Escobar-----aka "Bonehead"

Any competent umpire behind the plate and this decision is not happening. Angels fans booing Pierzynski and Escobar plunking the man are both missing the point.

And Guillen is the biggest horse's ass in the AL.

"And Guillen is the biggest horse's ass in the AL."

Talk about missing the point. Who cares if Guillen is a horse's ass? He's entertaining (in today's Tribune, he said he keeps Playboy magazine in his medicine cabinet) and -- most importantly -- he has the White Sox playing really good baseball. The guy has a .582 winning percentage as a manager. What else matters?

GUILLEN is the biggest jerk horse's ass? Excuse me, but GUILLEN's pitcher didn't hit anybody on purpose.

And don't tell me it wasn't. Escobar hits his first batter of the season, and magically it's Pierzynski, his nemesis from two games in the playoffs. It strains credibility that in 29-odd innings, the only batter Kelvim Escobar would hit accidentally would be AJP.

The umpires knew what to expect, and didn't do anything serious last night. Faced with a pretty obvious situation, Nauert chickened out and slapped both teams on the wrist, instead of just throwing Escobar out of the game on the spot, like he could have. Now MLB should do something. Escobar needs to be told to take about six days off, and Scioscia full well knows what happened, he's luck he's not facing a fine.

Guillen complains that he is constantly being warned by umpires not to retaliate, to the point where the White Sox have been hit by pitched balls over 50 times more than their opponents over the last 2+ years. Fortunately for Vladimir Guerrero, Guillen mostly shoots off his mouth in the newspaper rather than telling his next pitcher to aim for the head.

I don't know if it's just me, but it seems like the umps have handled well zero of the HBPs I've seen this year. And by HBP I mean the ones that you're 99% sure were intentional (Vizquel-Mesa, this one, etc.). That said, I can't remember a game of late where the starter was tossed in the first or second inning. If Garland plunks Vlad in the bottom of the first, I'm just wondering how they'll handle that one.

I don't think Nauert should have tossed Bonehead for hitting AJ. I would rather see teams take care of this stuff between themselves.

If Contreras wasn't warned then he could of had the oppurtunity to even up the score then that would have been the end of it, nothing carried over to the next day. This doesn't automatically mean a Angel would have been hit. With it being a 1 run game AJ could have told Contreras to forget about it and just win the game.

Now there is a bit of hard feelings on the Sox part because of Bonehead's actions and the ump giving the Sox a unfair warning.

GUILLEN is the biggest jerk horse's ass? Excuse me, but GUILLEN's pitcher didn't hit anybody on purpose.

Sure. And he also likened the Pierzynski/Paul missed strikeout play in last year's ALCS to the Bill Buckner play, which it clearly wasn't. It was the umpire who screwed up, not Paul. I stand by my comments.

The guy has a .582 winning percentage as a manager. What else matters?

Showing some class? As to that .582 WP, get back to me after Thome and Dye hit the DL. It's a long season.

Fortunately for Vladimir Guerrero, Guillen mostly shoots off his mouth in the newspaper rather than telling his next pitcher to aim for the head.

And you know this, how?

get back to me after Thome and Dye hit the DL.

It is, but Dye's not playing for the Royals or A's any more, he has a first-class training staff to watch over him. Same for Thome. Herman Schneider is a genius.

It was the umpire who screwed up,

Paul screwed up by not playing it safe and we all know it. Given the way he scooped it, he should have just tagged Pierzynski like catchers do every day.

And I say the ball clearly bounced. (smiles) In any case, the game was tied on the road, the Angels' chance of getting out of that inning without giving up a run was still about 87%; Escobar wasn't fated to throw a hanger to Crede.

The selective amnesia among the world's Angel fans about other calls they did get is amusing. Take Orlando Cabrera's uncalled and flagrant interference in Game One (an obvious rolling block on Iguchi leading to a weird throw over Konerko's head on a DP attempt) that led to the winning run. That was a call far more egregious than the Paul call because the umpires didn't need X-Ray vision to get that one right. So, Angel fans dwell on what might have been, but White Sox fans can retort "we should have had a sweep" and point to that play as proof. It's silly.

And you know this, how?

Empirical evidence. The White Sox pitchers consistently hit far fewer batters than their own hitters get hit.

(My comment was not about Scioscia; the Angels -- usually -- don't hit people much at all. Escobar hits about 1 batter per 30 innings. Except for AJP.)

