- Joined
- Feb 15, 2017
- Messages
- 662
- Reaction Score
- 4,277
I "liked" this post because it is provocative. (And as a high-water example, I give you 1 out in the top of the 9th inning of Game 4 of the 1988 NLCS. The Mets up (I think) 4-2 against the Dodgers, ready to take a commanding 3-1 lead in the series. Mike Soscia goes deep on Gooden for a 2-run HR, and the Dodgers win the game in extra-innings to ties the series. Within a year, the mighty Mets of the mid-80s were no more, with but a single WS to show for it.)I have been contemplating your post during my mourning and moping. I had never thought of it from your suggested viewpoint. Wow. a four-times-in-a-row NCAA champion, undefeated and holding the ball with about 15 seconds left in a tied semifinal game with a possible match against a team (SC) that they had already beaten comfortably eventually waiting for them in the final. then, to have it all disappear in an instant. Who knows the lingering effect in 2018 and, for that matter, in 2019?
Pardon my first comparison, but the words work so well. A stand of trees near Cemetery Ridge in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, is called the "High Water Mark of the Confederacy." It is marked with a plaque.
View attachment 42036
Then I thought about the 1996 Atlanta Braves Baseball team. 1995 World Series Champs, with three eventual HOF pitchers, overwhelm the Yankees in New York in the first two games. After a hiccup in game three, they hold a 6-run lead midway in game four. It seems that they will hold on at 6-3 in the eighth inning, and go up 3 games to 1, with top reliever Mark Wohlers facing backup Yankee catcher Jim Leyritz. The High Water mark of the Atlanta Braves. Leyritz hits a 3-run home run, the Yankees win in extra innings, win the next two games, and the Braves, despite all that talent, never get very close in succeeding years.
I welcome other high-water examples (perhaps the 1992 UNLV MCBB team vs. Duke, though there were some upcoming sanctions, or the 2001 New York Yankees going against the Diamondbacks in ninth inning of in game 7) but I am hoping not to see that last 15 UCONN /MS ST seconds commemorated any time soon.
But I caution against what I call "reading history backwards". It may certainly appear in retrospect that Game 3 of the '96 series was a high-water mark for the Braves. But reading history forward, no one at the time could ever have perceived that or thought that. And it is hard to believe that any player's performance in subsequent seasons was somehow affected by what happened in the previous year.
Interestingly, but understandably, we tend not to ask these high-water questions when history produces events that negate the need to ask in the first place. But that does not mean that fortuity was not also at work. Consider the Patriots incredible run. But for the ruling in the "Tuck" rule game, the 2001 Pats probably would not have gone on to win the SB 36. The SB 38 run had the Pats winning the Div. game by 3 points, the SB by another 3 points. In fact, the Patriots' margin of victory in SBs 36, 38 and 39 is a total of 9 points (3 points in each game). The Pats could have and probably should have lost '14 SB. Thus, but for a play here and there in each of these years, it is possible that the Pats could have not won a SB until 2017. In that event, history would be telling a very different story than the one that will be told (justifiably so) years hence. This is not to say that the Patriots are not a great team during these years. It is to say that sometimes fortune smiles on some more so than on others, perhaps disproportionately.