|
View Poll Results: Month | |||
0-30000 | 15 | 22.73% | |
30001-50000 | 3 | 4.55% | |
50001-75000 | 7 | 10.61% | |
75001-100000 | 5 | 7.58% | |
100000-150000 | 7 | 10.61% | |
>150000 | 12 | 18.18% | |
dont care /resutls please | 17 | 25.76% | |
Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1931
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] WTF pinch run for Varitek [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, because we won't need him in the extra innings. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] am I being leveled here? [/ QUOTE ] Pinch running for Varitek would have been a bad move. There were already two outs and if the game goes a couple of more innings who would you rather have bat: a 4 year old with a wiffle bat or Mirabelli? craig [/ QUOTE ] 1. Varitek's spot in the lineup is very unlikely to come up again, so there is almost zero cost offensively. 2. You don't lose all that much, if anything, having Mirabelli in defensively vs. Varitek for a couple of innings. (isn't Mirabelli generally considered a better defensive catcher, anyway?) If you're worried about not having Varitek in there to call pitches, certainly that could be worked around. 3. Fenway is a park where runners often don't score from 2nd on singles, so it pays to have a fast runner. An extra step or two could potentially be huge on a play at the plate. Having said that, I'm not sure they had any fast players runners left on the bench. But, if they did, I can't see not pinchrunning here. |
#1932
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
[ QUOTE ]
No, no, no. You'd miss Tek behind the plate, much more than you'd miss his bat. And we would be remiss not to mention: Gagne (W, 3-0) 1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, O BB, 3 K ...although he's lucky that fastball with no movement that he left up was only a double over Drew's head, and not a HR. I'm sure teams that are not called "Tampa Bay Devil Rays" have guys with enough power to take that one out the opposite way. [/ QUOTE ] you could just as easily say he was unlucky that it was hit over drews head to begin with. |
#1933
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
[ QUOTE ]
2. You don't lose all that much, if anything, having Mirabelli in defensively vs. Varitek for a couple of innings. (isn't Mirabelli generally considered a better defensive catcher, anyway?) If you're worried about not having Varitek in there to call pitches, certainly that could be worked around. [/ QUOTE ] Tek's greatest value to the team is "handling the pitching staff". This goes beyond calling pitches. You really, really don't want to take him out of a game if you can help it. [ QUOTE ] 3. Fenway is a park where runners often don't score from 2nd on singles, so it pays to have a fast runner. An extra step or two could potentially be huge on a play at the plate. [/ QUOTE ] With two outs, and the running moving on contact, a lot of the advantage that the speedier runner has is negated. The added speed would be a much bigger deal if the runner had to wait for the ball to get through the infield before taking off. Of course I'd like to have a faster runner on in this spot. That would be a luxury. But the cost (losing Tek for the remainder of the game) was too high. Believe me, if Clown Shoes Pena was the runner on second, we wouldn't be having this debate. |
#1934
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] No, no, no. You'd miss Tek behind the plate, much more than you'd miss his bat. And we would be remiss not to mention: Gagne (W, 3-0) 1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, O BB, 3 K ...although he's lucky that fastball with no movement that he left up was only a double over Drew's head, and not a HR. I'm sure teams that are not called "Tampa Bay Devil Rays" have guys with enough power to take that one out the opposite way. [/ QUOTE ] you could just as easily say he was unlucky that it was hit over drews head to begin with. [/ QUOTE ] I don't understand. He serves up the biggest meatball of the game (until Lowell's HR), and he's unlucky that it got crushed? |
#1935
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
CHB, on the crowd's impatience with Gagne last night:
"When Gagné went to 3-and-0 on the first batter he faced (Carlos Peña), it sounded as if Ulf Samuelsson had just been introduced at the old Garden. It was nasty. Just for a 3-and-0 count." |
#1936
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] No, no, no. You'd miss Tek behind the plate, much more than you'd miss his bat. And we would be remiss not to mention: Gagne (W, 3-0) 1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, O BB, 3 K ...although he's lucky that fastball with no movement that he left up was only a double over Drew's head, and not a HR. I'm sure teams that are not called "Tampa Bay Devil Rays" have guys with enough power to take that one out the opposite way. [/ QUOTE ] you could just as easily say he was unlucky that it was hit over drews head to begin with. [/ QUOTE ] I don't understand. He serves up the biggest meatball of the game (until Lowell's HR), and he's unlucky that it got crushed? [/ QUOTE ] when you look at ALL the possible outcomes of a bad pitch (line drive to a defender, fly ball out, fly ball hit, foul ball, swing and miss, popup, groundout etc etc) then yes, a hit over an outfielders head can easily be viewed as a unlucky outcome. also, i just watched the replay of that AB fastball high nasty curve 93 MPH fastball up & over outside part of the plate letter high high for double. i wouldnt call it a 'meatball' either as it almost definitely would have been called a ball if he didnt swing. i mean its right on MLB.tv, the pitch was not a meatball...probably not even a mistake. |
#1937
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
[ QUOTE ]
i mean its right on MLB.tv, the pitch was not a meatball...probably not even a mistake. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. YTF, you might be right that Harris could have Peskied that pitch, but there was nothing wrong with it, especially considering all the off-speed he had been throwing before that. His 1-1 changeup to Delman Young was a LOT more dangerous. And the odds of the two longest hit pitches also being the two biggest meatballs in the whole game are pretty slim, as I'm sure you know. |
#1938
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
[ QUOTE ]
They'll end up winning the first two of this series and lose the 3rd game, obviously. [/ QUOTE ] |
#1939
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] They'll end up winning the first two of this series and lose the 3rd game, obviously. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Was just coming here to quote this, nice call. |
#1940
|
|||
|
|||
Re: *official 2007 red sox thread*
Please let Remy be right about Bucholz coming up for Friday's doubleheader.
|
|
|