I can see an argument both ways.
Game 5 he would be on short rest and we would have Lester to go against him.
Game 6 he is in our house. Not that he had trouble there in game 2, but still.
I have tickets to games 6 and 7 so from that perspective I'm happy. Much higher probability I will get at least a game 6.
You could not ask for 2 more oppositely constructed franchises if you tried.
The cubs was built around great offense with some good pitching.
The braves was built around great pitching with some good hitting.
The problem with the braves was they had dominant starters 1 to 5 which was great for a 162 game season but when the post season started that advantage was nullified due to the fact that teams cut down from a 5 man rotation to a 3 man rotation.
So when the post season would start the braves dominance from 1 to 5 would be neutralized and they was on par with alot of teams 1 to 3 starters cutting into that great starting pitching advantage they would have during a 162 game season.
AND furthermore your comment is stupid simply on the basis that this is only the 2nd post season run for this current version of the cubs. There is not enough history yet with this team to even begin to say one way or the other how good or bad they are in october.
Pretty dumb post on so many levels.
basically this move forces the cubs to win the next 2 games to have any kind of realistic shot at winning this series.
If kershaw would have been pitching game 5 you could make the case that the cubs only would have had to win 1 of the next 2 games to have a decent shot at winning the series.
If kershaw would have been pitching game 5 you could make the case that the cubs only would have had to win 1 of the next 2 games to have a decent shot at winning the series.
