Relooking the Detroit series

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BOSOX1941. Show BOSOX1941's posts

    Re: Relooking the Detroit series

    In response to seabeachfred's comment:

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

     

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

     

     

    Yes, losing 3 of 4 games is bad.  But the Sox were definitely in three four games and lost the 1st and 4th games because of Bailey twice and the caught/dropped fly ball in the 9th of the 4th game.  And maybe Bailey doesn't give up that run if Napoli knows to tag one guy before stepping on 1B.  Also in game four, Drew had the error on the bad hop, only his second of the season. 

     

     



    With solid pitching down the stretch we could have easiliy taken 3 of 4 against Detroit.  Its all about consistency in the end, right now every team in the division has been inconsistent recently except the Jays.  We need better pitching and one more big bat to seperate from the pack.

     

     

     

     

     




    How about also a manager who is more concerned about winning games that trying to help a miserable reliever regain his confidence at the expense of the team's suucces?  We're right back to the old FrancoMa days of "NOT WANTING TO LOSE HIM" claptrap that doomed us when Tito was bungling things in the dugout.  Farrencona said Bailey would not be used in high leverage situations only to go back on his word and use the guy at high leverage a situation as could be imagined.  That was just plain utter stupidity on Farrelancona"s part and it points out that he is another Tito type, good at handling players and a complete nincompoop in the dugout.  He has helped cost us four wins the past two weeks.  We cannot afford that type of inepitude.

     

     



    Farrencona,lol... I was thinking Franarrell.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Relooking the Detroit series

    In response to BOSOX1941's comment:

    In response to seabeachfred's comment:

     

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

     

     

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

     

     

     

    Yes, losing 3 of 4 games is bad.  But the Sox were definitely in three four games and lost the 1st and 4th games because of Bailey twice and the caught/dropped fly ball in the 9th of the 4th game.  And maybe Bailey doesn't give up that run if Napoli knows to tag one guy before stepping on 1B.  Also in game four, Drew had the error on the bad hop, only his second of the season. 

     

     

     



    With solid pitching down the stretch we could have easiliy taken 3 of 4 against Detroit.  Its all about consistency in the end, right now every team in the division has been inconsistent recently except the Jays.  We need better pitching and one more big bat to seperate from the pack.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     




    How about also a manager who is more concerned about winning games that trying to help a miserable reliever regain his confidence at the expense of the team's suucces?  We're right back to the old FrancoMa days of "NOT WANTING TO LOSE HIM" claptrap that doomed us when Tito was bungling things in the dugout.  Farrencona said Bailey would not be used in high leverage situations only to go back on his word and use the guy at high leverage a situation as could be imagined.  That was just plain utter stupidity on Farrelancona"s part and it points out that he is another Tito type, good at handling players and a complete nincompoop in the dugout.  He has helped cost us four wins the past two weeks.  We cannot afford that type of inepitude.

     

     

     

     



    Farrencona,lol... I was thinking Franarrell.

     




    Stick with being a Valentine cheerleader.

    It's more your speed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Relooking the Detroit series

    In response to seabeachfred's comment:


    How about also a manager who is more concerned about winning games that trying to help a miserable reliever regain his confidence at the expense of the team's suucces?  We're right back to the old FrancoMa days of "NOT WANTING TO LOSE HIM" claptrap that doomed us when Tito was bungling things in the dugout.  Farrencona said Bailey would not be used in high leverage situations only to go back on his word and use the guy at high leverage a situation as could be imagined.  That was just plain utter stupidity on Farrelancona"s part and it points out that he is another Tito type, good at handling players and a complete nincompoop in the dugout.  He has helped cost us four wins the past two weeks.  We cannot afford that type of inepitude.




    Fred, you really need to try to understand the idea of managing for the season, and not winning one game at all costs when it's this early in the season.  Another thing to consider is that when the starter does not go deep into the game, it kind of ties the manager's hands as far as his reliever options go.  I was not thrilled with Bailey coming into the game either, but I at least try to understand the rationale.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Relooking the Detroit series

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    In response to seabeachfred's comment:

     

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

     

     

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

     

     

     

    Yes, losing 3 of 4 games is bad.  But the Sox were definitely in three four games and lost the 1st and 4th games because of Bailey twice and the caught/dropped fly ball in the 9th of the 4th game.  And maybe Bailey doesn't give up that run if Napoli knows to tag one guy before stepping on 1B.  Also in game four, Drew had the error on the bad hop, only his second of the season. 

     

     

     



    With solid pitching down the stretch we could have easiliy taken 3 of 4 against Detroit.  Its all about consistency in the end, right now every team in the division has been inconsistent recently except the Jays.  We need better pitching and one more big bat to seperate from the pack.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     




    How about also a manager who is more concerned about winning games that trying to help a miserable reliever regain his confidence at the expense of the team's suucces?  We're right back to the old FrancoMa days of "NOT WANTING TO LOSE HIM" claptrap that doomed us when Tito was bungling things in the dugout.  Farrencona said Bailey would not be used in high leverage situations only to go back on his word and use the guy at high leverage a situation as could be imagined.  That was just plain utter stupidity on Farrelancona"s part and it points out that he is another Tito type, good at handling players and a complete nincompoop in the dugout.  He has helped cost us four wins the past two weeks.  We cannot afford that type of inepitude.

     

     

     

     



    Seabeachfred,

     

    Actually, you're wrong about Bailey.  I agree he is struggling right now and Farrell should use him at his peril.

    But the simple fact is that Bailey has had 12 save opportunities and 8 saves and that of the 4 blown saves the Sox won every game but the one on June 20.  Yesterday he did not blow a save and in fact was credited with a hold. 

    I say again, to date Bailey has not hurt the team because they win when he goes in, almost regardless of what he actually does.  I think this is one of the reasons why Farrell hasn't completely given up on him. 

    The proximate cause of yesterday's loss was the liner/fly Nava seemed to catch and then drop, resulting in a man on second with nobody out in the bottom of the 8th at Detroit.  That in turn led to the bunt and the error by Miller, followed by the sac fly to tie the game and a later single to give the Tigers a three run lead. 




    The fact that Bailey was " credited " with a hold shows just how messed up the save/ hold/ blown save rule is. 

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share