General Baseball Thread 2012

[broncosteven]

Originally Posted by TheChamp24

The White Sox success confounds me right now. I honestly don't think they will really make a strong push for the playoffs, unless their pitching "stablizes" and they get consistency from throughout their lineup.
Just a glance, but there looks to be ZERO depth for the Sox, exactly one guy on the bench hitting .200 or better and ironically its right at .200.

Then again, that whole division is a big crapshoot.

Your right about their depth but with the way Konerko, AJ, Dunn, are hitting it doesn't matter yet, it is funny Kenny Williams was complaining about attendance before the latest win streak and made what I consider to be a threat about the trade deadline but if they are in the thick of it by then I bet they pick up a bat or 2 to help out.

I think their pitching is very good, again depth is an issue but Reed has been a good closer, they have a good solid 3 man deep roation, still could use a 4th and 5th guy to depend on but they are clicking right now.

It seems dumping Ozzie was a smart move, a lot of guys like Rios and Dunn who were struggling under Ozzie are having good to great years.

[SouthStndJunkie]

Justin Verlander takes the mound tonight against the Red Sox on ESPN.

[DBroncos4life]

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

ESPN reports that any team would have to outbid the Rangers. Oswalt didn't have a very good year for a team stacked with great players.

I think he he still has good value at Dodgers stadium. Anything to move Harang to the pen.

[SouthStndJunkie]

Originally Posted by DBroncos4life

I think he he still has good value at Dodgers stadium. Anything to move Harang to the pen.

ESPN is reporting that Oswalt signed with the Rangers today.

[SouthStndJunkie]

Magglio Ordonez was unable to latch on with a new team after rehabbing his second ankle surgery and Jason Beck of MLB.com reports that the six-time All-Star will make his retirement official Sunday at “Magglio Ordonez Day” in Detroit.

Ordonez spent his first eight seasons with the White Sox and his final seven seasons with the Tigers, hitting .309 with 294 homers, 2,156 hits, and an .871 OPS to rank among the best right-handed hitters of the past 20 years.

[DBroncos4life]

Originally Posted by SouthStndJunkie

ESPN is reporting that Oswalt signed with the Rangers today.

I just read that.

[elsid13]

Originally Posted by SouthStndJunkie

Justin Verlander takes the mound tonight against the Red Sox on ESPN.

Against Daniel Bard which means I doubt the Sox win this one.

[OrangeSe7en]

Originally Posted by TheChamp24

Saves always gives makes me wonder why 3 runs indicated a save. A pitcher can come into a game with a 4-1 lead, give up back to back homeruns, and then three straight ground ball outs and he gets a save. A closer should be able to protect a 3 run lead in the 9th 99% of the time.

It's not just three runs that qualifies you as a save. You can also qualify by pitching a certain number of innings. I can see why you wouldnt bother mentioning that because the idea of anyoe these days qualifying for a save that way is kind of a joke. But it does make me wonder what would happen if they changed the rules on what qualifies as a save to require a pitcher to pitch more than two innings. Is it such a selling point in contract negotiations that pitchers will either push to pitch three innings at the back end of the game or simply whine because of the rule change.

[broncocalijohn]

^ Nothing wrong with a save for 3 innings as it is rarely done and it is something of an accomplishment for a relief pitcher. The current rule is a joke to qualify for a save. The on deck batter, representing a tie, allows the pitcher to qualify for a save. WTF? The on deck batter isn't even in the game and so a 4 to 1 game with one on and two outs gets the pitcher a save for coming in and facing the one (possible) batter.

[TheChamp24]

Originally Posted by SouthStndJunkie

Magglio Ordonez was unable to latch on with a new team after rehabbing his second ankle surgery and Jason Beck of MLB.com reports that the six-time All-Star will make his retirement official Sunday at “Magglio Ordonez Day” in Detroit.

Ordonez spent his first eight seasons with the White Sox and his final seven seasons with the Tigers, hitting .309 with 294 homers, 2,156 hits, and an .871 OPS to rank among the best right-handed hitters of the past 20 years.

One of the best right handed hitters of the past 20 years? Is this a joke? Ordonez was a good player and all, but seriously?

