WS Game 7!

Who do you want to win?


  • Total voters
    153

loshjott

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
7,840
Silver Spring, MD
Remagellan said:
This series went one way because the Giants fat slow third baseman took an extra base on a fly ball and the Royals not fat slow former third baseman didn't have the speed to take an extra base   with the game on the line.  
 
I'm not sure any 3B coach in the history of baseball is going to make the instantaneous decision to send Gordon in that situation.
 
Now if he hustles from the get-go and runs through a stop sign and we have a bang bang play at the plate, regardless of result, that would have been great theater.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Hendu for Kutch said:
 
Bigger stage does not equal better performance.  Bumgarner was amazing, no doubt.  But take a look at the '99 Indians lineup vs. the .'14 Royals lineup.
 
Bigger stage absolutely can equal better performance.  Round one of the playoffs versus game 7 of the World Series?  Yes, that matters.
 
As I said, Pedro's performance was more dominating.  Even more incredible with his back issues.  And it was 6 innings, not 5.  Etc.
 
But game 7 of the World Series, that makes it "better".  Yes.  (IMO anyway, and you won't find a bigger Pedro fan than me)
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,558
Boston, MA
Was Salvador Perez's at bat the worst ever to end a series? He seemed utterly convinced that the strikezone extended to the top of his helmet. For my money, Carlos Beltran's ending the 2006 NLCS with a three pitch strikeout looking is probably even worse, but that's debatable.
 

rlsb

lurker
Aug 2, 2010
1,332
It took John McGraw 18 years what Bochy did in 5.  A Giants renaissance.  Congrats to the Giants.  McGraw lost two deciding games as well (1912 and 1924).  Tied for fourth with the Red Sox for championships, but the Olde Towners will be back for #9 next year!
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
25,073
Southwestern CT
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
 
Yeah, that's all a part of it.  She is pretty hot/adorable but nobody should be surprised.
 
The guy would be a much bigger star in Boston, NY or Philly.  But he belongs in San Francisco.   He will never have to buy a meal in the City (or the entire Bay Area) again.
 
Just want to point out that Pence was not a much bigger star when he played in Philly, despite the fact that he played very well there. 
 
I think the reason he's not a bigger star is that he's a quirky player with an odd look and a strange, twitchy approach at the plate.  If he had an outsized personality he could overcome these things and be a huge star (like Pedroia, as an example) but because he doesn't he remains very much under appreciated.
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
25,073
Southwestern CT
Also want to add that when I consider the fact that I had no rooting allegiance, this was one hell of a postseason.
 
Congrats to the Giant fans on the board. 
 

brienc

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 26, 2005
1,130
Shakedown Street
loshjott said:
 
I'm not sure any 3B coach in the history of baseball is going to make the instantaneous decision to send Gordon in that situation.
 
Now if he hustles from the get-go and runs through a stop sign and we have a bang bang play at the plate, regardless of result, that would have been great theater.
Wendell Kim would have sent him.
 

DanoooME

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
15,515
South Jersey
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
 
Yeah, that's all a part of it.  She is pretty hot/adorable but nobody should be surprised.
 
The guy would be a much bigger star in Boston, NY or Philly.  But he belongs in San Francisco.   He will never have to buy a meal in the City (or the entire Bay Area) again.
 
 
Average Reds said:
 
Just want to point out that Pence was not a much bigger star when he played in Philly, despite the fact that he played very well there. 
 
I think the reason he's not a bigger star is that he's a quirky player with an odd look and a strange, twitchy approach at the plate.  If he had an outsized personality he could overcome these things and be a huge star (like Pedroia, as an example) but because he doesn't he remains very much under appreciated.
 
He's not a bigger star because he doesn't generate the huge numbers that get him on season ending leaderboards.  He does a lot of things well, few things poorly but doesn't do anything GREAT.  
 
He's still hugely popular in Philly.  They loved him here.  My mom who's been a Phillies fan seemingly forever still misses him.
 

rembrat

Well-Known Member
Bronze Supporter
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,058
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
Yeah, that's all a part of it.  She is pretty hot/adorable but nobody should be surprised.
 
The guy would be a much bigger star in Boston, NY or Philly.  But he belongs in San Francisco.   He will never have to buy a meal in the City (or the entire Bay Area) again.
 
It's neat when players seem to end up where they look like they "belong." Pence definitely qualifies. He looks like he would be at home on a corner in The Haight promoting his band's upcoming gig. 
 

