Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2005 World Series ranked 35th-best in history

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 2005 World Series ranked 35th-best in history

    Thought this was a good showing considering it was a sweep:

    "35. 2005: White Sox over Astros in four
    Series leverage: 56th
    Game leverage: 1st

    By our series leverage index -- which measures how tight the World Series was -- this ranks just 56th all time. But the games themselves were outrageously good. By our game leverage index, this was the tightest collection of World Series games ever. Every game was either tied or within one run in the eighth inning or later. Every White Sox starter went at least seven innings. Compare that to the seven-game series between the Cubs and Cleveland in 2016, in which no starting pitcher went seven. The White Sox's 11-1 postseason record ended a World Series drought that was two years longer than the Red Sox's had been."

    Overall, the rankings are pretty solid with some decent thought behind them:

    https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...AMgv7i-4x7BPOo

  • #2
    I’m honestly surprised that ESPN ranked it that high. I’m surprised that they remembered that there was a World Series in 2005. They usually don’t.

    Comment


    • #3
      Any good things said about our World Series are fine by me.

      Comment


      • #4
        Let's be honest: if you're not White Sox fan it's not an especially good Series, though Game 2 was objectively very good. I was fine with the quick sweep and relative lack of drama.
        "Hope...may be indulged in by those who have abundant resources...but those who stake their all upon the venture see it in its true colors only after they are ruined."
        -- Thucydides

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by HomeFish View Post
          Let's be honest: if you're not White Sox fan it's not an especially good Series, though Game 2 was objectively very good. I was fine with the quick sweep and relative lack of drama.
          And Geoff ****ing Blum

          2005 32 CHW AL WS HOU W 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1.000 1.000 4.000 5.000 4
          Riding Shotgun on the Sox Bandwagon since before there was an Internet...



          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by HomeFish View Post
            Let's be honest: if you're not White Sox fan it's not an especially good Series, though Game 2 was objectively very good. I was fine with the quick sweep and relative lack of drama.
            Game 1 was a great game. Game 2 was an exceptional game. Games 3 and 4 were exceptional games. It was close baseball, well-played and full of drama with the White Sox prevailing, not quickly dispatching the Astros. Maybe it would have been more entertaining if it wasn't as well played, if Uribe had skipped a throw on a tough play past Konerko to end the eighth or ninth of Game 4, if a White Sox wild pitch at a crucial spot of Game 3 had eventually sent the Series back to Chicago for the full seven games. The fact that the White Sox outlasted the Astros in Game 3 or that Uribe took over Game 4 defensively from the last out of the eighth when the Astros had runners on first and third -- that he rose to the occasion and played great baseball -- doesn't diminish the quality of the baseball.

            Objectively, it was great, tight baseball for four games. Some celebrated seven-game World Series don't get that.

            Comment

            Working...
            X