The Tragic Number

by monkeyball on Sep 15, 2007 11:07 AM PDT in News Comment 29 comments

With the A's at 73-76 and the Angels at 86-61, the A's "tragic number" for being eliminated form the division is at 1. The A's could run the table for the last 13 games (hey, stranger things have happened), and the Angels would still have to win but a single game.

In the Wild Card race, things are more fluid and confusing, but presuming the Yankees maintain their lead in the WC, the A's tragic number stands at 3.

So: what's everybody's strategy for dealing with elimination? Pick another non-Evil team to root for through the playoffs? Tune out entirely? Burn your A's memorabilia and post harangues about Beane and his glassy-eyed legion of zombie followers?

Or do you continue to hang on Korach's every last syllable until the end of the game on the 30th? (Not that all of those are necessary mutually exclusive.)

The A's try to throw another armload of firewood down the basement stairs onto the Rangers today at 12:55 PT.

Poll

Once the A's are officially eliminated, what's your fan strategy for the rest of the season?

Officially, schmofficially -- I checked out weeks ago

90 votes

Heresy! Until both tragic numbers are at 0, I'm still rooting for the A's to pull off a miracle!

42 votes

Root regionally/league-wise through the playoffs (vomit)

18 votes

Pick another overachieving team of muppets < cough > Indians < cough > for whom to root

68 votes

Switch over to football/basketball/jai alai/xtreme knitting

57 votes

Root in spite for every other team still in contention to fall prey to the Ebola virus and for Vlad to finally collapse into a pile of component pieces

58 votes

333 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 29 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'm hoping the A's finish at or above .500

in order to do so they would need to win at least 8 of the remaining 13 games. Tough but not impossible.

I haven't considered them making the playoffs this season for at least a month.

by OaklandSi on Sep 15, 2007 11:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

keep the streak alive

the A's have finished .500 or better 8 seasons in a row. Doing it again this year will tie the club record set from 1968-76.

by 67MARQUEZ on Sep 15, 2007 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I want to vote so badly

If there was a "keep rooting for the A's and then not care about anything until April" option, I'd choose it. Instead I'll say basketball.

Barry Zito Colonoscopy

by JediLeroy on Sep 15, 2007 11:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

How about root for the Tigers or Ms

to remove the Stankees from the play-offs? That's a worth while cause to join.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Sep 15, 2007 11:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

My strategy...

Root for the A's (especially, the kids) to finish strong;

Root for the Diamondbacks to win the NL pennant and crush the Red Sox or Angels in the World Series;

Switch to football... Go RAAAIIIIIDERS!!!

Go A's!

by FoolshGame22 on Sep 15, 2007 11:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

But that means that the Angels would advance

I'm hoping for a first-round sweep of both the Angels and Yankees. They'll probably play each other. Is it just me, or have Red Sox fans gotten really cocky the last few years? One title in how many decades?

Barry Zito Colonoscopy

by JediLeroy on Sep 15, 2007 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

well, I'd love to see...

the Red Sox, Yankees and Angels all eliminated in the playoffs and the Indians advance to the World Series. But, the realist in me doesn't see that happening. And, it just wouldn't be as satisfying to watch the Dbacks crush the Indians as it would any of the other three.

As for Red Sox fans, here is their new fight song:

Go A's!

by FoolshGame22 on Sep 15, 2007 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

the Indians...

are a better team than the D-Backs.

by Cutthemullet on Sep 16, 2007 5:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

so?

Detroit was a better team than the Cardinals. The A's were a better team than the Dodgers and Reds.

The real question for the Indians... are they a better team than the Red Sox, Angels or Yanks. Getting there is more than half the problem for the Tribe.

Go A's!

by FoolshGame22 on Sep 16, 2007 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's football season.

by OldhamA on Sep 15, 2007 11:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Same as before

My "fan strategy" is always the same: Root for the A's to win the next game. It makes no difference whether we're in a playoff race, we're eliminated from the race, or we've already clinched. Regardless, I still want to win today's game.

