I guess Cohen and Renfroe didn't read Will James's post
- Thread starter Bro Montana
- Start date
If you're gonna be six pack cool at least wait until the inning is over before looking like a damn fool
This is a perfect example of what I have been talking about
The decision to bunt in this case was largely influenced by the fact that Renfroe struck out and looked bad against this pitcher in his first at bat. So, basically instead of having Renfroe strike out again and put the inning on the shoulders of Norris- who also struck out and looked bad with two outs, we had Renfroe squeeze (with the third baseman playing back- which is always a good time to bunt with a player with speed- and got home a run and the lead in a close game. We also nearly injured their pitcher on the play- which would have gotten us into their bullpen. Oh and by the way- since this was scored a single by Renfroe- it's not going to figure into your cute little stat.
The second bunt was because again- Norris struck out and looked bad in his first at bat, and the fact that they had just misplayed a bunt with a possibly injured pitcher. We move the runners to second and third and so that causes them to IBB Pirtle and face Henderson. Yes, Henderson hit into a double play- but now instead of having Pirtle, Henderson, Ammirati up next inning, we get Ammirati, Frazier, and CT up which means an extra plate appearance for two of our better hitters.
Again- you manage a baseball game based on individual players, match-ups, and situations. Not by gross stats- especially one that is flawed.
The decision to bunt in this case was largely influenced by the fact that Renfroe struck out and looked bad against this pitcher in his first at bat. So, basically instead of having Renfroe strike out again and put the inning on the shoulders of Norris- who also struck out and looked bad with two outs, we had Renfroe squeeze (with the third baseman playing back- which is always a good time to bunt with a player with speed- and got home a run and the lead in a close game. We also nearly injured their pitcher on the play- which would have gotten us into their bullpen. Oh and by the way- since this was scored a single by Renfroe- it's not going to figure into your cute little stat.
The second bunt was because again- Norris struck out and looked bad in his first at bat, and the fact that they had just misplayed a bunt with a possibly injured pitcher. We move the runners to second and third and so that causes them to IBB Pirtle and face Henderson. Yes, Henderson hit into a double play- but now instead of having Pirtle, Henderson, Ammirati up next inning, we get Ammirati, Frazier, and CT up which means an extra plate appearance for two of our better hitters.
Again- you manage a baseball game based on individual players, match-ups, and situations. Not by gross stats- especially one that is flawed.
Waiting on an explanation of Fraziers which is the whole of my bunt issue. Again man on 1st no out. Bunt with .667 Frazier. No runs. So dumb.
Cant say anything about the squeeze- it worked and we got a run. But I absolutely 17'ing hate bunting with a 3-4-5 hole guy.
Bunting Frazier was a bad move. Try to get a big inning going- dont give away outs
Well, I won't make you wait long
We bunted there because the third baseman had just made an error. So, we're going to make him make another play while that error is still fresh on his mind with a runner with good speed. Worst case scenario- a runner in scoring position with one out for CT Bradford and Rea coming up behind him.
We bunted there because the third baseman had just made an error. So, we're going to make him make another play while that error is still fresh on his mind with a runner with good speed. Worst case scenario- a runner in scoring position with one out for CT Bradford and Rea coming up behind him.
To have one bad looking strikeout mean you give up with what is supposed to be your best hitter is epic stupid. It's just a matter of who the stupid is assigned to: Cohen, if that's the decision he made and the reason, or Todd, for suggesting that's why Cohen had him bunt instead of just saying that's who he is as a coach no matter who is at the plate. I am particularly interested in how the first strikeout apparently foretold a second one was assured.
Sorry the stats show that is ********. Also taking the bat out of our hottest hitter was ********. The pitcher just had a runner reach base. Let's let our beat hitter try to get on base while it's still on the pitchers mind. You cannot defend bunting Frazier there. "Will you're right I'm sorry" is what you should say. If we lose by one it's Cohens 17ing fault.
Dude, Todd is the one over-thinking. Cohen bunted him because we're in a game with a really good pitcher and the game will likely be low scoring and close. End of story.
Is Renfroe our best hitter?
He is a good one- but I would say Frazier is a better hitter at this point. It all just depends on how bad the pitcher made the hitter look in his first at bat. If the hitter looked like he didn't have a clue or was missing really bad with his swings- it's probably not likely that he is going to figure it out in his second at bat. Not to mention the fact that this is a pitchers duel also influenced the decision heavily.
You can call Cohen and me stupid all year as long as we win games.
