Game 93: Mariners 5, Indians 3
by Ryan on Jul 19, 2009 5:42 PM EDT
in Game Recaps
182 comments
Watching the Mariners beat the Indians in three games out of four was rather instructive. Seattle doesn't have much of an offense, but because their pitching staff is the best in the league, and despite a lot of errors, has been one of the better teams in turning balls in play into outs, has managed to stick around in the race. The Indians, meanwhile, are pretty good offensively and horrible in everything else, and on track to lose 100 games.
Aaron Laffey was probably a couple hits from being taken out of the game in the first inning. But he got out of the inning giving up just the three runs, and settled down, giving the Indians five shutout innings. I can see a bit of light at the end of the starting pitching tunnel, with Laffey back in the rotation and Jake Westbrook and a supposedly fixed Fauso Carmona on the cusp of joining the Indians. Hopefully there's only a couple Tomo Ohka and/or Jeremy Sowers starts left to endure.
After Laffey left, Joe Smith worked out of a small jam in the seventh. In the eighth, though, Franklin Gutierrez singled off Rafael Betancourt, should have been thrown out at second but wasn't, and eventually scored the go-ahead run on a sacrifice fly. Kerry Wood worked the ninth, and although he got himself into a jam, should have have got out unscathed had Asdrubal Cabrera turned a double play. A couple plays, neither of which were errors, cost the Indians two runs in the last two innings of the game.
Ryan Garko was in the outfield again today. The only explanation I can think of for putting him out there is to showcase him for a trade. Otherwise, why not send down Chris Gimenez and recall Matt LaPorta or even Jordan Brown if you need another outfielder?
Next Up: A trip to Toronto. Lee vs. Cecil, 7:07 PM Tuesday.
| Highest WPA | Lowest WPA | ||
| Joe Smith | .123 | Asdrubal Cabrera | -.200 |
| Ben Francisco | .102 | Rafael Betancourt | -.186 |
| Grady Sizemore | .043 | Kelly Shoppach | -.125 |
0 recs |
182 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Wait… is Jordan Brown not below average in the OF?
Proud Fan of the Worst Baseball Team I've Ever Seen
Can we really call putting Garko in the outfield “showcasing” him?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Apropos of nothing, I am in no hurry to see Carmona back in the majors. The minor league season ends on September 7, seven weeks from now. After that date, the Indians can’t ever send him to the minors again to work out the kinks. Let’s get in the work now.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
same. Not like we’re going anywhere. Westbrook, on the other hand…
I JUST WANT TO SEE HIM PITCH AGAIN, DAMMIT
Proud Fan of the Worst Baseball Team I've Ever Seen
I didn’t know you were a fan of Westbrook, Westbrook.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Jul 19, 2009 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The more I see, the more I think Sowers time as a major/minor league starting pitcher should come to a close.
by MooneysRebellion on Jul 19, 2009 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d still rather see him than Ohka … let him do it until someone from the Carmona/Rondon/Westbrook group is ready to go … even if that’s September.
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 19, 2009 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t know … another way to look at it is that Sowers is out of options after this season, and we are running out of time to develop him as a reliever.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I can certainly buy that as a reason … but for some reason, this FO seems hesitant to make that move.
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 19, 2009 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Anyone up for game threading Rosario’s start in the AZL?
Anyone?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Well…that was quick. For those who missed out, this is the total of Rosario’s effort:
* Francisco Guzman reaches on fielding error by shortstop Jesus Merchan.
* Wes Darvill singles on a line drive to center fielder Darling Read. Francisco Guzman to 2nd.
* Robert Wagner lines out to first baseman Jose Camargo.
* With Juan Medina batting, Francisco Guzman caught stealing 3rd base, catcher Moises Montero to third baseman Jeremie Tice, Wes Darvill to 2nd.
* Juan Medina flies out to left fielder Kevin Rucker.
