4/16 Twins @ Sox

[Maxbialystock]

OK. With Houck on the mound, I'll take this shot for all the good thread starters.

 

Against righty Gray, ERA 3.86, Cora is staying with 6 righty and 3 lefty bats--

 

Enrique CF

Raffie 3B

Bogey SS

JDM DH

Verdugo LF

Story 2B

Dalbec 1B

JBJ RF

Vazquez C

 

It's been 4 days since Whitlock needed just 39 pitches to go 4 innings to beat the Tigers, so he could be available.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

The SOX line-up looks good on paper. Let's hope it starts looking good on grass.

[Maxbialystock]

The SOX line-up looks good on paper. Let's hope it starts looking good on grass.

 

Enrique is coming around, so is JBJ. Not so much Bogey, Story, or Vazquez. Dalbec in between. Devers, JDM, and Verdugo solid.

[Maxbialystock]

Those yellow and blue uniforms have grown on me.

[Maxbialystock]

Lotta empty seats at Fenway.

[Maxbialystock]

Great play, Vazquez and Story! 19 pitches to get thru the 1st, however.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Great play, Vazquez and Story! 19 pitches to get thru the 1st, however.

 

As of late I would consider a half-inning pitch count under 20 a blessing.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Is Bogey's wrist injury carrying over to this year? Should we use it as an excuse even if it isn't injured?

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

DuGoSOX! This guy can hit!

[vegasbob]

Verdugo could carry this team through April . Definitely lengthens the line up . Made the walk to JDM hurt the Twins. Key hit early in the game.

[Maxbialystock]

Tough break for Gray and the Twins.

[d-money]

It would be nice if houck threw strikes.

[jad]

Bogaerts sucks. Raffy sucks. Get rid of them for some prospects.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Bogaerts sucks. Raffy sucks. Get rid of them for some prospects.

 

Your posts suck.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Note to Dugo. Being a good hitter doesn't make you exempt from running hard on every grounder.

[jad]

Your posts suck.

 

My goodness, that seems very hurtful and judgmental!

[Maxbialystock]

I swear the umps have instructions this year--"when in doubt, call it a ball."

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Nice job today by Houck.

[jad]

I swear the umps have instructions this year--"when in doubt, call it a ball."

 

What was the rationale for not putting robo-calls into play this season?

[Maxbialystock]

What was the rationale for not putting robo-calls into play this season?

 

Robo-umps are stupid for the simple reason that nobody--and by that I mean nobody on the field of play, not the players, coaches, managers, fans, or umpires--can see that stupid rectangle we see on the screen.

[jad]

Robo-umps are stupid for the simple reason that nobody--and by that I mean nobody on the field of play, not the players, coaches, managers, fans, or umpires--can see that stupid rectangle we see on the screen.

 

Sure. But why is that a problem? There's no rectangle with the ump there either.

[Maxbialystock]

Sure. But why is that a problem? There's no rectangle with the ump there either.

 

That's my point. What the umpire sees and calls is real. He may make close mistakes, but they are based on what he sees on the field of play, which does not include some fabricated rectangle we can only see on our screens.

 

Every call made in a game should be based on what can physically seen on the field of play. Did the runner touch the bag or not? Was the tag made or not? Was the fly caught or not? Did the throw beat the runner or the runner beat the throw? Was the firstbaseman's foot on the bag or not? Did the fielder interfere with the baserunner or not? Did the baserunner interfere with the hit ball or not? Did the batter swing or not?

[Bellhorn04]

Wow, short thread.

 

Good solid pitching today. Let's get over .500 tomorrow.

[Bellhorn04]

That's my point. What the umpire sees and calls is real. He may make close mistakes, but they are based on what he sees on the field of play, which does not include some fabricated rectangle we can only see on our screens.

 

Every call made in a game should be based on what can physically seen on the field of play. Did the runner touch the bag or not? Was the tag made or not? Was the fly caught or not? Did the throw beat the runner or the runner beat the throw? Was the firstbaseman's foot on the bag or not? Did the fielder interfere with the baserunner or not? Did the baserunner interfere with the hit ball or not? Did the batter swing or not?

 

Sorry Max, your position has been litigated and lost and your complaints are a bit pointless now.

[moonslav59]

Gotta like what Houck gave, today. It was good to see him throw 89 pitches. He's rarely gone over 90 in the bigs.

 

They still don't trust him for the third time through the line-up, but I guess that's the trend of the day for most pitchers. (Will he ever get a chance to prove he's over that?)

 

I can't help but think a game with Houck going 6 and Whitlock 3, might be our best chance at a W.

 

Nice to see Bogey bust out.

 

Is this going to be Dugo's bust out year?

 

[Maxbialystock]

My points are still valid even though it looks as though robo umps could arrive next year.

[moonslav59]

My points are still valid even though it looks as though robo umps could arrive next year.

 

That's not soon enough.

[Maxbialystock]

Gotta like what Houck gave, today. It was good to see him throw 89 pitches. He's rarely gone over 90 in the bigs.

 

They still don't trust him for the third time through the line-up, but I guess that's the trend of the day for most pitchers. (Will he ever get a chance to prove he's over that?)

 

I can't help but think a game with Houck going 6 and Whitlock 3, might be our best chance at a W.

 

Nice to see Bogey bust out.

 

Is this going to be Dugo's bust out year?

 

 

Houck does not have a big repertoire although the splitter was an excellent addition. He threw 50 strikes in 89 pitches, 56%, compared to the preferred 67%, and benefitted from 2 GIDP's. I think Cora pulled him at the right time.

 

This was Whitlock's 3d appearance in 8 Sox games--with a total of 107 pitches compared to Eovaldi's 177, Houck's 167, and Pivetta's 135. He has pitched 8.2 innings to Eovaldi's 10, Houck's 9, and Pivetta's 7.2. Whitlock has thrown no more than 39 pitches in an outing.

[moonslav59]

Houck does not have a big repertoire although the splitter was an excellent addition. He threw 50 strikes in 89 pitches, 56%, compared to the preferred 67%, and benefitted from 2 GIDP's. I think Cora pulled him at the right time.

 

This was Whitlock's 3d appearance in 8 Sox games--with a total of 107 pitches compared to Eovaldi's 177, Houck's 167, and Pivetta's 135. He has pitched 8.2 innings to Eovaldi's 10, Houck's 9, and Pivetta's 7.2. Whitlock has thrown no more than 39 pitches in an outing.

 

I think he pulled him at the right time, too.

 

Ialso like how we are using Whitlock, and suggested something like this, not long ago.

[jad]

That's my point. What the umpire sees and calls is real. He may make close mistakes, but they are based on what he sees on the field of play, which does not include some fabricated rectangle we can only see on our screens.

 

Every call made in a game should be based on what can physically seen on the field of play. Did the runner touch the bag or not? Was the tag made or not? Was the fly caught or not? Did the throw beat the runner or the runner beat the throw? Was the firstbaseman's foot on the bag or not? Did the fielder interfere with the baserunner or not? Did the baserunner interfere with the hit ball or not? Did the batter swing or not?

 

Agree, but likely not for why you think. Replay should only cover "what can be seen" (what could be seen from a real or ideal view-point). I still don't understand your objection to Ball/strikes called through 'the rectangle'. Hell, what the ump sees in his mind isn't visible to anyone either. Why would you want the standard to be an imperfect application of an 'idea' of the strike zone that is known to one person alone?