PDA

View Full Version : I'm taking alot of heat from red sox fans...


boiler up
10-06-2005, 06:52 AM
for arguing the fact that Graff. didn't cost the red sox the game. In my eyes he didn't. We learned in pony ball that the pitcher is always supposed to come back and help out the fielder after the error. If I recall correctly, Graff. didn't throw the pitch to iguchi, did he?

Remember this season when Iguchi had a DP ball hit to him and he just ran to second because he thought there were two outs? Buehrle then pointed to him and said "i have you covered." The next batter buehrle struck out, IIRC.

It's just like saying Bartman caused the error at second base a couple of years ago...

doublem23
10-06-2005, 07:02 AM
Eh, it's 50/50; if Graffanino makes that DP, 3 runs never score and we could very well be looking at a 1-1 series heading to Boston. While I agree that the weight of the loss isn't totally to be burdened by Graffanino, I think he is more responsible. I mean, Wells did do his job against Uribe; he got him to ground weakly on the infield. Graffanino didn't do his job at all and forced David to have to go out and make the pitches again.

And, for the record, while I agree blaming Bartman for the whole debacle is stupid, if he never touches that ball, I am 100% certain that the Cubs would have won the 2003 NLCS.

boiler up
10-06-2005, 07:04 AM
Eh, it's 50/50; if Graffanino makes that DP, 3 runs never score and we could very well be looking at a 1-1 series heading to Boston. While I agree that the weight of the loss isn't totally to be burdened by Graffanino, I think he is more responsible. I mean, Wells did do his job against Uribe; he got him to ground weakly on the infield. Graffanino didn't do his job at all and forced David to have to go out and make the pitches again.

And, for the record, while I agree blaming Bartman for the whole debacle is stupid, if he never touches that ball, I am 100% certain that the Cubs would have won the 2003 NLCS.

i totally agree with you, and i thank you for the well thought out response. i'm just trying to state the fact that, yes, the red sox still had a perfectly good chance to shut the white sox down, and couldn't pull through. Get what I'm tryin to get at?

GregoryEtc
10-06-2005, 07:05 AM
Red Sox fans will always try to look for one guy they can pile on. I had the realization that the difference between Red Sox fans and Cubs fans are that Red Sox fans tend to blame individual players for their TEAM failures, whereas Cubs fans blame things unassociated with the team like goats and bartmen. Either way, its pathetic and tired and lame. Graffy did not lose that game for them. Its irrelevant if Lardbutt doesn't give up the 3 run blast to Gooch. If Boston wants to jump on Tony for that play, fine. Let us have him!

boiler up
10-06-2005, 07:11 AM
one was even low enough to call me a bandwagon fan that knows nothing about the sport. even though i shouldn't let it get to me, it still kinda does. i was born a white sox fan and would have been kicked out of my house at age 6 by my dad if i chose to root for another team. i follow the sox every year and even made a trip to NY to see them play the yankees this summer.

whatever, they're just being sore losers, i shouldn't have to defend myself.

Deuce
10-06-2005, 07:34 AM
To be honest, I don't think that play would have been a DP. Fielder's choice for certain, but Uribe was off like a bull with gas. He would have been safe at first, IMO.

Besides, errors (whether accreditted or not) are a part of baseball. The only reason the Wrong Sox were leading big early was because Crede "olayed" Damen's ground shot in the first, Pods got a bad jump on Manny's 2 run scoring double, and Konerko threw to second instead of home with bases loaded in the 3rd. These things happen and they usually result in runs. Every good fan knows that, which is why Wrong Sox and Scrubs "fans" don't get it.

Deuce

The Wimperoo
10-06-2005, 07:48 AM
Besides, errors (whether accreditted or not) are a part of baseball. The only reason the Wrong Sox were leading big early was because Crede "olayed" Damen's ground shot in the first, Pods got a bad jump on Manny's 2 run scoring double, and Konerko threw to second instead of home with bases loaded in the 3rd. These things happen and they usually result in runs. Every good fan knows that, which is why Wrong Sox and Scrubs "fans" don't get it.

Deuce

Exactly, if Crede and Pods would have decided to play defense in the 1st inning, who knows if the Red Sox even score in that inning. Same thing with Konerko's play, it would have saved a run.

