The title of this article is "Why the Billingsley-Hamels Matchup Favors Phils."
The author, Cliff Corcoran, felt the need to write a bunch of long sentences after that. This could be the title of an article from the Onion. You don't even need words to describe why the matchup favors the Phillies. This is all Cliff-boy would have had to write for his "article":
Hamels is 14-10 with a 3.09 ERA, a WHIP of 1.08 and a .227 BAA in 227 innings.
Billingsley is 16-10 with a 3.14 ERA, a WHIP of 1.34, and a .248 BAA in 200 innings.
Granted, I cherry picked those stats but just based on the matchup, which is what Cliffy-boy compared, it favors the Phillies. I know you may be saying, "wow, those numbers are closer than I thought they were going to be." You would be very correct but for further proof the matchup favors the Phillies, look at the playoff records for this year between these two good young pitchers in this series.
Billingsley: 2.1 innings, 8 runs, 8 hits, 0 K's, and three walks
Hamels: 7.0 innings, 6 hits, 2 runs, 8 k's and 0 walks.
This was only one game but based on that, I think you can say the matchup does favor the Phillies.
There is really no need to start a preview with this obvious fact.
You want more insight?
Indeed, if both starters perform well tonight, it will place the onus on the bullpens for the second straight game.
So, if both pitchers pitch well tonight, the bullpen will have to make sure not to give up any runs? Are you sure? May want to check on that again.
If the starters performed both shitty, the bullpens would have a large burden on them to not give up runs. The only way there is no pressure on the bullpen is if one pitcher gets blown out and other does not...and Billingsley got blown out last time he pitched and Hamels pitched well. So it could very well happen again, which is why the Phillies have the edge in the pitching matchup. I think this is obvious.
Ultimately, the key to tonight's game is Billingsley, who dominated the Cubs in Game 2 of the NLDS (6 2/3 IP, 5 H, 1 R, 1 BB, 7 K), but was awful in Game 2 of this series.
You heard it here first, the starting pitcher for the team down 3-1 is the key to tonight's game.
Unable to hit his spots last Friday, Billingsley watched helplessly as his pitches drifted over the plate and were scattered about the ballpark by the Phillies' hitters.
Amazingly, Billingsley did watch helplessly as mysterious forces pushed the ball out of his hand, while he was on the pitching rubber thereby preventing a balk with runners on base, and made the ball go over the plate. There was nothing anyone, least of all Billingsley, could do about this.
It was God's will.
Unless Billingsley is hurt or abnormally unnerved, which certainly didn't seem to be the case in the NLDS, he's likely rebound tonight.
Hamels is a better pitcher and he seemed unnerved in Game 2 and you have to take that into account. Advantage Phillies.
I know I am being nitpicky, but you can't start a game preview with reasons why a pitching matchup favors the guy who has pitched well in the only game he pitched in the series over the guy who got killed in the only game he pitched. It seems obvious enough. The key to the game is the Dodgers hitters and how they adjust to Hamels. I just want to see if Manny looks like he took a shower today.
Just so you know, magazine and newspaper writers don't write their own headlines, which goes for the web sites of magazines and newspapers as well. We just turn in a story and the editors do the rest. That said, the "title" of the article is "Previewing today's NLCS game." The line you quote up top was the description of the article from the link on the main page. I didn't write that either.
ReplyDeleteAs for the bullpen line, I was saying that I expected Billingsley to pitch well enough to negate Hamels' performance, passing the buck to the bullpens. I was, of course, very wrong about that, but such is the risk of doing pre-game analysis.
"You heard it here first, the starting pitcher for the team down 3-1 is the key to tonight's game."
Just because it's obvious doesn't mean it's not true.
As for Billingsley watching helplessly, he didn't mean to throw meatballs, so in that sense he was helpless. He tried to throw good pitches and they drifted over the plate. It would be a different story if he was a bad pitcher and couldn't reasonably have expected his pitches to go where he wanted them to, but he's a good pitcher who just didn't have it in that game. I'm sure he felt helpless out there, which is what I was trying to portray.
Meanwhile, you're going to make your argument based on one game, a mere 2 1/3 innings for Billingsley, rather than on a 200-inning regular season sample? Just because Billingsley got bombed again doesn't mean your reasoning is sound there.
And "Cliffy-boy?" I have no problem with someone taking me to task over something I've written, but name-calling is petty and cheap. I don't see any of my other articles on your site. I'm not sure how I've earned such disdain.
Anyway, thanks for reading.