Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Schilling's Sprained Ankiel Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:50 AM (#2580779)
Imagine how different the picture would look if Youks got that ball to drop in Game 2....
   2. Xander Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:54 AM (#2580785)
I'd like to see Ellsbury in CF please. Way too many holes in the lineup right now.
   3. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:55 AM (#2580787)
Imagine how different the picture would look if Youks got that ball to drop in Game 2....


I've been thinking the same thing. I suppose it takes my mind off the all-around uninspired showing for the last 25 innings.
   4. Mattbert Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:56 AM (#2580788)
Wake actually pitched pretty damn well, in my opinion. If he either fields that Cabrera comebacker cleanly or it gets past him without being deflected, it's very likely he gets out of that 5th with only 1 run allowed on the Blake homer. That said, the Sox are playing like zombies and absolutely do not deserve to win this series right now. Cleveland is getting the breaks, but they're capitalizing on them. What few breaks the Sox have gotten have been followed in short order by GIDPs or first pitch swinging popups.
   5. Darren Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:56 AM (#2580789)
Although I didn't get to see much of the game, I listened to some of it. Jon Miller is a terrible radio announcer. He often stutters while he tries to figure out what happens. It's also more important to him to share the pitch that was thrown than the result. For example, he'd say "Here's the pitch and it's a fastball on the outer part of the plate... fouled away."

Also, there's a funny pattern to how announcers will talk about decisions like Wakefield/Beckett. Early in the game, Miller and Morgan kept saying "and it looks like Terry Francona was right that Tim Wakefield was the right man for the job." When Cleveland took a 7-0 lead, this changed to "People are going to second-guess the decision to start Wakefield, but the Red Sox haven't scored any runs, so it doesn't matter anyways." And when Boston scored 3 runs, did they say "Hey, that Wakefield decision sure looks stupid now!" No, they simply stopped talking about the matter.
   6. Darren Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:57 AM (#2580790)
Youks also dropped a pop-up in that fifth that would have made a big difference. They've played pretty poorly.
   7. Hugh Jorgan Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:06 AM (#2580795)
Two huge innings conceded in 2 of the last 3 games...that concerns me. Its one thing to give up a run or two, but getting hammered for 7 runs twice is just nasty. I didn't see it either but the apparently the Youk missplay was a shocker that didn't help. 6-9 in order need to start to do something...take walks, move runners over, sac flys, anything productive.
Its all up to Beckett now, but we still need to support him with at least 4 runs.
   8. 1k5v3L Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:07 AM (#2580796)
That said, the Sox are playing like zombies and absolutely do not deserve to win this series right now. Cleveland is getting the breaks, but they're capitalizing on them. What few breaks the Sox have gotten have been followed in short order by GIDPs or first pitch swinging popups.


Replace "Sox" with "Dbacks", and "Cleveland" with "Colorado", and you'll know exactly how I felt during the NLCS.
   9. Best Regards, President of Comfort Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:09 AM (#2580797)
Replace Sox with "Yankees" and Boston fans will get a taste of what Yanks fans went through.
   10. Mattbert Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:17 AM (#2580799)
I've watched 90% of the NYY/CLE series and the NLCS and you're right, this does seem like a familiar refrain.
   11. tfbg9 Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:25 AM (#2580802)
Wake actually pitched pretty damn well, in my opinion.




I sure wouldn't go that far. Wake came into the game with a 6.12 career postseason ERA. It went up tonight. He had a chance to get victor Martinez, who he had at 0-2 IIRC, and escape the inning only down by two. Timmy really really needed that out right then and there, to arrest the bleeding. He couldn't get it, gave up a critical line drive RBI single, and Tito made the fateful decision to remove him.

He was the recipient of some crappy breaks, sure, particularly the non-DP and the MDC- surrendered killer 3 run bomb. He did not come up big either, and took a playoff L.
   12. Mattbert Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:30 AM (#2580806)
Line drive? Martinez lunged at an outside pitch and yanked a 2- or 3-bouncer through the hole. That was not poor pitching.

I did not like the early hook there, either. Even less so after what followed.
   13. winnipegwhip Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:31 AM (#2580808)
Replace Sox with "Yankees" and Boston fans will get a taste of what Yanks fans went through.


