If Bobby gets Fired

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    Hfx, I too have always felt LL has been the culprit here. He certainly did not help himself in supporting Ben. The salary dump, in my opinion, was done with orders from LL/Henry.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    roy, I do think you make excellent points (always have). Everything is 20-20 hindsight now in terms of the team and it's record/performance. It's likely they will finish some 20 games below .500. One thing that is interesting is I wonder if BV is actually mad at the FO right now, not because of the stringing him along as he wonders if 2013 is going to happen, but it goes back to the Blockbuster. I think BV's biggest supporters, and I might be totally off here, but it makes sense (ex brought up how Beckett was supportive) included Beckett and AGON, two veteran players. Not that AGON was BV's biggest fan, but that he seemed to be OK with him. The media seemed to be AGON and Beckett's big enemies or reasons causing one to want to be traded (AGON did) and the other just bewildered by everything. They seemed to at least in some small way have BV's back. Pedroia too, if you believe his quotes, which I do. Manager and players are family, and the media is like the old aunt who must constantly bring up old garbage or old wounds....BV is not a good manager (anymore), but the organization helped set him up, as it did by setting up a potentially poor season by not fixing the starting pitching staff. Now they have some 20 positions to fill or fix by next season. It's just a disaster. I think BV should finish out the year now, but I'm worried the young players are progressively getting worse by the game. Not BV's fault, but it's another indictment on the FO and the scouting staff that has given the team way too many clunkers over the years. Gee, now I almost feel sorry for BV...but I can't because he keeps talking. He needs to shut up the last month of the year, then leave gracefully.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Danny,

    Agree with this post 100 percent, especially the last part in bold.

    Actually not quite 100 percent. The one comment I think the front office gets a bit of a bad rap about not addressing the pitching. I think they addressed it better than given credit for. The details are best left for a seperate thread, except to say, everything that could go wrong with the pitching did.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    Yeah, I actually was questioning that myself, roy. Was the pitching as bad going in as it turned out? Of course, not. Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, Doubront were supposed to be a solid 4 and then they got Cook. The pen was very good the 1st half of the year--Albers, Atchson, Padilla, Miller, Aceves. Everything did go wrong pitching wise, and there is definite evidence that the hitting or more importantly the inability of the Sox to drive in runs with RISP was a huge contributor to the under .500 record. Amazing stat of the year was hearing that the Sox 290 hits led MLB in August. The offense still sucked.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    Moon was right from the start about the pitching. So was I, for that matter.
    Buchholz was coming off an injury -- to his back. For a pitcher, that's not a pinkie. IMO, the performance of Beckett and Lester in September should have been a red flag -- or at least a pink one. Lester was terrible. It's fine to say that he has ace potential, look at his record, and all that. But he has never really pitched like a #1 starter. Beckett was having a good year but couldn't finish the job when it was most needed. He said it had nothing to do with his ankle. He said, "I wasn't pitching good." He has not been consistently top drawer for the Sox. BV didn't want to Bard to start. That pitcher was completely miscast. Doubront hadn't showed that he could pitch well in any role. Morales wasn't even close to the starting chart -- and maybe should not be now. Great stuff but no consistent command. Better a soft-tossing lefty who drives batters nuts and gets them out when they try to pull the dead fish. Or when he gets them to chase the deuce, perfectly located. Then Cook, with his record!  
    When your two "aces" are coming off a bum month ( not one or two starts ) with all the chips on the table, and the third member of the so-called Big Three is coming off an injury, you better find a guy who can pitch up there at or near the top of the rotation. Or close to it. Closer than Doubront to say nothing of Bard. What is more, and very much to the point, as Moon, said repeatedly, it was risky, dangerously risky, to think that all three would remain healthy and effective for a season.
    Yup, the pen was very effective for a long stretch. The manager did a terrific job with it.
    But he wasn't given the rotation he needed. True, no one could have predicted that the starters would be as bad as they have been. But it wasn't hard to see that the team, this team, coming off September, needed a frontline guy, at the very least to cover for contingencies but mainly to get people out. 
    I'm not claiming that he could have compensated for all the injuries and sub-par performances in the first half. But he would have made a difference -- unless he funked it. And, yes, it would have made a big difference, injuries and all, if Beckett and Lester had pitched well. Among other things, a big thing, their early exits contributed heavily to BP burnout. When starters stink, repercussions follow. Many kinds.
    The lousy pitching is biggest reason why this team is bad.
    The FO needs to take a lap -- maybe 20 -- for that one. 
    After the Great Collapse, it should not have rolled the dice ( no pun intended ) with the rotation.
    IMO, that was a major mistake in judgment. I thought that even before events confirmed it. But Moon gets most of the credit for being on top of it from the get-go.