34 Inch Stick
10-06-2005, 08:40 AM
Even with the error AND the home run, they were only down by 1 going into the sixth against a pitcher who had been laboring. They had the tying run at second with 1 out and the top of the lineup coming up and did not get him in. It was a team loss.

dcb33
10-06-2005, 08:55 AM
Tom Verducci of SI argues the mistake by David Wells to Tad Iguchi was bigger than Graffanino's error:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/tom_verducci/10/05/wells.mistake/index.html

He also offered up this precious little nugget in the column:


Should second baseman Tony Graffanino havefielded that fifth-inning squibbed grounder off the bat of Jose Uribe? Sure. But Wells made a worse mistake, hanging a breaking ball to Tadihito Iguchi. After Graffanino's error and a subsequent pop fly, the Red Sox were one out away from getting out of the fifth with a 4-2 lead. Graffanino's mistake cost Boston one or two outs. Wells' mistake cost his team the game.

FielderJones
10-06-2005, 09:04 AM
Tom Verducci of SI argues the mistake by David Wells to Tad Iguchi was bigger than Graffanino's error:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/tom_verducci/10/05/wells.mistake/index.html




Jose Uribe? :rolleyes: Yet another East Coast twit who doesn't prepare properly.

FoulkeFan
10-06-2005, 09:05 AM
David Wells said after the game that it was his fault, FWIW.

fquaye149
10-06-2005, 09:10 AM
That's because Wells is a gamer.

The fact of the matter is we might not have won the game w/o Graffanino's error.

So what? FIELDING IS PART OF BASEBALL LAST I CHECKED.

How is an error like that more of a fluke than striking out Ortiz in the first inning or hitting the home run off Wells?

I heard the commentators say "both these pitchers (wells and buehrle) let the hitters put the ball in play. Wells is thinking 'my team let me down here'."

Well, yes. Did you expect Boston's defense to pick you up as a pitcher? Well then you shouldn't have :tongue:

That's the thing: we're built on pitching, defense, baserunning, and situational hitting (though we can pop the ball a little).

They are built on high OBP and the three run homer, eschewing pitching (lol) and defense. There's nothing necessarily wrong with this choice, especially in the AL. However, when you lose two games because of bad pitching and in this case bad defense...it shouldn't come as any particular surprise.

Cambridge
10-06-2005, 09:22 AM
They are built on high OBP and the three run homer, eschewing pitching (lol) and defense. There's nothing necessarily wrong with this choice, especially in the AL. However, when you lose two games because of bad pitching and in this case bad defense...it shouldn't come as any particular surprise.

You're right about OBP, and to a lesser extent the D. Pitching, however, no. Not by design, anyway.

The Red Sox have spent a lot of money and put careful projection into building a staff. Injuries and pitchers not performing up to reasonable expectations have hurt them more than anything. Schilling and Foulke are the most obvious examples. The White Sox certainly have a strong staff, but health and guys pitching the best baseball of their careers are a big reason why. No doubt you have a better staff right now, but it has less to do with organizational philosophy than good fortune.

SouthSide_HitMen
10-06-2005, 09:22 AM
David Wells said after the game that it was his fault, FWIW.

The last time I saw David Wells in person he was :chunks

on the mound before being pulled against the Cubs in the first inning (Sean Lowe and others had to clean up his mess and Carlos Lee won it on a Grand Slam in the 10th). He was better last night but the Sox have owned him with their right handed lineup. I am surprised we didn't bunt against him - was really shocked Podsednik who couldn't hit the ball out of the infield against him didn't bunt (safety squeeze) in the fifth (he ended up fouling out) but Iguchi saved the day with a three run blast.

At least Wells was classy enough to take the blame. He looked like he was laboring out there in the 5th - he was sweating (and it wasn't very hot out) and taking deep breaths but when you are that overweight it has to effect you.

Dick Allen
10-06-2005, 09:34 AM
It's doubtful that Uribe's grounder would have been a DP. It was hit a little too slowly.

Ol' No. 2
10-06-2005, 09:39 AM
It's doubtful that Uribe's grounder would have been a DP. It was hit a little too slowly.Makes no difference. Podsednik made what would have been the third out. All 3 runs were unearned.

But who cares? Last I checked, defense was still part of the game, and the Red Sox D is horrible. It finally cost them.

SOXPHILE
10-06-2005, 09:40 AM
Even with the error AND the home run, they were only down by 1 going into the sixth against a pitcher who had been laboring. They had the tying run at second with 1 out and the top of the lineup coming up and did not get him in. It was a team loss.