The difference is Francona will still have a job next week. And Joe will be .......?????
   14. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:32 AM (#2580809)
The difference is Francona will still have a job next week.

F!@# C!@# F!@# F!@# F!@# F!@# F!@# F!@# F!@#
   15. Dr. Vaux Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:41 AM (#2580814)
Jon Miller is a terrible radio announcer.


How can I ever trust you again?
   16. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:43 AM (#2580816)
Replace Sox with "Yankees" and Boston fans will get a taste of what Yanks fans went through.

Just wait and see if Steinbrenner makes good on his temper tantrum about Torre before we end this conversation. Losing the ALCS to a very good Cleveland team is nothing compared to losing Torre because some goddam senile owner throws a hissy fit.
   17. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:44 AM (#2580817)
Jon Miller is a terrible radio announcer.

How can I ever trust you again?


And how can anyone ever take anything else he says seriously?
   18. The importance of being Ernest Riles Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:46 AM (#2580818)
Replace Sox with "Yankees" and Boston fans will get a taste of what Yanks fans went through.

Replace the Sox AND they Yankees, and fans of other teams will get a taste of sweetness!
   19. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:48 AM (#2580819)
Manny D is not having a good ALCS after being very good in his outing in the ALDS
   20. Answer Guy Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:51 AM (#2580820)
Giving up 7-run innings, a useless bottom of the order, an inability to buy a break when they need one...I know I've seen this before.

That's right, I live in Baltimore. Not a good time for one's favorite team to become the Orioles.
   21. Dan Posted: October 17, 2007 at 05:12 AM (#2580832)
I know our information is incomplete, but I still believe that the Red Sox deserved to lose this one when they didn't grow a pair of put Beckett on the mound. I love the Red Sox, but I'm not in love with their taking winning for granted or whatever ######## reason they have for choosing not to get 2 Beckett starts down 2 games to 1. This series was set up PERFECTLY to take advantage of a horse like Beckett and get him 3 starts in 7 games, and the Red Sox either ignored that, or wanted to have Beckett ready for game 1 of a World Series they now look unlikely to see. I really had come around on Francona, and was thinking he knew what he was doing, but between Gagné in the tie game and Wake over Beckett today, I don't think I'd mind if he got canned, to be perfectly honest.
   22. Hugh Jorgan Posted: October 17, 2007 at 05:41 AM (#2580842)
The "should Beckett have started game 4 argument" has merit, but its spilt milk now and there's no point arguing it. The issue now is that he needs a real good game to justify their decision or the 2nd guessing will go on for a while. And of course we need to score at least 4 runs...
   23. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: October 17, 2007 at 05:45 AM (#2580843)
I really had come around on Francona, and was thinking he knew what he was doing, but between Gagné in the tie game and Wake over Beckett today,


Maybe I'm alone here, but I just don't see the decision to start Wake as one Tito made on his own.
   24. Baldrick Posted: October 17, 2007 at 06:35 AM (#2580852)
Wakefield was pretty darn good. The homerun was blasted, sure, but the rest of the 5th was hardly his fault. Youk makes that catch, and they get out of the inning with virtually no damage. Wake fields the line drive or lets it past untouched and they get out fine. The HBP was a classic "lean into it and take your base" on a pitch that was only a little inside. They also could've got an interference call on the fielder's choice when the guy slid about 6 feet off 2nd base to break up the double-play.

ANY of that goes differently, Wake doesn't get yanked, goes 6 or 7 innings with a couple runs, and everything is different.

It was a very frustrating game to watch given how many little breaks all went the wrong way. Not to say they "should" have won, since you should never have to count on breaks. And right now, everyone except the 2-3-4 slots have approximately zero chance of creating anything on their own.

But the idea that this was in any way a problem with Wakefield seems completely wrong to me. There's no way to know for sure what would have happened, but I was yelling about how stupid it was to pull him at the time and the events following seemed to prove that right.
   25. Norcan Posted: October 17, 2007 at 06:44 AM (#2580853)
Today, before game 4, I was thinking about how great Delcarmen's stuff has been . I mean, his changeup has been unbelievable, the closest thing to a in-his-prime Pedro changeup I've ever seen. I'm not joking, the changeups Pedro threw in the 1999 all-star look exactly like Delcarmen's. And then there's the 95 mph fastball and in game 2, he threw some nasty hooks. I was really pumped about him, with hopes that maybe he could be a starter, just maybe. After such positive thoughts, to then see him just get bombed tonight, it's deflating.
   26. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 17, 2007 at 07:03 AM (#2580857)
I'm still 100% behind Manny Delcarmen though. I have him penciled in as the #2 RHP in the bullpen next season.