     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    In response to expitch's comment:

    Moon was right from the start about the pitching. So was I, for that matter.
    Buchholz was coming off an injury -- to his back. For a pitcher, that's not a pinkie. IMO, the performance of Beckett and Lester in September should have been a red flag -- or at least a pink one. Lester was terrible. It's fine to say that he has ace potential, look at his record, and all that. But he has never really pitched like a #1 starter. Beckett was having a good year but couldn't finish the job when it was most needed. He said it had nothing to do with his ankle. He said, "I wasn't pitching good." He has not been consistently top drawer for the Sox. BV didn't want to Bard to start. That pitcher was completely miscast. Doubront hadn't showed that he could pitch well in any role. Morales wasn't even close to the starting chart -- and maybe should not be now. Great stuff but no consistent command. Better a soft-tossing lefty who drives batters nuts and gets them out when they try to pull the dead fish. Or when he gets them to chase the deuce, perfectly located. Then Cook, with his record!  
    When your two "aces" are coming off a bum month ( not one or two starts ) with all the chips on the table, and the third member of the so-called Big Three is coming off an injury, you better find a guy who can pitch up there at or near the top of the rotation. Or close to it. Closer than Doubront to say nothing of Bard. What is more, and very much to the point, as Moon, said repeatedly, it was risky, dangerously risky, to think that all three would remain healthy and effective for a season.
    Yup, the pen was very effective for a long stretch. The manager did a terrific job with it.
    But he wasn't given the rotation he needed. True, no one could have predicted that the starters would be as bad as they have been. But it wasn't hard to see that the team, this team, coming off September, needed a frontline guy, at the very least to cover for contingencies but mainly to get people out. 
    I'm not claiming that he could have compensated for all the injuries and sub-par performances in the first half. But he would have made a difference -- unless he funked it. And, yes, it would have made a big difference, injuries and all, if Beckett and Lester had pitched well. Among other things, a big thing, their early exits contributed heavily to BP burnout. When starters stink, repercussions follow. Many kinds.
    The lousy pitching is biggest reason why this team is bad.
    The FO needs to take a lap -- maybe 20 -- for that one. 
    After the Great Collapse, it should not have rolled the dice ( no pun intended ) with the rotation.
    IMO, that was a major mistake in judgment. I thought that even before events confirmed it. But Moon gets most of the credit for being on top of it from the get-go.





