{"id":13092,"date":"2016-11-04T10:32:00","date_gmt":"2016-11-04T14:32:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nationalsarmrace.com\/?p=13092"},"modified":"2016-11-04T10:32:00","modified_gmt":"2016-11-04T14:32:00","slug":"where-would-2016-world-series-game-7-rank-historically","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nationalsarmrace.com\/?p=13092","title":{"rendered":"Where would 2016 World Series Game 7 rank historically?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Zobrist's<\/a>

Zobrist’s hit won it for the Cubs, and won him the series MVP award. Photo via bleachereport<\/p><\/div>\n

So, we just saw a pretty darn good World Series, culminating in a very good Game 7. \u00a0The Cubs win was obviously historic; no need to repeat all the other post-game analysis going on to that end.<\/p>\n

The question here is; where does Game 7 rank historically? \u00a0We all suffer from recency bias, and many (most) of us were not around for such other classic games (1924 World Series game 7 going 12 innings and Walter Johnson<\/strong> pitching 4 innings on one day’s rest, 1960 game 7 featuring\u00a0Mazeroski<\/strong>‘s famous walk-off homer, or\u00a0Bobby Thompson<\/strong>‘s “Shot Heard ‘Round the World” to win the 1951 NL Pennant). \u00a0The normally sane\u00a0Jayson Stark<\/strong> just posted that 2016’s Game 7 was “the Greatest ever game<\/a>” in the long history of the sport.<\/p>\n

However, I’m skeptical of calling *anything* that just happened, the best ever, so quickly after it ended.<\/p>\n

On the “plus” side for its lofty status; Game 7 featured two long suffering franchises and was historic just on its own because of it. \u00a0It was a Game 7, which only happens about one in every four Series. \u00a0It went into extra innings, only the fifth\u00a0time that’d ever happened. \u00a0It featured a clutch and improbable late inning comeback to tie a game that seemed out of reach (Rajai<\/strong> Davis<\/strong>‘ 8th inning homer off of\u00a0Aroldis Chapman<\/strong>), and it ended with the tying run on base and the winning run at the plate for nail-biting.<\/p>\n

On the “negative” side; it was a sloppy game (4 errors, 3 by the winning side) that featured decidedly “un-clutch” pitching performances by the two marquee relievers (Chapman and\u00a0Andrew Miller<\/strong>), both patently exhausted from their workloads this post-season. \u00a0Neither starter even qualified for a decision. \u00a0The pitching in general was substandard; the teams combined for 24 \u00a0hits and 15 runs; this is a far cry from\u00a0Jack Morris<\/strong>‘ 10-inning shutout in the 1991 Game 7. \u00a0And thanks to the continuing trend of endless delays caused by interminable mound visits and bullpen switches, the game time (not even accounting for the rain delay) was nearly 4 and a half hours.<\/p>\n

So, for me, no this wasn’t the greatest ever game. \u00a0But it was still darn good. \u00a0How good?<\/p>\n

\n

In 2011, just after the epic Game 6 between St. Louis and Texas, I posted a similar analysis<\/a>; where did that game stand? \u00a0I put it into the context of the MLB TV’s 20 Greatest games of the last half century<\/a> series, which ranked the best games since 1960 (but specifically NOT including the Mazeroski game, which may have been #1) as follows:<\/p>\n