Wow, that’s just a big mouthful of who the F are those guys?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 20, 2009 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Rosario obviously you know. But if you had read my whole Dybzinski post Jay (I know you hate my long posts) /sarc
Merchan – looks like he was a recent minor league FA signing, played with Diamondbacks AAA team last year, originally an amateur free agent from Venezuela by the Twins in 2000
Read – amatuer FA 2006, from the Bronx
Camargo – amatuer FA 2007, from Panama
Montero – 2008 draft, 26th round, Chipola JC in Marianna, Florida
Tice – 2006 draft, 6th round, College of Charleston
Rucker – 2007 draft, 47th round, Pioneer Valley HS in Santa, Maria, CA
Merchan was an off-season minor league FA.
Actually tore the cover off the ball in the PCL last season, but apparently got hurt in ST somewhere along the way.
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 20, 2009 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions
I have heard of Merchan and Tice.
"Some days are better than others, but it's a long season."
— The Inestimable Eric Wedge
Tice has been playing at Lake County. He’s rehabbing with Arizona right now.
By the way, Mahoning Valley is actually full of all the college guys we drafted this year and last. And it has audio.
Why would I want to listen to a ballgame with a bunch of no-upside bums playing?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I hate how we suck.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 19, 2009 9:52 PM EDT reply actions
The only antidote is to watch the only team worse than us, the Nationals. Which I did this afternoon. And boy do they suck (they lost 11-3, despite starting Bard and Belliard, or maybe because of it).
If you believe it's just a game, you're also probably wondering why Santa keeps skipping your house every year.
by LeftyCatcher on Jul 19, 2009 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
If he wasn’t I bet they would have won. The other team would have left the field in disgust.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jul 20, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
This. Also, I am just sick of sucking.
I don’t know how I’m going to handle it the next time we have a winning record. That will be freaky.
--
Force quit and move to trash.
Any word on why Wegz was scratched out of the lineup today? Is it possible he’s getting called up to Columbus?
I honestly hope not (and I’d be surprised) but I guess if two of Brown, LaPorta and Marte are heading to Cleveland, they’ve got to get some plodding corners in Columbus.
Per the ABJ’s Stephanie Storm:
He (McBride) was penciled in late when usual left fielder Nick Weglarz was scratched with a tight back.
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 20, 2009 9:03 AM EDT up reply actions
And
Ironically, McBride wasn’t even in the initial lineup. He was penciled in late when usual left fielder Nick Weglarz was scratched with a tight back.
‘’I told McBride after the game that he ought to buy Wegs [sic] dinner tonight,’’ Sarbaugh said.
by dgcambridge on Jul 20, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
(1) 21 games under .500, new low point in season.
(2) Victor now 9-for-83 (.108) since June 23. Whoever said he was a potential batting champ hasn’t seen Joe Mauer play. (Victor is still the heart of the team.)
(3) When Kelly Shoppach struck out looking to end the fourth, it was his 17th strikeout in 44 at-bats with runners in scoring position. Are strikeouts neutral outs?
(4) Indians have allowed 123 more runs than the Red Sox.
Thanks, palcal.
"Actual versatility is a good thing. Imagined versatility is a bad thing."
Jay Levin
by woodsmeister on Jul 20, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions
(1) Pretty striking. I noticed yesterday that since the moment I pronounced the season dead (following the Cubs sweep), we are an astounding 7-15. Perhaps most damning to management is that the team refuses to hit bottom.
(2) Victor has always done this. Hits horribly for a month or so, then hits .370 for a few months. It’s his way.
(3) In at least 10 of those 17 cases, it was a neutral out. More in a moment.
(4) Okay.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Okay, here are the 17 “risp” strikeouts. How many were run-neutral, or at least win-neutral, and how many were significant, i.e., could have impacted the outcome of the game?
Remember, we’re only comparing the strikeout to other types of outs, to see if the strikeout obsessives might actually have a point.
1. Two outs — run-neutral.
2. Men on 2B and 3B, down by 3 runs in the 2nd. This is the most run-significant K on the list. Halladay got the K.
3. Already leading by 18 — win-neutral.
4. Two outs — run-neutral.
5. Man on 2B only with one out — run-neutral.
6. Men on 1B and 2B with one out, bottom of the ninth — win-neutral. (You can’t sac-fly the tying run from 1B to 2B, better to swing hard for extra bases to drive him home.)