    Here's my problem with your analysis.   You fall off the tracks immediately when you say Lester never has pitched like a No. 1. 16-6 with a 3.21 ERA in 2008 and 19-9 with a 3.25 ERA certainly is worthy of No. 1 description.   You also misrepresent their Septembers when you say they were coming off bad months, not just one or two starts. Let's start with Beckett. With him it certainly was just two starts. He started four times in September. His first start was 3.2 IP, 0 ER when he got hurt. When he came back, he went 6 IP, 2 ER (3.00 ERA) and won. He then pitched strong for the first six innings in his third start (1 or 2 runs allowed). So with him, it was the last eight innings of the season when he finally broke down (two IP, 4 runs to end his third start then the bad last start, although he pitched strong for the first five innings of his last start before blowing up. Regardless, with Beckett it was just the last two starts, not the entire month.   With Lester, his month was a mixed bag but he was good more than he was bad. He had six starts and was good in three of them: 5 IP, 1 ER; 7 IP, 0 ER; 6 IP, 2 ER. There was nothing wrong with those starts.   He was bad in two starts: 4 IP, 4 ER; 2.2 IP, 8 ER. Yes those were terrible. And he was mediocre in one start, 7 IP, 4 ER. It was decent enough. What nobody likes to notice is that the Sox scored more than three runs in just one of those games and scored one run twice. The Sox averaged better than five runs a game last year. If they scored the five runs in all six starts, he would have been 4-2 instead of 1-3 with 2 ND.   In Lester's "horrible" September, the Sox lost three of his starts by scores of 4-2, 4-3 and 4-3. But no -- it was just Lester's horrible performances as the reason for the September collapse, nothing else.   As for this year, yes it was reasonable to expect Buchholz to starts slow but it was also reasonable to expect him to get stronger, which he did. And as I pointed out, Lester was BAD in just two starts and was consistent the previous four years so it was also reasonable to expect him to win 15 games with an ERA in the mid-3s.   As for Beckett, I didn't expect him to be as good as he was for the first 5 1/2 months last year, but I didn't expect him  to be as bad as he was since he came off the DL. I expected him to be like he was before the DL stint when he was decent enough and his record would have been better with better run support.   Beyond that, the Sox made the decision to go with young arms on the back end. Sure there were questions. I was never as high on Felix (still not) as others and also questioned whether Bard could handle it. At the same time, they both have live arms and you have to give guys the chance, otherwise why play them at all.   And they went out and got depth and then like what always happens, they found an arm during the season (Morales). There's never guarantees with pitching but no one would ever predict that everything would go wrong like it did.   I agree that the rotation is the the major reason, but no reasonable analysis would have predicted it to be as bad as it turned out.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    If, as most people seem to think, BV is fired or leaves by "mutual consent" after the season, this organization -- players and the FO -- will enjoy the dubious distinction of having decapitated two managers in years running. Both are good baseball men with different styles. Both were done in LARGELY by the players. In BV's case, with a little help from the FO, as I say above. Neither deserved his fate -- if BV gets the can. The players should be ashamed for life for what they did to Tito. In neither case was ( is ) the obvious problem the manager. 
    Joe Briedy has made it his life's work to cite all of BV's managerial errors. I disagree with almost all of his points. I could see perfectly good reasons for most of what BV did. So it comes down to this. I will put my baseball judgment against Joe's any time. Now he's knocking BV for having the pitchers practice bunting. In an interleague game or a WS game, a good sacrifice can make the difference. Talk about foolish nit-picking. Joe also nicks BV about ST. By common consent, BV ran a good camp. See quotes from Youk and Beckett. Does Joe buy into the denied stories about mistreatment of players? How about the carping emails to Schilling, the guy who loves Tito? And maybe the emails came from someone who loves Tito too. 
    I single out Joe because I do believe that he was primed to scald BV from the outset. In the first game, BV let Morales pitch to Fiedler because he wanted to see what he had. Plain and simple. Joe said the move was "indefensible." That foolish word was the clue. From there on, he was more visceral than analytic.
    Like Joe, too many posters were primed to seek out reasons to bag on BV, and thus, IMO, to make unpersuasive criticism, some of it tortured.  On this I agree with Pumpsie. But I do not agree that BV made numerous tactical errors. As I said in another post, I'm not going to go back over "moves." All I can say is that I thought most of them were reasonable.
    BV's tactical acumen has not been criticized much over his long career, to say the least. And he was not "out of baseball for ten years." Heaven save us. They do not play cricket in Japan. Holy Moses. ( Maybe Pedey thought they play cricket over there. )  He's old. He's forgotten. He's living in the past. ( From 
    Joe. ) This is nonsense on its face -- and is another strong clue as to why most of this stuff cannot be taken seriously. 
    Not that the FO gives a hoot about what posters say -- if they even glance at forums from time to time. 
    Regarding my previous post about pitching, I anticipate that someone will point to Ben's having been "financially strapped." Moon suggested ways that the club might have gotten around that to bring in a pitcher. Is there any evidence that Ben -- even rumored evidence -- that Ben tried to be creative?  Don't ask me how. That's the GM's job. The evidence on the face of it is that Ben made a judgment to go with a staff that, as Danny said, was "supposed" to deliver. I think there were good reasons to wonder about that, as I said above. Ben rolled the dice and came up snake eyes. He should at least have asked for a new pair of dice.
    So we may soon see that two heads are better than one -- not on the bench but in the chopped head basket. 
    Given last year and this, the Red Sox organization will have on its legacy TWO huge black marks. As baseball history goes, they will be there forever. 
    I have seen this season no reason to doubt what Al Leiter said, "Bobby can be annoying, but if you listen to him you'll be a better player."
    Some of the Sox have played over their heads. Maybe THEY were listening. Maybe Middlebrooks was listening, even when BV wasn't saying, "Nice inning, kid." Especially to what BV said to him in private after that. 
    And so it goes. Perhaps the tumbrel goes up the hill again -- with many members of the crowd cheering. Bloody September deja vu. 
    And then what?  




