 more innings, has a higher strikeout rate and a much lower BAA than both Cleveland and Boston. I guess it all depends on what you value most.

The only reason the Yankees aren't unanimously #1 is because Chapman and Betances have appeared human this year.

Though I'll admit the Dodgers have a pretty damn good one too

Wins is a terrible stat to judge pitchers by IMO. That is a team stat. A bullpen could come into a tie game and give up 7 runs in the top of the 9th but have the hitters score 8 runs in the bottom of the 9th and get a win. They still pitched terribly.

Innings pitched by a bullpen is based on starting pitching performance. So the Yankees bullpen pitching 50 more innings tells me that the Yankees starting pitching didn't perform as well as Cleveland's did.

Cleveland's pen has a better K:BB ratio.

Chapman and Betances appearing human this year matters as we are judging the pens based on this year.

I'm guessing you are a Yankees fan? :)

Clearly I am a Royals fan and I don't think I'd listen to anyone who said there was a better bullpen than the Royals had in the 2014 and 2015 seasons.

They simply did not lose leads.

They changed the way baseball is currently being played.

The previous blueprint to winning baseball was great starting pitching. They showed you can win with average at best starting pitching and dominant bullpen pitching.

I'd have to go back and re calculate the numbers, but I think they averaged less than 5 innings a start in the playoffs the year they won the WS and I think only two starts of at least 7 innings during the playoffs.

The Royals bullpen simply dominated other teams and led to an absurd run difference late in games that year.

I can re calculate the numbers if anyone is interested. I can't remember them off the top of my head.

A bullpen having more wins means your team is in more close games. 50 more innings means the starters are worse, though being a good bullpen with more innings is harder. The higher K rate I'll give you, but it comes with way more walks, and it's the direct cause of the BAA, so you don't get to double count.

The Indians have the best ERA and FP in the majors, though admittedly that's easier when you have the fewest bullpen innings.

I'd put the Dodgers and Angels in the conversation too.

2015 I'll give you, Boyd, but the Mariners' bullpen was absolutely ridiculous in 2014.

Innings pitched by bullpen is a relevant stat when looking at which team has a better bullpen. Saying it is a reflection of starting pitching is true, but it shouldn't discount the impact it has on the other numbers.

The Yankees pitched 50 more bullpen innings, and having as good other numbers (ERA, whip etc.) shows they have tremendous bullpen depth - something that Cleveland may or may not have - we just don't know as strongly because they haven't been forced to rely on the bullpen as much. Cleveland has been able to rely on their outstanding starting pitching, and studs in the pen - it will be interesting to see if someone can force them to go to their lesser arms in the pen and see how they hold up.

I think innings pitched is fairly relevant, because the more you work your bullpen, the more likely they are to make mistakes. It's one of those things where - all things even - more innings is more impressive. But on the other hand, not much to be done if your pen simply isn't needed when you have the Cy Young pitcher on the roster.

The walks is a very good point against the Yankees though. Chapman and Betances have walked a lot of people this year - and blown a lot of saves. But even then, the Yankees OBP is almost the same as Boston and Cleveland.

I'll allow you that BAA is in part caused by the higher K rate. But K's don't necessarily cause the SLG and OPS to go down, do they? Yankees have the lowest of both in the Majors.

(And yes, I am a Yankees fan :)

I'm not saying the Yankees are the best. I'm just saying it's not an open and shut case for Cleveland.

But going back to the statement that started this all, I would agree that Cleveland is the most complete team in baseball right now.

Good baseball talk guys!

I would agree that all things equal, more innings by the bullpen would tip the scales.

And I know I said wins by a bullpen was a terrible way to judge pitching but I think a better statement would be that it can be misleading.

The 2015 Royals pen in the playoffs was 8-0 with 4 saves in 15 games with a 2.51 ERA. They pitched 64.1 innings in those 15 games so they were averaging about 4.1 innings per game. That is a lot of innings for a bullpen.

Their starters that year had a 4.97 ERA in the playoffs.

I had a feeling you were a Yanks fan goldfinger lol

Enjoy Hosmer and Moustakas starting next year :(

I think it'll be one or the other. Yanks aren't spending like they used to.

Plus, we need to save up for Bryce Harper