On SoCal’s two sports obsessions, the Dodgers and the Lakers – Whittier Daily News

Jim Alexander: Checking in from Flushing, N.Y., where we are a few hours away from Game 4 of the National League Championship Series, Yoshinobu Yamamoto vs. Jose Quintana … and yes, I know, the matchup of starting pitchers doesn’t carry as much weight in baseball as it did even a few years ago. It’s all about the bullpens this time of year – as the Dodgers have unhappily learned in recent seasons.

But this is a situation where starting pitching is crucial, especially when you only have three functional members of your rotation for a best-of-seven series. Jack Flaherty pitched like an ace in Game 1 against the Mets, Yamamoto was dominant in the Game 5 Division Series decider against San Diego, and Walker Buehler gave the Dodgers four precious innings in Game 3 last night, while demonstrating that he doesn’t have to be the fastball-dominant pitcher he used to be – and that he realizes it, finally.

That 3-2 curve he dropped on Francisco Lindor for a huge strikeout last night was a sign that he gets it now. Sometimes, after Tommy John surgery, it takes a while for a pitcher to realize he has to change.

So Wednesday night gave the Dodgers an edge, theoretically. Three of the final four, if necessary, will involve traditional starters (i.e., only one bullpen game will be necessary, probably if Game 6). If Yamamoto and Flaherty can pitch like aces, it’ll be done before Bill Plunkett and I and everyone else get back to L.A.

But, unlike some columnists, I’m not ready to proclaim it over. The Mets are good, they were stung last night and figure to come back strong, and Quintana (10-10, 3.75 during the regular year) is capable of delivering a series-tying effort tonight.

Yet … if it comes down to a battle of the bullpens, the Mets have Edwin Diaz but the Dodgers have strength in numbers.

Mirjam Swanson: Gotta agree with you, Jim!

As dominant as the Dodgers looked last night, this isn’t the 2001 Lakers-Sixers Finals, where a Lakers championship was purely academic and it took a superhuman effort from Allen Iverson – the good A.I. – to win one game for Philly.

These are the never-say-die Mets. Their whole season has been a study in rising from the dead. They were 21-29 after 50 games and 28-37 when ol’ Grimace threw out the first pitch. Since then, as has been well chronicled, the Mets have been living large and lovin’ it – 61-36 to end the regular season.

That’s not a team that’s going to go quietly. I know recency bias is a powerful stimulant, but the Mets just beat up on the Dodgers on Monday. To call it over is not only be premature, it’s silly.

That said … the Dodgers – leaning, yep, on bullpen quantity – could totally wrap this thing up before you and Bill Plunkett come home.

But it’s not like it’s going to be easy.

I have to know – what’s the vibes out there? What’s that part of New York feel like? Are they believers? Did yesterday’s result – which sent those poor, tired, cold fans scurrying – dampen the mood?

Jim: The Mets fans with which I shared a shuttle bus last night didn’t seem terribly disheartened. It still figures to be a joyful vibe tonight. After all, the Mets are in the NLCS for the first time since 2015, when they swept the Cubs – one year before that franchise’s own glorious October. The Mets lost that year’s World Series to Kansas City, just like they lost the 2000 Subway Series to the Yankees (and Joe Torre has an anecdote about that, and I’ll get to it in a minute).

Darryl Strawberry threw out the ceremonial first pitch Wednesday night to Dwight Gooden. In a pregame session in the interview room, they were asked about 1988 – not a good memory for Mets fans but a joyous one for Dodgers fans – and it was Gooden who noted that the ‘88 Mets team was better on paper than the ‘86 team that won it all, but that ‘86 team had “chemistry, we had heart.” (The ‘86 team had Jesse Orosco, too. By ‘88, he was a Dodger.)

But this being New York, you know there’s a sense of entitlement and a feeling that the Mets and Yankees are destined to play in another Subway Series. (And never mind that TV ratings would be well below Fox’s expectations if it were an all New York show.) Which brings us to the Torre anecdote, which he related in 2008 when he was managing the Dodgers, there was a possibility of a Freeway World Series – remember when the Angels were still good? – and I asked him about what it was like in 2000.

“Torture,” he said. “I started managing with the Mets, so I knew how important it was against the Yankees – spring training, the Mayor’s Trophy game, whatever it was. Then I went over to the Yankees, and it was every bit as important to beat the Mets.”