Showing some class?

Last year, Oakland's pitchers hit multiple White Sox batters in one game, knocking Uribe out for several games. The umpires warned, and then not only didn't punish the A's for hitting Joe Crede after the warning, they refused to let him take his base, and threw him out of the game for arguing about it, forcing the White Sox to play Chris Widger and Jermaine Dye as the left side of their infield as the A's rallied to "win".

This year, Kelvim Escobar retaliates childishly for his own boners in a high-pressure situation by hitting his perceived nemesis intentionally with a pitched ball. The umpires warn both benches.

What the hell is Ozzie supposed to do? Wait until tomorrow and tell Garland -- or, better yet, Jenks -- to plug Guerrero, John McGraw style? Or would you rather he just popped off to a reporter? What if Pierzynski's fibula had cracked? We White Sox fans are supposed to put up with six weeks of Chris Widger and Chris Stewart because Kelvim Escobar hates Paul Nauert?

Escobar needs a suspension long enough to cost him a start. The only way that's going to happen is if the White Sox vigorously demand to know why he's NOT getting one.

"Showing some class" would be if the ANGELS suspended Escobar for five days for what is 99.9% obvious to anybody not an Angels fan was a juvenile tantrum, or perhaps criminal assault, take your pick.

Give it a rest, johnny. I'm sure the White Sox excellent training staff would have been able to keep Jermaine Dye from breaking his leg. And when the White Sox put the A's best player on the D.L. with an HBP, that was just an accident the A's should have done nothing about. Also, Crede wasn't hit by the pitch you bring up. It was a pitch that Crede obviously leaned into. If you weren't there to see it, you should have watched the slow motion replays on the news that night.

no team would suspend their onw player for that.

ozzie is batshit insane.

as to the broken up double play dont forget that ozzie wants his players to slide into second to "break the bone" he is a ####### lunitic

Paul screwed up by not playing it safe and we all know it.

Eddings made the strike three signal. The pitcher ran off the mound, the catcher threw the ball to the mound and everyone headed to the dugout -- save for Pierzynski, who hadn't seen or heard any of this.

The umpire screwed up. Period.

Also, Crede wasn't hit by the pitch you bring up. It was a pitch that Crede obviously leaned into.

Um, what kind of sense is this supposed to make?

This thread is the classic Primer, "I'm extremely self-important, so my opinion is right and anyone who disagrees with me is a horse's ass!"

Guillen's winning percentage is current. I hope no one gets hurt, but if they do it doesn't take games off of the books.

What Guillen said is why Guillen's teams have won games during his tenure. It might be blind luck, but the difference was that when something like the Escobar plays or the Finley play happened, the White Sox took advantage while the Angels did not. If Joe Crede drops a pop-up, the pitcher just gets another grounder to short.

If folks think that it was a bad call on the "dropped" strike, that's fine. The difference is that if the call went against the Sox, I doubt they implode and chuck the rest of the series. Whatever you think, was there a smarter move than what A.J. did? Whatever you think, was there a dumber move than Finley pitching a fit IN THE MIDDLE OF A PLAY and costing his team at least one run? Whatever you think, is there a reason to hate a player because YOU TAGGED HIM WITHOUT THE BALL?

You might disagree with Guillen, and that's fine, but how is he a horse's ass for wanting players to control what they can and not obsess over external factors that they can't. The only issue I have with Guillen is his homophobia, and that's a big one for me, but one he shares with half of baseball.

I'm glad he strikes back in the newspaper--I don't want our pitchers to give back any runs in retaliation.

Escobar needs a suspension long enough to cost him a start. The only way that's going to happen is if the White Sox vigorously demand to know why he's NOT getting one.

Suspension? For what? He wasn't even ejected.

The difference is that if the call went against the Sox, I doubt they implode and chuck the rest of the series.

Oh, yeah? Were you even paying attention last year when they had a 12-16 August, including a seven-game losing streak to the Red Sox, Twins, and Yankees, all three of whom could at the time have been reasonably expected to make postseason appearances. Lots of things can happen in a short series. And yeah, Guillen is a horse's ass.

And you know this, how?

Empirical evidence.

In other words, you don't. Thanks for proving it.

Oh, yeah? Were you even paying attention last year when they had a 12-16 August, including a seven-game losing streak to the Red Sox, Twins, and Yankees, all three of whom could at the time have been reasonably expected to make postseason appearances. Lots of things can happen in a short series.

