1991 v 2016: Game 7

[BobAzar]

Which Game 7 was better? Obviously, most of us here are biased towards 1991, and I still think it is better since it was 0-0 until it ended, so the prospect of a run was such a threat. 

But 2016 was pretty great, from the history of the two teams, to the back and forth scoring, to Rajai Davis's HR, to the rain delay. 

1991 is still #1, but 2016 is a close 2nd.

Thought?

[Squirrel]

I thought 2016 game 7 was sloppy; entertaining, but sloppy. It wasn't until Cleveland tied it that it became ... intense and interesting. Game 7 1991 was intense the whole way through, and the starter went 10 innings. Yeah, I'm more biased, but as for a baseball game, there is no contest. Game 7 2016, as I said, was sloppy; entertaining but sloppy; entertaining, but not the best game ever played.

[Doomtints]

Only with such a team of capable hitters do you play Chapman in so many consecutive games.

 

Chapman has the 15 fastest pitches ever thrown already in his young career, and he threw most of the fastest pitches of the year ... something ridiculous like top 30 or top 40 fastest pitches.  That's not a guy you keep in very long.

 

He's a free agent now and probably going back to the Yankees, so maybe Maddon isn't worried about his future....

 

[Mike Sixel]

1991 was pretty boring if you weren't a fan of either team.....tense, but boring.

 

This game was sloppy, but didn't get real interesting until the end. But, imo, it was likely much more entertaining for the masses.

[wsnydes]

For me it's 1991, no contest.  0-0 pitcher's duels in that pressure packed scenario is about as good as it gets for me.  The later it got, the more the intensity ratcheted up.  The more each pitch became magnified, the more the little things because massive things.  Any mistake could be the difference, however small.  As Chitown said, 2016 was sloppy.

[wsnydes]

 

1991 was pretty boring if you weren't a fan of either team.....tense, but boring.

 

This game was sloppy, but didn't get real interesting until the end. But, imo, it was likely much more entertaining for the masses.

I tend to agree with this when talking about the masses, but I enjoyed Game 3 of 2016 immensely too.  That may have been my favorite game of the series.  I realize that I'm not the majority of the audience.

[Squirrel]

1991 was pretty boring if you weren't a fan of either team.....tense, but boring.

 

This game was sloppy, but didn't get real interesting until the end. But, imo, it was likely much more entertaining for the masses.

I guess when the OP asked which was a better game, I was thinking from the standards of baseball. If the question was which was more entertaining from a generic standpoint, I'd likely have answered differently.

 

I mean, 4 errors combined, starters that didn't go deep, that's not a great baseball game. Yeah, lots to be entertained by, and there's the whole historical aspects, but from a baseball standpoint, I don't think it can be compared to other truly great baseball games.

[BobAzar]

Sloppy is a good way to put it.

I was thinking more of the lines of; if you had to rank best WS games, which would be better. 

 

[Vanimal46]

I was on the edge of my crib for game 7 of the 1991 world series!! 

This year's game 7 got quite boring in the middle innings... Glad there was a payoff at the end to make it exciting, but I don't think I'll be looking back at this game as an all-time classic. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

1991 was one of the greatest, maybe the greatest, baseball games I've ever seen.

 

The fact that it was 0-0 heading into the 10th inning and Morris was still on the mound makes it the winner, in my opinion. The amount of suspense in a zero run game with the starter still on the mound in extra innings is something I never saw before that night and haven't seen since.

 

I'd compare the 2016 game seven more to the 2009 game 163 between the Twins and Tigers. Loads of fun, lots of suspense, but only a close game because both teams made several mistakes that allowed the game to ping-pong back and forth.

[Squirrel]

Sloppy is a good way to put it.

I was thinking more of the lines of; if you had to rank best WS games, which would be better.

 

Again, purely from the standards of baseball, 1991. From the standards of being more entertaining, for me I'd still say 1991. I think it depends on what you want to see from a game, but how and why I watch are likely very different from the general population. So, from a general population standpoint, 2016 was probably more entertaining.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Again, purely from the standards of baseball, 1991. From the standards of being more entertaining, for me I'd still say 1991. I think it depends on what you want to see from a game, but how and why I watch are likely very different from the general population. So, from a general population standpoint, 2016 was probably more entertaining.

Dunno. Game seven this season was great and all but I didn't even watch part of the game because the Cubs were up by a somewhat cushy margin for several innings.

 

The slow ramping up of suspense found in a 0-0 game may seem a bit underwhelming for the first, say, five innings but then you begin to realize one run might decide this thing, which cranks up the intensity from inning six onward.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Also, let's not forget Cleveland never led the game. The energy was all one-sided.

[Squirrel]

Dunno. Game seven this season was great and all but I didn't even watch part of the game because the Cubs were up by a somewhat cushy margin for several innings.

 

The slow ramping up of suspense found in a 0-0 game may seem a bit underwhelming for the first, say, five innings but then you begin to realize one run might decide this thing, which cranks up the intensity from inning six onward.

Yeah, honestly, for me, I wouldn't even compare the two games, and for me, yeah, didn't get interesting until Cleveland tied it (as I said above) but I think there were a lot who were entertained by it. But being entertained is a far cry from 'was it a good baseball game.' I was trying to make a distinction.

[Doomtints]

 

1991 was pretty boring if you weren't a fan of either team.....tense, but boring.

