IGT: Chicago @ Washington NLDS 2017 Game 5

TC in Mississippi · Oct 13, 2017

TL1961 said:
Lester in Game 2 is a possibility in Joe's mind, most likely. But Quintana should go Game 2 and get everybody back to normal rest. We are not winning a series with too many going on short rest. Q threw 12 pitches Thursday (though he was up once prior in pen)

If he goes Q tomorrow I would think he goes Lester on a quasi pitch count backed up by Monty on Sunday. Then you could do what you want, probably Hendricks, Arrieta, Q at home.

TL1961 · Oct 13, 2017

TC in Mississippi said:
If he goes Q tomorrow I would think he goes Lester on a quasi pitch count backed up by Monty on Sunday. Then you could do what you want, probably Hendricks, Arrieta, Q at home.

I'd be fine going with Lackey vs Kershaw and getting things back on schedule. Lots of pressure on Kershaw in that one.

chibears55 · Oct 13, 2017

TL1961 said:
Lester in Game 2 is a possibility in Joe's mind, most likely. But Quintana should go Game 2 and get everybody back to normal rest. We are not winning a series with too many going on short rest. Q threw 12 pitches Thursday (though he was up once prior in pen)

If he starts Lackey game 1

Lester would be only one going on short rest (3days) ..
Then you have him for 2 starts ..
Possible game 6

Hendricks would go on 4 days rest in Game 3 and will also get 2 starts
Possible Game 7

This could fall in cubs favor as far as pitching matchups rest of series

Especially if a miracle happens and they pull off a game 1 win

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

CSF77 · Oct 13, 2017

Parade_Rain said:
It is really strange how none of the guys threw as well as we know they can last night. Thankfully Davis had stones and Maddon had no one of interest left to bring off the bench.

That series was a dog fight. You have to factor in the will to win on the hitters not giving up at bats

CSF77 · Oct 13, 2017

I’m pretty sure it will be Wilson or Rondon depending on the Dodgers bench strength

CSF77 · Oct 13, 2017

chibears55 said:
If he starts Lackey game 1

Lester would be only one going on short rest (3days) ..
Then you have him for 2 starts ..
Possible game 6

Hendricks would go on 4 days rest in Game 3 and will also get 2 starts
Possible Game 7

This could fall in cubs favor as far as pitching matchups rest of series

Especially if a miracle happens and they pull off a game 1 win

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Hendricks tends to be less effective after being seen the 2nd time in a series.

You have to go with stuff guys and I can’t see Q not going x2

TC in Mississippi · Oct 13, 2017

TL1961 said:
I'd be fine going with Lackey vs Kershaw and getting things back on schedule. Lots of pressure on Kershaw in that one.

The interesting thing is this current Dodgers team is batting .222 against Lackey. I don't take much stock in that without some deeper numbers but it is interesting.

Parade_Rain · Oct 13, 2017

CSF77 said:
That series was a dog fight. You have to factor in the will to win on the hitters not giving up at bats

Have you factored in the likes of Baez swinging at the first pitch against Strasburg when he had about 87 pitches? First pitch double play ground ball? They got lucky against a superior team.

RacerX · Oct 13, 2017

Parade_Rain said:
It is really strange how none of the guys threw as well as we know they can last night..

Max Scherzer agrees with this post.

TC in Mississippi · Oct 13, 2017

Parade_Rain said:
Have you factored in the likes of Baez swinging at the first pitch against Strasburg when he had about 87 pitches? First pitch double play ground ball? They got lucky against a superior team.

I don't think the Nats were a superior team, I thought the teams were evenly matched with maybe a very slight edge to Washington. Was there luck involved? Sure, I think there always is in the playoffs, but to me what it really came down to was a team with a ton of pressure to perform and another team with a WS at their back who knew how to handle an elimination game. Last night could have very well have been the swan song for that Nationals team as we've known them, I assume Baker will be gone and if I were them I'd trade Harper with a year left. On the other side if our guys had lost there would have been some hand wringing but essentially nothing would have changed. Butts would still fill the seats, our contention window would still be open and the core of the Cubs would be the same.

beckdawg · Oct 13, 2017

I don't think the Nats were the superior team. I'd agree both were fairly even but if the cubs don't blow the lead in the 8th inning of game 2 they would have swept the series. They also could have(maybe should have) won game 4. The first run they gave up came after a blown swinging strike call that would have ended the inning. And the homer taylor hit barely made the basket where as the one Russell hit got knocked down by the wind.

Ultimately, the nats had great pitching but that's all they had. Their bats were pretty terrible all series and they made a number of costly mistakes that winning teams don't. I mean maybe you argue the cubs made a lot of defensive gaffs too but they did enough to offset them and won. The nats did't.

Parade_Rain · Oct 13, 2017

Overrated said:
Who cares? Better to be lucky than good. Besides, baseball is all about timely hitting and sometimes you need luck and bounces going your way like seeing eye base hits and bloopers that fall in. Look at the Indians, perhaps the best team in the playoffs on paper this year lose 3 straight to the Yankees, no one saw that coming.

