Congrats Giants.

Also the same guy that traded Liriano and Nathan for A.J. Pierzynski.

Congrats to the Giants. The one thing this proves is that you just have to get hot at the right time. Whether it's the 2004 Red Sox, 2006 Cardinals, or now the 2010 Giants, putting together 2-3 weeks of good baseball in October is all that matters.

It sucks being a Padres fan right now.

That's a load of shit. We just ran into a team with better pitching. It happens. We were the second-best team in baseball this year.

This. He also gave Matt Morris a horrible contract as well.

That's no excuse. The Royals offense was terrible. Our 7-9 hitters were worse than most everyone in baseball.

This team's best hitter was Aubrey Huff. And they won the World Series. All the credit in the world to them though, pretty amazing.

It's weird they put it up against MNF (not that they knew it was going to be a clinching game, but still)... seems like a Gary Bettman move.

I remember a bunch of Royals goofs saying that taking Hochevar was the better pick...:doh!::cuss:

No offense, dude, but you just don't know what you are talking about. Yes, the Giants have good pitching, but guys like Nelson Cruz, Vlad Guerrero, David Murphy, and even Andrus are way too prone to prolonged slumps.

The Rangers deserve a lot of credit, but the best two teams don't make the World Series every year, and the Rangers didn't even finish with the third best record in their own league, despite playing in the worst division in baseball.

But didn't trade Lincecum for Rios. THAT very nearly happened, but JP Riccardi went full reerun

And that's why he doesn't have a job anymore.

We're talking about five games here. Five games.

So? We proved ourselves against Tampa and New York.

Stop shitting on the Rangers. It just makes you look like a bitter Cards fan.

And thank christ for that.

I have nothing to be bitter about. We don't play one another, and our organization actually wins things.

The Rangers beat the Yankees and Rays, and deserve credit for that, but they weren't on par with those teams over the course of the regular season, the same way the Cards weren't as good as the 2006 Mets.

That's the beauty of a small sample size, though. However, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You're saying that five games isn't a proper way to judge the Rangers, while saying that the five games they played against the Rays and six against the Yankees do matter, and not the 162.

Look, the Rangers deserve credit, I'm not shitting on them. With that said, you aren't being realistic about what they were. Recent baseball history is littered with teams that rode hot streaks from mediocre pitchers to postseason success. Furthermore, someone who gives up on his team before the final game has been played can't come back and then the next day talk about how good they were.