Still.

F!@# you Coco Crisp. F!@# you Julio Lugo. F!@3 you Javier Lopez.

And F!@# you Eric Gagne. F!@# F!@# F!@# F!@# F!@# you.
   27. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: October 17, 2007 at 08:34 AM (#2580863)
I did not like the early hook there, either. Even less so after what followed.

Yeah. I said that in Chatter before MDC gave up the bomb. You really couldn't blame Wakefield for that inning, but it always seems to be the manager's instinct to blame the pitcher when things start to go wrong, even when the things going wrong are mostly the result of bad luck and bad fielding...
   28. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: October 17, 2007 at 09:12 AM (#2580867)
You know what sux...

The off day, I have to think about the 12 million 'what ifs' from this game for another 24 hours.

Disclaimer - Hope no one minds me saying that and does not think I was being a sore loser like in chatter.God forbid we can't be fans of our team who get the shits when things don't go our way....
   29. Vin Middle Posted: October 17, 2007 at 10:37 AM (#2580869)
Am I the only one who heard robo talk about Beckett having a 'tight back' after game 1? That played into the decision quite a bit I would think. The 2nd *(or first) guessing seems a bit misplaced
   30. karlmagnus Posted: October 17, 2007 at 11:28 AM (#2580873)
Pulling Wakefield at that point was a decision worthy of Jimy Williams. For one thing, if he'd got out of the 5th (probable, even though he had to get 6 outs to do it) and the Sox score only one more run next inning, he'd have been in line for the W. The Sox superfluity of medium quality starting pitchers may help in Games 6 and 7 though, if they get that far; should use Schilling and Dice-K in 6 (4 innings each) and Wake and Lester in 7th (again, 4 each.) If Sox pitchers can't get out of the 5th inning, don't get them into one.

Having said that, the Tribe have been getting all the breaks since Game 2 and it may just be one of those years. The 2004 club was incredibly lucky and not all that good; 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2007 have all been better.
   31. TomH Posted: October 17, 2007 at 11:46 AM (#2580875)
..and 1999

karl pushes the point a bit, but in general it's right.

but they ain't dead yet!!
   32. karlmagnus Posted: October 17, 2007 at 12:05 PM (#2580879)
1999 might have won the lot with a decent manager. Top 3 rotation of Pedro at his absolute peak, Saberhagen and Wake is pretty damn good. But no, Dumbo has to bench Wake and play Kent Mercker. '98 couldn't have won against the 1998 Yankees and '95 was splendid and noble but thin. All the above better than '88 or '90, however -- quality improved hugely in the mid 90s.

Main worry with not getting it this year is the numerous declines built into the current roster. Varitek is on his way out, Schilling will be Clemens 2007 at best from here on, Wake must be slowing soon, Manny may be in his "counting stats" period rather than putting up peak numbers and Ortiz may be moving towards late-Vaughan (though hopefully slowly.) The kids are good but they're not THAT good.
   33. Mister High Standards Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:16 PM (#2580933)
I liked Wake starting that game. In my opinion, not pitching Beckett isn't remotly the biggest decision of this post season. It's not carrying Clay.

Hey, we are playing with house money. Losing to the team that knocked out the Yankees is like winning.
   34. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:25 PM (#2580944)
1999 might have won the lot with a decent manager. Top 3 rotation of Pedro at his absolute peak, Saberhagen and Wake is pretty damn good. But no, Dumbo has to bench Wake and play Kent Mercker.
Don't let facts get in the way of your opinions, km:

Wakefield, who was outraged when he was left off the team's roster for the 1999 ALCS - a decision he has long blamed on former GM Dan Duquette

(Source)

So Goldenboy #1 left Goldenboy #2 off the post-season roster in '99. I'm guessing it will still be Jimy Williams' fault somehow.
   35. Smiling Joe Hesketh Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:26 PM (#2580946)
Hey, we are playing with house money. Losing to the team that knocked out the Yankees is like winning.

