Jump to content

6/20 Game Thread - CWS @ CHC, 1:20pm CT


Recommended Posts

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 03:25 PM)
chw2 we don't move runners over. That's not our game. We can't bunt.

Anderson had a triple and didn't take it.

We don't bunt. We are a classic AL team and hit home runs. If OC would have hit his we probably would have won.

You NEVER EVER make the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd base. I don't blame Anderson at all for being conservative in that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 876
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 04:23 PM)
Except for 3 or 4 games this year, Dotel has pretty much been unhittable. The 7th inning is his. The 8th would have been Linebrink's and the 9th would have been Jenks'. It didn't work out. It doesn't always. I don't like Ozzie as a manager, but I can't fault him today.

well said

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You NEVER EVER make the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd base. I don't blame Anderson at all for being conservative in that situation.

 

Even when you can walk into third with a triple as Hawk and DJ said? Nice.

We wouldn't have scored him anyway, unless we hit a home run, that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 03:25 PM)
chw2 we don't move runners over. That's not our game. We can't bunt.

Anderson had a triple and didn't take it.

We don't bunt. We are a classic AL team and hit home runs. If OC would have hit his we probably would have won.

 

At least hit to the right side, Thome is a lefty, he loves grounding into the shift all the time, why not now? Jesus Christ, that makes me mad. Swinging for the long ball in the 9th with a runner on 2nd in a tie game, f***ing fantastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Frankensteiner @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 03:31 PM)
This was exactly like the last game @ Tampa. What were we with RISP? 0-9 or something?

 

I thought this was the one to get today.

 

Something along those lines. This is what happens when we play good teams. We can hang in there, but when it really counts, we can't hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lost fan I love the double, a couple more feet and it would have been a key homer.

But Hawk and DJ insisted it was a gift triple.

It's a big a blunder as the many others we're mentioning.

That said, I'm sure he would have stranded at third so it probably doesn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 03:40 PM)
Only Brian Anderson can hit a leadoff double in the 9th against Kerry Wood and then be vilified for not making it a leadoff triple.

 

No kidding. Never make the first or last out of an inning at 3rd. Blame the guys behind him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ChWRoCk2 @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 04:18 PM)
I understand Linebrink is our best guy but you really have to bring your closer in for that situation, thats a closer type situation.

 

Oh well, we should knock up Marquis tomorrow but Contreras can be just as bad.

 

Sad thing is Lou recognized that. Ozzie however does not. Again it doesn't seem like he recognizes his bullpen's strengths all that much. To me, he pretty much lucked out in 2005 because everyone in that bullpen was just great. Damaso was the mental midget, but I rather take him over Dotel anyday of the week. He had the stuff and he just became different because of Ozzie. Dotel just doesn't have it anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 04:47 PM)
So you guys are saying don't even try for a triple when it is a standup triple cause you might fall down and be called out at third for the first out of an inning?

My god.

 

Yeah, that is exactly what we said.

 

If BA is out at 3rd, you b**** at Cox for trying to get him into 3rd with no outs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the bullpen should be used this way in close ball games...

 

Thonrton - 7th innning guy (if needed)

Linebrink - 8th inning guy (with Thornton coming in vs. a tough lefty if we didn't need him in the 7th)

Jenks - Closer and 9th inning guy in a tied ball game

Dotel - Extra innings guy/innings eater or 6th inning guy

Logan - Loogy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 05:43 PM)
Lost fan I love the double, a couple more feet and it would have been a key homer.

But Hawk and DJ insisted it was a gift triple.

It's a big a blunder as the many others we're mentioning.

That said, I'm sure he would have stranded at third so it probably doesn't matter.

For a player with Anderson's speed all it takes is a base hit to score him from 2nd. If this was the 6th inning it'd be different. Anderson got into scoring position, that is fine by me. Considering Anderson has been outright shafted at least twice on the basepaths by bad calls, and gotten burned trying to take an extra base, I don't blame him for being conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 04:47 PM)
So you guys are saying don't even try for a triple when it is a standup triple cause you might fall down and be called out at third for the first out of an inning?

My god.

 

That situation, you really cannot blame BA. If you have no outs and it's the 9th in a tie game, you have to have confidence that someone will get you in. We did a pathetic job behind him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you guys are saying don't even try for a triple when it is a standup triple cause you might fall down and be called out at third for the first out of an inning?

