Jump to content

What’s the preferable way to win a 2-1 series?

Frobby

By Frobby
in Orioles Talk

 Share

What’s the preferable way to win a 2-1 series   

50 members have voted

  1. 1. What’s the preferable way to win a 2-1 series?

    • Win the first two, lose the third
      24
    • Win one, lose one, win one
      16
    • Lose the first, win the last two
      11

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 06/15/24 at 19:51

Recommended Posts

Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted

At the end of the day, winning just about any series 2 games to 1 is a good outcome.  But do you have a preference as to which of the three games the O’s win?

On the one hand, it’s nerve wracking to lose the first game because then the team is behind the 8-ball.  One the other hand, when you win the first two, you’re kind of playing with house money but it’s deflating not to complete a sweep.  Win, lose, win begins and ends on a good note, but you never have that shot at a sweep.  

Which do you prefer?  I didn’t include a don’t care option.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Malike
Malike

To win the first two, sweeping any team is hard, but you are guaranteed a chance at it if you win the first two.

Aristotelian
Aristotelian

But in the hypothetical you are guaranteed to lose game 3.

Aristotelian
Aristotelian

Lol, but we're talking about after the fact when you have lost the third game. At that point you no longer have a chance at the sweep. Why do you care if you lost Game 1, 2, or 3?

Malike Hangout Grand Counsel

Malike

Posted
Posted
Just now, Aristotelian said:

 

But in the hypothetical you are guaranteed to lose game 3.

Correct but you don't know that at the time. If you win the first two you had a shot at a sweep, it just didn't happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aristotelian Hangout Grand Counsel

Aristotelian

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Malike said:

Correct but you don't know that at the time. If you win the first two you had a shot at a sweep, it just didn't happen. 

OK, so after the fact after losing the third game you prefer having had a shot at the sweep even though you failed to get it. Lol, it really makes no difference to me. Feels like a trick question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Malike Hangout Grand Counsel

Malike

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

OK, so after the fact after losing the third game you prefer having had a shot at the sweep even though you failed to get it. Lol, it really makes no difference to me. Feels like a trick question.

It's really not. Going into any series if you lose the first game, you have no shot at a sweep, so if you win the last two that's cool. If you win the first and lose the 2nd there is pressure of a rubber match game, if you win the first two, you always had a chance at a sweep, it's better to have that chance than not to, in my opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dystopia Hangout Grand Counsel

dystopia

Posted
Posted

My initial thought was win the first two and that’s how I voted, but thinking on it some more, that might be the *worst* way, especially if there’s an off-day after. Now the loss lingers as opposed to winning the last two and going into the next series feeling good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DirtyBird Hangout Grand Counsel

DirtyBird

Posted
Posted

Winning the series after losing the first game is definitely the most satisfying of the three ways. Quickly goes from a series you think you’re going to lose to one that you win, and the beginning of a win streak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Malike Hangout Grand Counsel

Malike

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Fiver6565 said:

How could this possibly matter?  If you're winning 2 of every 3, don't get picky!

The issue is you don't know how the series is going to play out until it's over. I was happy with the ATL series winning the first two, we lost the last one but I didn't feel like it was a crushing loss and nobody knew we were going to lose that game, I don't think the point is to look at this in hindsight, I want to win the first two games of every series if I have the choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • Sports Guy
      JD Martinez

      By Sports Guy · Posted

      Right..if the Orioles can trade for Brenton Doyle (my favorite top target), why should we care that his salary is low? Also in that scenario, Mullins is likely gone, so payroll would actually go down I believe. But someone like Bemore wins would still complain because the payroll isn’t where he thinks it should be.
    • Bahama O's Fan
      JD Martinez

      By Bahama O's Fan · Posted

      From here https://www.mlb.com/orioles/stats/ops/regular-season
    • OsFanSinceThe80s
      JD Martinez

      By OsFanSinceThe80s · Posted

      Where are you getting your stats from that's not correct looking at OPS.
    • Bahama O's Fan
      JD Martinez

      By Bahama O's Fan · Posted

      On the O's this year, Martinez would have been: 5th in OPS 5th in AVG 6th in HRs in 120 games
    • Hallas
      2024 Ravens regular season discussion

      By Hallas · Posted

      I think PFF is grading Roquan badly because the safeties behind him are playing like ass and it's making him look bad.  If teams are going to attack him over the middle on crossing routes with WRs (like KC did with Rice) he doesn't really stand much of a chance if the safeties behind him don't throw him a bone.  He's still a huge help in the run game.   In general I think PFF assigns a little too much blame to linebackers on passes over the middle, so unless you're an elite coverage guy at LB it's really hard to grade well.  The flip side to this is that teams probably need to adjust their coverage areas to account for the fact that LBs aren't going to be able to hold down WRs for long.  
    • Tony-OH
      2024 Ravens regular season discussion

      By Tony-OH · Posted

      Thanks. This tells me what my eyes have seen with Roquan. He's been a liability in coverage and the fact that Simpson is ahead of him is not good for our defensive leader. Do you have the PFF grades for offense too?
    • foxfield
      JD Martinez

      By foxfield · Posted

      What you want is perfectly reasonable.  But you seem entirely to focused on money.  The team needs to work to improve.  I don't care what it costs, you shouldn't either.  They are going to spend money and payroll will be higher next year and the year after that.  We need them to make improvements and some of that is rightfully going to come from within and not cost much. The improvements that are needed are going to cost too, I'm not saying they wont.  But ownership and the GM should simply work in tandem to make sure the team has what it needs.  I am not really concerned about how much that costs because it should be able to be done without jumping this particular team into say top ten in payroll.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...