He is a good one- but I would say Frazier is a better hitter at this point. It all just depends on how bad the pitcher made the hitter look in his first at bat. If the hitter looked like he didn't have a clue or was missing really bad with his swings- it's probably not likely that he is going to figure it out in his second at bat. Not to mention the fact that this is a pitchers duel also influenced the decision heavily.
You can call Cohen and me stupid all year as long as we win games.
Renfroe is the one they say has the most talent and just has to put it all together. Perhaps I should have said the one they want to be our best or believe can be our best.
And I am astounded that you are sticking to your guns on how the first at bat goes determining what you do the next at bat. That doesn't even make sense. Jim Deshaies once struck out the first 8 guys in a game. Should they have all bunted? Good hitters made adjustments to pitchers, and vice versa. I would hope that if Radke attacked Renfroe the same way again that he would figure that out and be ready.
And I am astounded that you are sticking to your guns on how the first at bat goes determining what you do the next at bat. That doesn't even make sense. Jim Deshaies once struck out the first 8 guys in a game. Should they have all bunted? Good hitters made adjustments to pitchers, and vice versa. I would hope that if Radke attacked Renfroe the same way again that he would figure that out and be ready.
And I'm sorry you can't defend your stat
Again- your stat treats bunt singles and singles equally and doesn't take into account bunts that are scored errors. Therefore- plays like the one we just scored a run on aren't accounted for. Making your stat worthless and flawed.
What you should be telling me is "Todd, I'm sorry that I'm trying too hard to be an internet superstar and I don't know what I'm talking about".
Really, it's Cohen's fault if we lose? Is that really up for debate? Thanks for that captain obvious. Who else is the blame supposed to go on? Dan Mullen?
Again- your stat treats bunt singles and singles equally and doesn't take into account bunts that are scored errors. Therefore- plays like the one we just scored a run on aren't accounted for. Making your stat worthless and flawed.
What you should be telling me is "Todd, I'm sorry that I'm trying too hard to be an internet superstar and I don't know what I'm talking about".
Really, it's Cohen's fault if we lose? Is that really up for debate? Thanks for that captain obvious. Who else is the blame supposed to go on? Dan Mullen?
Exactly. It has nothing to do with who is up or what he did in his previous at bat. It's the way he likes to play.
This is the whole entire reason of my incessant postings. People didn't want to admit that it is a problem and we win sometimes in spite of Cohens offensive gameplan. It will hurt is in close games because it costs us runs.
You keep saying that and I keep telling you my stat just takes into account what we do with a man of 1st no outs. Not all bunts dumbass. You know this yet still say it in hopes that the uneducated will think you are saying something logical.
well, you can look at both sides
Cohen bunted with men on 1st and 2nd to get them over in a close game- not bad strategy...so what happens? they walk pirtle to load them up- Henderson hits into a DP...Cohen bunted to avoid hitting into the DP, and we end up doing it anyway.
Damned if we do- damned if we dont
And Renfroe just struck out again
Hmmmm....
Some hitters struggle more against certain pitchers. Can we agree on that? I'm sure there is some guy from the 20's that owned Babe Ruth. I'm sure that there is someone that completely owned Ryne Sandberg. All at bats are not created equal as far as quality. If you have a hitter that looks awful against a certain pitcher- you have to do something- pinch-hit, bunt, take a strike out, pray for a miracle? What's the best option?
It also depends on the game situation. Again- we have a low scoring game and we need to try to create runs to win- because we are not hitting this guy very well. We created a run and now instead of it being a tie game, we have a one run lead at this moment.
If your first eight guys strike out - you are probably screwed anyway. So, my answer is this- it depends on the situation. If it's a low scoring game, yes, you need to try to create some runs somehow and if I had an opportunity to bunt to get a run home to win the game- I would do it in a heart beat. If my team was getting blown out and we were striking out a lot - no, I wouldn't.
Hmmmm....
Some hitters struggle more against certain pitchers. Can we agree on that? I'm sure there is some guy from the 20's that owned Babe Ruth. I'm sure that there is someone that completely owned Ryne Sandberg. All at bats are not created equal as far as quality. If you have a hitter that looks awful against a certain pitcher- you have to do something- pinch-hit, bunt, take a strike out, pray for a miracle? What's the best option?
It also depends on the game situation. Again- we have a low scoring game and we need to try to create runs to win- because we are not hitting this guy very well. We created a run and now instead of it being a tie game, we have a one run lead at this moment.