My god.

 

Are you joking? BA did the right thing. You don't want to be the first or third out. All it takes from there is a single to score him. It's just that that's too much to ask of our offense.

Edited by TheBigHurt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 03:47 PM)
So you guys are saying don't even try for a triple when it is a standup triple cause you might fall down and be called out at third for the first out of an inning?

My god.

If he tried for the triple and got thrown out, there would be at least 50 posts on this board asking for his head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Phil Rogers at chicagotribune.com:

 

By pulling Danks only 85 pitches into his afternoon, Guillen was being consistent in how he has handled the 23-year-old left-hander for two seasons. He has been babied almost beyond belief, throwing 100 pitches only three times in his 15 starts this season and never even 110 in his 41 career starts.

 

Those numbers will make old-schoolers want to throw up. But consider these numbers, as well—5.50, 2.80.

 

Those are Danks' earned-run averages from his rookie season in 2007 and this season. The improvement is staggering.

 

Something clearly is working in the job Guillen, pitching coach Don Cooper and others are doing in developing Danks. If the plan calls for him to be handled with kid gloves, so be it.

 

Too much caution is always better than not enough when dealing with young pitchers, who as a group represent the most valuable assets in baseball.

 

 

 

I have no problem with him getting yanked. Its funny neither Hawk or anyone else has really picked up on this considering this is the exact same treatment Jerry Manuel gave Garland and was ripped so much for. Its was the right move. People would have been b****ing if Danks started struggling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 03:56 PM)
I have no problem with him getting yanked. Its funny neither Hawk or anyone else has really picked up on this considering this is the exact same treatment Jerry Manuel gave Garland and was ripped so much for. Its was the right move. People would have been b****ing if Danks started struggling.

There are 2 totally separate issues between the yanking of Garland and the Yanking of Danks here.

 

When the Garland yanking was at its worst, in 2002 and 2003, Garland had already piled up a bunch of innings. 190+ in both of those years.

 

The reason to keep Danks on a tight leash is not struggling, it's health. Ask guys like Zambrano, Prior, and Wood how throwing a lot of innings early in their career has done for them, ore even how it's done for their shoulders recently.

 

The rule of thumb with a young pitcher is you can jump their total innings up by about 30 or so per year. That number puts Danks on a 160 inning limit for this year. When Garland in 03 was still getting Yanked by Manuel every time he got in any sort of trouble, he'd thrown 190 innings the year beforehand, so the yankings then had nothing to do with keeping his innings low, it had to do with a lack of faith in the guy.

 

Taking Danks out early today would have been similar to the Garland move if Danks allowed 2 runners in the 5th and Ozzie didn't give him a shot to finish that inning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 20, 2008 -> 06:04 PM)
There are 2 totally separate issues between the yanking of Garland and the Yanking of Danks here.

 

When the Garland yanking was at its worst, in 2002 and 2003, Garland had already piled up a bunch of innings. 190+ in both of those years.

 

The reason to keep Danks on a tight leash is not struggling, it's health. Ask guys like Zambrano, Prior, and Wood how throwing a lot of innings early in their career has done for them, ore even how it's done for their shoulders recently.

 

The rule of thumb with a young pitcher is you can jump their total innings up by about 30 or so per year. That number puts Danks on a 160 inning limit for this year. When Garland in 03 was still getting Yanked by Manuel every time he got in any sort of trouble, he'd thrown 190 innings the year beforehand, so the yankings then had nothing to do with keeping his innings low, it had to do with a lack of faith in the guy.

 

Taking Danks out early today would have been similar to the Garland move if Danks allowed 2 runners in the 5th and Ozzie didn't give him a shot to finish that inning.

You may want to go back to those years and look at pitch counts. You don't think health was involved with any of Manuel's decisions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some stupid Cubs fans or NL fans in general say the DH needs to be abolished because it favors the AL. BS, the fact that we have to have our pitchers hit is worse. At least NL teams can trot out a real hitter when they play in AL parks, we have to trot out a pitcher who gets 5 ABs a year when we play in NL parks.

 

And one of the biggest reasons Danks was pulled today was because of the lack of the DH. I know Uribe got a hit and all, but he didn't score! Be grateful Cubs fans, so many things handed you this game.

Edited by chw42
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...