Sberl wrote:
Uhm...ma non è l'ultimo stint di interlega per quest'anno questo?
Sinceramente non vedo l'ora di tornare alle solite rivali :)
Hai ragione :sbadat:
Beh, meno male. E' finita... allora domani si possono aggiornare le statistiche qui sopra (anche se qualche partita deve essere recuperata mi sembra), che saranno definitive. Nessun dominio NL purtroppo...
Beh, meno male. E' finita... allora domani si possono aggiornare le statistiche qui sopra (anche se qualche partita deve essere recuperata mi sembra), che saranno definitive. Nessun dominio NL purtroppo...
Ci basta vincere le 4 che contano a ottobre
Scherzi a parte, è bello fare queste serie ma sono durate davvero troppo. Personalmente ne avrei messe molto meno oppure un po' più dilatate nel tempo. Aspetterò le tue statistiche complete che pubblicherai (se le pubblicherai) qui o nel blog. Noi Redbirds per adesso bene in Interlega, anche se siamo riusciti a perdere con gli Indians....
Sberl wrote:
Ci basta vincere le 4 che contano a ottobre
Scherzi a parte, è bello fare queste serie ma sono durate davvero troppo. Personalmente ne avrei messe molto meno oppure un po' più dilatate nel tempo. Aspetterò le tue statistiche complete che pubblicherai (se le pubblicherai) qui o nel blog. Noi Redbirds per adesso bene in Interlega, anche se siamo riusciti a perdere con gli Indians....
In compenso noi e NY siamo riusciti a perdere da Washington!! :lol2:
L'interlega finisce 137-114 (.546 il record della NL). Non il disastroso e vergognoso 149-103 dell'anno scorso, ma si tratta ancora di una differenza estremamente sensibile. Soprattutto, come detto ieri, la NL ha banchettato con Athletics ed Indians, perchè le altre 12 sono state assolutamente dominanti. Niente da fare proprio...
rene144 wrote:
L'interlega finisce 137-114 (.546 il record della NL). Non il disastroso e vergognoso 149-103 dell'anno scorso, ma si tratta ancora di una differenza estremamente sensibile. Soprattutto, come detto ieri, la NL ha banchettato con Athletics ed Indians, perchè le altre 12 sono state assolutamente dominanti. Niente da fare proprio...
Qualche dato storico riguardante la vittoria per 22-1 dei Phillies sui Reds:
PHILLIES SCORE 10 IN FIRST BUT DON'T STOP THERE The Phillies put up a ten-spot in the first inning against the Reds and they weren't done scoring, as they added single runs in the second and third innings and four more in the fourth en route to a 22-1 victory. It was only the fourth time in major-league history that a team scored in double-figures in the first inning of a game and also scored in each of the next three (or more) innings. The other clubs to do that were Brooklyn in 1890 (Aug. 1 vs. Pittsburgh), the Cubs in 1906 (June 7 vs. New York Giants) and the Red Sox in 2003 (June 27 in a 25-8 win vs. Florida).
PHILLIES' THIRD-MOST ONE-SIDED WIN EVER Philadelphia's 22-1 win over the Reds was the third-largest margin of victory in Phillies history. Their two wins by a larger margin were both well over a century ago: in 1894 vs. Louisville (29-4) and 1887 at Indianapolis (24-0).
CUETO FOLLOWS THE GOOD WITH THE (VERY) BAD Reds starter Johnny Cueto lasted only two-thirds of an inning and allowed nine runs in Philadelphia on Monday night. In Cueto's last start, a 1-0 win last Wednesday against Arizona, he pitched six innings and gave up no runs. Since 1900, only two other starters allowed at least nine runs while pitching no more than one inning, after pitching at least than three innings and giving up no runs in their previous game. Rick Helling did that for Texas in 1994, but you need only look back two months to find the last instance and it was another Reds pitcher who had that up and down experience. Bronson Arroyo gave up nine runs while pitching only one inning against the Brewers on May 6, after pitching eight shutout innings in Pittsburgh five days earlier.
mattew88 wrote:
Qualche dato storico riguardante la vittoria per 22-1 dei Phillies sui Reds:
PHILLIES SCORE 10 IN FIRST BUT DON'T STOP THERE The Phillies put up a ten-spot in the first inning against the Reds and they weren't done scoring, as they added single runs in the second and third innings and four more in the fourth en route to a 22-1 victory. It was only the fourth time in major-league history that a team scored in double-figures in the first inning of a game and also scored in each of the next three (or more) innings. The other clubs to do that were Brooklyn in 1890 (Aug. 1 vs. Pittsburgh), the Cubs in 1906 (June 7 vs. New York Giants) and the Red Sox in 2003 (June 27 in a 25-8 win vs. Florida).
PHILLIES' THIRD-MOST ONE-SIDED WIN EVER Philadelphia's 22-1 win over the Reds was the third-largest margin of victory in Phillies history. Their two wins by a larger margin were both well over a century ago: in 1894 vs. Louisville (29-4) and 1887 at Indianapolis (24-0).
CUETO FOLLOWS THE GOOD WITH THE (VERY) BAD Reds starter Johnny Cueto lasted only two-thirds of an inning and allowed nine runs in Philadelphia on Monday night. In Cueto's last start, a 1-0 win last Wednesday against Arizona, he pitched six innings and gave up no runs. Since 1900, only two other starters allowed at least nine runs while pitching no more than one inning, after pitching at least than three innings and giving up no runs in their previous game. Rick Helling did that for Texas in 1994, but you need only look back two months to find the last instance and it was another Reds pitcher who had that up and down experience. Bronson Arroyo gave up nine runs while pitching only one inning against the Brewers on May 6, after pitching eight shutout innings in Pittsburgh five days earlier.
Pablets wrote:
Lo scrivo anche qui: i Cubs sono stati ceduti a Mr Ricketts. Manca l'approvazione degli altri 29 proprietari.
Io se fossi un tifoso dei Cubs sarei contento di questa operazione,visto che i Cubs hanno rischiato di essere
presi da Mark Cuban.Scusate la domanda banale perche' una franchigia per essere comprata deve avere
l'approvazione dei altri 29 proprietari?come se io volessi comprare il Parma baseball ma non posso perche' gli
altri presidenti non vogliono
