So what's the deal, aren't Laker fans Dodger fans too?

[rickortreat]

I would have thought I'd hear all kinds of smack from you guys about how you were doing to beat the Phillies. I know you're not shy about the Lakers. What gives?

[jemagee]

Your premise is incorrect.

[westkoast]

I am a Dodger fan but baseball doesn't get me excited enough to 'talk smack' about nor do I follow it as closely.  Was actually going to wait to talk about the DOYERS (as WOW and his people say) after the first game.  Right now there is not much to say other than both teams handled their first playoff opponent with relative ease and that Philly does have the upper hand mentally after smacking around the Dodgers last year.

Most people are Lakers fans in Southern California from San Diego all the way up till it starts to smell like cows.  When it comes to baseball each area tends to root for their local team.  Orange County people stick with the Angels (unless they was born/raised in the LA area), LA people obviously are Dodger fans, and people in San Diego are Padres fans.

[jemagee]

Philly does have the upper hand mentally after smacking around the Dodgers last year.

Only in the eyes of the fans and the dolts at ESPN.

The Dodgers are a better team than last year...though the performance of Vicente Padilla is just unexplainable and unsustainable for a long period of time - though for a couple weeks - possibly.

The young guys are hitting their strides, Kershaw had another full season...if the Dodgers think the phils have any advantage because of last year - that's just silly...Hamels isn't as good as he was looked last year (nor is he as bad as he looked this year, he's somewhere in between) - Lee is doing well...but beyond that the pitching is shaky - it's lefty heavy and the dodgers are better against lefties than the rockies...the phillies pen is an adventure if Charlie Manuel still thinks that Lidge is his 'closer' (who knows if he does or not)...and sure Torre shreds a bullpen and is vastly over rated but I'd rather have broxton and that dude from blatimore than what the phils have now.

I think it's a pretty evenly matched series right now - i'm mildly uncomfortable that Cliff Lee isn't pitching until game 3- but it is what it is

[rickortreat]

I think WK is right about the psych edge, you don't know what the Dodgers players are thinking or how they feel about a rematch.

Until they actually win a game against the Phillies, they have an edge over the Dodgers. They saw the Phillies come back from 3 runs down in the top of the ninth against the Rockies in their home park, and they saw Lidge get the last out with his slider working. That's impressive.

The one thing the Dodgers have going for them is that Lee won't be ready to start.  IF Cole gets them that first win, that will be huge for the Phils.  Still waiting to see if they will use Manny.

Also, the Phillies are better than last year, thanks to the addition of Lee. I think this is going to be a great series. All the teams left have been very impressive, particularly the Dodgers since everyone was so sure about the Cardinals.

[jemagee]

I think WK is right about the psych edge, you don't know what the Dodgers players are thinking or how they feel about a rematch.

So I don't - but WK and you do?

That makes a lot of sense.

If a professional athlete is focused on what happened a year ago as opposed to what happens tonight - he's not going to be a good professional athlete.

The dodgers beat the phillies 4 out of 7 times this year...that's with THIS years rosters, you know hte ones playing, not the rosters of last year.

Also, the Phillies are better than last year, thanks to the addition of Lee. I think this is going to be a great series. All the teams left have been very impressive, particularly the Dodgers since everyone was so sure about the Cardinals.

Hamels outcomes are not as good as last year, Moyer is dead (as far as baseball goes), Lidge is a disaster and parts of the offense aren't as good as they were last year...but because the phillies have cliff lee they are better.

The Dodgers are better too.

Your certainty in this is baffling...there are no 'perfect' teams in the NL - both teams have flaws...and you're existing on 'well we beat them last year' and 'we added cliff lee' while ignoring the relevant positives about the dodgers and the fact that there are parts of the phillies that are WORSE than last year.

Then again - you think the only hole in the phillies offense is the #9 spot - there by ignoring one of the worst offensive 3rd baseman in all of baseball.

PS - I assume by Manny you mean Pedro - I know how hard it is to tell guys like that apart...Pedro himself seems to have said publicly that he isn't ready to start yet and wants to do some bullpen work.

Oh yeah - which means the phillies only really have on right handed starter for the series - which is a bit different than last year too. 

Well that and who has homefield advantage

[rickortreat]

The only certainty I have is about the psychological edge.  Simply because a 4-3 edge during the regular season carries no weight, and because the Phils have a very good away record and they beat them last year.  Even if the Dodgers are better, they still don't know if they're good enough.  As soon as they win a tough game the edge goes away, but until the do, they can't help but have some doubt.
  That's human nature.

We've all seen teams that worked their way up, building and getting better season after season until they finally break through and win. Magic used to talk about how they had doubts about their ability to bear the Celtics until they did it. It took the Sixers years and the addition of Moses to get by the Celtics and LA. The difference is one of maturity and confidence, not ability. I know the Phillies have that, AND the Dodgers still have to earn that.

