Carl Crawford's At-Bat > Life, Etc.
What in the world happened to our old hacking Carl? The new one took the two far outside pitches for balls, fouled a few borderline pitches off, and then turned on a pitch inside and sent it deep into the night. Right now, Carl is about everything we ever hoped he could be.
Given the scenario of facing Mariano Rivera twice, I think everyone would've hoped for a split in this series, instead the Rays somehow took both games despite blowing late leads both times. The terrifying prophecy of Andy Sonnanstine and Jeff Niemann pitching in a wind tunnel turned out to be nothing but paranoia as neither allowed a ball to leave the park.
A week ago we were talking about desperately needing to win a series, now we've beaten the Red Sox and Yankees back-to-back and in the process raised our playoff odds by about 10% while moving up to third place in the division. We've got five more games on the road; three against Boston, two against Baltimore.
Don't fool yourself, this team has a chance to end this road trip at above.500 overall.
41 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Don't fool yourself, this team has a chance to end this road trip at .500 overall.
Mathematically impossible.
by rays_world_champs on May 8, 2009 12:55 AM EDT reply actions
Uh, how?
We’re 14-16, we have five games left.
by R.J. Anderson on May 8, 2009 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions
There could be a rain out.
Until Next Time,
The Sports Chief
by Top Gun Numba 1 on May 8, 2009 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions
We need a fanpost on this. It's got more action on it then ManRoid
There’s a rule that says when the starter craps his pants that the official scorekeeper gets to pick the best-performing reliever to get the win. That’s what happened.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
I'm not sure thats what happened in this case
Because they ended up tying the game after Niemann left. If we held the lead the whole time then I think your rule applies.
I believe there is a rule that states the scorer has discretion to award the win to another pitcher if who would have gotten the win normally is deemed ineffective.
It had nothing to do with the starter.
Wheeler was the pitcher of record when we scored. The official scorer can choose between Wheeler and the next relief pitcher on who gets the win. Since the scorer didn’t feel like Wheeler “earned” a win and Shouse got two big outs, he rightfully gave the nod to Shouse.
www.draysbay.com
It's not between the next two relief pitchers
The official scorer shall not credit as the winning pitcher a relief pitcher who is ineffective in a brief appearance, when at least one succeeding relief pitcher pitches effectively in helping his team maintain its lead. In such a case, the official scorer shall credit as the winning pitcher the succeeding relief pitcher who was most effective, in the judgment of the official scorer.
Literally, it’s scorer’s discretion among all relievers behind the starter.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
I think it has to be a pitcher beyond the traditional pitcher of record
By inducing the tying run, Wheeler became the traditional pitcher of record. Due to his ineffectiveness (2 run blast), the scorekeeper can credit a succeeding reliever. A prior reliever such as Howell would not be eligible regardless of how effective he pitched.
I recall this happening many years ago,
in the 1960s, I think. I cannot remember the details or the pitchers, but it was a slugfest in which just about every pitcher got lit up. The “technical” winning pitcher was awful, so the scorer credited the win to the only pitcher who was reasonably effective. I am pretty sure it was a Yankee game and it’s possible the beneficiary was Hal Reniff, but that is just a guess.
This could be the game you are referencing
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYA/NYA196405171.shtml
Hal Reniff entered this game with the team already up 11-9, but since he was the only guy who didn’t give up a run in the game, they gave him the Win even though Bud Dailey was like technically.
Fantastic memory Bob.
www.draysbay.com
by Tommy Rancel on May 8, 2009 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Saw the Yankees post game
everyone commented how great the AB by Crawford was
Why was Niemann pulled so early? I didn't get to watch the game. Was it because of steroids?
Until Next Time,
The Sports Chief
No, it was another 'S' word though.
Suckage. You could also apply Snoozefest if you wanted.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
So this is just on observation
but it has seemed that over the past week or two that Crawford has been a little more partient at the plate and not chasing balls out of the zone. I know I have read you talk about stats covering swinging at pitches out of the zone but don’t remember where that is from. Does the data actually back up the observation?
He used to swing at balls outside the zone 32% last year. This year he is swinging at balls outside the zone at a 26% clip.
I really, really, really, really hope this keeps up.
If he doesn’t revert to his hacking ways, he’s gonna win MVP. I mean, if Longo doesn’t.
Maybe if he stole 100 bases while he bats to his current average and OBP while scraping out 10HR.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
It'd be nice to see his power jump up to about .450 Slugging, but
I’ll take the plus defense, good average and good OBP any day of the week.
I don't need the SLG
OBP is his key stat. His speed turns every time on base vs a righty into an automatic double at a minimum.
The new patient CC makes me happy
on a side note…..FREE ZORILLA!
Going back to 2008 he has 17HRs in 259ABs.
Does anyone else think he could hit 30 if he got 500-600 at bats?
Not with everyday play, no.
Like he’s being used right now, yes.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
Actually, hell. I have no idea. The guy defies logic.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
Why not?
The sample size has become large enough (especially when combined with his Durham play) to warrant a shot.
Oh.
Tommy had a big article about Zobrist’s new training methods using some special bat. The patent lawyer for the bat came on and commented, which of course set off a chain reaction eventually leading to the collapse of the known universe.
Also featuring:
Christopher Walken as Tommy Rancel
John Belushi as Patrick Kennedy
Adam Goldberg as Top Gun Numba1
And introducing:
Dakota Fanning as R.J. Anderson
Obv. I would be played by Michael Clarke Duncan
Until Next Time,
The Sports Chief
by Top Gun Numba 1 on May 8, 2009 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions
I read Tommys article and some of the comments
Apparently I left before the patent lawyer jumped in. Thats was pretty funny
Follow up from above
Here it is. Also, the inventor had some choice words for RJ’s sarcastic comment which made him a little butthurt.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
I can't believe the guy thought I was serious.
by R.J. Anderson on May 8, 2009 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Indeed. It was odd.
Then again, you’re conditioned to neo-sarcasm.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."

by 




















