Post by: HudsonHawk on June 20, 2006, 11:57:14 pm
I can hear Phil Garner now....[jimmydugan] Preston, what team do you play for? Good because I was just wondering why YOU would throw home, when we've got a 2-RUN LEAD!! You let the tying run get on second base, and we lost the lead BECAUSE OF YOU!!! [/jimmydugan]
Post by: MusicMan on June 21, 2006, 12:04:55 am
However, he did have the big HR to make up for it. Unfortunately, Revert gave it right back.
Post by: HudsonHawk on June 21, 2006, 12:20:34 am
Quote:
Bad baseball.
However, he did have the big HR to make up for it. Unfortunately, Revert gave it right back.
Had Wilson hit two HRs in the 9th, he would have been even. Getting back one run for the two you cost isn't really "making up".
Post by: MusicMan on June 21, 2006, 12:40:05 am
Quote:Quote:
Bad baseball.
However, he did have the big HR to make up for it. Unfortunately, Revert gave it right back.
Had Wilson hit two HRs in the 9th, he would have been even. Getting back one run for the two you cost isn't really "making up".
How did he give up two? Unless you're assuming DP on the grounder.
Post by: HudsonHawk on June 21, 2006, 12:49:06 am
Quote:Quote:Quote:
Bad baseball.
However, he did have the big HR to make up for it. Unfortunately, Revert gave it right back.
Had Wilson hit two HRs in the 9th, he would have been even. Getting back one run for the two you cost isn't really "making up".
How did he give up two? Unless you're assuming DP on the grounder.
Of course I'm assuming the DP on the grounder. Why wouldn't I? It was a perfect DP ball. Even without the DP, it would have been difficult to score the tying run from 1B on the double to LF. Poor fundementals by Wilson cost the Astros the lead in the 7th and ultimately the win.
Post by: Zan on June 21, 2006, 01:12:24 am
Post by: HudsonHawk on June 21, 2006, 01:17:55 am
Quote:
In fairness to Wilson, performances by some others certainly didn't help.
True, but that one was glaring and it was a mental mistake. Those are particulalry frustrating.
Post by: Zan on June 21, 2006, 01:25:50 am
Quote:Quote:
In fairness to Wilson, performances by some others certainly didn't help.
True, but that one was glaring and it was a mental mistake. Those are particulalry frustrating.
Good point.
Switching angles, I expect to receive the full force of anti-clark venom, but here goes: Why did Garner go with Miller in the 10th? That didn't strike me as using your best available reliever in a key spot. But I readily admit I'm probably missing something. What am I missing?
Post by: HudsonHawk on June 21, 2006, 02:11:48 am
Quote:
Switching angles, I expect to receive the full force of anti-clark venom, but here goes: Why did Garner go with Miller in the 10th? That didn't strike me as using your best available reliever in a key spot. But I readily admit I'm probably missing something. What am I missing?
I'm assuming that the idea was to have Miller face the lefthanded Morneau. Unfortunately, Morneau drilled the first pitch he saw.
Post by: S.P. Rodriguez on June 21, 2006, 03:20:15 am
Quote:Quote:
Switching angles, I expect to receive the full force of anti-clark venom, but here goes: Why did Garner go with Miller in the 10th? That didn't strike me as using your best available reliever in a key spot. But I readily admit I'm probably missing something. What am I missing?
I'm assuming that the idea was to have Miller face the lefthanded Morneau. Unfortunately, Morneau drilled the first pitch he saw.
I don't think that provokes any anti-clark statements. Miller has had his good moments and his awful moments. It's problematic when your lefty specialists isn't reliable against lefties. Morneau is a pretty good hitter, in all fairness. But Miller is on the roster and Garner is going to use him. How much longer Miller remains on the roster seems to be a fair question.
Post by: Fredia on June 21, 2006, 08:52:12 am
Post by: JimR on June 21, 2006, 10:36:26 am
Miller had not given up a run in his last 5 outings. nothing wrong with using him.
Post by: Zan on June 21, 2006, 10:41:59 am
Positives: outstanding effort by Ausmus to block Lidge's atrocious pitch, and great job gunning down Hunter.
