1549 Posted April 17, 2003 Share Posted April 17, 2003 This year the East is a joke...but the playoffs should be good until the finals where the west will dominate. I don't like this years seven game first round format...I love the 5 game series. If baseball switches to 7 for the DS I will be pissed. Now the matchups, and predictions East:(1)Detroit vs. (8)Orlando another disappointing season for Orlando, Detroit in 5. (2)New Jersey vs. (7)Milwaukee I love the Glove, but I have to root for my state's team. Nets in 6. (3)Indiana vs. (6)Boston Indiana is good, but I hate 'em. Boston in 7. (4)Philadelphia vs. (5)New Orleans Iverson and KVH are too much for the Hornets. 76ers in 5. West:(1)Spurs vs. (8)Suns Duncan and Parker are great, Spurs in 4. (2)Kings vs. (7)Jazz CWebb is dominating force in this series. Kings in 5. (3)Dallas vs. (6)Portland Portland has a lot to prove, Dallas is great, I predict an upset. Portland in 6. (4)T'Wolves vs. (5)Lakers KG and Hudson have a lot to prove, Phil Jackson doesn't lose in the playoffs. T'Wolves in 7. There are my picks...I will save you of the bore of reading my picks for the next rounds and just say, Kings over 76ers in 4 in the finals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted April 17, 2003 Share Posted April 17, 2003 This year the East is a joke...but the playoffs should be good until the finals where the west will dominate. I don't like this years seven game first round format...I love the 5 game series. If baseball switches to 7 for the DS I will be pissed. Now the matchups, and predictions East:(1)Detroit vs. (8)Orlando another disappointing season for Orlando, Detroit in 5. (2)New Jersey vs. (7)Milwaukee I love the Glove, but I have to root for my state's team. Nets in 6. (3)Indiana vs. (6)Boston Indiana is good, but I hate 'em. Boston in 7. (4)Philadelphia vs. (5)New Orleans Iverson and KVH are too much for the Hornets. 76ers in 5. West:(1)Spurs vs. (8)Suns Duncan and Parker are great, Spurs in 4. (2)Kings vs. (7)Jazz CWebb is dominating force in this series. Kings in 5. (3)Dallas vs. (6)Portland Portland has a lot to prove, Dallas is great, I predict an upset. Portland in 6. (4)T'Wolves vs. (5)Lakers KG and Hudson have a lot to prove, Phil Jackson doesn't lose in the playoffs. T'Wolves in 7. There are my picks...I will save you of the bore of reading my picks for the next rounds and just say, Kings over 76ers in 4 in the finals. All series should be 7 games. For every game you take off it gives the lesser team a better chance to win, so a greater chance the actual better team doesn't come out on top. And i'm not talking about where they are in the standings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesox247 Posted April 17, 2003 Share Posted April 17, 2003 KINGS ALL DA WAY BABY..AINT NO FREE THROW PROBLEMS GONNA STOP THEM DIS YEAR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bighurt52235 Posted April 17, 2003 Share Posted April 17, 2003 I'm going to the first game in Portland when the Blazers host the Mavs. Should be good fun, having never been to a NBA playoff game before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonkeyKongerko Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 I think baseball series should all be seven games. You play a 162 game season on the strength of a 5-man rotation. To play so many games and then start a playoff series where a team can win on the strength of two starters alone is pretty ridiculous. Then again the DBacks of '01 proved a 7-game series can also be dominated by two starters. How about the 9-game series of the old days? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted April 18, 2003 Author Share Posted April 18, 2003 An early 5 game series adds more excitement, meaning and thrill to each of those 5 games...it also increases the chances of an upset. That is why I prefer the 5 game series Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubKilla Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 I got three words and a vowel for you..... Who Gives a f*** ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 An early 5 game series adds more excitement, meaning and thrill to each of those 5 games...it also increases the chances of an upset. That is why I prefer the 5 game series 5-game series suck because of the reason you stated....the chances of an upset increase temendously. You look at the A's and Twinkies in last year's ALDS....and you go with a 7-game format....and the Twinkies get the s*** kicked out of them. In 5-games....Howe tried to squeeze all 3 starters to get 5 games out of them....and that was a very bad move. If you have a 7-game series....and say you win 2 of the first 3....you can then afford to use your #4 starter the next game....because you'll be going with a fresh 1, 2, and 3 for games 5, 6, and 7(assuming the other team even gets there). However....at this point in time....a 5-game series would work out for the best of us. Using MB and Colon in games 1 & 2 and 4 & 5 would be great...and, assuming our bullpen would be able to pitch well enough....we'd only need 6 innings out of both of them both times....then you give it to Flash, then to Marte, then to Koch....and, hopefully, game over....just like that. Come the 7-game series....we got to a 4-man rotation. Anyways....to get to basketball....I predict the Kings win it all....and the TWolves make it to the semifinals. We'll see who the better player is....Garnett or Nowitski....and I got a hunch that it is going to be Garnett....because he's gonna step up his game and maybe average a triple double.....or get damn close to it. And I'll say the Pacers from the east. