Big Pimpin wrote:
FouLLine wrote:Hyperbole is not the correct literal term you are trying to use here... I'm not sure what is, but hyperbole is surely not it. A hyperbole is an intentional and extreme exaggeration used to prove a point. Such as, "Wow, that took forever." When in fact this statement would ever be true unless it was being used to describe an eternity. That guy was obviously being serious.
"Pitching wins championships" would be more of a baseball cliche than anything. There is nothing with in that statement that was an intentional exaggeration.
Eh, I see it being both a baseball cliche and an extreme exaggeration. We can argue about whether or not it was intentional but I have to assume that it was.
Not that it matters, because pitching clearly doesn't win championships.
Remember baseball is a game that is designed to be dominated by pitching. If a guy can get a hit 30% of the time he is considered a good hitter. The reason people say pitching wins championships is because it has in the past. Granted it takes everything hitting, fielding, and pitching to win a championship. But there are seasons when good pitching turns great in the post season and just dominates.
2005 Chicago White Sox. Starting pitching carried that team, hands down. This was the most dominate performance ever in the playoffs of the modern ear... bar none.
2008 The Phillies best ERA in the post season. There were 4 teams with more wins than the Phillies in the regular season. Yet The Phillies still dominated and went 11 - 3 in there championship run. They beat Tampa Bay (who had the best ERA in the AL in the 2008 post season).
2007 The Boston Red Sox 2nd best ERA in the post season. Only beat out by the Arizona Diamondbacks who didn't play nearly as many games nor pitch against an AL lineup. The Red Sox beat the Colorado Rockies who had the 3rd best ERA in the post season.
2006 The St. Louis Cardinals best ERA in the post season. They were by far the worst team in the playoffs going into the post season with only 83 wins. Yet they beat the Detriot Tigers (who had the 2nd best ERA in the post season) in the World Series.
2004 The Red Sox (best ERA in the AL for the post season) sweept the Cardinals (best ERA in the NL for the post season).
I'm not saying that I value pitchers more than hitters. But if this above evidence is undeniable. I'm not going to sit here and hinge and entire team on pitching. But when it counts in a 7 game series it is much easier and more likely that you can be carried by your pitching staff than your lineup and even more likely than your team being carried by defense.
There's a reason why "pitching wins championships" is a cliche in baseball where as "pitching doesn't win championships" is not a cliche. No matter the argument here weather if pitching wins championships is true or not, you saying pitching does not win championships is far more incorrect than someone saying it does win championships.