LoweTek

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2005
1,486
Central Florida
Was Salvador Perez's at bat the worst ever to end a series? He seemed utterly convinced that the strikezone extended to the top of his helmet. For my money, Carlos Beltran's ending the 2006 NLCS with a three pitch strikeout looking is probably even worse, but that's debatable.
I felt almost every at-bat against Bumgarner (is it me or were all the announcers pronouncing it BumGarDner?) was extremely poorly executed. I would like to see the in zone and out of zone swing and miss/foul numbers for his outing. It was as though every batter gave him at least one free strike, most gave him two, by swinging at something well out of the strike zone and getting behind very quickly. They could not have made his inevitable MVP ascent easier for him. The Royals hitters seemed to get the Schiraldi look once he came into the game. Not one of the KC hitters gave the impression he wanted to be in the box in the situation.

I did not have the feeling I was watching an unhittable pitcher at all.
 

RIrooter09

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2008
4,456
LoweTek said:
I felt almost every at-bat against Bumgarner (is it me or were all the announcers pronouncing it BumGarDner?) was extremely poorly executed. I would like to see the in zone and out of zone swing and miss/foul numbers for his outing. It was as though every batter gave him at least one free strike, most gave him two, by swinging at something well out of the strike zone and getting behind very quickly. They could not have made his inevitable MVP ascent easier for him. The Royals hitters seemed to get the Schiraldi look once he came into the game. Not one of the KC hitters gave the impression he wanted to be in the box in the situation.

I did not have the feeling I was watching an unhittable pitcher at all.
 
According to Fangraphs he threw 74% of his pitches for strikes, but only 29% in the zone. 
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,310
LoweTek said:
I felt almost every at-bat against Bumgarner (is it me or were all the announcers pronouncing it BumGarDner?) was extremely poorly executed. I would like to see the in zone and out of zone swing and miss/foul numbers for his outing. It was as though every batter gave him at least one free strike, most gave him two, by swinging at something well out of the strike zone and getting behind very quickly. They could not have made his inevitable MVP ascent easier for him. The Royals hitters seemed to get the Schiraldi look once he came into the game. Not one of the KC hitters gave the impression he wanted to be in the box in the situation.

I did not have the feeling I was watching an unhittable pitcher at all.
This is pretty much exactly right. 
 

 
Maybe Bum went in knowing this is all he had to do to beat the Royals, but they made it so fucking easy. Just an awful game 7 for them, and I don't say that to take anything away from the Giants. They did what they had to do to win, and that's all that matters IMO. 
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
12,863
LoweTek said:
I felt almost every at-bat against Bumgarner (is it me or were all the announcers pronouncing it BumGarDner?) was extremely poorly executed. I would like to see the in zone and out of zone swing and miss/foul numbers for his outing. It was as though every batter gave him at least one free strike, most gave him two, by swinging at something well out of the strike zone and getting behind very quickly. They could not have made his inevitable MVP ascent easier for him. The Royals hitters seemed to get the Schiraldi look once he came into the game. Not one of the KC hitters gave the impression he wanted to be in the box in the situation.

I did not have the feeling I was watching an unhittable pitcher at all.
 
Poorly executed by KC or perfectly executed by SF, knowing that KC swings and swings and swings swings some more.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
6,531
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
LoweTek said:
I felt almost every at-bat against Bumgarner (is it me or were all the announcers pronouncing it BumGarDner?) was extremely poorly executed. I would like to see the in zone and out of zone swing and miss/foul numbers for his outing. It was as though every batter gave him at least one free strike, most gave him two, by swinging at something well out of the strike zone and getting behind very quickly. They could not have made his inevitable MVP ascent easier for him. The Royals hitters seemed to get the Schiraldi look once he came into the game. Not one of the KC hitters gave the impression he wanted to be in the box in the situation.

I did not have the feeling I was watching an unhittable pitcher at all.
 
After the first inning where Bumgarner struggled with command and the Royals were still happy to swing at junk and make outs for him, he pretty much figured out he didn't need to attack them to have success, so that's exactly what he did. In the fifth he legitimately struggled, from them on he toyed with the Royals hitters, going out of the strikezone repeatedly seemed to be more of a deliberate strategy as the game went on. At least that's the impression I got.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
49,500
San Andreas Fault
JimD said:
 
The Indians had scored eight runs in three innings off Saberhagen and Lowe, but were completely shut down by Martinez once he was put in.  Plus it was also an elimination game, albeit earlier in the playoffs.  It's close but I still rate Pedro's gem a little higher.
One other thing, Pedro was on full 4 days rest, Bumgarner 2 days.This shouldn't enter into the argument of which was more epic, but it adds to the legend.
 