No it isn't.

The Sox are getting outplayed in every aspect of the game. Their starters can't get through 5 (Pulling Wake was absolutely the right move there IMHO), 1/2 the lineup isn't hitting, the bullpen's got maybe 2 guys who can be trusted, and the Sox are merriliy hitting into double plays at a record pace.

It's terribly disappointing, but the truth is the Sox are getting their asses kicked.
   36. Nasty Nate Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:26 PM (#2580947)
For those of you who had the sound on during that foul pop missed by Youks, was it me or McCarver who was completely off his rocker? He was saying that the runner tagging-up could leave the base as soon as the ball touched a fielders glove, even if it wasnt caught yet. is that right?
   37. Smiling Joe Hesketh Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:26 PM (#2580949)
That is correct, Nate.
   38. Mister High Standards Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:30 PM (#2580954)
No it isn't.


Thanks for explaing how I feel SJH, I know understand my feelings much better. Very insightful!!
   39. Mister High Standards Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:31 PM (#2580956)
Nate, yes it is correct.
   40. The Original SJ Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:32 PM (#2580960)
Hey, we are playing with house money. Losing to the team that knocked out the Yankees is like winning.

I have no reason to doubt you, but I can't imagine feeling this way. You are saying your hate for the Yankees is stronger than your love for the Red Sox?
   41. Nasty Nate Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:34 PM (#2580962)
never knew that
   42. Smiling Joe Hesketh Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:35 PM (#2580965)
Thanks for explaing how I feel SJH, I know understand my feelings much better. Very insightful!!

Feel any way you like. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I merely completely disagree with your take. The Sox are not playing with house money; they were considered World Series contenders and it appears they will come up short. That's a huge letdown.

I will say this: it will be massively disappointing to lose the ALCS to the Indians, but at least it's a baseball playoff series and not a referendum on our self-worth like a series against the Yankees would be.
   43. Toby Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:37 PM (#2580968)
Boy, I sure wish we had used Beckett so that we would have lost 4-3 in 12 innings instead of 7-3 in 9 innings.
   44. Smiling Joe Hesketh Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:38 PM (#2580970)
Rosenthal pretty much said last night Beckett could not have pitched. Back was tight, I think. I missed the whole report, but that was the jist of it I believe.
   45. Sean Forman Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:43 PM (#2580973)
I'm guessing that rule is to prevent guys like John McGraw from juggling the ball in an effort to double off the runner on an appeal play. Watching 1880's baseball would have been an interesting thing. Dropped infield fly double plays, dropped third strike double plays (I'm just guessing on this one), cutting bases when the umpire wasn't watching the play.

To be honest, I wouldn't mind seeing the infield fly rule go away. With as good as infielders are now, the groundball is an automatic double play, why should the bases loaded popup be any different, plus it would be an interesting play to see attempted on a regular basis.
   46. Dudefella Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:43 PM (#2580975)
The HBP was a classic "lean into it and take your base" on a pitch that was only a little inside.


I dunno about that; from my (possibly flawed) memory, it seemed like he got Shoppach pretty squarely in the back.

Now, a bigger point in the Sox favor on that call is that Shoppach didn't even remotely make any effort to get out of the way.

Per Rule 6.08:
The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be
put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when—

(b) He is touched by a pitched ball which he is not attempting to hit unless . . .(2) The batter makes no attempt to
avoid being touched by the ball


Wakefield's pitches were hitting what, 60 mph maybe? And Shoppach's acting like he's about to get nailed by a Nolan Ryan fastball. I'd love to see that rule be enforced even occasionally.
   47. Mister High Standards Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:46 PM (#2580984)
Feel any way you like. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I merely completely disagree with your take. The Sox are not playing with house money; they were considered World Series contenders and it appears they will come up short. That's a huge letdown.


While:
1) It isn't over.

2)
>If: you are hugely let down, after:
A] winning a world series 3 years ago.
B] having a 96 win season.
C] outperforming your arch rival
D] continued development of young stars
>Then: You must be hugely let down often. Last year, was a huge let down. This year, was a very mild disapointment. Like the diner only having milk instead of creame to serve with coffee.

