This Week In Baseball

[KingPK 0]

I tend to agree with AS. The Yanks really look like they don't want to be there. ON Sat, with two outs in the 12th, down by a run, what does Jeter do? Take a pitch or two? No, he weakly swings at the first pitch and grounds to short. Today, Giambi did pretty much the same thing with one out in the 9th.

That is the biggest difference I've seen with this Yankees team compared to previous seasons: they just don't seem to make much of an effort. The Red Sox batted .200 over these last three games, with a .170-ish average w/RISP, which INCLUDES the 11 run Friday night, which shows you how bad they were in the Sat/Sun games. Past Yankee teams would have taken those last two games easily.

 

I know it's April, and they have started slowly before, but this seems different somehow.

[treble 0]

I had to have tickets for the O's worst showing of the season. The offense was mostly dead (but of course we're facing the reigning AL Cy Young), and the pitching was just not doing anything right. O well. I'm 0-2 in live O's games.

Can you buy season's tickets?

[Bruiser Chong 0]

I'm going to have to agree with the sentiment that the Yanks simply don't seem to be trying. I think a lot of them are in slumps, but many of them look to be phoning it in a lot, something they have no excuse to be doing.

 

I think it has a lot to do with simply taking things for granted. Teams like the Yankees, who are always present in the postseason, are just taking for granted that they're the Yankees and regardless of what they do, they're going to somehow wind up in the postseason with a shot of winning it all. It's the same reason poor teams are able to play the role of spoilers for contending teams late in the season. Many of the contending teams are figuring that they're set up for some easy wins and that they're just going to roll right over their opposition. And then they get a wakeup call by actually dropping some games to these teams.

 

I think they'll eventually break out of the funk, but I'm seeing a lot of slacking around, much like I saw during the 2003 World Series, the reason I truly believe the Marlins won their second world championship. They simply wanted it more. So far, almost every team the Yanks have faced this season have seemingly wanted it more. Simple as that.

[NoCalMike 0]

Something I've noticed with the A's batters this season is they are watching too damn many first pitch strikes. Now I know you want your hitters to be patient, but watching a first pitch strike go right down the pipe in the name of "patience" is just ridiculous. If you get a pitch to hit, knock the snot out of that sucker.

[Bruiser Chong 0]

It can be frustrating to see hitters take good pitches, but it's all in the name of making the pitcher throw them. If they get behind a ball or two right out of the gates, they're more or less forced to throw something to the hitter's liking.

[Styles 0]

I had to have tickets for the O's worst showing of the season. The offense was mostly dead (but of course we're facing the reigning AL Cy Young), and the pitching was just not doing anything right. O well. I'm 0-2 in live O's games.

Can you buy season's tickets?

shuddup...

 

A couple years ago every game I went to (like 7 or 8) was either delayed or postponed by rain...crazy...

[Some Guy 0]

Sac bunts only make sense when there is a runner on second and no outs. A fly ball, ground ball, wild pitch/passed ball, balk, squeeze play, etc.. could all et the guy home. Moving a guy to second is foolish in virtually any instance (pitcher batting or a really bad hitter (Pokey Reese) would be those instances).

 

I disagree. Moving the runner from second to third adds situations which are marginal at best. They are certainly not likely enough to warrent giving up an extra chance to gather a hit, in my opinion. Moving the runner from first to second is a better option. But usually I'd rather not see sacrifices at all.

I disagree. Bottom of the 9th or extra innings at home and you get a lead off double or some how end up with a guy on 2B with no outs. You'd be retarded not to bunt him over, assuming you have a guy who can do it. Then as I said in my previous post you have a multitude of ways to score a run and win a game. Other than that I don't have much use for it unless you have a guy who can't hit or hits into a ton of DPs.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Well lets look at that situation. Bottom 9, no outs, runner on second. You have three chances to gather a safe hit, which will bring the runner home. Now lets say we sacrifice the runner over. Now its one out, man on third. But now he can score on a sacrifice fly, but for the next batter only. Those multitudes of extra scoring situations are only good for ONE batter. If he doesn't succeed, you're back to square one, with one less chance to score.

[Some Guy 0]

Well lets look at that situation. Bottom 9, no outs, runner on second. You have three chances to gather a safe hit, which will bring the runner home. Now lets say we sacrifice the runner over. Now its one out, man on third. But now he can score on a sacrifice fly, but for the next batter only. Those multitudes of extra scoring situations are only good for ONE batter. If he doesn't succeed, you're back to square one, with one less chance to score.

Sure, but leaving him on second gives three guys a chance to move the runner 180 feet by various means. That basically meaqns you need a hit to the outfield, a sac fly or grounder to teh right side to move him to third and then you're in teh same situation as you would be if you bunted. It is much easier to score a guy from 3B than from 2B. A team needs more thign sto go right to get a guy home from 2B than they do from 3B. Plus, msny hitters are capable of just hititng the ball 250 feet into the outfield to score the run.

 

I understand your thinking, the team gets 3 cahnces to bring a guy in form 3B but only 2 from 3B, but I still disagree.