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 I think baseball series should all be seven games. You play a 162 game season on the strength of a 5-man rotation. To play so many games and then start a playoff series where a team can win on the strength of two starters alone is pretty ridiculous. Then again the DBacks of '01 proved a 7-game series can also be dominated by two starters. How about the 9-game series of the old days? It doesn't matter how many games there are. When they are played like every other day, you can get away with 2-3 pitchers. It's the one thing that bugs me about baseball. You have to use 5 pitchers all year to win games, yet in the playoffs you can completely mask them if that's your weakness. Arz could have complete s*** in the 3-5 spots and get away with it in the playoffs. Ideally i'd love a one week 7 game series where you have to use all your pitchers, just like during the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleM23 Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 If baseball switches to 7 for the DS I will be pissed. The best option would be to just go back to the 2-division format and only have 1 LCS, but that wouldn't generate enough money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 If baseball switches to 7 for the DS I will be pissed. The best option would be to just go back to the 2-division format and only have 1 LCS, but that wouldn't generate enough money. No, there needs to be more than 4 out of 30 teams in the playoffs. Look at how tight the competition is. And look who won the world series last year. With 4 teams there'd be even more teams out of the race by july and august and the interest in baseball would dwindle. It's more exciting with 8 teams, and it's still nowhere near 16 of nhl and nba. Baseball still has a low number of teams in that manner. I know 16 in baseball isn't possible, but 8 isn't really that high considering everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cali Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 I'm not a basketball fan, but I'm sure the Lakers will win it all again, just for the fact that all the "Hollywood" Laker fans can have those f***ing flags on their cars again, and piss me off to no end! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 I'm not a basketball fan, but I'm sure the Lakers will win it all again, just for the fact that all the "Hollywood" Laker fans can have those f***ing flags on their cars again, and piss me off to no end! Kings will beat em this year, if the Spurs don't take care of them first Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASHWOUND Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 This year the East is a joke...but the playoffs should be good until the finals where the west will dominate. I don't like this years seven game first round format...I love the 5 game series. If baseball switches to 7 for the DS I will be pissed. Now the matchups, and predictions East:(1)Detroit vs. (8)Orlando another disappointing season for Orlando, Detroit in 5. (2)New Jersey vs. (7)Milwaukee I love the Glove, but I have to root for my state's team. Nets in 6. (3)Indiana vs. (6)Boston Indiana is good, but I hate 'em. Boston in 7. (4)Philadelphia vs. (5)New Orleans Iverson and KVH are too much for the Hornets. 76ers in 5. West:(1)Spurs vs. (8)Suns Duncan and Parker are great, Spurs in 4. (2)Kings vs. (7)Jazz CWebb is dominating force in this series. Kings in 5. (3)Dallas vs. (6)Portland Portland has a lot to prove, Dallas is great, I predict an upset. Portland in 6. (4)T'Wolves vs. (5)Lakers KG and Hudson have a lot to prove, Phil Jackson doesn't lose in the playoffs. T'Wolves in 7. There are my picks...I will save you of the bore of reading my picks for the next rounds and just say, Kings over 76ers in 4 in the finals. Your so f***in right, the EAST is embarrassingly bad.its scary..if the Suns were to play in the east they would be the #1 seed in the east, but in the west they're the 8th. amazin. Actually, I don't care who wins..just as long if its not the lakers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonkeyKongerko Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 Last year two 93 win teams and a 92 win team did not make the playoffs. The strata of MLB are pretty well defined with only a few teams able to make the rise from good to great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubKilla Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 If baseball switches to 7 for the DS I will be pissed. The best option would be to just go back to the 2-division format and only have 1 LCS, but that wouldn't generate enough money. Of course it doesn't "generate enough money" but doing that makes entirely too much sense. I've been advocating realigning the leagues and going back to two divisions in each league since interleague play began. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted April 18, 2003 Author Share Posted April 18, 2003 It doesn't matter how many games there are. When they are played like every other day, you can get away with 2-3 pitchers. It's the one thing that bugs me about baseball. You have to use 5 pitchers all year to win games, yet in the playoffs you can completely mask them if that's your weakness. Arz could have complete s*** in the 3-5 spots and get away with it in the playoffs. Ideally i'd love a one week 7 game series where you have to use all your pitchers, just like during the season. That would be really stupid to force a team to use all of it's pitchers, it is fine in that sence the way it is. You throw out your aces, and go as far as they take you...it was beautiful in 2001 watching Johnson and Schilling single handedly win the World Series. The best option would be to just go back to the 2-division format and only have 1 LCS, but that wouldn't generate enough money. I would love to see that happen, but as Kochthis explained, it just wouldn't be a good plan for baseball...too many teams would be out of the races by late summer. Plus one could argue that whoever gets placed in the East is instantly screwed because of the Yankees, as for the West, exciting baseball...White Sox, A's, Twins, Mariners, Angels all in the same division. 5-game series suck because of the reason you stated....the chances of an upset increase temendously. No, upsets are great, one could argue that the Yankees could have beaten the angels in a 7 game series last year, afterall they had won three in a row vs. the A's in 2001. As for the twins and the A's, the Twins had to face Zito, Mulder, Hudson in the ALDS. If the series was 7 games, they still would have faced Zito Mulder Hudson, so if they won in a 5, who is to say they would not have beaten them in a 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 It doesn't matter how many games there are. When they are played like every other day, you can get away with 2-3 pitchers. It's the one thing that bugs me about baseball. You have to use 5 pitchers all year to win games, yet in the playoffs you can completely mask them if that's your weakness. Arz could have complete s*** in the 3-5 spots and get away with it in the playoffs. Ideally i'd love a one week 7 game series where you have to use all your pitchers, just like during the season. That would be really stupid to force a team to use all of it's pitchers, it is fine in that sence the way it is. You throw out your aces, and go as far as they take you...it was beautiful in 2001 watching Johnson and Schilling single handedly win the World Series. The best option would be to just go back to the 2-division format and only have 1 LCS, but that wouldn't generate enough money. I would love to see that happen, but as Kochthis explained, it just wouldn't be a good plan for baseball...too many teams would be out of the races by late summer. Plus one could argue that whoever gets placed in the East is instantly screwed because of the Yankees, as for the West, exciting baseball...White Sox, A's, Twins, Mariners, Angels all in the same division. 5-game series suck because of the reason you stated....the chances of an upset increase temendously. No, upsets are great, one could argue that the Yankees could have beaten the angels in a 7 game series last year, afterall they had won three in a row vs. the A's in 2001. As for the twins and the A's, the Twins had to face Zito, Mulder, Hudson in the ALDS. If the series was 7 games, they still would have faced Zito Mulder Hudson, so if they won in a 5, who is to say they would not have beaten them in a 7 No, that's not the nature of the game. All year you have to use 5 starting pitchers, yet playoffs, well, use 2-3. There's no other sport where you can not use the players that got you to the playoffs It changes the outlook of a team in the time the regular season ends til the time the playoffs start, yet they made no moves to their roster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 5-game series suck because of the reason you stated....the chances of an upset increase temendously. No, upsets are great, one could argue that the Yankees could have beaten the angels in a 7 game series last year, afterall they had won three in a row vs. the A's in 2001. As for the twins and the A's, the Twins had to face Zito, Mulder, Hudson in the ALDS. If the series was 7 games, they still would have faced Zito Mulder Hudson, so if they won in a 5, who is to say they would not have beaten them in a 7 Are you s***tin me? The Angels whooped the s*** out of the Yankees....the Yankees were depending on solid starting pitching