Let's win a pennant!

I was cool with that.

I hope the Stros can close it out in St. Louie on Wednesday.

I hope to see your posts them too, as well as from everyone else who was kind enough to drop by for our victory party gone awry.

Let's try again on Wednesday, with a starting pitcher who's not ailing, and a closer named Wheeler.

But these are professionals, even if most of 'em don't hit all that well, and they will give maximum effort Wednesday no matter what Pujols did tonight, and Roy Oz is a fucking bulldog, and if he needs to go nine to win Wednesday, I am sure that's what he'll do.

And the Astros are counting on Game Six

Not sure what you mean about the sold their soul thing, though.

He even could have told Lidge to just walk Pujols, because even if Sanders got a ball to the outfield, only two runs would have scored on a cleanly fielded ball.

Bingo.  My fiancé said in real time that Garner should walk Pujols, and I told her no, they'd never put the winning run on base.

So I wouldn't have done it, but then again, I don't get paid the big bucks.

The more I think about it, she was right.  The WPA thing says you double your chances of losing from 7.5% to 15% by going from 1st and 2nd with two out  to the bases loaded, but the WPA software doesn't know anything about facing the best hitter in the game.  At that point it's damage control:  who can hurt you least.

Garner had the chance to outmaneuver LaRussa the way LaRussa once had the opportunity to outmaneuver Lasorda:  I'd always thought LaRussa should have had Eck walk Kirk Gibson.  Tying run is still at second, and you make Lasorda use a pinch-runner.  Plus Sax is just a little less dangerous than Gibson.

No pinch-runner here, but you diminish the Cardinal advantage in bypassing their most dangerous hitter.  And it's almost crticism proof--unless Sanders triples.  Because if Sanders homers with the bases loaded in that alternate universe which should have been,  the fans and the media would certainly understand that Pujols would have done the same.

I would have.

Had I been watching as Lidge put Pujols on, at first I would have been like, "No.  You can't do that."  But as it sank in, I would have seen the logic.

Another thing you could try was to hand Wheeler the ball for the second consecutive inning.  Don't tell me you weren't worried about Lidge after yesterday's luckfest in the ninth.  So why wasn't Garner worried?

Well, I'm sure he was, but I won't blame Phil for the "tyranny of the closer," where you have to use a recently ineffective pitcher in a critical position, because otherwise you'd hurt his precious feelings, or whatever.  That's just the state of the game, by far the most frustrating thing about it for me, and I can't expect Phil Garner to change that in one NLCS contest.

But in an isolated perfect world, unencumbered by all the baggage, using Wheeler (who threw 4 pitches in the eighth, right?) to pitch the ninth is at least as defensible as walking Pujols.

Which, of course, is what they should have done.

I am, by the way, not over my anger with Lidge at all.  And it's for that reason that the non-pinch hit in the fourth doesn't bother me at all.  I disagreed with the move at the time, but the Astros got away with it, pure and simple.  They had a two run lead with 2 strikes to go.  I can imagine plenty of scenarios where Astacio gives up runs, and the fact is, although I thought it was fait accompli, Pettitte didn't.

Criticize Ensberg?  Sure.  Absolutely.  Everett had better at bats last night.   The Pettitte at bat in the fourth was better than one of Ensberg's strikeouts.  Our MVP has hit one homer in the last month.