What does that even mean?

I don't know if it's just me, but it seems like the umps have handled well zero of the HBPs I've seen this year. And by HBP I mean the ones that you're 99% sure were intentional (Vizquel-Mesa, this one, etc.). That said, I can't remember a game of late where the starter was tossed in the first or second inning. If Garland plunks Vlad in the bottom of the first, I'm just wondering how they'll handle that one.

Matt Morris was tossed in the first of the recent Giants-Rockies game. Entirely caused by MLB's terrible handling of Vizquel-Mesa the previous day. I think Guillen shows class not to retaliate - yet. What Escobar did was bush league, but yesterday's game was too close to go round plunking people. If the Sox start "accidentally" hitting Angels batters in a blowout, I won't have the least sympathy for the Angels.

Guillen is a horse's ass.

I'm sure he doesn't care.

He's really just doing his job, and sticking up for his players is part of that job.

Another part is to be a lightning rod - to take flak that might otherwise be directed at the players. He's excellent at that.

but he also creates the flak. oh well as long as the sox do well enough to get all the trixies and other morons out of wrigly ill be happpy

Empirical evidence.

In other words, you don't. Thanks for proving it.

scareduck is a disciple of Feyerabend.

"And Guillen is the biggest horse's ass in the AL."

What did Ozzie do in this case? Hes absolutely right. Pity theres a DH, bc Escobar deserves to be standing in the batters box with a fastball coming at his ass right now after this chickenshit move.

Ozzie has bought in to the whole "Angels are in Los Angeles" thing. Arte Moreno should be very happy.

As for Pierzynski, shouldn't he just be hit with a pitch on general principles for being Pierzynski?

In other words, you don't. Thanks for proving it

Yes, I do. I don't see "HBP: Guerrero (by Contreras)" or "HBP: Molina (by Contreras)" in the box score.

ozzie wants his players to slide into second to "break the bone"

"Slide" doesn't mean "roll sideways and then use your arms and legs to throw your body up into the second baseman's knees". Sliding feet-first through the infielder has been legit in baseball since Ross Barnes manned second for the White Stockings. The latter play is and has been banned for as long as I remember.

I'm glad he strikes back in the newspaper--I don't want our pitchers to give back any runs in retaliation.

Here's what I'd like to see. The next time the Sox have a big lead against the Angels, bring in Jenks in the 9th. Have him purposely throw his warm up pitches all over the place. Then, on the first pitch to the batter, throw a 98 MPH about a foot behind his buttocks. Jenks shrugs as if "Hey, I've got nothing. You saw the warm ups." Assuming he's not ejected, Ozzie then walks to the mound to yank Jenks, all the while staring at the Angels dugout. Ozzie's just the guy to do it.

"Also, Crede wasn't hit by the pitch you bring up. It was a pitch that Crede obviously leaned into."

'Um, what kind of sense is this supposed to make?'

Um, it means Crede initiated the contact. The pitcher didn't hit Crede with a pitch. Crede leaned out to make contact with a pitch that was close to being a strike. Under the circumstances, there's no way anyone should have expected the pitcher to be ejected or for Crede to be awarded first base.

Eddings made the strike three signal. The pitcher ran off the mound, the catcher threw the ball to the mound and everyone headed to the dugout -- save for Pierzynski, who hadn't seen or heard any of this.

The umpire screwed up. Period.

So this is a reason to hit Pierzynski intentionally with a pitched ball?

If the Sox start "accidentally" hitting Angels batters in a blowout, I won't have the least sympathy for the Angels.

Well I would. Hitting batters on purpose is barbaric. I would hope Ozzie confines his ire to the press room.

if ozzie were a decent manager he would run out there and take the hbp for his players

What did Ozzie do in this case?

Pay attention. He's comparing the Doug Eddings missed strikeout to Bill Buckner's missed groundball in the '86 World Series, which is in no way resembles; did the umpire in that game somehow fail to call a fair catch?

Guillen's just amazing. It's colorful when they're winning, but he'll be on the short list to be shown the door once things get rough.

As for Pierzynski, shouldn't he just be hit with a pitch on general principles for being Pierzynski?

Can't disagree with you there.

In other words, you don't. Thanks for proving it.