[broncosteven]

Originally Posted by SouthStndJunkie

Magglio Ordonez was unable to latch on with a new team after rehabbing his second ankle surgery and Jason Beck of MLB.com reports that the six-time All-Star will make his retirement official Sunday at “Magglio Ordonez Day” in Detroit.

Ordonez spent his first eight seasons with the White Sox and his final seven seasons with the Tigers, hitting .309 with 294 homers, 2,156 hits, and an .871 OPS to rank among the best right-handed hitters of the past 20 years.

I was mad they let him walk but they won the WS without him the next year so no great loss after all. Dye turned into a much better clutch hitter for us than Magglio was.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

^ Nothing wrong with a save for 3 innings as it is rarely done and it is something of an accomplishment for a relief pitcher. The current rule is a joke to qualify for a save. The on deck batter, representing a tie, allows the pitcher to qualify for a save. WTF? The on deck batter isn't even in the game and so a 4 to 1 game with one on and two outs gets the pitcher a save for coming in and facing the one (possible) batter.

It's even easier than that. A pitcher gets credited with a save if all four of the following conditions are met:

He is the finishing pitcher in a game won by his team;
He is not the winning pitcher;
He is credited with at least ⅓ of an inning pitched; and
He satisfies one of the following conditions:
He enters the game with a lead of no more than three runs and pitches for at least one inning
He enters the game, regardless of the count, with the potential tying run either on base, at bat or on deck
He pitches for at least three innings

The three innings thing is awesome, you're right. Everything else is subject.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by elsid13

Against Daniel Bard which means I doubt the Sox win this one.

I assume you were as pleasantly surprised as I was.

[OrangeSe7en]

Originally Posted by houghtam

It's even easier than that. A pitcher gets credited with a save if all four of the following conditions are met:

He is the finishing pitcher in a game won by his team;
He is not the winning pitcher;
He is credited with at least ⅓ of an inning pitched; and
He satisfies one of the following conditions:
He enters the game with a lead of no more than three runs and pitches for at least one inning
He enters the game, regardless of the count, with the potential tying run either on base, at bat or on deck
He pitches for at least three innings

The three innings thing is awesome, you're right. Everything else is subject.

Thanks for posting that. It's no wonder that I didn't have it memorized. It's so stupid and convoluted.

And to think the owners once went after stolen bases by implementing defensive indifference. And whats even more lame is that they did this at a time when bullpens were becoming highly specialized and the game was moving to one of less speed.

BTW, another stupid rule is how a starting pitcher can qualify for a loss. Lets say a starter pitches 5 innings and is behind 1-0. Giving up a run in 5 innings is very respectable. But then, lets say a reliever comes in, in the 6th inning and gives up 7 runs in the 6th. This would make it 8-0 after 6. At this point, the starter is on the hook for the loss unless his team comes back and scores 8 runs instead of the the 1 that the starter gave up.

The nuance to what/who qualifies for the win loss, like with the save stat, also invites abuse. It's amazing how much more forgiving it is to relievers than starters. Lets say you have a person designated to pitch the 1st inning the way someone pitches the 8th inning. But then after that first inning, you bring in the guy who's responsible for pitching 6 plus innings. The person pitching the 6+ innings is, essentially, the starter, except by not assuming the mound at the beginning of the game, he triggers rules that are much more forgiving. For example, that scenario, that I described above where the 1st inning run gives up 1 run and is behind 1-0, the 6+ inning guy can give up a lot of runs and not be on the hook for a loss. Also, by not assuming the mound at the beginning of the game, the 6+ inning guy(at least typically the case), wouldnt have to pitch 5 innings to qualify for the win.

[elsid13]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

I assume you were as pleasantly surprised as I was.

I was extremely happy. With the news the Laser Show was going to DL, I was sure it was going to be ass whipping.

[DBroncos4life]

Seatle has 16 runs in 3 three innings vs Texas. Good luck at that hitters park Oswalt.

[TheChamp24]

Originally Posted by OrangeSe7en

Thanks for posting that. It's no wonder that I didn't have it memorized. It's so stupid and convoluted.

And to think the owners once went after stolen bases by implementing defensive indifference. And whats even more lame is that they did this at a time when bullpens were becoming highly specialized and the game was moving to one of less speed.

