If Detroit did not make the errors they did, would they have won the World Series? They gave up 10+ unerned runs and not to mention all of the runs that they gave up because innings continued.
2006-11-07 15:26:41 · 24 answers · asked by nick m 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
SHOULD isn't even a question. They didn't win it. What they COULD have done differently is an issue. If they did pitch better then maybe they could have won. The truth of the matter is that their pitching was terrible and they lost.
2006-11-07 22:42:18 · answer #1 · answered by Adam 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I happen to think that it is a difficult question to ask, or even consider, given that the world series was won in 5 games. That constitutes a blow out, and Detroit wasn't even competitive in this series.
If it was a 7 game series, and the Cards won, I think it would be something to consider. There are several cases where the better team loses in a close series. And you could definitely then make an argument that Detroit was the better team. (Similarly, I would argue that the Mets were a better team the the Cardinals.)
But, Detroit, on the biggest stage, played miserably. And teams that deserve to win don't play that poorly in the World Series. And, factor in that the only game they won was pitched by a guy who was proven as a cheater.
So, my short answer is, no Detroit shouldn't have won the world series.
2006-11-08 10:51:55 · answer #2 · answered by Jeff S 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Cardinals peaked at the right time. They had a horrible last part of the season and everyone was counting them out. Scott Rolen finally started getting the hits that they had not been getting from him. The Cardinal pitching staff(Even without Isringhousen) stepped up and kept a potent Detroit offense under control. St Louis just seemed to want it more and made the plays necessary to win and that is why they are the World Series champions.
2006-11-10 01:01:31 · answer #3 · answered by hawkeye316 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
G'day Nick M,
Thank you for your question.
There were several reasons why good judges as well as me tipped the Detroit Tigers:
a) Detroit was the fresher team;
b) Detroit was due to play more home games;
c) they had the better regular season record and St Louis had a winning record during the regular season of less than 50 per cent;
d) the Tigers home ground is a hard ground to play at if you aren't used to it.
Congratulations to the Cardinals as they were clearly the best team during the series. Jim Leyland will view this series as the one that got away and Tony LaRussa will think that his luck had changed.
Regards
2006-11-08 04:48:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, St Louis in easily the better ball club here I mean I think it could have been a closer series but even without the mistakes home runs and errors the Cardinals possibly would have still came out on top and the Tigers arent as veteraned as them st louis desereved it
2006-11-08 13:26:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I say no. Its pretty much a mute point to make an argument for any team winning a series when they lose in 5.
By the way (and I respect Jim Leyland), but what was he thinking in not throwing Kenny Rodgers in game 5? You don't get back to Detroit if you can't win game 5. Not to mention, if he continues his dominance, you could throw him again for 3 or 4 innings in game 7.
2006-11-08 03:18:44 · answer #6 · answered by cubnpack 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have been a Detroit Tiger fan since I was a kid many years ago, in good years (1972, 1984,1987,2006) and the really crummy years (all the others) and I really hoped that they would play better, but they did not. The St. Louis Cardinals simply played well when they had to to get to the Series, and really out-played the Tigers in the Series.
They are the Champions and we Tiger fans have to get over it.
2006-11-08 17:32:28 · answer #7 · answered by jpbofohio 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NOOOO!!!!!! because any baseball fans knows that anything can happen and thats what makes the game great. If anyone should have won it should have been the Mets. They had the best regular season team. But they had physical problems that led to not winning the World Series. The Tigers Didn't Win the world series because they made mental mistakes.
2006-11-07 23:39:31 · answer #8 · answered by Zebrra 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
"If Detroit did not make the errors they did" . If, ifs and buts were candy and nuts we would all have a merry Christmas!! Having the better regular season record does not necessarily mean you're going to win the World Series, "see Cardinals 2004" You have to actually show up and play the games...
"Should have won" Maybe, did they deserve to, NO!! The Cardinals outplayed them in every phase of the game...
2006-11-08 01:33:00 · answer #9 · answered by C_F_45 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Even without the errors the runs they gave up, they would still have lost the series.
The series has been over for a couple weeks now, please, give it up. The Cardinals were the better team in the series.
And the Tigers just shot themselves in the foot by commiting all those errors.
2006-11-08 18:06:11 · answer #10 · answered by Bryan M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. This a pointless question.
The St Louis Cardinals simply played better
baseball then The Tigers did.
If you're a Tiger fan you should be grateful they got as far
as they did, considering where they have been.
It would have been nice if the Tiger had won,
but St Louis deserved to win----they played better and won.
2006-11-08 08:43:59 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