Game Thread World Series Game 5 Royals vs. Mets Sunday 11/1/15

[Rick2583]

^^^ Chuck honestly I'd like to see a kid like Refsnyder get a fair shot.

 

[chuckd3534]

I don't disagree with you there, but you never know what the Yanks will do with name players out there. I know they are different these days, but not making the playoffs/losing in a WC game the past 3 years could mean they make some bigger adds this winter.

Who knows...

 

[Mattingly23NY]

Good stuff Chuck,

You just earned the "War and Peace" - Tolstoy Trophy from off my trophy case.....

 

[cagedlion]

After watching this WS, I'd pass on both Murphy and
Cespedes. Each has shown his wares and has had
his moments; yet, somebody will overpay for their
services.

 

[Mattingly23NY]

After watching this WS, I'd pass on both Murphy and
Cespedes. Each has shown his wares and has had
his moments; yet, somebody will overpay for their
services.

...^^^

:

:
ditto........

 

[yankeesince59]

Buster Olney has a pretty good slant on Cespedes;

 

[Mattingly23NY]

Buster Olney has a pretty good slant on Cepedes;

...^^^

indeed, Olney hit the nail (Cespedes) on the head.....!

 

[chuckd3534]

Yeah, Cesp will move on and I am fine with it. He was a monster when he first came on board, but struggled big time the last handful of games, and all playoffs outside of 1 or 2 games. He really came up small when it counted most. If we are going to spend on a big hitter I think we can do better than 30 year old Cespedes.

BUT with that said I do thank him for what he did for the team when he first got here. Without him I don't think we win the NL East...so I thank him for that. He was great for us when he first got here.

 

[Mattingly23NY]

Yeah, Cesp will move on and I am fine with it. He was a monster when he first came on board, but struggled big time the last handful of games, and all playoffs outside of 1 or 2 games. He really came up small when it counted most. If we are going to spend on a big hitter I think we can do better than 30 year old Cespedes.

BUT with that said I do thank him for what he did for the team when he first got here. Without him I don't think we win the NL East...so I thank him for that. He was great for us when he first got here.

Hot or Cold, that seems to be Cespedes life in MLB in a nutshell......

I'm curious how his pre-and post Season play, work either against Him, or For Him, as a FA with those offers.....

I agree with 59, I don't foresee Yoenis being worth more than 15 Mil. His Series failures, both defensively and offensively, may just of cost him another 5 Mil.....

unless some ignorant Owner, like the Bums group throws excessive $$$ , & perhaps a 10 yr contract, at Him, as if he's Superman.....

I am so tired of watching these excessive over priced, long term contracts being handed out...!

 

[blgridesagain]

I thought it was an entertaining and interesting WS despite it lasting just five games.
There was only one save recorded in the series.
KC hit two HRs in the series, both in game one.
Mets lead going into the 9th in two of their losses.
Couple of extra inning games as a result of late inning rallies.
First WS complete game victory (Cueto) by A.L. SP in 24 years.

KC played their "game" and showed a lot of balls.
They continued to hit well w/risp as they did in the reg season, bullpen was as good as advertised, 7/7 in SB att.
Cueto and Volquez were a bit of a surprise to me in games 1,2,5.
21 IP, 2.14 ERA

Virtually all the Mets with the exceptions of Grandy, Conforto and Harvey had a "bad" series.
Very costly late inning errors and defense (Wright, Murphy, Duda) and a baserunning blunder to end the game. (Cespedes).
d'Arnaud was exposed as being very weak vs SB att...mostly non competive in his attempts at throwing out base stealers.
Just wondering, how often a team (KC) had as many as 7 SB in a WS without getting caught? (vs the same catcher?)

KC proved to be the better team hands down while the Mets looked like an "average" team dropped into a World Series on late notice.
....too often playing shabby ball - yet it still was (imo) an exciting entertaining kinda weird WS.


You can say KC has proven to be the most consistent best team for the last two seasons.
And the Mets were haunted just in time for Halloween.

 

[chuckd3534]

Your last comment is ridiculous rides, but my guess is you are some Mets hater?