If your first eight guys strike out - you are probably screwed anyway. So, my answer is this- it depends on the situation. If it's a low scoring game, yes, you need to try to create some runs somehow and if I had an opportunity to bunt to get a run home to win the game- I would do it in a heart beat. If my team was getting blown out and we were striking out a lot - no, I wouldn't.
Are y'all going to argue about every decision Cohen makes all year long?
Less than two games into to the season and y'all have annoyed the 17 out me already.
Damn.
Less than two games into to the season and y'all have annoyed the 17 out me already.
Damn.
I don't like that bunt either but that bunt is not my point. It's the man on first bunt which accounted for 75% of our bunts last year. Bunting 2 men over probably is neutral. Bunting the one over is just statistically and practically dumb.
Coach, I don't have a problem with the strategy there if we think we aren't going to score many runs, which might have been the case today against Radke. Get the run(s) when you can. If we felt like scoring was not going be an issue, then I am not much on the get 'em over philosophy until about the 6th or so or if you have the 8 or 9 hole guys up at any point.
This is a rich statement coming from you
So, basically you are admitting to using a flawed stat to make people think the same thing that you just accused me of?
So, basically you are admitting to using a flawed stat to make people think the same thing that you just accused me of?
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS HOT. Someone as concerned with stats and numbers as you should know that streaks are illusions.
And even if there were something to them, no one is "hot" in the second game of the season.
And even if there were something to them, no one is "hot" in the second game of the season.
One AB is not a valid enough sample size to make a judgment like that. If Renfroe homered off of him in the first, would you walk him the next time?
Logic is not strong with you. I cannot make it easier. I don't like bunting one man over. When we have a man on with no outs the stats prove me right and it's not close.
And here's the bottom line on that
You're going to have blow outs like we had yesterday and close games like today. When you beat someone 16-1- there's no need to create runs. But to win the close low scoring games- you have to try to create runs- whether that is bunting, stealing, or whatever. I'm glad that we have a coach that is willing to create runs if he has to to win the game. That's just the bottom line to it. Right now, that squeeze play is the difference in winning and being tied. Now, we have finally gotten their ace out of the game and we have the lead.
You're going to have blow outs like we had yesterday and close games like today. When you beat someone 16-1- there's no need to create runs. But to win the close low scoring games- you have to try to create runs- whether that is bunting, stealing, or whatever. I'm glad that we have a coach that is willing to create runs if he has to to win the game. That's just the bottom line to it. Right now, that squeeze play is the difference in winning and being tied. Now, we have finally gotten their ace out of the game and we have the lead.
The best way to create runs is to score runs. The best way to score runs is by not getting out. Therefore you should not purposefully help them get outs like Norris Frazier and Rea, 3 solid bats have done today, resulting in ZERO runs. We scored twice as often and 6 times as many runs per inning doing what I say rather than your and Cohens ********. By now it's obvious to the board.
now that is ********...as a former player there are times when you see the ball better and get into a groove. It doesnt matter what any stats say
You can tell if a guy is swinging and it isn't even close
or the guy goes back to the dugout and tells the coach (Cohen) "damn I didn't see anything, I can't hit that"- that's a pretty good idea that he isn't likely to hit him.
If Renfroe hit a home run off of the guy- first of all, Cohen is going to let him swing away not to mention the fact that it wouldn't be a 0-0 game. If I'm the coach for Portland State- I'm telling my pitcher to be careful with him. Again- it just depends- did the pitcher throw a bad pitch because it was a mechanical issue? Did he not follow through a leave the ball up in the zone? Pitching and hitting are two different animals though. You can't compare the two. You can pitch a hitter differently. But if a pitcher knows you have a weakness or a pitch you can't hit- they are not likely to attack you differently.
or the guy goes back to the dugout and tells the coach (Cohen) "damn I didn't see anything, I can't hit that"- that's a pretty good idea that he isn't likely to hit him.
If Renfroe hit a home run off of the guy- first of all, Cohen is going to let him swing away not to mention the fact that it wouldn't be a 0-0 game. If I'm the coach for Portland State- I'm telling my pitcher to be careful with him. Again- it just depends- did the pitcher throw a bad pitch because it was a mechanical issue? Did he not follow through a leave the ball up in the zone? Pitching and hitting are two different animals though. You can't compare the two. You can pitch a hitter differently. But if a pitcher knows you have a weakness or a pitch you can't hit- they are not likely to attack you differently.
Well, then you should have been OK with a squeeze play then
Unless you don't like bunting men over to score runs in a close game.
Call me back when your stats count bunt singles and errors into the equation.
Unless you don't like bunting men over to score runs in a close game.
Call me back when your stats count bunt singles and errors into the equation.