7. Man on 2B only with one out — run-neutral.
8. Man on 2B only with no outs, up by four runs, bottom of the 7th. Could have set up a sac-fly opportunity for the next batter by hitting the ball to the right side, giving the team a better chance to go up by 5. Very slightly significant. Grady struck out, Asdrubal flew out to strand the runner.
9. Two outs — run-neutral.
10. Man on 2B only with one out — run-neutral.
11. Bases loaded, no outs, down 3-0 in the 6th. Definitely significant.
12. Man on 2B only with one out — run-neutral.
13. Men on 1B and 2B with one out, down by 9 runs — damned near run-neutral and definitely win-neutral.
14. Two outs — run-neutral.
15. Bases loaded, one out in the 5th, down by 8 runs. Somewhat significant. Choo drove one runner in on sac-fly.
16. Two outs — run-neutral.
17. Two outs — run-neutral.
I count at least 13 instances where the type of out was definitely insignificant. Two of the “significant” situations were bases-loaded, which is a mixed bag as far as strikeouts go. If he makes an out on a ball in play, it may lead to an extra run scoring, but just as likely it leads to a GIDP. You want a guy who swings hard in those situations.
In summary … strikeouts are actually no big deal.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
That last line. Just because you looked at KS strikeout situations doesn’t really prove “strikeouts are actually no big deal.” I don’t have to tell you this, but BABIP is going to put some of those balls for hits.
Actually, you would “have to tell me this,” because it isn’t true.
Anyone who’s ever even watched baseball, let alone actually played it, should understand that swinging with more authority is going to lead to more line drive hits, more extra base hits, etc. Choking up to prevent the dreaded strikeout is going to produce more balls in play, but not particularly well hit balls in play. And sometimes you’ll strike out anyway, and some times you’ll ground out in a way that is no better than a strikeout, and sometimes you’ll GIDP.
If Kelly changes his approach with an eye toward striking out less, it doesn’t necessarily mean more hits, and it more likely than not means fewer extra-base hits. We all ought to agree on that much. The question isn’t so much whether Kelly ought to change, but rather how much he’s hurting us by being the way he is.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I’m not saying Kelly should change is approach – and therefore the little league coaching lesson really isn’t relevant.
But to say that a strikeout is the same as every other out is misleading, because there is no certainty with the other outs. A strikeout is the same as a regular out except for the 20-25% of the time when that would-be out grows eyes and falls. Also, you looked at Kelly’s k’s in isolation. What about the batter previous? BABIP luck could compound and two outs might become one out – which brings sac-flies into play.
We can talk hypotheticals all day — the basic principles of sabermetrics show that strikeouts aren’t a big deal in the mass aggregate sense. I showed that with these specific 17 PA, which, notably, was a set someone else selected for this purpose, not me.
Strikeouts are aggravating in specific moments, but over the course of a season, they really aren’t a big deal.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I don’t know anything about sabermetrics. Admit it – I had you fooled, didn’t I? But seriously – does the assertion that strikeouts aren’t a big deal apply to all teams – or does it assume good diversity on a club? Because I wonder how teams with of 2/3 of the true outcomes would do.
It’s a good question, but the bottom line is that their effect obviously is overrated by the casual observer.
Look at the list of events above, and consider — that doesn’t even count the times the bases were empty, every one of which is a situation where strikeouts are the same as other outs.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Of course most of the time all outs are created equal, but that’s assuming a guaranteed ball-in-play out. I’m just questioning that the other outs disguise themselves as lucky hits a non-trivial percentage of the time.
There’s a basic concept here that you’re leaving out, and that many players and coaches missed for decades.
The hitting coach would say, “Just put the ball in play, and good things can happen.”
The pitching coach would say, “Just let your defense work for you.”
The thing is, they can’t both be right. Generating more balls in play cannot be good for both the hitter and the pitcher.
Saying you want more balls in play without a change in approach is basically nonsensical — you might as well be talking about a perfect square with five sides. It doesn’t exist, so no real point discussing it.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Not necessarily – I guess what I’m saying is that a team should hedge itself against having a lot of high K guys. I actually don’t care that much about Kelly’s offense – he’s a catcher. We’re using him as an example. But instead of changing the approach of the high K guys, you should just not have too many on your team.