Post by: HudsonHawk on June 21, 2006, 11:08:52 am
Quote:
i thought the problem was that the throw could not be, or was not, cut off. i could not tell whose fault that was. certainly throwing to third was safer.
The throw was too high to be cut. There is no excuse for a big leaguer missing the cutoff man in that situation, IMO. I think Wilson's a pretty good defensive outfielder, but he made a mistake last night, and it came back to haunt.
Post by: astro pete on June 21, 2006, 11:13:24 am
Quote:Quote:
In fairness to Wilson, performances by some others certainly didn't help.
True, but that one was glaring and it was a mental mistake. Those are particulalry frustrating.
These quotes are frustrating:
Quote:
"I'm not going to lie to you, I thought the game was over, and that's probably why we ended up getting beat," Berkman said. "You can't count out the possibility the other team is going to make a comeback like they did."
Quote:
"One bad inning killed me," said Oswalt, who struck out the side in the eighth. "I get through that inning, maybe I get to go the whole game. Just a lack of concentration on my part."
web page
Post by: drew corleone on June 21, 2006, 11:57:08 am
The Twins have a scrappy ballclub. If I liked AL baseball (and had the Extra Innings package) I might watch them play more often.
Post by: astro pete on June 21, 2006, 12:33:30 pm
Quote:
I feel bad for Roy, because that inning aside, he pitched one helluva game. And that was typical Roy, putting it behind him to come in and strike out the side in the 8th.
The Twins have a scrappy ballclub. If I liked AL baseball (and had the Extra Innings package) I might watch them play more often.
Awfully tough to complain about Roy. He does, however, seem to always have one inning where he "loses" it. Maybe it's a concentration thing, maybe it's just because baseball is hard.
Post by: JimR on June 21, 2006, 12:44:55 pm
Post by: drew corleone on June 21, 2006, 12:47:45 pm
Post by: HudsonHawk on June 21, 2006, 12:58:22 pm
Quote:
yeah, he does. I don't know if it's because he doesn't want to give in, so hitters know they're probably going to have something to at least slap the other way, or what...
I vote for "because pitching is hard and Major League hitters are good".
Post by: Depot Stove on June 21, 2006, 02:16:41 pm
Post by: drew corleone on June 21, 2006, 02:25:14 pm
Quote:Quote:
yeah, he does. I don't know if it's because he doesn't want to give in, so hitters know they're probably going to have something to at least slap the other way, or what...
I vote for "because pitching is hard and Major League hitters are good".
Indeed it is and they are.
Post by: No? in Austin on June 21, 2006, 02:45:26 pm
Quote:Quote:Quote:
yeah, he does. I don't know if it's because he doesn't want to give in, so hitters know they're probably going to have something to at least slap the other way, or what...
I vote for "because pitching is hard and Major League hitters are good".
Indeed it is and they are.
Plus, when you play a team that has won seven straight games, you do the little things right to make sure you can take them out. If you slip up on fundementals or concentration, it is just enough of a crack in the door for a hot team to take you out.
Post by: Limey on June 21, 2006, 09:29:49 pm
Quote:
It's problematic when your lefty specialists isn't reliable against lefties.
Quick! Name the last Astro leftie reliever who was reliable at retiring lefties!
Post by: Holly on June 21, 2006, 10:13:40 pm
Post by: No? in Austin on June 22, 2006, 01:04:47 am
Quote:
Wagner.
Wrong. It was Pedro Borbon.
Post by: JimR on June 22, 2006, 01:08:47 am
Post by: Holly on June 22, 2006, 01:41:32 am
Quote:Quote:
Wagner.
Wrong. It was Pedro Borbon.
Huh? He was crap here. Or was that sarcasm? (I'm sticking by my answer of Wagner, regardless.)
Post by: No? in Austin on June 22, 2006, 03:06:29 am
Quote:Quote:Quote:
Wagner.
Wrong. It was Pedro Borbon.
Huh? He was crap here. Or was that sarcasm? (I'm sticking by my answer of Wagner, regardless.)
Nope. Pedro Borbon was a killer getting lefty hitters out. He couldn't get a righty hitter out for the life of him... but lefties could not touch him.