     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    Pitching is largely about making the right pitch. It can be the first pitch, which sets up the whole AB. It can be the pitch that gets the K or the pop up with two outs and men on base. Doing this consistently is what aces are made of. Lester and Beckett have failed at it repeatedly this season, as they did at the end of last season. I can't count the times Lester has bounced his cutter on a count of 1 and 2. An ace finishes off the batter consistently on that count. Beckett just threw too many cookies. 
    They weren't up to the job last September. True, no one should have EXPECTED them to go south and stay there overnight. At the same time, someone should have suspected that the trouble might carry over. If Beckett and Lester had come into this season bursting with confidence, they would have been super-human -- or sub-human. Anyone who didn't think that their performance last season could very well have an effect coming into this one is either talking about abstract numbers or robots. 
    Lester is an emotional guy. He was very down on himself after last season. Sure, one can SAY that he would bounce back because he had something to prove. That's rah-rah talk. It's just as reasonable to think that Lester came back with maybe just a small doubt about whether he could prove it. He certainly looked that way, often lost somewhere. He made too many mistakes when he had to make a pitch. That's normally a sign of distraction. What was distracting him? BV? Please. It could have been self-doubt. His most recent memory of being on a mound gave him no reason to think that he could just hum it past them or break a bat with a nasty cutter. This game IS largely mental, especially on the mound. 
    I think that the FO ought to have at least allowed for that possibility. Instead it counted upon --
    yes, counted upon -- Lester immediately and automatically returning to his glory days. Beckett too, probably. I call that a mistake in human judgment. 
    I've seen it before, almost the same thing, in baseball. Risky business, that. All the more risky when your club has just had an historic collapse -- and you know darn well that another funked season is, as everyone keeps saying, "unacceptable."
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    In short, Roy, I didn't "go off the tracks." You and I are on different tracks. You think yours is the right one. Ditto me. 
    I'm content to let it go at that.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    In response to expitch's comment:


    They weren't up to the job last September. True, no one should have EXPECTED them to go south and stay there overnight. At the same time, someone should have suspected that the trouble might carry over. If Beckett and Lester had come into this season bursting with confidence, they would have been super-human -- or sub-human. Anyone who didn't think that their performance last season could very well have an effect coming into this one is either talking about abstract numbers or robots. 



    Obviously, you didn't read my post. Lester had TWO bad starts out of six, so again, to say he wasn't up to it last September -- lumping the whole month together -- is tremendously overstated and feeding into the myth that he was bad all month.

    Lester's last start of the year was a good start -- 6 IP, 2 ER -- so he hardly finished the season on a bad note. And Lester's first two starts this season were great -- 7 IP, 1 ER; 8 IP, 3 ER. After nine starts this year, Lester's ERA was 3.95 and he was 3-3 and pitched well enough at that point to have five or six wins had he gotten better run support.

    So your theory that he had some kind of confidence coming into this season because of last year is crp. Lester's problems this year have nothing to do with last year.

    And as that start showed, it wasn't "rah rah" thinking to think he'd have a a good year this year. There was nothing to bounce back from because for the zillionth time, he had just two bad starts in the month. Over a larger sample, he was conistent over four years. No one said he'd feel he had something to prove.

    And Beckett had a 0.95 ERA in the spring. That's hardly a pitcher who had any kind of mental carry-over. In the season, his ERA was 4.06 at the end of June (13 starts), not great but respectable and more important, it was an ERA that was ballooned because of two really bad starts, which means in the other 11 starts, his ERA was 2.79. Again, that's hardly a pitcher who had some kind of carry over from last year. He had five wins but pitched well enough to have at least eight. Whatever problems he had since then have nothing to do with last year.

    And if you look at there starts, as I pointed out, after Lester's first nine and Beckett's first 13 starts, they combined for eight wins but had pitched well enough to have at least 16 wins combined. That is why the injuries to the lineup also had an effect on the season.

    So as both pitchers showed with their starts to the season, it was more likely that both pitchers would have had good seasons than bad ones. Who knows what happened that made them go downhill. Heck, maybe it was the atmosphere created by Bobby V. If people are going to blame Francona for their bad starts in September, then Bobby V. is fair game to blame for Lester's and Backett's seasons going downhill after relatively good starts to the season by both.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SteveM. Show SteveM's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    If Ben and JH are not in Seattle to fire Bobby maybe they can bring King Felix back with them. One vote for Rich Gedman to manage in 2013.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    In response to SteveM's comment:

    One vote for Rich Gedman to manage in 2013.



