Two words: 2004 ALCS.
Which situation is more dire? Being down 5.5 games with 40 games to play, or being down three games in a seven-game series?
And recall, pitching was our problem in the 2004 ALCS, too. Schilling was DOA, Arroyo was terrible, and Lowe had been so bad he'd been bumped from the rotation. Pedro was the only one who pitched well (as Schilling's been the only one pitching well now).
The Sox pitching has sucked. And when it hasn't, other problems have arisen (passed ball by Mirabelli, followed by bloop RBI single by Jeter).
If the pitching can turn around, the Sox can make the playoffs. If it doesn't, they can't. I wouldn't place a bet either way.
Re:Dude...
pudge on 2006-08-22T00:56:21
Being 5.5 games behind is not too bad at all, but you can't compare it to the situation above
Yes, you can. I will do it right now: that was a much more difficult and implausible comeback than this would be. That happened, so this can happen too.
See? I just did it!
And we'll see you tomorrow in Anaheim...
Remember the '64 Phillies!
waltman on 2006-08-22T01:32:10
The 1964 Phillies blew a 6.5 game lead with only 12 games left. The Sox still have 38 games left. So it's possible, even if it's not likely...Re:Remember the '64 Phillies!
pudge on 2006-08-22T03:47:49
Yep. Very possible. And yep, not likely: obviously, the team with the lead is the most likely team to win, especially when it's more than a game or two, especially when that team just kicked the other team's butt.
