|
|
Post by sdm3 on Sept 14, 2020 15:22:51 GMT
Yet that same core, as you describe them, won every game at home in that 2011 Final by a combined score of 17-3. Why is it that they were arbitrarily spooked by playing a Stanley Cup Final game at home this time? Because the pressure of playing a game 7 at home was greater in their minds than doing it on the road where they have the 'nothing to lose' mentality that the Blues clearly had last year. This is my point. Players react differently in different circumstances. The pressure of doing it on home ice clearly affected them more than in 2011 on the road. Why was Peyton one of the winningest QBs of all time, but has an atrocious playoff record? Different situation, different performance. It happens. So to me, a guy throwing a no-hitter in an empty stadium isn't as impressive as doing in front of a packed house. It's still hard, it still counts, it's still impressive. But I think there's a difference. Sometimes it really is as simple as this: Why did the team/player lose? Because the other team played better. A player is a known choker... until he isn't. A team is a group of battle-hardened veterans with championship experience that know how to win... until they lose. A player threw a no-hitter in an empty stadium because he had a great game. The Phillies' bullpen shat the bed in an empty stadium because they sucked in that game (and many other games). I think that's all true whether there are fans in the arena or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 14, 2020 16:48:36 GMT
Because the pressure of playing a game 7 at home was greater in their minds than doing it on the road where they have the 'nothing to lose' mentality that the Blues clearly had last year. This is my point. Players react differently in different circumstances. The pressure of doing it on home ice clearly affected them more than in 2011 on the road. Why was Peyton one of the winningest QBs of all time, but has an atrocious playoff record? Different situation, different performance. It happens. So to me, a guy throwing a no-hitter in an empty stadium isn't as impressive as doing in front of a packed house. It's still hard, it still counts, it's still impressive. But I think there's a difference. Sometimes it really is as simple as this: Why did the team/player lose? Because the other team played better. A player is a known choker... until he isn't. A team is a group of battle-hardened veterans with championship experience that know how to win... until they lose. A player threw a no-hitter in an empty stadium because he had a great game. The Phillies' bullpen shat the bed in an empty stadium because they sucked in that game (and many other games). I think that's all true whether there are fans in the arena or not. Agree completely. I don't like to accuse my teams of choking that often because I feel like it takes away from the other team's accomplishment, which isn't my intent. The Blues outplayed the Bruins and deserved to win; the Giants outplayed the Pats in SB 42, etc. I think nerves were a factor for my teams in those situations, but the other teams stayed focused and outplayed them. They earned it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rufus-T on Sept 14, 2020 17:07:15 GMT
Burned. My team didn't make the playoff this year.
I got in with a 3-4 record and 4th place. Was way up there in points, though. Outscored the 3rd and 5th place teams by well over 300 points. I've felt like no-hitters haven't been all that for quite some time. And now you can have 7 inning ones. Lucky you. Good luck in the playoff.
I have a 4-3 record with 4th highest score but wound up 6th place. In such short season, one week lost is a big deal like the NFL season. I lost my playoff chance early in the season by not preparing for all the COVID ppd early in the season and a week when my pitchers went 0-7 going into Sunday while losing by not much. In consolation, the team with the highest score in my league didn't make the playoff either, wound up 5th place.
|
|
|
|
Post by millar70 on Sept 14, 2020 19:56:42 GMT
As with everything else in life, it all depends on the individual. Some guys can totally block out the crowd, even in tough places like a Philly or a Boston, but some others can let that same crowd get in their head a bit.
I gotta think for a guy like Alec Mills (hope I got the name right), having an empty stadium probably made it easier to twirl a no-hitter than if he had to pitch in a loud stadium full of fans rooting against him. Or even a stadium full of fans rooting for him. Maybe it alters his concentration a bit, maybe it doesn't, but I gotta think 40,000 people add a different dimension to the scene than an empty stadium would.
|
|
|
|
Post by SportsFan19 on Sept 16, 2020 17:22:57 GMT
Doesn't the crowd/no crowd add the same positive/negative effect on the hitters, and fielders, as it does the pitchers?
|
|