(More so, as I wrote at the time, given the late George Steinbrenner’s obsession with the back pages of the Daily News and Post.)

“So you can well imagine playing a World Series against the Mets,” Torre continued, “when you’re supposed to win because you’re the sort-of resident big league team and they’re the expansion team. That was probably the most grueling of all.”

Torre also revealed this: For the middle three games at Shea Stadium, Steinbrenner made sure the clubhouse furniture from Yankee Stadium was hauled from the Bronx to Queens and installed in the visitors’ clubhouse. The man thought of everything.

Mirjam: Those are great anecdotes. And great perspective. Torre, a great storyteller.

So what are we expecting on the field tonight? The Dodgers won themselves an edge, but we’ve got another 8 p.m. East Coast start (cool with us here in California!) and what feels like a must-win for the Mets vs. Yamamoto, who pitched so well last time out, as you mentioned …

What are some ways it could go? I don’t think it’ll be a blowout this time. I think we’re due for a tight one. Unless, of course, Ohtani comes up a couple times with runners on base, then … it could get ugly quickly again. (And what do you make of his Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde routine with runners on or not?)

Jim: Here’s the thing about 8 p.m. starts: It feels like forever waiting for the game to start. I had to keep telling myself last night that this is for the benefit of West Coast TV audiences. (Although I do have an issue with the idea that Fox put this game on FS1 rather than on the big network. And I wonder if anyone, either in Fox’s offices or those of MLB, thought that maybe ratings would be exponentially higher if they at least put these games on the network in the home markets, at least. You know, like the NFL does.)

As for Shohei, I thought the Harold Reynolds’ analysis on MLB Network that I brought up in today’s column was interesting and had some weight to it. When Ohtani does the simple relaxation technique of laying his bat on his shoulder before getting into hitting position, he seems to have more success. He hasn’t been, but he did so on the first pitch before that blast off Tylor Megill last night.

Really, I think he’ll be fine. First time he gets a hit with no one on base, that could unlock the floodgates.

Meanwhile, time waits for none of us. The hockey season has already begun – the Kings are not looking good, while the young Ducks won their opener against Utah (and it’s great to have the scowling duck back on their sweaters) – and the NBA is not too far behind. The Lakers are this community’s other sports obsession – so tell me, is there reason for optimism that said obsession will be worth pursuing this season?

(In other words, is JJ Redick the next Pat Riley, as some incurable optimists suggested when he was hired?)

Mirjam: I’d say there’s room for selective, cautious optimism? Is that a thing?

The Lakers’ big offseason acquisition was Redick – a first-time coach with good ideas and a good relationship with Lebron and good deal of confidence, too. Will he be the next Pat Riley? Will he be the next Derek Fisher? Will he land somewhere in between – and would Lakers’ fans accept that? It’s hard to imagine anything short of the first option really satisfying this fan base, but we’ll see!

Redick will be piloting a roster that is much the same as last year’s, if you take away Taurean Prince and Spencer Dinwiddie and replace those NBA rotation guys with rookies Dalton Knecht and Bronny James. LeBron is, of course – because time waits for none of us – a year older. But also his Olympics run this summer was so impressive it just feels like that should carry over.

The question is whether Redick can get more out of this Lakers roster than Darvin Ham did? And if he can, how much more? He plans to take 50 3-pointers a game (not really, he said, but … seems like he wants it to feel like that). He wants to crash from the corners. He wants to experiment with playing Jaxson Hayes beside Anthony Davis. All ideas with upside … and potential drawbacks, too.

The Lakers should have been better last season than they were. But I don’t know how much better. And going into this season, it feels like there’s a world where they’re actually worse.

So, no, I’m not overly optimistic. But I’m also open-minded. Because what if JJ is the next Riley?

Any sense from what you heard from JJ and the team during their preseason media sessions?

Jim: The one vibe I get is that JJ is willing to do different things, strategically and analytically, and that could be a shot in the arm for an organization that has seemed forever wedded to the way things were done in the Showtime era. At some point, star power and the allure of those banners hanging at one end of the arena only goes so far.

And the other thing I think will be helpful: JJ played fairly recently, and seems to have a good handle on the way to approach players. If he can get guys to buy in, this could be fun. Given that the only time this team avoided the play-in round since it was instituted was by missing the playoffs altogether, maybe guys are ready to listen.