Blowing off the Mets as an average team after also saying they led in the 9th inning in two of their L's...and the 3rd L they led in the 8th inning BTW...is ridiculous.

The Mets are a very good team who made some big mistakes in the field late in the games. The Royals deserve full credit for that, and took advantage of the Mets issues late, and proved they were the better team.

But to dismiss the Mets as whatever, which is exactly the tone of your post, is ridiculous.

But to each their own.

 

[blgridesagain]

Your last comment is ridiculous rides, but my guess is you are some Mets hater?

Blowing off the Mets as an average team after also saying they led in the 9th inning in two of their L's...and the 3rd L they led in the 8th inning BTW...is ridiculous.

The Mets are a very good team who made some big mistakes in the field late in the games. The Royals deserve full credit for that, and took advantage of the Mets issues late, and proved they were the better team.

But to dismiss the Mets as whatever, which is exactly the tone of your post, is ridiculous.

But to each their own.

I thought the Mets would WIN this WS.
What I mean by looked like an average team was exactly how I explained it - costly late inn errors, bad defense, game ending baserunning blunder, inability to throw out a single base stealer ( in 7 att).
You can also add a blown save if you like.
All the earmarks of an "average" team. And I said average, not bad.

You would be hard pressed to find other WS teams which played such shoddy baseball in those game situations. And I don't buy the excuse of the Royals putting relentless pressure on them - this is the WS, it comes with the territory.
I'm talking about basic routine plays which weren't executed by the Mets and if I were a Mets' fan I would choose other more colorful words to describe the way they played.

The series lasted only five games for a reason.

 

[blgridesagain]

I thought the Mets would WIN this WS.
What I mean by looked like an average team was exactly how I explained it - costly late inn errors, bad defense, game ending baserunning blunder, inability to throw out a single base stealer ( in 7 att).
You can also add a blown save if you like.
All the earmarks of an "average" team. And I said average, not bad.

You would be hard pressed to find other WS teams which played such shoddy baseball in those game situations. And I don't buy the excuse of the Royals putting relentless pressure on them - this is the WS, it comes with the territory.
I'm talking about basic routine plays which weren't executed by the Mets and if I were a Mets' fan I would choose other more colorful words to describe the way they played.

The series lasted only five games for a reason.

 

[chuckd3534]

The series lasted 5 games because the Royals executed when it mattered most and the Mets didn't. The Royals proved they were the better team. But I do not think the Mets can be dismissed as clearly being outclassed or the Royals proved they were the much better team. I just don't see how that can be said when the Mets led in the 9th inning in 2 of their L's and led in the 8th inning in their other L.

That doesn't compute to me, but again to each their own.

I will say the Mets clearly have issues in the field, and struggled there most of the season so that is nothing new...although it was taken to a new level in the WS. Now if you want to say the moment was too big for the Mets late in the game...sure you can make that case, but again I don't see how the math works to say leading in the 9th in 2 L's and leading in the 8th in the other L proves they were outclassed and the Royals were the much better team. That doesn't make sense to me.

 

[chuckd3534]

I will say one other thing. Even though the games were close this was not a close series. When you lose in 5 games you cannot consider that a close series. So at the end of the day the Royals won decisively in the series, but I do not think the Mets were outclassed. I do think the Mets need to look to improve their D up the middle though, that was clear this series.

 

[Messiah717]

If the Mets win game one who knows how the series would've gone. In the end though the Royals did what they have done the last two seasons. They also have all contact hitters in their lineup, great speed and play good defense. A solid bullpen then make up for the fact that they don't have a very flashy starting rotation.

 

[Rick2583]

The Mets literally gave two games away with there lousy defense.

 

[yankeesince59]

If the Mets win game one who knows how the series would've gone. In the end though the Royals did what they have done the last two seasons. They also have all contact hitters in their lineup, great speed and play good defense. A solid bullpen then make up for the fact that they don't have a very flashy starting rotation.

...^^^this,,,...game 1 set the tone for the rest of the series...Familia giving up the bomb to Gordon in the 9th?...who saw that comin?

...if Mets had won game 1 it would likely have affected the psyche of BOTH teams going forward.