Right ! After the inning was over, and the Red Sox were down 5-4, they still had 4 innings to score a couple of runs, or even just 1 run to tie it up, and they didn't. It was an error in the 5th inning of the 2nd game of the 1st round of the playoffs. Some people are acting like it was the 9th inning of game 7 of the World Series.

scottjanssens
10-06-2005, 09:45 AM
Graff would deserve more blame had his error occured in the 8th or 9th inning. Fact is the Red Sox had four more innings to get a single run to tie. They only managed three hits. One of those hits was a double in the 9th to put the tying run in scoring position. Then Damon and Renteria failed to get the ball out of the infield. The fault lies with every player who failed to get on base or hit someone in. It's a team sport.

Cambridge
10-06-2005, 10:02 AM
Fact is the Red Sox had four more innings to get a single run to tie. They only managed three hits.

I agree completely with janssens' post. That said, they hit the ball hard. In baseball, that's all you can do; the rest is up to random chance. A few of the line drive outs and Nixon's foul ball HR could easily have meant runs for Boston. Yes, you win and lose as a team, but the Red Sox offense made hard contact -- it just didn't work out.

Dick Allen
10-06-2005, 10:06 AM
Makes no difference. Podsednik made what would have been the third out. All 3 runs were unearned.

But who cares? Last I checked, defense was still part of the game, and the Red Sox D is horrible. It finally cost them.I know, I was just responding to some of the people here plus media types who said it was a DP ball.

PatK
10-06-2005, 10:29 AM
David Wells said after the game that it was his fault, FWIW.

Did anybody even look at the pitches Wells was throwing to Iguchi?

He threw three curevballs in a row. And the third one was hanging.

scottjanssens
10-06-2005, 10:38 AM
Wells said that on last pitch to Iguchi he was trying to quick-pitch him. He tried to catch Iguchi of guard but Guch was ready for it.

fquaye149
10-06-2005, 12:01 PM
You're right about OBP, and to a lesser extent the D. Pitching, however, no. Not by design, anyway.

The Red Sox have spent a lot of money and put careful projection into building a staff. Injuries and pitchers not performing up to reasonable expectations have hurt them more than anything. Schilling and Foulke are the most obvious examples. The White Sox certainly have a strong staff, but health and guys pitching the best baseball of their careers are a big reason why. No doubt you have a better staff right now, but it has less to do with organizational philosophy than good fortune.

I'm not talking about the team's philosophy. I'm talking about the reason for the team's success and what accounts for their current success.

The success you've had this season has not been on account of your pitching.

Your staff is a joke. It is bar-none the worst staff of all the teams in the playoffs.

Your rotation does not have a legitimate number one starter - Wells is your best big game pitcher and he would probably be going late for any team but the Padres or the Braves. Even for them he'd be going second day. Meanwhile Clement has been brutal this half, Wakefield has had win success but not ERA success, Schilling is over the hill (or just playing really banged up - either way no good), and Arroyo either doesn't have it or hasn't figured it out yet.

Do we REALLY need to get into your bullpen?

Look - your success hinges on hitting and you will win in SPITE of your pitching and your defense. It is BRUTAL.

You may still win the series, but if you do it will be because either

a.) you have succeeded at the plate
b.) we have failed in our pitching and defense and situational hitting
c.) a combination of the two.

All I'm saying is that while it may be surprising to many people that the Red Sox lost their first two games of this series, it shouldn't be surprising in the least that if they were going to lose that it would be because of horrible pitching in one game and brutal defense in the second.

(By the way - Epstein's managerial philosophy to add pitching wasn't exactly grade A - sign a not so good second half pitcher in Clement, sign an injury risk in Miller, sign an injury risk in Wells, get rid of Pedro but keep Schilling who ended the season with his ankle hanging off...it's not exactly "bad fortune" that your pitching staff was in shambles come year's end)

Oh and Foulke's always had a bad knee...and yet no contingency plan for closer? Fair enough....


Edit: the more I read your post the funnier it gets - careful projection? By signing Wade Miller and relying on Curt Schilling's ankle?....not to mention David Wells - for God's sake - fortune is on your side: it's clear it is because David Wells is still able to STAND UP this time of year with his back. You rolled the dice on three pitchers in your starting rotation....four if you count Clement and the arm risk from his slider and the overwork Dusty gave him last year. You rolled the dice on three huge longshots and you only lost on two...that's not bad fortune...that's expected outcome. There's a reason you got Wade Miller so cheap. There's a reason Wells' price was so low.

Chicken Dinner
10-06-2005, 12:15 PM
Just smile :smile: at those BoSox fans and tell them that they are absolutely right. The White Sox won because Tony G made an error. Even though we out scored them 19-6, the reason the White Sox are winning is because of Tony G.