Yes, I do. I don't see "HBP: Guerrero (by Contreras)" or "HBP: Molina (by Contreras)" in the box score


I also don't see Final: Angels 4, White Sox 2 in the box score, or that faeries captured Casey Kotchman's flyball out in Friday's game and spirited it into a home run, either. That neither Vlad nor Molina got plunked is proof of nothing.

Oh, yeah? Were you even paying attention last year when they had a 12-16 August, including a seven-game losing streak to the Red Sox, Twins, and Yankees, all three of whom could at the time have been reasonably expected to make postseason appearances. Lots of things can happen in a short series.

What does that even mean?

It means that certain people around here are quick to forget that the Sox were swooning in August, and people were openly calling the joyride over. Over a seven-game series, there was plenty of reason to think the White Sox could have stumbled.

if ozzie were a good manager he would have ran out there and jumped in the way of the ball, but he didnt thereofre ozzie sucks

Um, it means Crede initiated the contact. The pitcher didn't hit Crede with a pitch. Crede leaned out to make contact with a pitch that was close to being a strike. Under the circumstances, there's no way anyone should have expected the pitcher to be ejected or for Crede to be awarded first base.

This is awesome. This is straight out of the "my mommy says it's good debating to just make #### up and then hide in semantics" strategy book. (Which I have some copies for sale if anyone else needs help winning arguments on this site.)

The ball hit him. He was "hit by a pitch". Whether he should have been awarded first base like the vast majority of players doing the same thing he did in the history of the game, is subject to debate. Whether the ball hit him or not, is not. To say otherwise, you are being intentionally obtuse.

34,
so that makes him a horses ass? get a grip

Um, it means Crede initiated the contact. The pitcher didn't hit Crede with a pitch. Crede leaned out to make contact with a pitch that was close to being a strike. Under the circumstances, there's no way anyone should have expected the pitcher to be ejected or for Crede to be awarded first base.

Batters are awarded first base on that situation about three times a week. The umpires are instructed specifically to assume that major league pitchers are deceptive and that it is a major stretch to assume a batter got hit on purpose. This call almost never happens and we both know it. Later that same week Craig Biggio practically dived into a pitch and got to go to first base.

Besides, the issue in that game was not the A's or their pitcher (JD). Nobody seriously thinks Justin (I think it was) hit Crede on purpose, that would have been really, really stupid. It was that Hunter Wendelstedt and Bruce Froemming were clearly carrying out a vendetta against Guillen because Guillen had said that Hunter wasn't "even a pimple on his Daddy's ass". White Sox fans knew going into that series that they were in trouble because the crew was thought to be unprincipled and vindictive, and in the series, they proved it. Not only the Crede play, but also the ridiculously bad play at the plate the night before where Pierzynski (!) tagged out a baserunner a foot and a half in front of the plate who was mysteriously called safe. There was a giant picture of said play on the cover of the Contra Costa times, with the baserunner clearly out by the proverbial mile and the caption saying he "scored".

Those umpires apparently continued this petty vendetta at a later Yankee-White Sox game, when Alex Rodriguez lined out to right and then "accidentally" interfered with the throw from the right fielder to first base for a double play. These same umpires told Guillen that Rodriguez didn't interfere "intentionally". Too bad the rules don't require interference to be "intentional" on that play; batter-runners who are already out are not allowed to interfere with throws just because they are returning to the dugout, intentionally or otherwise.

Fortunately that crew was broken up this year.

I have a lot of sympathy, by the way, for A's fans, because of the bizarre Tejada/Mueller interference call some years back...

It means that certain people around here are quick to forget that the Sox were swooning in August, and people were openly calling the joyride over. Over a seven-game series, there was plenty of reason to think the White Sox could have stumbled.

Yes, people who were utterly wrong were calling a slightly below .500 month the death knell for a 99-win season. Their lack of predictive skills proves what exactly?

Is your point really that Guillen had a losing month sometime last year, so he and the Sox are no good?

How many managers HAVEN'T had a losing month in the last year?

Pay attention. He's comparing the Doug Eddings missed strikeout to Bill Buckner's missed groundball in the '86 World Series, which is in no way resembles; did the umpire in that game somehow fail to call a fair catch?

I don't think that's true. He's saying the Angels should remember that play as the Red Sox do. They didn't blame Mookie Wilson for hitting a ground ball through Bill Buckner's legs, and the Angels shouldn't blame A.J. Pierzynski for Josh Paul not bothering to tag him (you may feel like Paul did nothing wrong. Others, like myself, disagree). Now obviously, it's not a perfect comparison, because of the Eddings factor. But Ozzie's essential point is true: any anger toward A.J. is misdirected, and throwing at him is bull####.