Thanks, Captain Obvious.

fatbeard · Oct 13, 2017

beckdawg said:
I don't think the Nats were the superior team. I'd agree both were fairly even but if the cubs don't blow the lead in the 8th inning of game 2 they would have swept the series. They also could have(maybe should have) won game 4. The first run they gave up came after a blown swinging strike call that would have ended the inning. And the homer taylor hit barely made the basket where as the one Russell hit got knocked down by the wind.

Ultimately, the nats had great pitching but that's all they had. Their bats were pretty terrible all series and they made a number of costly mistakes that winning teams don't. I mean maybe you argue the cubs made a lot of defensive gaffs too but they did enough to offset them and won. The nats did't.

...and if Scherzer doesn't tweak his hamstring a week before the season ends, the Cubs have to face him and Strasburg four times in five games. That's a death sentence. They are as good a one-two punch as Schilling/Johnson, and the Cubs were fortunate to get by them playing as poorly as they did at times.

TL1961 · Oct 13, 2017

chibears55 said:
If he starts Lackey game 1

Lester would be only one going on short rest (3days) ..
Then you have him for 2 starts ..
Possible game 6

Hendricks would go on 4 days rest in Game 3 and will also get 2 starts
Possible Game 7

This could fall in cubs favor as far as pitching matchups rest of series

Especially if a miracle happens and they pull off a game 1 win

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Lester three days after bullpen, shortly after a start. May work, but I don't want to see him lost for the series rather than get him on normal schedule, or get everyone needed rest.

Q would be my choice. Why wait on him?

TL1961 · Oct 13, 2017

fatbeard said:
...and if Scherzer doesn't tweak his hamstring a week before the season ends, the Cubs have to face him and Strasburg four times in five games. That's a death sentence. They are as good a one-two punch as Schilling/Johnson, and the Cubs were fortunate to get by them playing as poorly as they did at times.

Oh, please.

The Nats' three losses were Strasburg, Scherzer, Scherzer.

Let's stop acting like the Cubs roll over for every good pitcher every time.

For example, they lost last year to Kershaw and Kluber, but also beat them both.

Give the Cubs some credit.

CSF77 · Oct 13, 2017

What happens in the regular season means squat. What mattered was the Cubs have won it all and have the drive to push a game to that point of winning. The Nats were desperate and pushed their limits and almost came back.

You really can't put a series like this as more talent lost to less talent. That is bunk. The Cubs won it all with basically the same group of guys. If anything the Cubs had the edge in experience and it played out. The Cubs have done what it takes and the Nats had to prove that they can get out of the first round.

beckdawg · Oct 13, 2017

fatbeard said:
...and if Scherzer doesn't tweak his hamstring a week before the season ends, the Cubs have to face him and Strasburg four times in five games. That's a death sentence. They are as good a one-two punch as Schilling/Johnson, and the Cubs were fortunate to get by them playing as poorly as they did at times.

They did face Scherzer/Stras 4 times in 5 games...

fatbeard · Oct 14, 2017

beckdawg said:
They did face Scherzer/Stras 4 times in 5 games...

Please. Facing a compromised Scherzer out of the pen on short rest is not what I was referring to. If he doesn't have the hamstring, he starts Games 2 and 5 on normal rest and the Nats cover four games with Stras/Scherzer in a five game series. There is no path to victory for the Cubs in that scenario, "better team" or not. The Nats were tailor-made for a short series and Scherzer's hamstring is the only reason the Cubs season isn't over.

ijustposthere · Oct 14, 2017

fatbeard said:
...and if Scherzer doesn't tweak his hamstring a week before the season ends, the Cubs have to face him and Strasburg four times in five games. That's a death sentence. They are as good a one-two punch as Schilling/Johnson, and the Cubs were fortunate to get by them playing as poorly as they did at times.

And if there was no rain, they probably end the series in 4 games without seeing Stras again. This goes both ways. The teams were pretty even. Plus, this is fairly irrelevant since the Cubs did beat both Stras and Scherzer in two of their three starts.

ijustposthere · Oct 14, 2017

fatbeard said:
Please. Facing a compromised Scherzer out of the pen on short rest is not what I was referring to. If he doesn't have the hamstring, he starts Games 2 and 5 on normal rest and the Nats cover four games with Stras/Scherzer in a five game series. There is no path to victory for the Cubs in that scenario, "better team" or not. The Nats were tailor-made for a short series and Scherzer's hamstring is the only reason the Cubs season isn't over.

If Scherzer wasn't hurt, the projected rotation is:

G1: Scherzer
G2: Stras
Off
G3: Gio
G4: Roark
Off
G5: Scherzer

And again, the Cubs have found a way to beat very good pitchers in the last few years in the playoffs. With the mistakes the Nats were making, I'm not giving a clear victory to the Nats.

IGT: Chicago @ Washington NLDS 2017 Game 5

CCS Staff

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

CCS Staff

CCS Donator

My favorite teams

Silicon Valley CA Bears H

CCS Staff

Well-known member

CCS Donator

My favorite teams

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Message Board Hero

My favorite teams

Message Board Hero

My favorite teams