Vernam
10-06-2005, 12:16 PM
Did anybody even look at the pitches Wells was throwing to Iguchi? He threw three curevballs in a row. And the third one was hanging.This morning WMVP replayed the Boston radio play-by-play leading up to Iguchi's homer. After the previous curve was a called strike -- and it was nasty, btw -- the announcer said, "Iguchi is a fastball hitter. He doesn't like the breaking ball." (Or words to that effect.) Next pitch is another looping curve, but just a Tad higher in the zone. The announcers sounded like two kids who just learned there's no Santa Claus.

Vernam

Cambridge
10-06-2005, 12:42 PM
Wakefield has had win success but not ERA success...and Arroyo either doesn't have it...get rid of Pedro but keep Schilling...By signing Wade Miller...not to mention David Wells...

Is Boston's pitching strong right now? No. That said, I'll address a few of your above opinions and factual errors.

Wakefield has had an ERA at or below league average each of the past five years.

Arroyo was pencilled in as our number 5 starter and went 14-10.

Pedro was a free agent demanding a 4-year contract and HUGE money. Schilling was already signed for this year.

We got Wade Miller for basically nothing. He was a low-risk gamble who was earmarked as our number 6 starter.

Wells went 15-7.

maurice
10-06-2005, 01:06 PM
The Red Sox have spent a lot of money and put careful projection into building a staff. Injuries and pitchers not performing up to reasonable expectations have hurt them more than anything. Schilling and Foulke are the most obvious examples.

Schilling and Foulke are the most obvious examples of good pitchers who are injured. OTOH, the Red Cubs knew that Schilling was injured (and old) but failed to account for it. They also knew that they had no bullpen depth going into the season; the Foulke injury just made a bad situation worse.

The Red Cubs' pitching staff simply blows. A reasonable "projection" would have predicted this result (a bunch of guys with 4+ ERAs), since they came into the season with no depth. Their bloated payroll was not money well spent.

fquaye149
10-06-2005, 01:06 PM
Is Boston's pitching strong right now? No. That said, I'll address a few of your above opinions and factual errors.

Wakefield has had an ERA at or below league average each of the past five years.

Arroyo was pencilled in as our number 5 starter and went 14-10.

Pedro was a free agent demanding a 4-year contract and HUGE money. Schilling was already signed for this year.

We got Wade Miller for basically nothing. He was a low-risk gamble who was earmarked as our number 6 starter.

Wells went 15-7.

I'm not talking about what happened. I'm talking about the team you have.

Unless Epstein's goal was to make the playoffs. Was that his goal? If that was his goal, he did a good job. The sketchy pitching you had was good enough to make the playoffs. You made the playoffs. Now you're in the playoffs.

Now you have to evaluate how Epstein prepared you for the playoffs.

He signed two injury plagued pitchers in Wells and Miller. He didn't get anyone to replace Schilling, assuming that a guy who ended last season with a bloody sock could carry this team in October.

These foolish decisions mean that now your playoff rotation amounts to you being down 2-0 and having to decide between WAKEFIELD as your stopper or FORMER-CLOSER CURT SCHILLING. Should you somehow win those games, which is possible, you'll be matching up either CLEMENT, WELLS ON SHORT REST, or BRONSON ARROYO out of the pen for a rubber game.

That is poor planning. That is akin to the Yankees signing Kevin Brown - the Yankees knew he couldn't go in September, October and their goal was to win in October, not April-September. Therefore it's a stupid decision. At least THEY only did that with one pitcher. Epstein signed two pitchers who probably wouldn't be pitching come October (one of them is, lucky him) one pitcher (Clement) who had an overload last season (which is probably much of the reason he has no command right now), and counted on SCHILLING who is old as dirt and coming off a serious injury.

Not to mention he was left to pick off the waiver wire in his bullpen, and didn't make any effort to bolster Foulke, who was an injury waiting to happen, what with his knee.

But like I said, it was good personnel management if his goal was to go one and done in the playoffs. Was that his goal? Because if it wasn't WHY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FIRST HALF STATS FROM INJURY PRONE PITCHERS?

maurice
10-06-2005, 01:11 PM
WHY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FIRST HALF STATS FROM INJURY PRONE PITCHERS?

Because they're the Red Cubs. They compile a roster of talented but injury-prone players and then bitch that it's unfair when they experience extremely predictable injuries. Sound familiar?

soltrain21
10-06-2005, 01:13 PM
Is Boston's pitching strong right now? No. That said, I'll address a few of your above opinions and factual errors.