#38: That's not true, johnny. They routinely get the bag when they just stand there or when they do the rotation maneuver -- but not when they make an obvious lean forward to hang out over the plate.

"Over a seven-game series, there was plenty of reason to think the White Sox could have stumbled."

Which seperates them from which teams exactly?

I'll say it again. AJ did nothing wrong. I hold no animosity towards AJ for either of those plays.

That said, AJ is a total prick, and he always has been, and it's not much of a secret. If he got beaned every time up for the rest of his career, I wouldn't feel too much sympathy for him.

This year, Kelvim Escobar retaliates childishly for his own boners in a high-pressure situation by hitting his....

So close to violating BTF's TOS.

Best Regards

John

I was at the A's game right behind the plate. The pitch looked was within two or three inches of being a strike and Crede moved in on the plate. he would not have been hit from where he started. i agree the call is very rarely given, but the rule clearly states that:

He is touched by a pitched ball which he is not attempting to hit unless (1) The ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or (2) The batter makes no attempt to avoid being touched by the ball; If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, it shall be called a strike, whether or not the batter tries to avoid the ball. If the ball is outside the strike zone when it touches the batter, it shall be called a ball if he makes no attempt to avoid being touched.

This was one of the better umpiring calls I saw last year and I wish the rule as written was more consistently enforced. the rulebook requires the umpires to make a judgement about whether a batter tries to avoid the ball. By all means criticise umpires that don't but White Sox fans should save their grievances for times umpires didn't apply the rules.

Take Orlando Cabrera's uncalled and flagrant interference in Game One (an obvious rolling block on Iguchi leading to a weird throw over Konerko's head on a DP attempt) that led to the winning run. That was a call far more egregious than the Paul call because the umpires didn't need X-Ray vision to get that one right.

Had that play been called interference, we would all be better off putting the players in skirts. That play was perfectly legal and justified, and you are happy to have your team do that to my middle infielders every day of the week if they can.

***

I don't blame AJ for Doug Eddings being an indecisive lying asshead. That said, I don't really care if he gets hit every time he touches a bat. I don't want him to get hurt, but let him get hit.

And I've seen a lot more obvious incidents of batters getting hit than this case that haven't been met with warnings or ejections or anything else. I think the umpire way overreacted here; he should have waited until the ChiSox retaliated to issue the warnings.

***

The fact that the ChiSox didn't hit anyone in the game is not evidence that Ozzie wouldn't have had his guys hit someone had the warning not been issued. Of course, we have no evidence he would have made such an order, either.

***

I don't blame Josh Paul for rolling the ball. Kelvim Escobar was standing right next to it and could have picked it up and thrown to first, but he was staring right at the Moron Eddings, and saw him make the out motion. Orlando Cabrera, Adam Kennedy, and Darin Erstad all could have yelled at Escobar, who was standing right next to the ball, to pick it up, but did not as they were all staring right at the Moron Eddings, and saw him make the out motion.

Look, it didn't lose the series, as the White Sox were at the top of their game and taking all comers last October. But Eddings screwed up huge, and MLB's public support of his actions was pretty embarrassing. But that's life.

"It was that Hunter Wendelstedt and Bruce Froemming were clearly carrying out a vendetta against Guillen because Guillen had said that Hunter wasn't 'even a pimple on his Daddy's ass.'"

Well, let me ask you something. Let's assume your interpretation of this is true. (And I'm a Braves' fan, so I didn't see the events in question beyond the Crede HBP.)

Wouldn't this an incident where Ozzie's heretofore harmless mouth directly contributed to the defeat of his team? Obviously umpires shouldn't hold vendettas based on press statements. But isn't it pretty stupid to loudly insult an umpire on the record?

It's one thing for Ozzie to mock Magglio or Kelvim Escobar or some other random player on another team. But how wise is it to go out of your way to mock the arbiters of the game?

the rulebook requires the umpires to make a judgement about whether a batter tries to avoid the ball.

These are the instructions given to major league umpires clarifying this rule:

"Professional Interpretation: There is a fine distinction in determining whether a batter intentionally tried to get
hit by a pitched ball or failed to avoid being hit.