You are saying your hate for the Yankees is stronger than your love for the Red Sox?

Not remotly. What I'm saying is that it isn't binary. The way the playoffs/season is unfolding, I can get a lot of enjoymenet out of a team winning that isn't the the RedSox. Specificly either Cleveland or Colorado. I can get virtually no enjoyment out of the Yankees ever winning. Now in 2004, I things were very different. If both the Yankees and the Red Sox go zero for the next 20 years in terms of winning the world series then I'm sure the situation will change.
   48. Answer Guy Posted: October 17, 2007 at 01:50 PM (#2580988)

Hey, we are playing with house money. Losing to the team that knocked out the Yankees is like winning.


Not if we don't do any better against them the Yankees did.

For those reading who don't know this, one of the reasons Boston fans on here invoke the Yankees constantly is that almost all of us, particularly those of us who live outside the Greater Boston area, are going to have coworkers, colleagues, classmates, friends, relatives, and acquaintences who are Yankee fans. This year the Red Sox won the division and advanced to the ALCS, which gives said Yankee fans in the vicinity no ammunition as to this season.
   49. SoSH U at work Posted: October 17, 2007 at 02:07 PM (#2581005)
To be honest, I wouldn't mind seeing the infield fly rule go away. With as good as infielders are now, the groundball is an automatic double play, why should the bases loaded popup be any different, plus it would be an interesting play to see attempted on a regular basis.


Treder will be happy to know that we've got someone else on board our doomed effort to repeal the IF fly rule.
   50. Nasty Nate Posted: October 17, 2007 at 02:16 PM (#2581016)
I'm guessing that rule is to prevent guys like John McGraw from juggling the ball in an effort to double off the runner on an appeal play.


yeah. because i didnt know of the rule, i always wondered why some outfielder with great hands didnt bobble a ball intentionally to try to get a runner to leave early.

..................
to paraphrase Kevin Millar paraphrasing himself: "Dont let us win tomorrow night, because we have Schilling pitching game 6, and then anything can happen in game 7"
   51. SoSH U at work Posted: October 17, 2007 at 02:28 PM (#2581045)
yeah. because i didnt know of the rule, i always wondered why some outfielder with great hands didnt bobble a ball intentionally to try to get a runner to leave early.


In an old baseball book I had as a kid, it was said that there was one outfielder who would juggle the ball while running it back toward the infield, which prevented runners from tagging up, precipitating the rule change. The accuracy of that story is certainly up for debate.
   52. robinred Posted: October 17, 2007 at 02:38 PM (#2581062)
You guys are missing the key issue: unless the Red Sox come back, we will be deprived of the Helton-Youkilis facial hair smackdown.
   53. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 02:47 PM (#2581083)
I have to agree with Baldrick in #24 and Mattbert in #4. Wakefield did a pretty decent job. He was cruising along with no runs allowed on 3 hits (one hard hit 2-out double and 2 fairly weak hits)and 7 K's through 4 innings. Unfortunately the Red Sox line-up could do nothing with the rather mediocre/hittable looking Paul Byrd for 5 straight innings. Yeah the homer to Blake was a well struck shot off a high knuckleball that did nothing, but you can expect to see one or two of those a game off Wakefield - you just hope it's with the bases empty like this one. The HBP to Shoppach after Gutierrez singled did hurt the Red Sox much more than it ever threatened to hurt Shoppach. And yes, Baldrick had it right - it was barely off the plate and Shoppach turned inward and leaned his front arm/shoulder into it. Good move by Shoppach because the umps never call the rule requiring the batter to "attempt to avoid being struck by the ball".

Still, if Youkilis hangs onto the pop foul or Wake either catches the soft liner or allows Dustin to play it on a hop and turn two, the inning is minimal damage. That being said, I was in favor of pulling Timmy Wake after the ground ball single by Martinez. But I wasn't crazy about the choice of MDC to close the inning. I still think of MDC as the 8th inning set-up guy to Li'l Paps. I'd prefer Timlin in that spot.