But what makes you think that? Strikeouts correlate positively with home runs — it’s a slight correlation, but positive nonetheless. And what’s better than home runs? You’d like for your entire lineup to be full of home threats, and for a home run threat, strikeouts aren’t entirely bad thing.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Home runs are guaranteed runs. I understand the rally killing effect they can appear to have but the point is a ball going over the yellow line is at least one run that you may not get if you let someone else continue the inning. Home runs are awesome.
That being said I’m not one of those “chicks who dig the long ball” only.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
I hope so too. I haven’t discussed much with him so I can’t tell. Also some people really are serious about stuff like that.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
Generating more balls in play is better for the hitter than the fielder. BIP can be hits, errors, advance runners, etc. The “bad” things that can occur with BIPs are double plays. The only good thing that can happen with a K—from an offensive perspective—is a K with first base open. BIPs have much greater positive outcomes for hitters.
Just let your defense work for you is what you tell a nibbling bum on the rubber.
Just let your defense work for you is what you tell a nibbling bum on the rubber.
Well that’s just incorrect.
Steel Nick
Agree with your assessment, mostly. I am curious about one thing, though. Why is “Man on 2B w/ one out” run neutral? It seems like a deep sac fly or ground ball to the right side (or even, heaven forbid, a bunt), would be a more productive out than a K b/c it moves the runner to third and increases the chance of scoring a run. Granted, if the next batter singles the outcome is no different and it is not a sac fly situation, but there are several ways that having the runner on third increases the chance of scoring a run (wild pitch, passed ball, infield or short outfield single). Is it really run neutral or is the likelihood of those latter events so small that they’re statistically insignificant?
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 20, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
It is an insignificant edge, not technically zero.
Because the runner possibly advances from 2B to 3B as the second out is made. At that point, the difference in run expectancy is pretty negligible. With two outs, the runner scores from 2B about 22% of the time, compared with scoring from 3B about 26% of the time. In other words, if the ball is put in play, there is the possibility that the runner will advance, and if he advances, that’s worth 0.04 runs.
I think you would find, actually, that runners advance from 2B to 3B far less than half the time a ball is put in play — especially when the second out is being made, because everyone knows you don’t make the third out at 3B. And the reason that’s the rule of thumb is because with two outs, there’s no significant difference between being on 2B and 3B … so it’s sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy, you see? But for the right reasons.
Bottom line, compared to a strikeout in that situation, the value of putting the ball in play for an out is probably below 0.02 runs and may be closer to 0.01.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
And don’t forget the possibility of a runner moving to third and scoring on WP, error or balk. Rare events, but maybe good for a run. I disagree about wanting a guy who swings hard in those situations. I’d rather have Rod Carew.
Next thing I know, you’ll be telling me Shoppach is one of the best power hitters in the American League.
I haven’t forgotten it, but the numbers are revealing. It just doesn’t happen often enough to worry about.
You may want Rod Carew, but would you want Rod Carew with Shoppach’s foot speed?
In any event, we can agree that Shoppach is no Rod Carew, and Rod Carew is not available to be our catcher.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
I mostly remember Carew as an older player, when he wasn’t quick. How much faster than Shoppach was a 40-year-old Tony Gwynn? Gwynn had 12 doubles in 2000.
I know it’s not fair to compare people to Carew or Gwynn.
Yeah, the numbers are revealing. Not much difference. But maybe the golf swing, if properly restrained, could result in a few hits.
You know me, I just think he needs more reps.
I think we should give him four starts out of five. He thrived in that situation, and you never know, maybe he will again. Perfect situation to find out with this season in the tank, and with Santana possibly ready to percolate to the bigs mid-2010. It’s a can’t-lose situation.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
It’s a can’t-lose situation.
Not if your Ryan Garko. Or someone pitching while Vic plays first and Ryan Garko plays left.
"Actual versatility is a good thing. Imagined versatility is a bad thing."
Jay Levin
by woodsmeister on Jul 20, 2009 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Ten of those 17 Ks came in the final three innings of games, thus making them more noticeable.
Also, the Indians were, as you might expect, losing in 11 of those 17 games, thus making his inability to score runs more conspicuous..