Wakefield has had an ERA at or below league average each of the past five years.

Arroyo was pencilled in as our number 5 starter and went 14-10.

Pedro was a free agent demanding a 4-year contract and HUGE money. Schilling was already signed for this year.

We got Wade Miller for basically nothing. He was a low-risk gamble who was earmarked as our number 6 starter.

Wells went 15-7.


Your pitching staff sucks, and that is my completely biased opinion. If you don't like it then go back and hang out with the rest of the "nation."

Cambridge
10-06-2005, 01:20 PM
Much of what you (fquaye149) say is accurate, and I've already commented on what I disagree with. But baseball is never as simple as a rotisserie draft. You start with a core group under contract, and then mix and match with what's available by trade (usually little when it comes to pitching) and free agency (usually overpriced guys like Pavano and Wright). I was saying that the Red Sox staff was hurt by injuries and key players not meeting expectations. Were those predictable or fixable? That's a hard question to answer.

One note on Foulke: From 99-03, Foulke had a better VORP than Mariano Rivera (I don't know the 04 numbers). As one of the most undervalued relievers in baseball history, his loss was devastating.

BTW: fquaye149: I appreciate you putting thought and reasons behind your opinions. They have more value than others offered on this, and other, sites.

EDIT: I forgot to add the farm system. While Boston debuted some of the best arms they've produced in decades, they're a year away from contributing on a consistent basis.

maurice
10-06-2005, 01:50 PM
Were those predictable or fixable? That's a hard question to answer.

Not when the players in question come into the season with serious, preexisting injuries. The Sox had a similar problem with Frank Thomas. The difference is that KW was smart enough to account for it, despite a much smaller payroll than the Red Cubs.

As one of the most undervalued relievers in baseball history, [Foulke's] loss was devastating.

No doubt . . . but it would have been significantly less devastating if the Red Cubs had accounted for the possibility that just maybe a key member of their extremely shallow bullpen might become injured. Surprise pitching injuries have been known to happen from time to time. Again, the Sox had a similar problem early with an ineffective Takatsu (who was outstanding last season) and then later with Hermanson. The difference is that KW accounted for this possibility and compiled a very deep pitching staff, despite a much smaller payroll than the Red Cubs.

If they want to compete for the championship next season, the Red Cubs will need to completely revamp their pitching staff by adding quality veterans, not rookies, retreads, and guys coming off of serious injuries.

Tragg
10-06-2005, 01:59 PM
for arguing the fact that Graff. didn't cost the red sox the game. In my eyes he didn't. ...

Graff is emblematic of this series.

Emblematic in the sense that he actually STARTS for the Redcubs. We wanted him as a utility player - for him, he's a starter.
That's the difference in these 2 lineups.

TaylorStSox
10-06-2005, 02:06 PM
One note on Foulke: From 99-03, Foulke had a better VORP than Mariano Rivera (I don't know the 04 numbers).


This really speaks volumes on VORP and what a bull**** "stat" it is. I hate FOBB's.

RadioheadRocks
10-06-2005, 02:18 PM
One life lesson I've learned is never to get bogged down in "ifs"... "if this, if that, if grandma had cajones she'd be grandpa..."

LET'S WIN IT AT FENWAY!!!!! :D:

scottjanssens
10-06-2005, 02:49 PM
This really speaks volumes on VORP and what a bull**** "stat" it is. I hate FOBB's.

You know what? THEY DON'T CARE.

Ol' No. 2
10-06-2005, 02:57 PM
This really speaks volumes on VORP and what a bull**** "stat" it is. I hate FOBB's.VORP is the biggest steaming pile of crap there is. Look at how it's calculated. It's basically just OPS, disguised with a fake mustache and beard.

IowaSox1971
10-06-2005, 05:36 PM
In the first regular-season game we played against the Red Sox this year, Crede dropped an easy foul pop-up in a tie game, then Ramirez, later in that same at-bat, hit a game-winning homer. Did Red Sox fans consider that victory a fluke? I doubt it. By the way, in that same game, the Red Sox rallied from a 4-1 deficit in the seventh inning when Iguchi made two errors on the same play. So, you needed three key errors to beat us in that game, but I don't recall an asterisk or anything like that being placed next to that Boston victory.

Face it, Boston fans: Your team has been outplayed in the first two games of this series. You got pounded in Game 1, then you blew a 4-0 lead and lost Game 2, even though one of baseball's winningest postseason pitchers was throwing for you. It's still possible you could win this series, but you got beat fair and square in the first two games. Deal with it.