Does anyone else wonder like me whether having Mirabelli catch MDC rather than making the double switch and going with 'Tek had any effect on his performance? He sure did look uncharacteristically bad in dousing the smouldering fire with gasoline.

The bright spot was how strong Lester looked. If Beckett wins #5 and Schill wins #6 I'm all in favor of Lester in Game #7 unless Buchholz were suddenly magically available. Although KM's idea about not letting any of the starters go into the 5th does sound intriguing under the current circumstances.

Anyway, I had no issue with the choice of Wake over Beckett for Game #4 even if Josh's back were not stiff. Down 2 games to 1 in a 7 game series with the final two at home does not require panic. I think the Red Sox brass felt Wake had a legitimate shot to beat Byrd - which he did if the offense had contributed anything early in the game. Certainly Beckett gives the Sox a better chance against Sabathia than any other option. Schill matches well against Carmona. If there is a time to call all hands short rest or not it's game #7 where they could then call on Beckett for a few innings if need be.

My last point is Manny's celebration following his solo homerun in the 6th trailing 7-3 seemed pretty idiotic and clueless. Does Manny have any idea what is going on around him or does he simply not care about anything outside of Manny-World?
   54. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 02:56 PM (#2581108)
Sorry- Let me correct my referenced stats. Wake had only 6 K's through 4 innings (including 2 in an 8 pitch 2nd inning), but he also only had surrendered the one two-out bases empty double, the other two runners were walks (not weak hits as I had previously recounted).
   55. chris p Posted: October 17, 2007 at 02:57 PM (#2581111)
It's not carrying Clay.

i agree that not having clay on the roster hurts the teat. the question is, was he really tiring? or is that just the front office's excuse? i don't think it's fair to speculate, although if i had to guess, i'd say it's a ######## excuse.

so, i'd say the biggest mistake is not playing ellsbury in center field. giving coco's 2 years of mostly suck against ellsbury's september, i'd take ellsbury by far.

that all said, i like this team for the long term--matsuzaka will be better next, buchholz and ellsbury will both be starting ... hopefully manny will bounce back and ortiz' knee will be fine. ah well, this year isn't quite over yet, hopefully they wake up.
   56. tfbg9 Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:04 PM (#2581127)
Didn't Martinez's ball first hit the ground as it skipped between 3rd and SS?

Wake failed to come up with a big game whenthe club needed one. No excuses--you could say he didn't catch any breaks, but he didn't have to give up the HR, HBP, and two singles either. Not a great game by him.

I'm kind of taking the MHS attitude about all this too. Hats off the CLE...
   57. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:11 PM (#2581140)
I'd like to see Ellsbury get a shot also. What is the point in carrying a .394 OBP player on the post season roster if all he is going to do is get a pinch running chance or a defensive replacement inning or two? When you're down two runs and the due hitters include a threesome batting at .200, .143, and .188 in the post season (7th inning) or .250, .267, .188 (9th inning) - you want to tell me Jacoby doesn't give a better option than any ot them?
   58. Josh Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:17 PM (#2581147)
i agree that not having clay on the roster hurts the teat.
Hurt so bad.
   59. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:19 PM (#2581150)
Didn't Martinez's ball first hit the ground as it skipped between 3rd and SS?


tfbg9 - My recollection was a somewhat off-balance defensive swing and two skips through the infield into LF where Manny picked it up ant threw to 2nd having no chance to get Sizemore at the plate.
   60. Toby Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:20 PM (#2581153)
Personally, I am glad for the off day, I think most of our hitters could use it. They seem mentally fried, and some of them may be physically banged up too. I'm sure Papi's knee could use a rest, for example.

I'd rather not be down 3-1 but things aren't grim. We have Beckett going in Game 5 and if we can win that, we go back to Fenway, where we played well in Games 1 and 2 and where we pretty much always play well.
   61. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:26 PM (#2581160)
Beckett + Schilling + Matsuzaka = SWEEP!!! (cross posted from the Slappy thread).

Then, Beckett in game 1 of the WS, as the Rockies are nice and stale.
   62. tfbg9 Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:26 PM (#2581161)
#59-I just watched it online--looked like the first time it hit the ground was the front part of the infied dirt between SS and 3rd.
   63. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:27 PM (#2581166)
ortiz' knee will be fine

I think so. It's not a "aging wearing down" thing, it's a "medically screwed just needs to be fixed" thing.
   64. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 03:44 PM (#2581192)
Thanks tfbg9.