(1) Yes, this team is still searching for a bottom. Prediction: Bottom will not be found until Ryan Garko is sent packing. Here’s an interesting read about the toxic environment in Seattle last year, an environment mitigated by Don Wakamatsu (pay content).
(2) This is really true. That’s probably why he won’t win a batting title. He’s still great.
(3), (4). Okay.
We started the season talking about high ceilings and are now resigned to talking about how low the floor can possibly go.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 20, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
This season really has become a ride on the Rotor, where the bottom keeps dropping out and we’re all plastered to the side by the centrifugal force of suckitude.
"Actual versatility is a good thing. Imagined versatility is a bad thing."
Jay Levin
by woodsmeister on Jul 20, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Crap.
Brown, LaPorta, Marte all in the C-bus lineup tonight.
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 20, 2009 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Perhaps tomorrow night, instead of the lineup, the GDT can just say “Quo.”
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 20, 2009 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I just watched an awesome segment on SC called “Who can the Red Sox trade for?”
Since that is clearly the most important thing in everyone’s life
Opening credits roll. Man sitting at desk.
“Let us proceed from the assumption the Red Sox can trade for everyone. The only possible exceptions would be a few players on the Yankees, though even these will certainly have their price.”
“From this wide universe of players, who would most benefit the Red Sox? Of course, if all these players were to play for Boston, there would be no opponents—surely not an acceptable situation, for the Boston Red Sox would have to play someone in order to win.”
Wouldn’t the segment take less time if it were called “Who CAN’T the Red Sox trade for?”
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 20, 2009 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, for one, Ben Francisco. They have no players at Low A that could help them less in 2009.
Proud Fan of the Worst Baseball Team I've Ever Seen
That would be part of the complimentary segment called “Who WON’T the Red Sox trade for?”
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 20, 2009 8:17 PM EDT up reply actions
With the advent of the MLB Network and the return of Hugsy Reynolds, I have trouble watching ESPN anymore.
Yeah, I was just using this as an opportunity to point out that ESPN’s baseball coverage has become borderline insufferable.
Become? It’s been pretty insufferable for years. It’s just that we now have an alternative, one that has a vested interest not to alienate 93.3% of the clubs.
Best part about switching from Comcast to FiOS is MLBN in HD.
When I got that on my phone and saw it was from Tribe Insider, I have to say, I expected something much more exciting.
Seriously. Hope they’re not expecting a big f’ing send-off at the airport or anything.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Jul 20, 2009 11:06 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I get off work early tomorrow, and would’ve gone to the game if Andy was in the lineup. But alas, no.
by supermarioelia on Jul 20, 2009 11:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice looking swing too.
And Lovullo is apparently read to incite a brawl on his own!
by FallsTribeFan on Jul 20, 2009 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Let’s turn this around.
Has Shapiro ever been wrong about a hitting prospect?
Well, then, what are the odds he was wrong about this one?
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Been thinking about this since I typed it.
Among real prospects — not older prospect guys like Dubois — the position player Shapiro has acquired who panned out the worst is … Alex Escobar. And he broke his leg right after being acquired, still led Triple-A in home runs the next year, and the year after that nearly led the AL in outfield assists despite playing in less than half the games. Decent chance he pans out at some point if not for that broken leg.
Second worst? Ben Broussard. And all we traded for him was Russ Branyan, and we turned around and traded him for Shin-Soo Choo and another guy.
Third worst? Jody Gerut. Arguably rookie of the year, and he’s had a little value since then when not injured.
Fourth worst? Josh Bard, who’s had a couple of nice seasons, too.
The point is that none of those guys are that bad, and those are the worst of them. After that?
Milton Bradley. Grady Sizemore. Brandon Phillips. Coco Crisp. Travis Hafner. Ryan Ludwick. Franklin Gutierrez. Andy Marte. Kelly Shoppach. Asdrubal Cabrera. Shin-Soo Choo. Matt LaPorta. Michael Brantley. Carlos Santana. Luis Valbuena.