I have no idea who will win the series. I haven't watched the Dodgers play enough to have an opinion.

Yes, I meant Pedro, if he was ready to go against the Rockies, he should be ready by now. Blanton is the pitcher that pushed the Phils over the top last season. That's two right handers to throw against the Dodgers. And don't forget the addition of Happ who has been very impressive in his own right.

The fact that two of the Dodgers pitchers are Phils rejects also has an influence. 

[Joe Vancil]

The "psychological edge" from a previous beating cuts both ways.  Some teams man-up, come together, and use it as a motivation point - reclaim a bit of pride.  Other teams wilt under the pressure of going up against the group the beat them.  

On the other side, some players will play confident, knowing that it's a team they beat before.  Others will play over-confident, figuring that it's all the same as last time.  

I believe that over-all, it's a wash - and especially so when the history is limited.

[jemagee]

I believe that much like clutch and grit this is one of those 'long held beliefs' that has no actual merit or basis in reality - it's not like this was this season - this was a year ago - head to head this year the dodgers took 4 of 7 from the phillies...they swept the cardinals and had the best record in the NL this season while their 'best' player suffered a 50 game suspension for cheating.

Looking backwards is pointless - all that matters is the next game until there are no more games in the season...

[rickortreat]

Joe has a point about it cutting both ways, and as I said, I know little about the Dodgers.

But I do know the Phils have a confidence about them that is visible, and the Dodgers have to overcome that.

Sure it is motivation, you really want to get back at the team that beat you before. BUT you have to have that doubt until you overcome it.  This is human nature. It is part of the human condition to worry about the outcome, not knowing the future!

You can't believe in something until you know it, and you can't know it until you do it! Maybe you remember learning to swim.  In a regular pool in the shallow end you were fine - any problem and you could stand in the water. Even if you didn't need to, you knew you could. Then they took you over to the deep end or the diving pool. Everyone sat there, scared. No one was ready to go in right away. Then the instructor told you it's the same as the regular pool, you now how to swim, the depth means NOTHING! Then you realize he's right and you decide you can do it.  You go in, and the fear is gone.

But in professional sports it's not you against yourself, it's against other players who beat you before. They know it and you know it too. If the Dodger win, they'll have earned the right to be confident. Like the Phillies are right now!  It's the edge that comes from experience, and it's different in the post season, even though it's the same game. Just like swimming in the deep end of the pool.

[westkoast]

The "psychological edge" from a previous beating cuts both ways.  Some teams man-up, come together, and use it as a motivation point - reclaim a bit of pride.  Other teams wilt under the pressure of going up against the group the beat them.  

On the other side, some players will play confident, knowing that it's a team they beat before.  Others will play over-confident, figuring that it's all the same as last time.  

I believe that over-all, it's a wash - and especially so when the history is limited.

Like the Angels, who had been whooped on by Boston for years, only to sweep them in the first round.

My comment about the psychological edge stems more from the way I view playoff matchups in sports  than it does from some kind of insider information.  Maybe the Dodgers are worried, maybe they are using it as motivation to treat Philly like a doormat.  I am not claiming to know the janitor at Dodger stadium like Reality does in SA.    Simply put I think that until a team is actually able to beat another in a playoff series, that in the back of their minds they think about the lose from the previous year.  Whereas the team who won is a bit more confident because they did just beat the team the previous year.  The fact the Phillies beat the Dodgers and are the champs, to me, gives them a mental edge going into the series.   That doesn't mean I think the Phillies will win 

[jemagee]

Like the Angels, who had been whooped on by Boston for years, only to sweep them in the first round.

Yeah but see the Angels have the psychological edge of playing for Nick Adenhart on their side - so i'm told - that's why they're going to beat the Yankees

[westkoast]

Like the Angels, who had been whooped on by Boston for years, only to sweep them in the first round.

Yeah but see the Angels have the psychological edge of playing for Nick Adenhart on their side - so i'm told - that's why they're going to beat the Yankees

No they have the psychological edge against the Yankees because they've beat them in the playoffs a number of times this decade.  (Yes I get you were trying to be sarcastic because you are salty your opinion didn't get taken into consideration by Rick)

[jemagee]

No they have the psychological edge against the Yankees because they've beat them in the playoffs a number of times this decade.  (Yes I get you were trying to be sarcastic because you are salty your opinion didn't get taken into consideration by Rick)

Wait aren't you trying to be sarcastic too...now i'm confused - stupid flu.

As for rick and my opinion - i realized something and took advantage of that new fangled addition that came into effect (affect?) while i was gone.

I just had to listen to the 710 ESPN guys slather over the angels for how well they dealt with the nick adenhart thing (which is great that they dealt with it well but i don't think it adds any 'oomph' - then again, that guy on ESPN who switched to cincy over blatimore because of the defensive coorddinator and his wife passing was right)

[jemagee]

PS - when did the yankees and angels last play in the playoffs?