Actually we will.
Actually we won't....
Do you think Gonzalez boots a ball trying to turn a double play IF there's already two outs?
Nope.
Also, for your scenario you'd need to take away two runs...
1. Castillo (out on the Bartman play)
2. The run scoring sac fly would have been the 3rd out
So at most it's 3-2 Cubs. But also, maybe Prior doesn't get rattled? He was cruising before the bartman play.
So yeah, we actually don't know. That's what hypothetical means. It didn't happen so you have no way of actually knowing. You can use the data to come up with an educated guess, but you have no way of knowing for sure.
It was Alex Gonzalez's error on the next hitter that changed that game, and no one talks about it.
I do agree with that, but that has nothing to do with knowing how many runs the Marlins would have scored in a hypothetical scenario. Besides, every pitch the pitcher throws changes the game.
Even if we accept your 4-3 Marlins still win scenario the Cubs last two at bats are COMPLETELY different. Being down a run is a lot different than being down 5. Pitching is a lot different there also. Different pitchers probably get used in that situation. Probably a set up man and the closer. Not sure who was used in the 8-3 "real game", but I doubt the closer is in with a 5 run lead.
But, I don't accept your 4-3 Marlins' win and explained (quite beautifully) why.
reply
share
Learning_Too_Fly
9 years ago
But also, maybe Prior doesn't get rattled? He was cruising before the bartman play.
If that play rattled Prior, then he was bound to get rattled anyway. It didn't change anything; not even the count in the at-bat. Any pitcher who is good under pressure would've shrugged off what may or may not have been an out on that play and continued to work. If that ball not being caught rattled him with no one on base and one already out, then he was simply weak-minded.
This year in the NLCS the Mets had at least two plays where outs weren't made that should have been; one resulted in a double and one an infield single. Yet the Mets pitchers didn't let it faze them and got out of the trouble. Prior still had NO ONE on base after the Bartman play; these guys had runners now on base. The difference is the ability to handle pressure and bad luck situations.
reply
share
doggie_rodriguez
9 years ago
If that play rattled Prior, then he was bound to get rattled anyway.
If the play that rattled him doesn't rattle him then something else rattles him? That makes no sense. That's like saying "if Bob doesn't shoot you, Kevin will."
I'm not saying they would have won or lost if that catch is made. Check the context. I was responding to someone else that said the Marlins still win that game even if Alou catches the Bartman ball. I made my points that it's "unknown" what would have happened if Alou catches the ball. I certainly don't believe the Marlins win 8-3 if Alou catches the ball. And I disagree with the poster above that the Marlins win 4-3 (and showed why). But again, we'll never know b/c it didn't happen.
Any pitcher who is good under pressure would've shrugged off what may or may not have been an out on that play and continued to work.
And induced a potential inning ending ground ball double play? Like he did, but Gonzalez booted it. (which also, that play probably doesn't happen if Alou catches the Bartman ball b/c Gonzo wouldn't have needed to turn 2 b/c there would have already been 2 outs).
Prior still had NO ONE on base after the Bartman play;
Actually there was a runner on second. I believe it was Juan Pierre.
Here's a play by play of the inning (after the Bartman play)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Bartman_incidentYet the Mets pitchers didn't let it faze them and got out of the trouble.
It's easy to get out of jams when you have the benefit of an extremely generous strike zone (FYI, I'm going by the K zone they had on the screen, not by my Cub fan heart). It costs the Cubs at least 3 walks that first game. Maybe it was like that for both teams, but I don't remember it hurting the Mets that much.
Also the Mets made several great defensive plays (and had many hard hit balls right at them). Regardless of the strike zone, the Mets were just the better team. They deserved to win. It just wasn't the Cubs' time. But it will be soon enough. 97 wins out of a young team predicted by many to be an 81 win (.500) team. The Cubs will be like the Braves were in the 90s. Win the division every year for a long time.. Hopefully they will win more than one title though. But honestly, this city would take it.
reply
share
9 years ago
[deleted]
doggie_rodriguez
9 years ago
No mention of Prior?
I did mention Prior. I think you might be responding to the wrong person. You responded to me in another thread and it felt like that was meant for someone else as well.
reply
share
Imac7065
8 years ago
I'm just seeing this now so I'm sorry for the late reply...
You just went on a rant about "what if's" "could be" "how about...".... I can't do that. I can only go with the facts. If the foul ball is caught by Moises Alou, and the inning continues as it did.. the marlins leave the inning with a 4-3 lead and win the game. The Bartman play had no actual impact on the outcome of the game, just the final score. This is a fact, no what if's or could be's.. just a fact.
reply
share