    As long as he doesn't teach hitters how to swing a bat or catchers how to block low pitches.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    He still had the greatest single playoff hitting performance off one pitcher who was dominating the rest of the team...Mike Witt...single, double, HR. So much so that it was the reason why Mauch went out to fetch Witt after the Baylor HR. All the Baylor HR did was make it 5-2. Gedman forced the hand of Gene Mauch. Without Gedman, no WS for Sox in '86, and no Buckner, and no shame of choking a 2 outs and no one on clinching situation at NY.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    Joe Briedy has made it his life's work to cite all of BV's managerial errors. I disagree with almost all of his points. I could see perfectly good reasons for most of what BV did. So it comes down to this. I will put my baseball judgment against Joe's any time.

    I think you're knowledgeable, but you refuse to see BV for what he is.

    Now he's knocking BV for having the pitchers practice bunting. In an interleague game or a WS game, a good sacrifice can make the difference.

    So you practice a bunt in March because you might use it in May?  You're better off having them take batting practice.

    Talk about foolish nit-picking. Joe also nicks BV about ST. By common consent, BV ran a good camp. See quotes from Youk and Beckett. Does Joe buy into the denied stories about mistreatment of players? How about the carping emails to Schilling, the guy who loves Tito? And maybe the emails came from someone who loves Tito too.

    So you agree with BV telling the press that Doubront had no out pitch?  Or complaining that Bard wasn't throwing enough changeups, instead Valentine simply telling Bard to throw more changeups?

    I single out Joe because I do believe that he was primed to scald BV from the outset. In the first game, BV let Morales pitch to Fiedler because he wanted to see what he had.

    To see what he had?  'Er. Mr. Bochy, why did you have Zito start the opening game of the WS rather than Cain?  Oh, I wanted to see what he had'?  That makes no sense.  It's the first game of the season, and you're basically saying it was more important for Valentine to get acquainted with his players than to choose the best matchups.

    I noticed you didn't comment on the fact that he didn't know Hendriks was pitching.  Explain that one to me.

    Or how about the fact that he gave Matsui an IBB?  Remember that one?  That turned a 3-2 lead into a 4-3 deficit.  Matsui is arguably the worst hitter in BB.  Matsui was so bad, TB cut him a week later.  He had a .435 OPS.  He was batting .175 at the time.  How could anyone suggest that he be intentionally walked?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    Joe Briedy has made it his life's work to cite all of BV's managerial errors. I disagree with almost all of his points. I could see perfectly good reasons for most of what BV did. So it comes down to this. I will put my baseball judgment against Joe's any time.

    I think you're knowledgeable, but you refuse to see BV for what he is.

    Now he's knocking BV for having the pitchers practice bunting. In an interleague game or a WS game, a good sacrifice can make the difference.

    So you practice a bunt in March because you might use it in May?  You're better off having them take batting practice.

    Talk about foolish nit-picking. Joe also nicks BV about ST. By common consent, BV ran a good camp. See quotes from Youk and Beckett. Does Joe buy into the denied stories about mistreatment of players? How about the carping emails to Schilling, the guy who loves Tito? And maybe the emails came from someone who loves Tito too.

    So you agree with BV telling the press that Doubront had no out pitch?  Or complaining that Bard wasn't throwing enough changeups, instead Valentine simply telling Bard to throw more changeups?

    I single out Joe because I do believe that he was primed to scald BV from the outset. In the first game, BV let Morales pitch to Fiedler because he wanted to see what he had.

    To see what he had?  'Er. Mr. Bochy, why did you have Zito start the opening game of the WS rather than Cain?  Oh, I wanted to see what he had'?  That makes no sense.  It's the first game of the season, and you're basically saying it was more important for Valentine to get acquainted with his players than to choose the best matchups.

    I noticed you didn't comment on the fact that he didn't know Hendriks was pitching.  Explain that one to me.

    Or how about the fact that he gave Matsui an IBB?  Remember that one?  That turned a 3-2 lead into a 4-3 deficit.  Matsui is arguably the worst hitter in BB.  Matsui was so bad, TB cut him a week later.  He had a .435 OPS.  He was batting .175 at the time.  How could anyone suggest that he be intentionally walked?