BTW, another stupid rule is how a starting pitcher can qualify for a loss. Lets say a starter pitches 5 innings and is behind 1-0. Giving up a run in 5 innings is very respectable. But then, lets say a reliever comes in, in the 6th inning and gives up 7 runs in the 6th. This would make it 8-0 after 6. At this point, the starter is on the hook for the loss unless his team comes back and scores 8 runs instead of the the 1 that the starter gave up.

The nuance to what/who qualifies for the win loss, like with the save stat, also invites abuse. It's amazing how much more forgiving it is to relievers than starters. Lets say you have a person designated to pitch the 1st inning the way someone pitches the 8th inning. But then after that first inning, you bring in the guy who's responsible for pitching 6 plus innings. The person pitching the 6+ innings is, essentially, the starter, except by not assuming the mound at the beginning of the game, he triggers rules that are much more forgiving. For example, that scenario, that I described above where the 1st inning run gives up 1 run and is behind 1-0, the 6+ inning guy can give up a lot of runs and not be on the hook for a loss. Also, by not assuming the mound at the beginning of the game, the 6+ inning guy(at least typically the case), wouldnt have to pitch 5 innings to qualify for the win.

This....is complete ridiculous-ness.
The pitcher giving up 1 run in 5 innings gets the loss because he was the one who was trailing when he left the game. If his team never comes back to tie it, he lost the game, no matter how good or bad he pitched. I mean, you might have a point if you say his team came back and scored 6 runs in the 8th, but still trailed 7-6, and lost 7-6.
There is nothing wrong really with the wins and losses attributed to pitchers, and frankly wins and losses is kind of a dumb stat to keep record of now.

[eff1ngham]

Originally Posted by houghtam

It's even easier than that. A pitcher gets credited with a save if all four of the following conditions are met:

He is the finishing pitcher in a game won by his team;
He is not the winning pitcher;
He is credited with at least ⅓ of an inning pitched; and
He satisfies one of the following conditions:
He enters the game with a lead of no more than three runs and pitches for at least one inning
He enters the game, regardless of the count, with the potential tying run either on base, at bat or on deck
He pitches for at least three innings

The three innings thing is awesome, you're right. Everything else is subject.

Speaking of the 3 inning "save," check out the box score from the Ms Rangers game:

http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/boxsco...-texas-rangers

Yup, 21-8 final, Iwakuma locked that bad boy down

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by eff1ngham

Speaking of the 3 inning "save," check out the box score from the Ms Rangers game:

http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/boxsco...-texas-rangers

Yup, 21-8 final, Iwakuma locked that bad boy down

Well to be fair, Iwakuma faced 15 batters, so if he'd let 13 of them score, he'd have been in line for the blown save.

[SouthStndJunkie]

Johan Santana of the Mets is 1 out from pitching the 1st no hitter in team history.

[SouthStndJunkie]

Johan Santana has pitched the 1st no hitter in the 51 year history of the New York Mets.

[SouthStndJunkie]

Adam Dunn looks to be back on track this year, proving last year was a fluke.

He'll probably bat in his usual .230 to .250 range....but his power numbers should be back up to his normal 35 to 40 HRs and 100+ RBIs after ****ting the bed in 2011.

He has already gone yard 17 times this year....in 2011 he only went yard 11 times and batted .159 in 122 games.

[broncosteven]

Sox keep their streak in tact, great 8th inning with the game tied at 4!

Wow, hope they can keep up this kind of play through the majority of the season.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by SouthStndJunkie

Adam Dunn looks to be back on track this year, proving last year was a fluke.

He'll probably bat in his usual .230 to .250 range....but his power numbers should be back up to his normal 35 to 40 HRs and 100+ RBIs after ****ting the bed in 2011.

He has already gone yard 17 times this year....in 2011 he only went yard 11 times and batted .159 in 122 games.

...and he's a better player than his batting average indicates, even. He strikes out a lot, but he's also had over 100 walks 6 times in his career. His .878 career OPS is only 3 points behind Adrian Gonzalez. Quite impressive. I've been a fan of Dunn's since he was in Cincinnati...hate, hate, HATE that he's on the White Sox.

[maven]

Go Fish!