the 3-run homer. That won them game one. The Angels went with more a small-ball style, with the big hit coming late in the games, instead of early. The Yankees blew a 5-run lead to the Angels....because, instead of just producing runs here and there, they were trying for the huge hit early on....and it never came. Late in the game, the Yankees had to face the extremely tough Angels bullpen....and they got shut down. The Angels would have won a 7-game series in 5 games against the Yanks last year. Their style of play was better suited against the Yankees. That's why I'm scared that we'd get embarrassed like that if we were to make the playoffs this year with CLee in the lineup instead of maybe Shannon Stewart....with Stewart, we'd be more of a small-ball team with the big hit coming late in the game....ala the Angels. With CLee, we wait for the 3-run homer, and while that is still a good way to produce offense, it just does not work in the postseason. That style of offense will have big games, but when a pitcher is on, no one will hit. If we faced Randy Johnson with his A game right now....we would hit air....and a lot of it. With the 7-game series....you'll see more teams that are deserving of moving onward instead of teams that are flukes. The Twins got their asses handed to them in the ALCS last year, because they didn't deserve to go. 5-game series are the devil. Death to the 5-game series! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted April 18, 2003 Share Posted April 18, 2003 Playoffs cancelled lack of interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted April 19, 2003 Author Share Posted April 19, 2003 Are you s***tin me? The Angels whooped the s*** out of the Yankees....the Yankees were depending on solid starting pitching the 3-run homer No, I am not s***tin you. You can't just say a team that won 103 games is going to bow out. Lets say the series was the same through 4 games, 3-1. Ok, well a team with a lineup of Soriano, Jeter, Bernie, Giambi, Posada, Ventura, White, Mondesi, Johson is capable of coming back and winning 3 in a row. The '01 Yankees with primarily the same pitching as the '02 yanks came back from down 0-2 to beat the A's...and that was without, Giambi, Ventura, White, Mondesi, Johnson. The A's were a better baseball team that had outplayed the Yankees the sameway the Angels had, yet because the Yankees are the superior team they are easily capable of a comeback. Especially in a 7 game series that would have returned to the Bronx with a win in game 5. You gotta be s***tin me to say that there is no way the Yankees could have comeback, not too mention that the Yankees were facing Appier, Ortiz, and Washburn, Washburn is the only stud among those guys, Ortiz proved unworthy in Game 2. The Yankees actually should have won game 2. Game 4 in that series was the only game you could say...damn the Angels really outplayed the Yankees. As for the twinkies, yes they deserved to go as much as their ALCS opponent, the Angels deserved to be there. The Twins were as impressive in the ALDS as the Angels. Why do you want to see the teams that deserve to be there anyways, thats like saying that you want all the high seeds to win in the NCAA tourney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted April 19, 2003 Share Posted April 19, 2003 Are you s***tin me? The Angels whooped the s*** out of the Yankees....the Yankees were depending on solid starting pitching the 3-run homer No, I am not s***tin you. You can't just say a team that won 103 games is going to bow out. Lets say the series was the same through 4 games, 3-1. Ok, well a team with a lineup of Soriano, Jeter, Bernie, Giambi, Posada, Ventura, White, Mondesi, Johson is capable of coming back and winning 3 in a row. The '01 Yankees with primarily the same pitching as the '02 yanks came back from down 0-2 to beat the A's...and that was without, Giambi, Ventura, White, Mondesi, Johnson. The A's were a better baseball team that had outplayed the Yankees the sameway the Angels had, yet because the Yankees are the superior team they are easily capable of a comeback. Especially in a 7 game series that would have returned to the Bronx with a win in game 5. You gotta be s***tin me to say that there is no way the Yankees could have comeback, not too mention that the Yankees were facing Appier, Ortiz, and Washburn, Washburn is the only stud among those guys, Ortiz proved unworthy in Game 2. The Yankees actually should have won game 2. Game 4 in that series was the only game you could say...damn the Angels really outplayed the Yankees. As for the twinkies, yes they deserved to go as much as their ALCS opponent, the Angels deserved to be there. The Twins were as impressive in the ALDS as the Angels. Why do you want to see the teams that deserve to be there anyways, thats like saying that you want all the high seeds to win in the NCAA tourney The A's didn't dominate the series like the Angels did though. The Angels were tearing up the Yankees. The Yanks couldn't stop them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.