Bumgarner's got the all-time ERA lead with a 0.25 (36 IP). If he gets into another WS and gives up one run in nine innings, he loses that. Jack Billingham would go back into first. Christy Mathewson's 0.97 over 101 2/3 innings may be the most remarkable WS ERA stat. 
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
5,704
Westwood MA
I hate to go there, but I just have to; watching that game last night with the Giants up 3-2, two outs nobody on, then the Royals get the gift triple and strand the runner at third to end the WS....................it just absolutely boggles my mind that I saw the 1986 Red Sox up by TWO runs, two outs, nobody on, two strikes on the hitter and then the whole thing imploded, they gave up three runs and lost the game.
 
Just astounding; ok, back to the Giants and them winning their third WS title in five years.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
49,500
San Andreas Fault
MakMan44 said:
This is pretty much exactly right. 
 
 
 
Poorly executed by KC or perfectly executed by SF, knowing that KC swings and swings and swings swings some more.
 
rodderick said:
 
After the first inning where Bumgarner struggled with command and the Royals were still happy to swing at junk and make outs for him, he pretty much figured out he didn't need to attack them to have success, so that's exactly what he did. In the fifth he legitimately struggled, from them on he toyed with the Royals hitters, going out of the strikezone repeatedly seemed to be more of a deliberate strategy as the game went on. At least that's the impression I got.
 
 
Maybe Bum went in knowing this is all he had to do to beat the Royals, but they made it so fucking easy. Just an awful game 7 for them, and I don't say that to take anything away from the Giants. They did what they had to do to win, and that's all that matters IMO. 
He was quite frank when asked in post-game about his strategy in pitching to Perez. He said he knew the Royals were aggressive, and he even said Perez would want to "do something great", so he and Buster would "use" that. So, they went up, up, up. Perez cooperated totally. This was posted earlier. 
 
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
6,610
Al Zarilla said:
One other thing, Pedro was on full 4 days rest, Bumgarner 2 days.This shouldn't enter into the argument of which was more epic, but it adds to the legend.
 
 
Pedro had left game 1 with a back injury, so that should be worth some legendary epicness points.
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
25,270
Pioneer Valley
rodderick said:
 
After the first inning where Bumgarner struggled with command and the Royals were still happy to swing at junk and make outs for him, he pretty much figured out he didn't need to attack them to have success, so that's exactly what he did. In the fifth he legitimately struggled, from them on he toyed with the Royals hitters, going out of the strikezone repeatedly seemed to be more of a deliberate strategy as the game went on. At least that's the impression I got.
I saw it the same way, which is why I am reconciled to the outcome. Plus, the Giants beat the Royals  at the running game. Congrats, Giants fans!
 

LoweTek

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2005
1,486
Central Florida
joe dokes said:
Poorly executed by KC or perfectly executed by SF, knowing that KC swings and swings and swings swings some more.
Well, of course I don't blame him for driving his truck through a weakness that size. It doesn't make him an historically unhittable post-season pitcher either. They all got to see him more than once. It just wasn't professional hitting. KC simply cracked and did not execute or adjust, IMO. There were plenty of opportunities to do so, even within the context of individual ABs. The Perez AB, as someone mentioned earlier, was an appallingly bad AB, especially under the circumstances.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
6,531
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
LoweTek said:
Well, of course I don't blame him for driving his truck through a weakness that size. It doesn't make him an historically unhittable post-season pitcher either. They all got to see him more than once. It just wasn't professional hitting. KC simply cracked and did not execute or adjust, IMO. There were plenty of opportunities to do so, even within the context of individual ABs. The Perez AB, as someone mentioned earlier, was an appallingly bad AB, especially under the circumstances.
 
You're making it sound like Bumgarner is a junkballer and the Royals swung at pitches out of the zone the whole series. It wasn't like that at all, apart from his performance last night. The Royals aren't a strikeout happy team, their whole philosophy is based on making contact at pretty much all costs. They just aren't a very good hitting team, but swinging at junk isn't what that team was known for (aside from guys like Perez). The fact Bumgarner made them seem like a lineup comprised of hackers last night is a testament to his ability. 
 

epraz

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2002
5,686
I know that Gordon wasn't going to beat a decent throw home on his hit, but what are the chances of a bad throw from the cut-off man that allowed him to score?  Better than the chances of him being plated by a subsequent batter?
 

Hendu for Kutch

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
5,728
Nashua, NH
Al Zarilla said:
One other thing, Pedro was on full 4 days rest, Bumgarner 2 days.This shouldn't enter into the argument of which was more epic, but it adds to the legend.
 
I know I mentioned the quality of offenses faced earlier, but just to solidify what different beasts Pedro and Bumgarner were dealing with, here are all 18 starters in the 2 games, sorted by OPS.  The bolded names are '99 Indians.
 
Ramirez - 1.105
Thome - .967
R. Alomar - .955
Cordero - .864

S. Alomar - .855
Lofton - .838
Vizquel - .833

Gordon - .783
Cain - .751
Fryman - .719
Hosmer - .716
Aoki - .710
Butler - .702
Perez - .692
Escobar - .694
Baines - .684
Moustakas - .632
Infante - .632
 
 

HriniakPosterChild

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
10,286
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
epraz said:
I know that Gordon wasn't going to beat a decent throw home on his hit, but what are the chances of a bad throw from the cut-off man that allowed him to score?  Better than the chances of him being plated by a subsequent batter?
 
There were two outs, and the strike zone plot from the next hitter is here. That should answer your question. 
 
Putting in a pinch runner to steal home would have been a better strategy than expecting an injured Perez to reach base in that AB.
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,167
rodderick said:
 
You're making it sound like Bumgarner is a junkballer and the Royals swung at pitches out of the zone the whole series. It wasn't like that at all, apart from his performance last night. The Royals aren't a strikeout happy team, their whole philosophy is based on making contact at pretty much all costs. They just aren't a very good hitting team, but swinging at junk isn't what that team was known for (aside from guys like Perez). The fact Bumgarner made them seem like a lineup comprised of hackers last night is a testament to his ability. 
 
I guess it depends on what you mean by swinging at junk.. Royals were 6th in the majors in O-Swing % (% of pitches swung at outside the zone), but then again they were second in the league in  O-Contact % (% of contact on pitches swung at outside the zone). They had the third lowest swinging strike percentage. What it looks like to me is the Royals are a free-swinging team that is very good at making contact - kind of the perfect lineup for a league where umpires are calling a larger and larger strike zone. The fact that Bumgarner got so many swings and misses last night is testament to his ability and to the Royals' freezing up.
 

rembrat

Well-Known Member
Bronze Supporter
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,058
I'm actually curious and would like to hear from people who have seen him pitch more than 40 innings because I, too, don't see what makes Madison Bumgarner an unbelievable talent. He doesn't seem to have a plus plus pitch anywhere or possess great velocity. So is it command? Is his delivery deceptive?
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
25,571
rembrat said:
I'm actually curious and would like to hear from people who have seen him pitch more than 40 innings because I, too, don't see what makes Madison Bumgarner an unbelievable talent. He doesn't seem to have a plus plus pitch anywhere or possess great velocity. So is it command? Is his delivery deceptive?
 
 
He's quite good at hitting both corners  with different pitches and avoiding the heart of the plate. His ability to get in on the hands of righties is particularly notable.
 

Tangled Up In Red

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2004
2,646
Bernal

Tangled Up In Red

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2004
2,646
Bernal
For the record, I think Bumgarner's biggest strength is deception. But is also believe he is the king of very good (velocity, command, 4 pitches, durability, mental toughness) without being truly outstanding in any one (except maybe mental toughness). Combine all of the very goods and you get an overall outstanding.
 
Deathofthebambino said:
You can't really talk about great post-season pitching performances without mentioning Koufax.  In 63, he started two games, and finished them both, giving up a total of 3 earned runs, and striking out 23, giving up 12 hits and 3 walks.  In 65, he was even better.  He pitched 3 games in the WS, went 24 innings, struck out 29, walked 5, gave up 13 hits and ONE earned run. 
 
Totally different time back then, with so many less post-season games, but he has to be mentioned.
 
Likewise, in 67, a guy named Bob Gibson threw 3 complete games in the world series, striking out 26, walking 5 and giving up 14 hits and 3 earned runs.  He followed that up the following year with 3 more complete games in the world series, striking out 35 in 27 innings, walked 4, gave up 18 hits and 5 earned runs.
 
Oh yeah, Gibson also threw 2 complete games in the 64 world series (he pitched 27 innings, but one game went extras that he didn't finish) and struck out 31 that year.  In 3 series, he pitched 9 games, 81 innings.  Basically, him and Koufax did what Bumgarner did in the world series every year for about 5 straight years. 
 
And just for fun let's throw out a one-timer in this regard...1968 WS MVP Mickey Lolich. For one memorable week, Oct 3-10, he threw three CGs. Game 7 was on two days rest. And in his first start (it wasn't even game 1) he helped his own cause with a couple of hits, dinger included.
 
27 IP 21 K 6 BB 5 ER 
 
The doughnut man. How things have changed. Here's to the portly southpaw!
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
25,571
runnels3 said:
 
And just for fun let's throw out a one-timer in this regard...1968 WS MVP Mickey Lolich. For one memorable week, Oct 3-10, he threw three CGs. Game 7 was on two days rest. And in his first start (it wasn't even game 1) he helped his own cause with a couple of hits, dinger included.
 