 

 

The ratings of the series say otherwise.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Another thing about the 91 series is the build-up of excitement leading into game seven.

 

Game two was decided by one run.

 

Game three was decided by one run in 12 innings.

 

Game four was decided by one run.

 

Game six was decided by one run in 11 innings.

 

And then that absurd game seven happened.

 

Five games decided by one run, three of them going into extras.

[Doomtints]

 

Dunno. Game seven this season was great and all but I didn't even watch part of the game because the Cubs were up by a somewhat cushy margin for several innings.

 

The slow ramping up of suspense found in a 0-0 game may seem a bit underwhelming for the first, say, five innings but then you begin to realize one run might decide this thing, which cranks up the intensity from inning six onward.

 

Most of the 2016 series games were long, boring affairs where the games were decided early on.  

 

I switched off game 7 when the Cubs went comfortably ahead.  I was woken up by fireworks so I knew they'd won ... by looking at the clock I knew it got exciting at the end.

 

But really ... this series was painfully dull to watch.  Not as bad as the "Subway series" was, but for a series that went to 7 games there sure was a lot of nothing going on.  

[TheLeviathan]

1991.  I think a lot of people perceive here has more to do with what was on the line for the two teams than the actual drama of the game.

 

That gets to count too, but in terms of tension and that sort of thing, I'd for sure put 1991 ahead.  Better series, better finish.

[Vanimal46]

Not to take the topic away from 1991 vs. 2016, but 2001 was a great game 7 too... Still remember Luis Gonzalez's blooper over Derek Jeter to clinch the victory against the legend known as Mariano Rivera. 

[Doomtints]

 

Not to take the topic away from 1991 vs. 2016, but 2001 was a great game 7 too... Still remember Luis Gonzalez's blooper over Derek Jeter to clinch the victory against the legend known as Mariano Rivera. 

 

Journalists were painting that series as fate that the Yankees would win it.  But for all but one of the Yankees losses in that series, the games were not close.  And for two of the Yankees wins, they needed extra innings to get them.

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Not to take the topic away from 1991 vs. 2016, but 2001 was a great game 7 too... Still remember Luis Gonzalez's blooper over Derek Jeter to clinch the victory against the legend known as Mariano Rivera. 

The second best game seven I've seen for sure.

 

The bar I was in blew up when Gonzalez hit that blooper to center.

[TheLeviathan]

And as a Twins fan, seeing the Yankees go down like that only added to it.  I'd also put that as my second favorite game seven.

 

The problem with this game was that the drama never really started until Davis' homerun in the 8th.  Then we got about 3 innings of really good drama.

 

Here's my standard - if your baseball/football/basketball game can make me compare it to a tight Game 7 in playoff hockey - then you're in the conversation for best games.  Only 1991 and 2001 fit that for me.  Otherwise I'd take any 2-1 NHL playoff game every time.  

[ashbury]

The slow ramping up of suspense found in a 0-0 game may seem a bit underwhelming for the first, say, five innings but then you begin to realize one run might decide this thing, which cranks up the intensity from inning six onward.

Another aspect that I think hasn't been mentioned is the relative frequency of such pitchers' duels. Had that game occurred in 1968 (or the earlier Deadball era) it might be remembered as simply a good finish to a Series. Coming in 1991, the developing drama was just that much more acute.

 

As has been noted, Cleveland never led in this one, although their odds of winning became better than 50-50 after Rajai's homer. Had the game been more of a seesaw battle, the intensity felt by fans would have been a good deal higher, I believe.

[wsnydes]

No love for Game 7 of the '97 World Series?  I'd put it in the conversation, but probably still put '01 ahead of it I think.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

No love for Game 7 of the '97 World Series?  I'd put it in the conversation, but probably still put '01 ahead of it I think.

I file that game seven under the category of "soul crushing". It was a great game but so painful for one dugout.

[Jerr]

 

Another thing about the 91 series is the build-up of excitement leading into game seven.

 

Game two was decided by one run.

 

Game three was decided by one run in 12 innings.

 

Game four was decided by one run.

 

Game six was decided by one run in 11 innings.

 

And then that absurd game seven happened.

 

Five games decided by one run, three of them going into extras.

Waaaay more tension/excitement at each pitch, in almost all the games. And game 7? My nails are still trying to grow back lol!!!!!

[Squirrel]

1991. I think a lot of people perceive here has more to do with what was on the line for the two teams than the actual drama of the game.

 

That gets to count too, but in terms of tension and that sort of thing, I'd for sure put 1991 ahead. Better series, better finish.

Well, and the national and local (for me) media certainly never let you forget the Cubs story and what was on the line for them.

[HitInAPinch]

1991 Game 7:  hands down for me Best Baseball Game EVER!!! 

[pbrezeasap]

1991 Game 7 for me also. I would put 2001 and 1997 ahead also, getting to see a team win with a walk-off in front of their home crowd is always great. If Cleveland would have come back with 3 runs in the bottom of the 10th to keep the Cubs the lovable losers then this year could have made a case vs 1991.

[Longdistancetwins]

 

I tend to agree with this when talking about the masses, but I enjoyed Game 3 of 2016 immensely too.  That may have been my favorite game of the series.  I realize that I'm not the majority of the audience.

Me, too.  I was riveted on every pitch of Game 3.