Originally Posted by doublem23
The White Sox were also significantly better than the Astros. But come on, the Tigers went from scoring 4 RPG in the ALDS and ALCS to going on a 20-inning shut out streak in the World Series? If you want to believe the Giants were just that dominant on the mound, that's fine, but I think it's pretty clear the lay-off hurt Detroit. Anyone who would argue that a week-long layoff in a sport of such routine like baseball is just completely out of their mind.
That's fine, except that a baseball season is longer than a week. Sure, it's great that the Cardinals and Giants looked nice last week. There were a couple of weeks this summer when the Sox looked like legitimate contenders in the American League. Unfortunately, a baseball season is a 6-month marathon. It's pretty clear that the Rangers and Yankees were probably the best teams in baseball that just couldn't finish this year; Texas because their injury problems and getting caught by a red hot A's team and the Yankees because they probably ran out of gas from that crazy pennant chase in the East. But that's just baseball, rarely does the best team in the league win the World Series. I think you could replay the 2012 season 100 times and you'd probably end up with at least 5-10 different teams who could win a championship and probably most would win more often than the Giants. Lucky for them this was their year.
I think it's silly to proclaim the era of AL dominance is over when the AL continues to wipe the floor with the NL over the course of interleague play (which may come to an end now that they're giving us their worst team) just because two middle of the road teams in each league played and the one from the NL happened to win the series. Using that logic, you can argue the 55-win Astros were better than the 85-win White Sox because Houston took 2 of 3 from them this year.
Apologies to mods for bumping this, but I have to cite a couple of points you make here.
The season is a 7 month marathon, not 6.
I'll just ask this: In a race, let's say the 500 meter... who is the best in that race? Is it the guy who crossed the finish line first? Or is it the guy who led the race for 90% of it, only to run out of gas at the end? After the winner crosses the line and wins the race, should we say, "Congrats, but the guy who led most of the way, and lost, was still better than you."
The MLB season starts at Opening Day, at ends at the last out of the World Series. 30 teams start running. At one point, 20 are dead, and 10 are left to keep running toward that Finish Line. If you run out of gas, you are not the best. No way, no how.
A long layoff is a pitiful excuse for losing. And the AL's superior regular season record against the NL may be outweighed by the NL's recent WS success over the AL.
If an NL fan tells me "Haha, my league has won more WS than your league lately!", I won't respond with "But my league has won more regular season games!!!". That'd be asinine.
The World Series is where it's at. Let NL fans have bragging rights. The AL doesn't dominate the NL.