And Wagner wasn't a lefty killer, his hard stuff was great, but on occasion a Bonds, Giles, Klesko or Griffey would touch him up. Borbon? Giles hated facing him, made him look like a fool!
Post by: HudsonHawk on June 22, 2006, 03:13:36 am
Quote:Quote:Quote:
Wagner.
Wrong. It was Pedro Borbon.
Huh? He was crap here. Or was that sarcasm? (I'm sticking by my answer of Wagner, regardless.)
Borbon was hardly crap. He was useful if for no other reason than Adam Dunn was scared shitless of him.
Post by: Reuben on June 22, 2006, 04:36:47 am
Quote:Quote:Quote:Quote:
Wagner.
Wrong. It was Pedro Borbon.
Huh? He was crap here. Or was that sarcasm? (I'm sticking by my answer of Wagner, regardless.)
Borbon was hardly crap. He was useful if for no other reason than Adam Dunn was scared shitless of him.
Dunn on Borbon
Post by: Holly on June 22, 2006, 11:03:39 am
And, if the criteria were absolute domination of The Very Best Lefties, then OK, Wagner wouldn't make that cut. He does, however, fit the role of lefty killer... and I'm going on memory AND numbers with that
Post by: Astroholic on June 22, 2006, 11:09:29 am
Post by: BUWebguy on June 22, 2006, 11:13:31 am
Borbon vs. RHB in 2002 -- .324 BA, .433 OBP, .676 SLG
Post by: pravata on June 22, 2006, 11:30:11 am
Quote:
Speaking of Wags, I guess he is not trusting his stuff (or in his case he is trusting it too much) as he gave it up to the reds in the ninth last night.
"Brandon Phillips said. "He threw me a fastball inside, a pitch high, another pitch high. If he threw me one more time a high pitch, I would've struck out."
Phillips took a strike, fouled one off and took another strike before he hit a lower fastball back up the middle..."
Wagner not going with the high hard one?
Post by: Astroholic on June 22, 2006, 11:38:03 am
Post by: pravata on June 22, 2006, 11:39:50 am
Quote:
billy quote (sounds like billy goat) in the NYTimes said 'maybe i was being too aggressive'. You think?
What's the alternative? He's not going to all sudden get "crafty".
Post by: Astroholic on June 22, 2006, 11:46:13 am
Post by: No? in Austin on June 22, 2006, 12:12:30 pm
Quote:Quote:
billy quote (sounds like billy goat) in the NYTimes said 'maybe i was being too aggressive'. You think?
What's the alternative? He's not going to all sudden get "crafty".
He was also throwing fastballs at 92 mph tops. One fastball was clocked at 89 mph. May of been the slow gun used last night, but he didn't look like the same Billy Waggs we all know. His strikeouts were all four seamers. His walks were all up and away pitches to the hitters.
The fastball to Phillips was right down the middle of the plate, 91 mph.
Post by: No? in Austin on June 22, 2006, 12:19:51 pm
Quote:
Well, I'll have to take your word on it with Borbon, because I don't remember the guy specifically. His numbers, however, were crap.
Well, the question wasn't about numbers, it was about being a lefty killer. Borbon was great at getting lefties out. His style of pitching gave lefties the jelly leg. I can't tell you how many times I saw great hitting lefties like Giles and Klesko look absolutely clueless when batting against Borbon.
Quote:
And, if the criteria were absolute domination of The Very Best Lefties, then OK, Wagner wouldn't make that cut.
Very best or average, Wagner has a straight ball and you can pick it up from his hands. It was his speed and location that got people out. But he wasn't the type of lefty that could dominate a lefty hitter in the true sense.
Quote:
He does, however, fit the role of lefty killer... and I'm going on memory AND numbers with that
I think you misunderstand the role of lefty killer. Wagner was a dominant closer, meaning lefty or righty, it didn't matter, he'd challenge them and win most of the time. But on occasion a guy like Brian Giles would clock a Wagner fastball and absolutely crush it. You took the bad with the good with Wagner. A lot of good, not much in terms of bad.
You and I differ on what a lefty specialist reliever is all about I think.
Post by: pravata on June 22, 2006, 12:20:49 pm
Quote:Quote:Quote:
billy quote (sounds like billy goat) in the NYTimes said 'maybe i was being too aggressive'. You think?