    No, you practice everything in ST. That's what it's for. In a situation either in interleague or in a WS, a pitcher will not be swinging away. Or he'll be lifted for a PH. Best he learns to bunt. 
    Yup, a new manager with a team that had just tanked, perhaps because it didn't have to guts to stick it out. In the first game, maybe the first few,it was very important for THAT manager to see what he had. Maybe not Girardi, but THAT manager, yes.
    As I've said, I have no problem with a manager expressing publicly what he thinks players need to do. Or even dissing one. 
    No, I see BV differently from you. Not kosher?  Why is the way you see him the right way. Others agree with you. But not all. Is my view of the man "indefensible."
    I didn't see the intentional BB.
    I've never said that BV hasn't made any mistakes. I've said that for the most part I have agreed with his tactical decisions. You take the opposite view -- in very damning language.
    The Hendricks thing bothers me not at all. IIRC, Casey had made out a lineup once for a lefty until reminded by Yogi. Small change and, yes, nit-picking. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    Why is the way you see him the right way. Others agree with you. But not all. Is my view of the man "indefensible."
    I didn't see the intentional BB. 
    I've never said that BV hasn't made any mistakes. I've said that for the most part I have agreed with his tactical decisions. You take the opposite view -- in very damning language. 
    The Hendricks thing bothers me not at all. IIRC, Casey had made out a lineup once for a lefty until reminded by Yogi. Small change and, yes, nit-picking.  


    At the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding.  We are only one or two losses away from having our worst record in 45 years.  That was 1966.  We were a small market team the last time we were this bad.  We averaged 10,000 fans a game the last time were this bad.  Our payroll was $183,000 the last time we were this bad.  This is not a disappointing season like 2011.  This is an epic failure.

    Past that, if you don't think an IBB to Matsui, his only one of the season, isn't a problem, or not preparing the lineups early enough, or with enough analysis to realize who was pitching, isn't a problem, then naturally we're going to disagree.

    I mean, walking matsui to load the bases is okay, but pitching to Fielder in the same circumstances is also okay?  Basically, Valentine showed more respect for matui's .435 OPS than Fielder's .928 OPS.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: If Bobby gets Fired

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    Why is the way you see him the right way. Others agree with you. But not all. Is my view of the man "indefensible."
    I didn't see the intentional BB. 
    I've never said that BV hasn't made any mistakes. I've said that for the most part I have agreed with his tactical decisions. You take the opposite view -- in very damning language. 
    The Hendricks thing bothers me not at all. IIRC, Casey had made out a lineup once for a lefty until reminded by Yogi. Small change and, yes, nit-picking.  


    At the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding.  We are only one or two losses away from having our worst record in 45 years.  That was 1966.  We were a small market team the last time we were this bad.  We averaged 10,000 fans a game the last time were this bad.  Our payroll was $183,000 the last time we were this bad.  This is not a disappointing season like 2011.  This is an epic failure.

    Past that, if you don't think an IBB to Matsui, his only one of the season, isn't a problem, or not preparing the lineups early enough, or with enough analysis to realize who was pitching, isn't a problem, then naturally we're going to disagree.

    I mean, walking matsui to load the bases is okay, but pitching to Fielder in the same circumstances is also okay?  Basically, Valentine showed more respect for matui's .435 OPS than Fielder's .928 OPS.


    A lot of things have gone into that pudding, starting at the end of last year, many of them sour.
    Oh, for goodness sake, if you insist, I'll agree with you on Hendricks and Matsui. 
    The Fielder thing has become an idee fixe with you. In fact, BV is an idee fixe with you. Your comparison was far-fetched. I have no idea why BV walked Matsui down the road in the season. But I know darn well why he let Morales pitch to Fielder. I tried to explain why to you on several occasions during the season. Like it or lump it. But -- puleeze -- stop bringing it up to me. Do you court personal dislike?
    You're darn tootin that I disagree with you, on BV anyway, almost all the time. But then I "refuse" ( another of your loaded words ) to see the light when you're shining it brightly. Have you not noticed that there are others on this board who disagree with you about BV? Are they also failing -- all of them -- to see what you see? Even some people who now think that maybe it will not be a good idea to bring BV back next year don't have anything close to your record of hammering him. You've spoken in anger and disgust from Day One. The others I refer to speak in tones of resignation, even sadness. 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share