Taking it slow, easy Despite having a 3-1 lead in the ALCS match-up against the New York Yankees, folks point to the Yankees' pedigree of winning and "what the Rangers have done in the past" as reasons to believe the series is far from over.
I think it is smart to be cautiously optimistic. The series is not over. People point to the Yankees' body language and I remember after game 2 against Tampa Bay the same things being said. Then Tampa reeled off two wins.
When the final out of this series is made and the Rangers are the winner, I'll pelvic thrust, high five, make suggestive gyrations and many other lewd actions. Until that time, I'll play it cool. Not becuase of the Rangers, however.
The Yankees don't win 27 World Series and countless other trips to the post-season without building some kind of mystique -- whether that's experience, balls, magic or whatever. Good teams -- like the Yankees -- never go down as quietly as we like.
What pessimism I do display has nothing to do with the Rangers. Mainly because there's little to go on. For me, it's unfair to judge the Rangers as not having any post-season experience. Every team in the history of everything has at one time or the other has not had post-season experience. The Florida Marlins once had zero post-season experience. So did the Chicago Cubs. Their franchise since has had plenty of post-season experience, but it does not help them now in the least.
So, if it's hard to judge a singular team on a history that doesn't exist, there must be some correlation between -- not just failure -- but choking with the Rangers. And it doesn't exist.
The 1990s are unfair. They ran up against one of the greatest dynasties in professional baseball at their very peak. The Rangers could've been 25 percent better than they were and they still weren't beating the 1996, 1998 or 1999 Yankees.
Otherwise, there's little to go on. I think people assume the Rangers contend every year and somehow lose what they have late in the season. This is very subjective. Being eight back of the Angels in August and winding up 12 or 15 back by October doesn't really mean anything.
The Rangers have stunk, but they haven't stunk this season. Once upon a time, the New York Yankees stunk. But no one's writing columns or filling minutes on a talk radio program talking about the disappointing 1990 New York Yankees.
The Rangers are a very young team that never had the ownership to put things together. It's no coincidence that the two bright spots in this franchise's history -- the 1990s and now -- come when it's generally considered they have good, solid ownership.
Play it cool with the Rangers. That's OK. But don't point to some pretend history of choking as a reason to doubt the Rangers. Believe and enjoy the ride.