In the first instance, no base shall ever be awarded when the umpire adjudges that the batter tried to get hit.

In the second instance, it becomes the umpire's responsibility to determine whether or not the batter could have feasiblely avoided the pitch. With the variety of pitches that professional pitchers command today, it is unrealistic to expect batters to protect the plate and not subject themselves to being hit. The umpire incurs tremendous responsibility in determining the batter's intent."

i agree the call is very rarely given,

It was only given in that game simply because those specific umpires were carrying out an unprofessional vendetta. We White Sox fans knew this was happening before the games started. I saw a news story that that series was actually investigated by MLB.

But Eddings screwed up huge, and MLB's public support of his actions was pretty embarrassing. But that's life.

You are 100% right that he screwed up by signalling an out. This communicated to the players on the field that the catcher caught the strike. I'm not sure he did, but Eddings had no way to see it, and umpires have to use their best judgement. Once they signal a play out, they can only change their minds if the signal didn't influence subsequent actions. In this case he did.

But this play was trivial. Runner at first with two out scores 12% of the time. Escobar losing composure and hanging a nickle slider for Crede to hammer was what cost the Angels the game. Further, as has been pointed out, all Pierzynski did was hustle to first base. He didn't see Eddings pump his fist. What exactly about this was so criminal that it's OK to try to injure him?

You're all correct that Buckner is a bad comparison. A better comparison is Denkinger 1985. The Cardinals didn't have to explode like 50,000 tons of TNT after that call. They lost the next game something like 12-0. And I don't think Cardinal fans held a vendetta against Jorge Orta...

"By all means criticise umpires that don't but White Sox fans should save their grievances for times umpires didn't apply the rules."

As a White Sox fan, I'm saving all my grievances for a time when my team isn't:

-the reigning World Champion AND

-the team with the best record in baseball this season AND

-a team that's gone 127-71 (for a .641 winning percentage) since the start of the '05 season.

This magical time will eventually end, but I'm going to enjoy it for as long as it lasts. Of course other teams and their fans are going to be mad at us -- we usually beat them. Let's be magnanimous, shall we?

I'll say it again. AJ did nothing wrong. I hold no animosity towards AJ for either of those plays.

That said, AJ is a total prick, and he always has been, and it's not much of a secret. If he got beaned every time up for the rest of his career, I wouldn't feel too much sympathy for him.

I agree with this 100%.

I just had a problem with people being angry with AJ for hustling and for being in the wrong/right place when Escobar/Paul/the umpire messed up.

I'm not saying he's some stellar human being--I have no idea, but I have my suspicions.

Finally, I DO hope he gets hit everytime up for the rest of a long career. Then I can be there when he is inducted into the HoF as the most valuable catcher in major league history.

But this play was trivial.

Shut up.

It was only given in that game simply because those specific umpires were carrying out an unprofessional vendetta. We White Sox fans knew this was happening before the games started. I saw a news story that that series was actually investigated by MLB.

Neither you nor I know this. It might be right, but you are on extremely weak ground when the call was well within the scope of the rules. the call isn't often given, but very few batters move into the path of the ball with the blatancy that Crede did. From your description, you have a better case on the Rodriguez interference you described.

As a White Sox fan, I'm saving all my grievances for a time when my team isn't:

-the reigning World Champion AND

-the team with the best record in baseball this season AND

-a team that's gone 127-71 (for a .641 winning percentage) since the start of the '05 season.

A fine attitude. If I was a White Sox fan I'd also enjoy every minute of Ozzie. Who was the last manager to provide such fine entretainment value?

As others have said its the most retarded thing ever to blame Pierzynski for going down to first...its not his job to umpire. you dont do what you think is right, you do everything you can till the ump tells you youre out.

say we have a stolen base, runner is obviously out but the ump blows the call...should the base stealer walk back to the dugout anyway?

i didnt see Credes HBP but i will say that ive seen a million HBPs at all levels of baseball and i cant remember a player being called for leaning in. Im sure its partly due to Credes relative lack of stardom compared to other notable offenders (Bonds, Biggio). And i dont really hold it against hitters to try to get hit, i did the same thing in HS ball, it makes me respect them for doing all they can to help thier team. its not cheating. but at the same time its so obvious that the umps need to call it but they dont.

He didn't see Eddings pump his fist. What exactly about this was so criminal that it's OK to try to injure him?

