The Cardinals and Red Sox are about to meet for the third time in World Series history. The Cardinals beat the Red Sox in seven games in 1946, scoring the winning run in the bottom of the 8th inning of game 7. In 1967, the Cardinals again won in 7 games, pounding the Sox 7-2 in the finale, including a HR by Bob Gibson. The Red Sox had not lost a World Series before 1946, and haven't won one since in four tries. It's fitting that the Red Sox should be playing the Cardinals, since the Red Birds are the Yankees of the National League, having won more World Series than any other NL team (9).

Offensively, the two teams each led their respective leagues in runs per game.

Both teams are offensive power houses. The Red Sox did a better job relative to their league of getting on base, but both team hit for tremendous power. Looking at the Red Sox aggregate batting order, the first 8 slots were all above league average in OBA in 2004. So there's only 1 easy out in the order (much of that was Pokey Reese; Cabrera is better but still not league average). The Cardinals are above league average in OBA 1-5, but not close 6-9. So the Red Sox will have a tougher lineup to get through 1-9.

The Cardinals strength, as I've said before, is that their offense is concentrated in four outstanding players. Those four (Pujols, Walker, Edmonds and Rolen) are better than any big four in the majors, but that's it. You can see it in the LCS stats, compared to the Red Sox big four of Ortiz, Ramirez, Damon and Millar:

There's no one to pick up the Cardinals if the big four slump. On the other hand, the Red Sox won game six vs. NY on the strength of a 4-run inning from the bottom of their order. The edge on offense goes to the Red Sox for depth; the ability of 8 of their 9 slots to get on base.

Both team also had excellent years from the mound.

The Cardinals were 2nd in ERA by .01, but actually led the NL in fewest runs allowed per game. Both of these are great pitching staffs. The way I see it, the Red Sox have two advantages:

1. They strike out a lot of batters (they had more strikeouts than the Cardinals despite facing very few pitchers at the plate).
2. They don't allow many HR (they allowed fewer HR than the Cardinals despite facing very few pitchers at the plate).

One big story that I see will be who wins the contest of hitting HR between the Red Sox pitchers and the Cardinals hitters. If the Boston staff is able to keep the ball in the park, they'll take away St. Louis' biggest offensive weapon.

The Sox and the Cards staffs are the mirrors of their offenses, however. The Red Sox have two great pitchers in Martinez and Schilling. The Cardinals have four starters who are indistinguishable from each other. The Cardinals also have a better and deeper bullpen. The Cardinals overall have better depth (although this is not as extreme a difference as it is for the offenses).

And the big wild card is Schilling's ankle. Right now, it looks like they are going to stitch it up again before his next two starts. How well it holds together again is a mystery, especially if the Cardinals (unlike the Yankees), force Schilling to throw a lot of pitches and move off the mound often. I give a slight edge to the Cardinals staff on this one, basically because Schilling's condition is such an unknown.

Defensively, the Cardinals are the better fielding club. They had a DER of .711, tied for best in the NL. The Red Sox were very good also, with a .695 DER, 4th in the AL. The Red Sox pitcher, striking out more batters, could afford a more porous defense.

As for the intangibles, I just don't know. They're too intangible. :-)

So I like the Red Sox offense because it doesn't give the Cardinals pitchers a break. I like the Red Sox pitching if Schilling can push off, the Cardinals otherwise. I can't wait to see Pujols hitting in Fenway. I'm very curious as to how La Russa will try to exploit Schilling's injury. I'm interested in seeing if Lowe pitches well under pressure again. The Ray King/David Ortiz matchups should be fun. I conditionally like the Red Sox to win this series, but only by a hair.