In any case, Wake went into that inning having given up just 1 hit in four innings. He gave up the lead-off shot for a homer, a Gutierrez line drive single to LF on another high knuckler, the soft HBP to Shoppach, a FC grounder by Sizemore, then the foul pop dropped by Youk and the deflected soft liner by Cabrera, a strike-out of Hafner, and the two out 2-2 RBI single by Martinez. He didn't exactly get bombed in the inning. If his reliever provides any relief, he leaves down 3-0 even with the misplayed pop foul and the lost DP ball.
   65. The Marksist Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:03 PM (#2581218)
Wake failed to come up with a big game whenthe club needed one. No excuses--you could say he didn't catch any breaks, but he didn't have to give up the HR, HBP, and two singles either. Not a great game by him.

I'm not sure how we can blame Wake. He is utterly at the mercy of the knuckler. If it's unhittable, he's unhittable. If not, he's... not. I'm of the mind that he did what he could and that one good defensive play or one break and that inning is a 3-run ouchie, not a 7 run sh1tstorm.
   66. Nasty Nate Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:09 PM (#2581225)
if I'm not mistaken, JD Drew has played 19 straight postseason games without an extra base hit. !!!
   67. 1k5v3L Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:15 PM (#2581233)
if I'm not mistaken, JD Drew has played 19 straight postseason games without an extra base hit. !!!


You guys signed the wrong Drew.
   68. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:16 PM (#2581234)
it would not disappoint me to see either Drew or the 5/25 Coco rested a game in favor of Ellsbury.
   69. bunyon Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:17 PM (#2581236)
Good move by Shoppach because the umps never call the rule requiring the batter to "attempt to avoid being struck by the ball".

By turning out of the way, the batter has, technically, made an attempt to avoid the ball. Which is why you make that turn.

I think they should change the rule so that a team only gets first base if the hit batter leaves the game. If it doesn't hurt enough to force you out, it's just a ball.
   70. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:19 PM (#2581240)
oops, sorry that should read 5/26 for coco with a .453 OPS
   71. Toby Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:23 PM (#2581245)
Quick quiz: Rank the following 4 2/3-IP performances from best to worst.

Wake: 5 H, 5 R, 5 ER, 2 BB, 7 K, 1 HR
Dice: 6 H, 4 R, 4 ER, 2 BB, 6 K, 1 HR
Curt: 9 H, 5 R, 5 ER, 0 BB, 3 K, 2 HR

I think you have to go with Wake being the best of the lot. Especially when you allow that all three of these guys left with runners on first and second. The bullpen that inherited those runners allowed Wake's to score but not Dice's or Curt's.

I'm not saying Wake pitched particularly well, but he was better than Dice or Curt. In fact, the quick hook for Wake was a little surprising to me, while the hooks for Dice and Curt seemed timely. I wonder if Wake was already on fumes (or not feeling right) going into the fifth; he didn't K anyone in the fourth and the Peralta double was very close to a HR.
   72. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:23 PM (#2581246)
By turning out of the way, the batter has, technically, made an attempt to avoid the ball. Which is why you make that turn.


Actually bunyon, the reason they make that turn is to give the appearance of trying to avoid being hit while intentionally "taking one for the team" on a padded bycep or back rather than a bony wrist or hand. A good percentage of the youth travel baseball coaches I've gone up against over the years actually spend time teaching this art to the teenage players.
   73. Dave Cyprian Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:25 PM (#2581248)
This disaster is all Pedroia's fault.

EDIT: Why blame Crisp or Lugo? They don't have the talent... The pitching staff GOT us to the post-season, they pretty much get a pass as long as the Indians score 7 runs or less. All thats left is JD Drew, and he gets a hit when there are two outs and no one on base. So pretty much Pedroia is it. Indians fans were getting on Sizemore for not setting the table, and as he heated up so did his team. Pedey needs to return to that "Young Nomah" form.
   74. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:29 PM (#2581256)
I'd rank Schilling's 4.2 inning performance as the worst of the three from the vantage point I had in front of my TV. I thought both Dice and Wake were a little snake-bit and they both could have been in the game still with a little offensive support.

