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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:10 PM EDT

    This is why I never like the sac bunt in that situation. You only have three outs. Cannot afford to give one away. A lot of people like it , but stats have shown that with men on first and second and no outs, the sac bunt is the worst thing you can do. I know this is contrary to popular opinion , but it generally is not the best move. 
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:13 PM EDT

    It's a terrible move. Outs are valuable, more so than risp.
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:14 PM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread : The management shouldn't care what the second guessers say... The right thing to do there is to stay close to the bag and tag up if it drops you score and with that diving catch he should've went. If Darnell would've got a good jump it would've taken two perfect throws to get him.
    Posted by zack5042

    Zack , with all due respect , you don't know what you are talking about. McDonald was in a position to tag , but the coach held him. What do you mean by two perfect throws? There would not be a relay. Gordon would throw to the plate.
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:15 PM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    This is why I never like the sac bunt in that situation. You only have three outs. Cannot afford to give one away. A lot of people like it , but stats have shown that with men on first and second and no outs, the sac bunt is the worst thing you can do. I know this is contrary to popular opinion , but it generally is not the best move. 
    Posted by dgalehouse


    With runners on 1st and 2nd and no outs, the chances are higher to have a 1-2 run inning if the batter bunts. That's what BV was going for IMO. 
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:18 PM EDT

    The impotence and incompetence is nearly unwatchable.
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:19 PM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread : With runners on 1st and 2nd and no outs, the chances are higher to have a 1-2 run inning if the batter bunts. That's what BV was going for IMO. 
    Posted by nhsteven

    To have a one run inning , maybe. I'm not sure. For one thing , there is no guarantee the bunt will be successful. But for a two run inning ? No way in the world !!!!
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:19 PM EDT

    Sac bunt was right Byrd against a righty. Sweeney just couldn't deliver. McDonald was out by a couple yards if he tagged and went.
     

  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from chuchos. Show chuchos's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:20 PM EDT

    I don't know, but it seems likely that 1,2 no outs, chances are you are going to give away an out anyway.  Might as well have it advance the runners instead of a double play or lazy fly.  Or K.

    No stats, just a feeling.
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:20 PM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    This team would look SO much different with Els and Crawford. Just the defense and baserunning alone
    Posted by upperco1

    No argument there.
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:26 PM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread : To have a one run inning , maybe. I'm not sure. For one thing , there is no guarantee the bunt will be successful. But for a two run inning ? No way in the world !!!!
    Posted by dgalehouse


    The assumption is the batter at the plate is at least an adequate bunter, who would get the runners over most of the time; otherwise, it's a waste of an out.  
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:28 PM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread : The assumption is the batter at the plate is at least an adequate bunter, who would get the runners over most of the time; otherwise, it's a waste of an out.  
    Posted by nhsteven

    Okay , Steve. But there is no way that the bunt helps you score the second run. Think about it.
     

  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:36 PM EDT

    Sweeney has to drive the ball - and he didn't.

    The rest is not worth arguing about.  Sweeney failed.
     

  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from chuchos. Show chuchos's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/9/2012 11:52 PM EDT

    But the Sox really need to play one run at a time these days.  There's no second run if there isn't a first run.
     

  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/10/2012 12:36 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread : Okay , Steve. But there is no way that the bunt helps you score the second run. Think about it.
    Posted by dgalehouse


    Think of it this way; you have 2 chances to get a hit to knock in that 2nd run; and if they got the 1st, they might still be playing.
     

  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/10/2012 6:34 AM EDT

    I'm glad I don't have the time to watch the sawx this season. If last nights game is any indication of how the season is going to be played.Pee yew! I don't know who the ump was that called the ball that Ross caught a double but evidently he was a Royals player at one time because Ross ran with the ball in his glove for two full strides before it came out. Again I thank God for not making me watch this crud...Terrible team and the pitching sucks hind teets! Beckett do everyone a favor and demand a trade,Lester you might want to do the same and Buchholz you are just putrid! Bard at least you have an excuse and as for Doubrant nice fill in guy but still not ready for the bigs!I have tickets to one game this season in Miami and I'm thinking of letting my nephew use them.
     

  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/10/2012 7:48 AM EDT

    Did the Yankees play last night? Thanks.

    Cool
     

  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from mryazz. Show mryazz's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/10/2012 9:51 AM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    I still think the Yankees are always the team to beat.
    Posted by dgalehouse



    i always love it when the yank-ems get beat, but i'm afraid this year's version of the SOX won't be the ones beating them or anybody else for that matter, except ,maybe, the TWINS. the SOX own them this year.
     

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

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/10/2012 12:19 PM EDT

    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread:
    In Response to Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread : Think of it this way; you have 2 chances to get a hit to knock in that 2nd run; and if they got the 1st, they might still be playing.
    Posted by nhsteven

    On the other hand , without the bunt , you would have three chances to knock in one or both runs. The first run was already in scoring position.
     

  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/10/2012 12:25 PM EDT

    Well, we've certainly come a long way from Dave Roberts to Darnell MacDonald.  Stealy Dave would have stolen 2B and then we'd have 3 chances to get ONE single to tie the game.  If you can't get a Single in 3 chances with the game on the line then you don't deserve to win.  If I recall properly, I think BV was going for the win on the road and not tie.  I don't think that should be a hard and fast rule - we are talking about the Sox who are struggling to win, we have a decent pen right now to compete in late innings, and the Royals don't exactly have Mariano out there.........
     

  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from chuchos. Show chuchos's posts

    Re: Sox vs Royals Wednesday game thread

    posted at 5/10/2012 12:35 PM EDT

    They had 2 chances to get the run in and failed.  I think taking away the double play and going at the very least for a sac fly was a good call considering that they had 2 chances to score one run and failed.  3 chances for a base hit with this offense is asking too much.  Unfortunately.