grandmastapoop;842370386 said:
Yes, the A's were hot. Insanely hot. Like the Giants were in May. And then they both regressed to the mean and won 88 games. Nice seasons.
It is hard to feel bad for A's fans when reading these kinds of threads.
Yeah, I think the real issue is that guys like Moss and Norris were playing WAY over their heads in the early part of the season. Very unlikely they were going to keep up that pace. And Crisp getting hurt didn't help either. Cespedes was about at his base level and remained there after being traded, so he may have helped a bit . . . but still not enough for them to stay ahead of the Angels.
Unfortunately these things played out the same way in this game: they started out well before fading. Norris was forced to play catcher because of an injury and was overmatched against the Royals' running game. Crisp injured himself in extra innings and was replaced by Jonny Gomes, who played a ball at the wall about as badly as possible and turned a double into a triple.
EDIT: Another thing to consider is that the A's seemed really unlucky with run distribution. Even with the horrible second half, they still finished with the best run differential in the majors. A team that scores 729 runs while allowing 572 can usually be expected to win 99 games. The A's were way under that, which suggests a lot of games lost by 1 or 2 runs, followed by an 8-run blowout win. Usually over the course of a long season those things even out, but the A's were way on the extreme negative end of the spectrum, a full 11 games worse than their "expected" record based on run totals.