1. I certainly agree that AJ isn't to blame for the incident in any way.

2. I'm not convinced the HBP was intentional. (Maybe I'm just naive.)

3. The chances of him being hurt on that ball are exactly 0%. The pitch hit him on the calf. So if it was intentional, it was more, "You're a jackass; suck it" than "I'm going to kill you."

As for the play being "trivial" ... yeah, from a Run Matrix/Win Expectancy standpoint, I see what you mean, but on the other hand the inning would literally have been over and extra innings would have been initiated. It's a weird circumstance.

Guillen's just amazing. It's colorful when they're winning, but he'll be on the short list to be shown the door once things get rough.

Wow, someone's bitter.

It's funny -- in all of these OG threads, I get the impression that people think Guillen is nothing more than a rah-rah guy with no real baseball smarts, other than wanting guys to bunt and steal bases. In all reality, along with being a down-to-earth manager who's capable of being a clubhouse leader, he handles the pitching staff EXTREMELY well. He has a good grasp on when his starters are done, and for all the gripes that Sox fans have now and then, he handles the bullpen pretty well.

2. I'm not convinced the HBP was intentional. (Maybe I'm just naive.)

I thought that Escobar had said before the game that he was going to hit A.J. If not, I apologize, that was part of my reasoning in the thread.

Keith, yeah I don't get that either. If people hate Guillen for some of what he's said or just don't like his personality, that's fine, but what would give people the idea that he doesn't know much about baseball. He's been one of the game's most competent game managers over the last couple of years, and that's even including his over-bunting...

As for the play being "trivial" ... yeah, from a Run Matrix/Win Expectancy standpoint, I see what you mean, but on the other hand the inning would literally have been over and extra innings would have been initiated. It's a weird circumstance.

It also ignores the fact that my dead grandmother could steal second base off of Escobar, so the run expectancy analysis is pretty much worthless.

Plus, it's not trivial. It means they'll win 5-8% more often than not. That's a noticeable difference.

Seems pretty obvious to me that Kelvim Escobar's a thug, and if the Angels stand with him they're thugs, too.

It's nice to wear the white hat in the Western...and the White Sox are clearly wearing the white hat.

40 oz to meatwasted Posted: April 30, 2006 at 12:32 PM (#1997096)
as to the broken up double play dont forget that ozzie wants his players to slide into second to "break the bone" he is a ####### lunitic

What...are...you...talking...about?

Hey, we have Jenks and Thornton to go headhunting with, if we have to. Seems to me that Ozzie's the best in baseball. He doesn't hit players, he plays the game clean, handles his bullpen, bench, pitching staff and lineup well. All teams should be so lucky.

Really, who has Ozzie hit? Not Magglio. Not Carlos. Not Everett. Ozzie Guillen's the best manager in baseball, and last year's A's series proves that. A's pitchers knocked Uribe and Iguchi (if I'm not mistaken) out of the series, and Huner Wendelstedt gets his vendetta out, and Ozzie handles it with class.

The fact that the ChiSox didn't hit anyone in the game is not evidence that Ozzie wouldn't have had his guys hit someone had the warning not been issued. Of course, we have no evidence he would have made such an order, either.

Of course it is.

It's one thing for Ozzie to mock Magglio or Kelvim Escobar or some other random player on another team. But how wise is it to go out of your way to mock the arbiters of the game?

When they're wrong? It's not even wise when they're wrong, but I like that Ozzie isn't afraid to tell people off.

This magical time will eventually end, but I'm going to enjoy it for as long as it lasts. Of course other teams and their fans are going to be mad at us -- we usually beat them. Let's be magnanimous, shall we?

I'll go for that.

Ozzie Guillen's the best manager in baseball, and last year's A's series proves that.

Batshit ####### insane.

Re: HBP, I've seen a couple instances where guys weren't given first, I believe it happened to somebody else last year as well. And Crede's HBP was probably the worst non-Biggio instance I've ever seen of leaning over. He calmly stood there, leaned forward and stuck his elbow in there. It was ridiculous.

And Guillen's a douche.

Outside of Bobby Cox, he is the best.

I thought that Escobar had said before the game that he was going to hit A.J.

I'm pretty sure this didn't happen. We were talking about it Chatter and no one had a cite for it.

Seems pretty obvious to me that Kelvim Escobar's a thug

Well, it's never been reported that Kelvim has kneed a trainer in the balls, so he has that going for him.