Cleveland does look to be getting more of the lucky bounces. That and their bullpen has been pretty solid.

Can anyone PLEASE hit one Betancourt pitch solid on the top half of the ball????
   75. James Darnell's #1 Fan Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:32 PM (#2581262)
As I said since the beginning of the series, Indians in 6.
   76. bunyon Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:33 PM (#2581263)
Actually bunyon, the reason they make that turn is to give the appearance of trying to avoid being hit while intentionally "taking one for the team" on a padded bycep or back rather than a bony wrist or hand. A good percentage of the youth travel baseball coaches I've gone up against over the years actually spend time teaching this art to the teenage players.

Yeah, sorry I wasn't clear. That is essentially what I meant by "which is why they do it". They're trying to look like they're avoiding the ball while either not avoiding it or approaching it.

My guess is that the drop in reluctance to be hit by pitches (I'm guessing based on historical HBP data) is a significant part of the offensive explosion. It leads to higher OBP and hitters that are more aggressive.
   77. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:38 PM (#2581272)
Dave- Dustin's AB's have been bad and his pitch selection not good. He's looked alot more like the overmatched April version of Pedroia than the potential ROY model. I was wondering whether the shoulder strain was bothering him still, but it looks more like lack of plate discipline and patience. Yesterday at least he hit a few balls hard and layed off one pitch at his shoulders. Let's hope he returns to his May through August form and that there is enough of a series left for him to shine as the plate setter for Papi and Manny.
   78. esturminator_CT Posted: October 17, 2007 at 04:46 PM (#2581279)
My guess is that the drop in reluctance to be hit by pitches (I'm guessing based on historical HBP data) is a significant part of the offensive explosion. It leads to higher OBP and hitters that are more aggressive.


I'd guess it also leads to some reluctance on the part of many pitchers to be aggressive on the inside half of the plate. This combination of batters taking free on-bases, hanging out over the plate to handle the low and away pitches better, and getting fewer pitches that jam them on the wrist may be nearly as big a contributor to offensive explosion as the lowering of the mound and shortening of fences.
   79. chris p Posted: October 17, 2007 at 05:27 PM (#2581338)
You guys signed the wrong Drew.

better than drew henson.
   80. rLr Is King Of The Romans And Above Grammar Posted: October 17, 2007 at 05:44 PM (#2581361)
better than drew henson.

Or aspiring sidearm reliever Drew Gooden.
   81. villageidiom Posted: October 17, 2007 at 08:28 PM (#2581687)
Wake was fine last night. Stuff happens, like the dropped popup, the one off Wake's glove, etc. The 5th inning wasn't the sharpest I've seen, yet as Toby points out it was better than what we got in games 2 and 3.

A little more love for the hitters, please? Cabrera makes a great snag, they hit a lot of right-at-ems, including the last out of the game last night. They almost matched Cleveland in hits in game 4, and outhit them in game 3. They've been pretty weak against Betancourt, but otherwise they've been hitting the ball well... Just not into open space unless it goes over the wall, and not with RISP. Credit to Cleveland's defense for sure.

I know they've played worse in this series than their regular season record suggests, but they've also played better than their ALCS record suggests.
   82. Golfing Great Mitch Cumstein Posted: October 17, 2007 at 11:38 PM (#2581852)
I called in to win Bruins Opening Night tickets without realizing that they were playing the same night as Game 5. Does anybody want the Bruin tickets?
   83. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: October 18, 2007 at 12:06 AM (#2581861)
Does anybody want the Bruin tickets?

Probably not.
   84. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: October 18, 2007 at 12:15 AM (#2581867)
it would not disappoint me to see either Drew or the 5/25 Coco rested a game in favor of Ellsbury.

Kielty is in, while I hope he benches Coco for Ellsbury
   85. Darren Posted: October 18, 2007 at 02:05 AM (#2581927)
I'm sorry, but Miller really was terrible. I was stunned by how often he couldn't get the words out to describe the action. As I said, he often focused on secondary details while I could hear action happening in the background as well.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Francis
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.8294 seconds
41 querie(s) executed