What's the alternative? He's not going to all sudden get "crafty".
He was also throwing fastballs at 92 mph tops. One fastball was clocked at 89 mph. May of been the slow gun used last night, but he didn't look like the same Billy Waggs we all know. His strikeouts were all four seamers. His walks were all up and away pitches to the hitters.
The fastball to Phillips was right down the middle of the plate, 91 mph.
"right down the middle" has always been The Kids' undoing. Wasn't about the speed, it's the control. "Here it is hit it?" "Don't mind if I do."
Post by: stubbyc on June 22, 2006, 01:50:21 pm
Quote:Quote:Quote:
billy quote (sounds like billy goat) in the NYTimes said 'maybe i was being too aggressive'. You think?
What's the alternative? He's not going to all sudden get "crafty".
He was also throwing fastballs at 92 mph tops. One fastball was clocked at 89 mph. May of been the slow gun used last night, but he didn't look like the same Billy Waggs we all know. His strikeouts were all four seamers. His walks were all up and away pitches to the hitters.
The fastball to Phillips was right down the middle of the plate, 91 mph.
The ESPN gun was way way off all night though. Unless Joe Mays' fastball is really 79mph and Soler tops out at 84mph. The highlights on the local NY network had him consistently 98.
Post by: No? in Austin on June 22, 2006, 02:06:17 pm
Quote:
The ESPN gun was way way off all night though. Unless Joe Mays' fastball is really 79mph and Soler tops out at 84mph. The highlights on the local NY network had him consistently 98.
It is not really that the gun was off, it was just that the ESPN gun was the proverbial "slow" gun. That means they measure the velocity differently between the different guns. One measures at the relase point and one measures at the arrival point. Obviously one is going to be slower than the other because as the ball travels, it loses velocity.
Be that as it may, Wagner didn't look sharp at all last night. Far from it. He seemed to be aiming his pitches and relied heavily on the four seamer. It was that reliance that led to the walks too and eventually, when he tried to compensate for the high and away pitch he had been missing with, he got it down in the zone and very hittable to Phillips.
Post by: Holly on June 22, 2006, 02:11:48 pm
Limey wrote:
Quick! Name the last Astro leftie reliever who was reliable at retiring lefties!
And I took that to mean any left-handed relief pitcher who could get left-handed batters out, effectively. Granted, Limey's post followed one specifically about lefty specialists, and their oft-failed appearances, but given topic drift around here, I answered the question as I saw fit.
We've been going back and forth on Borbon here because we were "answering" different questions
Post by: No? in Austin on June 22, 2006, 02:13:43 pm
Quote:
We've been going back and forth on Borbon here because we were "answering" different questions
I don't think so. I just have a different opinion than you.
Post by: Holly on June 22, 2006, 02:15:37 pm
Quote:Quote:
We've been going back and forth on Borbon here because we were "answering" different questions
I don't think so. I just have a different opinion than you.
Make that back and forth on *Wagner* not on Borbon. Sorry.
Post by: No? in Austin on June 22, 2006, 02:19:41 pm
Quote:Quote:Quote:
We've been going back and forth on Borbon here because we were "answering" different questions
I don't think so. I just have a different opinion than you.
Make that back and forth on *Wagner* not on Borbon. Sorry.
Cool.
Post by: toddthebod on June 22, 2006, 02:35:42 pm
Post by: chuck on June 22, 2006, 02:54:31 pm
Quote:
This morning on WFAN, my favorite "host," Joe Beningo, was saying that he has absolutely no confidence in Wagner and thinks that Duaner Sanchez should be closing. Nothing like a Mets meltdown to get me through a day.
The first thing I did this morning is email a colleague - probably the biggest Mets fan I know - to remind him that the Mets will be paying Wagner a lot of money for a long time.
It would be a lot more fun if they weren't running away with the division.
Post by: tophfar on June 22, 2006, 03:10:08 pm
Quote:
It would be a lot more fun if they weren't running away with the division.
don't worry, the fun will have only just started if/when that happens in the playoffs.
Post by: toddthebod on June 22, 2006, 03:49:43 pm
Goddamn major league baseball for putting me in this position. Let's go Mets.