For me the fun of baseball is the individual game, not the meta-game. I think I'd enjoy baseball just as much if the playoffs didn't exist at all.

I realize I'm in the minority here, but I think the obsessive focus on the playoffs is weird. As if any game could be "meaningless".

"Ten times thy self were better than ten Hattebergs" -- Monkeyball, channeling Shakespeare

by iglew on Sep 15, 2007 11:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

This is pretty much me, too...

I'm a baseball fan and an A's fan. I will continue to root for the A's until the last game of the season, no matter what. I want them to finish strong, if for no other reason than so they can have a winning record while the Giants have a losing record. :-)

After the A's get eliminated, I will continue to root for them in individual games, especially if they have a chance to play "spoiler" (that adds a whole other dimension to a game, IMHO), but will probably pick another team to root for in the post-season. That team will still be #2 in my book, though.

by UncleLeo on Sep 15, 2007 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

pretty much agree

I'm an Oakland A's fan. I keep following the A's in each game -- and attend as many home games as possible -- until the end of the season.

Of course it's great when they are in the postseason. But I love baseball and will watch games (and decide who to root for in each series) even if the A's aren't in it.

by OaklandSi on Sep 15, 2007 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Makes no difference?

Really?

I don't know. The "beauty of the game" argument always strikes me as a little pompous (and a little disingenuous). Though possibly I'm just misinterpreting your comments.

If the individual win isn't in service of anything, what, in your view, makes it meaningful? If you relish the competition and the aesthetics, and disdain such banalities as standings and playoffs and the like, wouldn't you view the individual win/loss as irrelevant? You should just be reveling in the polished execution of a double play, or the slider on the outside corner, or whatever ... for that matter, what difference does it make (in this context) which team does what? If the "meta-game" doesn't matter, rendering the game results superfluous, I'm not sure I understand the point of picking a favorite team, or rooting at all.

In any event. I love watching the games, just for the sake of watching them, standings be damned. But I still care that the A's are under .500, and won't make the playoffs. I root for them now, though they are out of the race, because I want them to be better next year, because the performances of guys like Suzuki and Barton and Meyer matter in that context. Aesthetics are part of the appeal, sure, but pulling for your team isn't the same as peering up at the Sistine Chapel ceiling. We're not in reverent meditation here. And I don't think you can decouple rooting from the standings.

by 74mk on Sep 15, 2007 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

'Beauty of the game'

No, I definitely didn't mean to invoke that. I know some people are into that, and I don't want to belittle their views, but I think my feelings about it are similar to yours.

For me, rooting for the A's to win a game is pretty much the same as my own effort to win when I'm playing in a game.

If I'm playing a game with my friends, I play to win. Not because I'm playing for money, and obviously not because I dislike my opponents. I play to win, because that's the fun of the game. If you don't care, then it isn't fun.

In terms of improving my skills, sure, I think about whether I'm getting better, faring well against better competition, etc., but I'm not counting my win-loss total and I'm not thinking about how I rank in the standings. Even if it's a game we play on a regular basis with a regular group, it's still not part of a meta-game where at the end of the year the guy who wins the most games is crowned champion. Sure, you want to win as many games as you can, but only because that happens to be the sum of the individual goals of winning each game.

It's not about aesthetics, it's about what unit you choose to focus on. For me it's each game. For most people here it seems to be each playoff season. I can't help but wonder how such fans would fare if they had a different favorite team. Suppose you're a Pittsburgh Pirates fan and all you care about is the playoffs. What do you do? Do you just give up on every season before it begins and not care at all? That doesn't seem like much fun.

"Ten times thy self were better than ten Hattebergs" -- Monkeyball, channeling Shakespeare

by iglew on Sep 15, 2007 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Playing to win

If I'm playing a game with my friends, I play to win. Not because I'm playing for money, and obviously not because I dislike my opponents. I play to win, because that's the fun of the game. If you don't care, then it isn't fun.