27 IP 21 K 6 BB 5 ER 
 
The doughnut man. How things have changed. Here's to the portly southpaw!
 
Yeah, but Lolich cheated to get extra rest. He used his right arm for everything except pitching.
 

Spacemans Bong

chapeau rose
SoSH Member
ifmanis5 said:
 
But, but, but...baseball is dying!
 
Seriously though, the number one reason, by far, why World Series TV ratings have been crappy is because we've had two 7 game series since 2002. The 2011 Game 7 also had bonko ratings - a 25 share if I remember correctly.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
49,500
San Andreas Fault
Tangled Up In Red said:
For the record, I think Bumgarner's biggest strength is deception. But is also believe he is the king of very good (velocity, command, 4 pitches, durability, mental toughness) without being truly outstanding in any one (except maybe mental toughness). Combine all of the very goods and you get an overall outstanding.
I agree. It's that almost sidewinder delivery that makes it so hard for hitters to pick up the baseball. There's no other pitcher quite like that right now. In fact, I saw a story somewhere, or heard it on local Comcast that his coaches tried to change his delivery when he was 18 or 19, screwed him all up, so he went back. So, thousands of young lefties, and righties will be trying his motion next spring. I like how one guy, forget who, said he looked like he was throwing around the corner of a building.
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
25,270
Pioneer Valley
The NYTimes has noticed Harold Reynolds:
 
 
In Game 7 on Wednesday, in the midst of Madison Bumgarner’s magnificent, five-inning relief appearance for the Giants, Reynolds played down the effect of Bumgarner’s pitching nearly 270 innings because of his size, as if pitchers measuring 6-foot-5 and 235 pounds are immunized from arm trouble. Another odd moment from Game 7: Reynolds wondered what the Giants starter Tim Hudson had learned about the Royals’ lineup from watching Jake Peavy, the Game 6 starter, without offering context: Peavy was knocked out after 11/3 innings. What was he to learn? Don’t do what Peavy did?

 
 
A small aside about Reynolds. If you’re going to talk about your history as a player, be precise. During the Series, he claimed that he made his major league debut in 1983 in Kansas City at Kauffman Stadium. Actually, his debut was as a pinch-runner at the Kingdome in Seattle. His first game in the Mariners’ starting lineup came three days later in Kansas City. Second, he said that he broke the Gold Glove Award streak of Royals second baseman Frank White. Which one? The famous six-year streak that Lou Whitaker broke in 1983? Or the two-year winning streak that Reynolds ended in 1988?
I can't remember such a skewering, mild as it is, of any recent sports commentators, at least in the Times. The article points out a number of other Fox missteps, while giving credit to the wonderful camera work. (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/31/sports/baseball/world-series-is-over-but-fox-crew-still-has-a-ways-to-go-.html?action=click&contentCollection=Baseball&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=article)
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
17,195
Alamogordo
loshjott said:
 
Quote from that article:
 
 
Then Kevin pulled out his phone. He had texted Madison after the eighth inning, and he tried to read it to me. He began to choke up and just handed me the phone.
“OMG. You’re so much more than awesome,” Kevin had written to his son. “To see you work on the mound reminds me of watching you in high school. You are willing yourself to perfection and dragging the team along with you. I couldn’t be more proud of your baseball accomplishments.”
 
Thanks for the post, that was a really good read.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
5,789
Springfield, VA
normstalls said:
Agree to disagree. Am I confused or is it not scorers discretion if the starter doesn't go 5? In that case, Bum going 5 through 9 seems to deserve the win. Over Affeldt for 8 outs or so.

Edit: I stand corrected. According to rule 10.17 Affeldt does deserve the win. He was definitely effective in his outing.
 
Dumb rule.  If someone goes 5 IP in a nine-inning win, he should get the W, period.  Why should it matter whether it was the first five innings or the last five innings?
 

HriniakPosterChild

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
10,286
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
Lowrielicious said:
The best argument for not sending Gordon is that it would have meant the world series ended (or gone into extras) on an appeal play at the plate resulting in a 20 minute delay followed by some ridiculous ruling that either way would have been a massive letdown.
So better to just lose more quickly with Perez swinging at junk over his head?
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
Jul 18, 2005
25,882
Alexandria, VA
Tangled Up In Red said:
50 men on the combined rosters, right? How many get used?
 
Amazingly, the 2 starters combined for just 4 innings pitched and yet only 25 players (5 over the minimum--under the assumption that DHs are used) played. No PHs, 3 pitchers for SF and 4 for KC.