It is a ridiculous list.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
No, and neither do the last few. The point is just to put him in that context. Very nearly every prospect Shapiro has traded for has panned out, at some point, and had at least a couple of good years as a major leaguer. Even at this late date, it should not be a surprise if Marte does so as well.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Very nearly every prospect Shapiro has traded for has panned out.
Interesting, but can you say this about pitching prospects he’s traded for? Meloan? Rob Bryson?
Can you really blame the guy for Bryson getting hurt? And we should be very happy with Santana alone for Casey Blake.
Pitchers get hurt. But, ipso facto, good pitchers don’t get hurt. A pitcher who can’t throw isn’t a good pitcher.
Which is to say, “hurt pitchers aren’t good,” which is a world different than “good pitchers don’t get hurt.”
Have I offended you? Sorry if so. You can stockpile all the injured pitchers you want—great ones, too—and you still won’t win many games. Shaun Marcum looked great in 2008, but not so this season.
I think the point is that junkballer said it correctly and you didn’t. Good pitchers get hurt all the time (Prior, Wood, Carpenter, etc.). Not the “same difference” at all.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jul 21, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions
You all are missing the forest for the trees. Once a good pitcher is hurt he is no longer a good pitcher. That ain’t “gaming words.” Health is neither a skill nor an ability, but it is a fact of life, especially for men who throw baseballs for a living.
If you think I’m saying good pitchers have some sort of mystical ability to avoid injury, you’re really missing my point.
Yes, but that was a Hart trade.
For those who don’t recall, Hart’s retirement and Shapiro’s succession were announced at the start of the 2001 season. Hart made a point of saying that prospect acquisitions that season were Shapiro’s call, so I included Bradley, Gerut and Bard on the list.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
In fairness, Shapiro has not traded for very many pitchers.
I think it’s a safe bet that Shapiro made a strategic determination that you need to develop pitchers — dozens of them — from within, and that it’s more efficient to acquire hitters in trades than pitchers. Trades are often shaped by the simple number of players coming back, based on a vague sense of how many players is the appropriate number, and at what level. That influence fails to account for the fact that attrition rates are far, far higher for pitching prospects than for hitters.
So if you’re going to get 3-4 players regardless, you’re better off getting more hitters than pitchers. Another way to put it is that while pitchers may be more valuable than hitters, hitting prospects are more valuable than pitching prospects … because, as we all all know, there’s no such thing …
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Man, you don’t miss a trick … six comments in a row, I make it clear I’m referring to hitting prospects, position players, and the one time I leave that word out, you pounce!
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Jul 21, 2009 8:48 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Gerut didn’t have much value left at that point. Dubois was 26 when we acquired him, not really a prospect at that point.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Christ, he even hit on Ryan Ludwick.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jul 20, 2009 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry, I meant only prospects acquired by trade.
As a side point, Garko was drafted as a catcher, and as catchers go, he’s a very good hitter. I know this is a difficult concept for you.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Yeah, that’s a tough one for me. But if Ryan Garko had the defensive abilities of Tony Pena, his pop-up act would be more tolerable. Or wait: if Garko hit as well as Miguel Olivo, all would be forgiven.
Except that Ryan Garko actually does hit better than Miguel Olivo. He just doesn’t hit well enough to make up for being a 1B with sub-Molina speed.
Yes, I’m exaggerating. But he’s not much better than a bum like Olivo. If Garko were a catcher, his offense would be acceptable but not impressive.
Hell, if Ryan Garko ran as well as Miguel Olivo all would be forgiven.
"Actual versatility is a good thing. Imagined versatility is a bad thing."
Jay Levin
by woodsmeister on Jul 21, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Breslow picked up a win over his former Twin teammates after pitching the top of the 7th with the A’s down 13-7. The low-scoring A’s put across 7 in the bottom of the 7th, including a GS from Holliday. The A’s held on to win 14-13.
So all is not lost, even if you have a low-scoring team and Breslow comes out of your bullpen in seemingly hopeless game.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- BIG Series: Padres and Giants set to battle for control of NL West
- The Grandstand: Crunch time in September arrives again
- Hello, Bourjos: Angels rookie plays it fast on both sides of ball
- An off-the-wall take on why the Twins will make the World Series
- John Lindsey couldn't have come any closer to his first at-bat
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