Are you referring only to baseball, or all games in general? I'm a selfish guy, because I enjoy even a loss if I've played well (in any sport). Sure, the win is much more enjoyable, but I can still have fun if we lose a close game and I got 5-5 with 6 RBI.

This is what happens with the A's in a non-contending year, for me. I really want Cust and Swisher to hit a few bombs so that I can feel good about their yearly stats. I'd love each of the starting pitchers to get another win or two. Maybe this stems from years of baseball card collecting, but even in a down year I take solace knowing that I got to watch some good players.

As an aside, I hate playing board games to win. I invest so much emotionally that if somebody's strategy purposefully screws me over, I get pissed. It's a lot easier for me to enjoy playing a game of Settlers of Catan or Risk (or even Scattergories, Boggle or Uno) if I don't care about winning. That way, I'm happy about winning, but not upset about losing.

Barry Zito Colonoscopy

by JediLeroy on Sep 15, 2007 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was referring to games in general.

I don't play baseball. I play plenty of board games.

I still love Settlers after all these years. Used to love Boggle, but sort of burned out lately. Don't care for the others you mentioned.

I don't hate losing. You always play to win, of course, because that's a big part of the fun. But inevitably you're going to lose your share, and that's OK.

I'd certainly rather play against good competition and lose 50% of the time (or even 75% of the time) than play inferior opponents I can beat consistently. So in that sense winning isn't everything. But playing to win is.

"Ten times thy self were better than ten Hattebergs" -- Monkeyball, channeling Shakespeare

by iglew on Sep 18, 2007 5:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll root for us until the season is over

Then hockey starts, and I'll root for the Sharks.

death to myspace!

by malikot on Sep 15, 2007 11:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Not Bad

Was there w/friends that had never been to a game before, hoping their first game would be a good one. The first couple of innings were PAINFUL... slow, slower, slowest - and down 6-2 no less.

Then the 5th inning happened and it made up for everything.

Barton's 1st homer... our kids sat behind the Ranger's dugout and got a ball tossed to them.... A's win. All is well with the world again.

"I realize that I'm generalizing here, but as is often the case when I generalize, I don't care." -Dave Barry

by tmail on Sep 15, 2007 12:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

A's fan till I die

35 years I have been an A's fan and will cheer for them even if they are out of the playoffs. I remember the 1977 season and still went to the games when you could buy a third deck ticket and still sit behind the A's dugout with the other 3,000 fans at the game.

by Arcman on Sep 15, 2007 12:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

3,000 fans???

you must have only gone to the weekend games!!!!

speaking of small crowds, it seems many have already "checked out" because there were at most 12,000 at last nights game and the announced attendance (tickets sold) was 19,300.

great game though....big comeback, barton's 1st HR, squeeze play, bounce back after TX tied it....very fun game!!!

for awhile i thought they were playing first team to 30 wins,

by cvdoug on Sep 15, 2007 12:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

3,000 and less

Back in time when the crowds were small you could go get a hot dog and coke and only miss 1 pitch in the time it took. Also getting players autographs was alot easier. You could get to the game early and pretty much get the whole team to sign a baseball.

by Arcman on Sep 15, 2007 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'd like em

to finish at 500. A small moral victory and something to cheer for

by Spidz34 on Sep 15, 2007 12:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Over .500

and secondly, cheering for anybody but the angels. Worst. Fans. Ever.

by LWilliams on Sep 15, 2007 12:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

My strategy for elimination

is to increase my need for elimination, by attending the the 13th Annual California Brewers' Festival in Sacramento today.

So it goes.

by jeepers on Sep 15, 2007 12:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

By the way

could we get the teetotaler from Lookout Landing to visit this thread and chastise me for my beer drinking ways? 150 or so humorous posts would also be a workable elimination strategy.

So it goes.

by jeepers on Sep 15, 2007 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs