|
Knockknees posted:What are a few good things to know in order to participate in/follow a friendly discussion about the Reds with Reds fans this season? You will need to form an opinion as to the appropriateness of spaghetti noodles in chili.
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 12:54 |
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:The easiest way for you to get in to it is going to be picking a team. You should pick a cool team like the A's. You seem to have misspelled "Tigers". 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
Big foul areas keeping foul pops in play helps a lot, too. A park that is laid out so that most days the wind is blowing in toward the plate is another factor, or such that shadows make it difficult to pick up the ball from the pitcher's hand on many days. It could also mean a soft infield that slows down ground balls and makes them easier to field. Essentially, it implies a number of conditions which collectively make it harder to hit (and particularly hit home runs) and thus help to boost any pitcher's stats.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
Michael Corleone posted:Is it easier to steal bases off a righty or lefty pitcher? Anything else to look for that can give base runners an advantage when looking to commit theft? Generally a right-hander, since he has his back to the bag. Speed of delivery is also a big factor, though, so standard "all else being equal" disclaimer. All pitchers have a "tell", a gesture or action on the windup that indicates whether he's going home or over to first with the ball. Good base stealers pick up on it and use it to gain an extra step. It's usually very subtle, and difficult to catch just watching the game. One tell I read about was that a particular pitcher would always raise his eyebrows when throwing home, for example. Sometimes it's the way he stands on the rubber, or an extra nod of the head when reading the signs, or some other sort of unconscious action the runner can read.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Popete posted:The discussion has come up among some friends about how out of shape a lot of baseball players look. Is there a good explanation for this? I mean I understand a lot of power guys just want to be able to smash dingers and I suppose that momentum helps. But it's hard to explain to friends/girlfriend why a lot of these guys just look non-athletic and are fatties (e.g. Prince Fielder, Colon even Miggy is a little bigger). How is this an advantage over guys being just plain ripped like Harper/Trout/Holliday, it obviously effects their defense as well (e.g. Fielder/Miggy). I guess it's a "survival of the fittest" (lol) situation. Being totally ripped and in tip-top shape apparently does not offer enough of an advantage to displace the fatties. It suggests that raw talent is of primary importance, and refinement of specific techniques and strategies confers more benefit than general physical fitness. It doesn't matter how fit you are if you can't hit a curve ball, for example.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Popete posted:Which is why I'm asking the question, not telling Bartolo Colon to drop 80 lbs and work on his abs. I remember something related to this involving the Tigers' pitcher Micky Lolich in the early 70s. He had always been kind of tubby and got razzed a lot for it, so he went on a diet and lost about 20 pounds. He looked a lot better and said he felt a whole lot better, too. The problem was that the loss of weight affected his delivery. He lost velocity on his fastball, and had trouble with location. He finally gave up on the new svelte look and regained the 20 lbs. His delivery problems disappeared. Billy Martin described him as "the best pot-bellied pitcher I have." So I guess the answer is "it's complicated." Players have a natural body type and shape that gives them the best success on the field for whatever reasons, and deviating too much from it (high or low) produces worse results. Some players benefit from being trimmer and in better overall shape, and some don't. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
The thing with Lolich is purely a memory from when I was 10 or 12. It was probably part of a pre-game interview, and memories being what they are (especially 40+ years later), I don't have any idea where it would be referenced. I distinctly remember him saying he had lost weight and it messed him up, so he put the weight back on. It was probably a response to a reporter teasing him about losing some weight, and Mickey's response was basically, "Been there, done that, not going back." The actual weight-loss incident may have occurred earlier in his career, or even in the minors. Google news tells me the Billy Martin comment about him being the best left-handed pot-bellied pitcher he has was from September 2, 1971 if you want a reference for that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
Earl Weaver would occasionally pull his starting pitcher after one pitch and replace him with an opposite-handed guy. Sometimes crazy stuff is worthwhile just to screw up the opposing manager's game plan. With all the money in the game, however, there isn't a lot of room to screw around any more.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:There are no less painful ways to get your baseball fix. Sometimes your team will be lovely. It happens. The Rays are going to be not-lovely a lot more often than they're lovely. Very true. If you can only enjoy baseball when your team is good, you don't really enjoy baseball. You enjoy winning. Enjoy the game for the game. Even if your team is terrible it's still baseball, and that's good.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
Everblight posted:What? How? I thought Home Runs were always credited to the pitcher giving them up (ignoring men on base via error, catcher interference, etc), so he should definitely have at least 3 ER? If an error occurs on what should have been the third out, all runs scored after that are unearned.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
jackofarcades posted:Best possible batting order isn't OBP highest to lowest, it's probably not a big effect, and you have to please the players. You'd generally want high OBP for the first couple guys, preferably with a guy hitting second who can hit to right field to move the runner from 1st to 3rd. Then you want your high slugging percentage guys who can drive the runs in. I never really cared about the bottom three or four in the order when I coached, although I probably should have. Of course, it doesn't actually work that way most of the time, but the percentages are in your favor, at least.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Capt. Sticl posted:Generally, the handedness of the batter. Shortstop covers for a lefty hitter, second baseman for a righty. More specifically, the goal is to cover the steal attempt while minimizing the chance you create a hole for the hitter. So, you should base the decision on a specific batter's tendencies related to hitting the ball to either left field (second baseman would cover steal) or right field (shortstop would cover). They will also share the duty for a hitter that can hit to either side. SS/2B will signal to each other as to who has the base on the next pitch with a running threat on. They try to randomize it to minimize the hit-and-run advantage.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2014 14:20
|
|
|
skooma512 posted:It bounced off the left field wall, but he was right on top of it. Anybody on base? Runners can advance after a foul catch. It's often better to let fouls go in that case.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:Actually, it gets tricky. But to keep it simple, just remember that at the time a fielder touches the ball, it's the position of the ball, not the player, that determines whether it is fair or foul. If the player attempts to field the ball in fair territory, and the ball is in fair territory at the time this attempt is made, and this attempt causes the ball to go into foul territory, then it's a fair ball. And as a corollary, the line itself is fair. The ball must be completely beyond the line to be foul. If any part of the ball is above any part of the line, it's a fair ball.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Say a game is on the last out of a potential no-hitter. Say there's a weird blooper hit into the infield and the fielder realizes that he won't be able to get the out in time. Can he intentionally airmail the ball into the stands to get it to count as an error? Depends on if the official scorer thinks the runner would have been safe regardless. It would be a hit+error in that case. No fielder is going to throw it into the stands deliberately if he thinks he has a shot at the out, though, so the scorer should be able to tell pretty clearly.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
Pander posted:Calling hitters as a general group "terrible" suggests to me that rather than hitters being bad, pitchers have been re-developing an edge ever since the end of the steroid era. Hitting and pitching has generally been cyclical, and for the moment increased scouting information available has seemed to benefit pitchers more due to better shifting and understanding of hitter weaknesses. I have seen this attributed to the development of the pitch tracker, which has resulted in umpires substantially lowering the strike zone, much to the pitchers' advantage. The strike zone used to end about the waist, which pitchers hated. Offensive production began falling with the increase in low strikes. I don't know if the relationship is real, but its certainly plausible. I'd really like to think that all the idiots bitching about umpires and their strike zones are directly responsible for the lack of hitting.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
ayn rand hand job posted:He can't intentionally interfere with a thrown ball. What I was taught about that is that if the runner makes no reaction to the throw, he's probably OK. If he moves sideways or jumps or puts up a hand or does anything that indicates he knows the throw is coming, it's interference. Most runners do the safe thing and just hit the dirt once they're out. About the only way a runner can get away with it is if he has his head down and is running straight for the base, oblivious to the overall play, and the throw drills him in the chest (or head, as in the Dizzy Dean story above).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
Everblight posted:What's the difference between command and control, really? Command generally refers to the ability to throw multiple types of pitches well, and be able to make the release on all of them look the same. It also includes being able to vary the speed and amount of break in various pitches, minimizing random variability. A pitcher does not have good command of his curve ball if he tips it with arm motion every time, or cannot routinely give it the speed and break that he desires. Control is the ability to locate pitches in the strike zone, regardless of the type of pitch.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
To me, the classic "hanging curve ball" is a good illustration of command versus control. The guy has good control as he has thrown the ball at the correct spot, assuming the ball breaks properly. Due to his poor command of the pitch, however, it doesn't break as it should and stays up in the zone, making it easy to hit.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:I understand what you're saying, I've just literally never heard "command" used in that way before. From broadcasts to blogs, it's always in my experience been related to location. Well, they're related. Not being in command of your pitches makes the ball go all over the place even when it's aimed at exactly the same place every time, so it has the same effect as poor control. It's a matter of breaking down where the error is - whether it is the way the pitch is thrown or where it was aimed. Great pitchers have both, obviously.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:I'm guessing in this particular thread most people are asking how people in baseball are defining things. Part of the problem is that baseball people themselves are not consistent with the terms. I have often heard former pitchers as commentators, for example, complain about a pitcher's lack of command of his curve ball, meaning he could not throw it reproducibly with the same break each time. Jim Palmer particularly was good about this. I've heard others commentators describe the inability to throw strikes as "poor command" of pitches in general and also as "poor control." Sometimes commentators are not very precise in their use of the terms. The inability to throw strikes can be caused by either or both. To me, there are two separate issues. One is the ability to make the ball do what you want it to consistently, which I have generally heard referred to as "command." The other is to be able to locate a pitch where desired, which I have generally heard referred to as "control." I have learned this primarily from listening to pitchers talk on the art of pitching. Your mileage may vary.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
porkface posted:I think what kensei is saying is that for Designated Hitters like Edgar, there should be wild-card berths for getting into the Hall of Fame. I don't think he has enough command of his hitting.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 12:54 |
|
|
Monicro posted:i command this thread to control its sperg levels https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAvRBDQqSmY
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2014 07:38
|
|