Webstergrovesalum wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Not only that, but note he never said the pitches were strikes. He simply said that he made the pitches he wanted to make and "deserved" the calls.

I also would have loved for a reporter to have asked Howell how pitches like the one he threw to Rasmus affect a pitcher's salary/career.

BTW, finally saw the meltdown. Friggin classic. It never gets old watching someone slam his glove on the ground.  Brings back fond memories of Pedro Guerrero and Ted Lilly.

I guess Rasmus hadn't even finished rounding the bases as all this was going on too!  (lol)

Rasmus probably Cadillaced the trot, Web. You know, to make the Rays look foolish.

If I had hit the ball out that Berkman did on Thursday, I would've stood, admired it and took a picture.

artie_fufkin wrote:

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

He's kidding, Web. Max is trying to acknowledge that some of his criticisms of Rasmus earlier in the week may have been ill-timed.

Well, not exactly that, either.  I know we got on Pujols's case earlier in the year after he pulled a Bonds, and admired his home run and flipped the bat after hitting a walk off.  Rasmus wasn't quite that obvious, but there was some self-admiration there.  Just an observation.

Jeez, Max. If the thing you took away from all that nonsense was Rasmus allegedly showing up the other team, I'd say your fixation is starting to get a little weird.

Or someone's trying really hard to prove a point. I mean the first thing I thought when I saw the replay was "what a prima donna".

forsberg_us wrote:

Max wrote:

when I noticed the little mini-admiration thing.

You'd be the only person who noticed it, but that's just me.

[img][url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/24183648@N08/5894627507/]

artie_fufkin wrote:

Webstergrovesalum wrote:

I'm starting to understand the Ray's melt-down a little more now.  Their coach got thrown out after arguing a walk.  Then there was a balk called ---- then another walk--- then the 3 run HR.  Recipe for melt-down I suppose  (cute)

The problem is the umpires were right and the Rays were wrong. In every instance. Just because the pitcher hits the mitt doesn't mean the pitch is a strike. Jaso was set up well inside on the 3-2 pitch to Berkman, and it was a ball. Close, but a ball, and it was confirmed on the replay as a ball. Rays' TV didn't show the replay of the disputed pitch to Freese, but it was the same pitch the umpire called a ball to Berkman.
The balk was indisputable. Howell flinched, and both the plate umpire and the first base umpire saw it. As soon as I saw it, I reflexively said to my son "That's a balk." I don't think that played any part of Howell's meltdown. He was pissed about not getting the close pittches.
Maddon was just trying to wake up his team. He knows he can't argue balls and strikes. And it worked, to a degree.
As for Howell slamming his glove to the ground, if one of my Little League kids had done that, I would have taken him off the field, sat him on the bench for the rest of the game and after it was over made him apologize to the umpire, his teammates, and the kids on the other team.

I was going to comment on the Berkman at bat last night but didnt get back on he computer.  I saw it the same way you did.

I would add that the Rays were annoyed by Westbrooks effectiveness.  It was really there fault.  Westbrook is a shitty pitcher.  If he is spoting the ball on the edge of the strike zone as he was and getting the call he is effective.  However if he misses or doesnt get the call he quickly falls behind and lacks a swing a miss pitch.  The Rays mad the mistak of expanding the strike zone and the choosing not to sing on boardrline pitches tht ended up being strikes.  Westbrook simply cant pitch from behind.  If you make him do that he will lose ever time.

forsberg_us wrote:

Ok. And?  He followed through and set the bat down. You'll find a picture like that for every left hander that hits a home run.

I thought when you hit a fly ball you are supposed to run toward first base?  Why is he walking toward first for the first couple of steps?  In the screen grab both feet are planted for Christ sake!

I thought when you make contact you are supposed to release the bat in one fluid motion with your swing. Why is he still holding his bat unless to make a conspicuous statement about how and where he puts the bat down?

All I ever said was that there was a 'mini-admiration' after his swing.  It seems pretty obvious that I am correct about that, and that the screen grab proves it by showing Rasmus standing over home plate in something less than a half-stride, holding his bat like a gladiator holding a sword over a fallen opponent.

I respect that when you are unequivocally wrong, such as when Ludwick got traded last season, that you are quick to acknowledge it.  But you defend any take that is even a bit subjective to the point that it seems like you are out to 'win' rather than to educate and learn.

Last edited by Max (7/03/2011 12:01 am)

On the assumption that when he smacks a triple he reckons he needs to run, and not act like a prima donna, here's another Rasmus triple:

[img][url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/24183648@N08/5895761741/]

I will give you this, Fors, when he hits a long fly ball, he is less likely to leap into that 'ready to run' position.  There was one triple that was a long fly to deep center, and he dogged it at first, before realizing it wouldn't clear the wall, after which he turned it on and even the announcers commented on the burst of speed he put on after rounding first. 

Actually this exercise has given me more respect for his base running skills: he explodes out of the box on anything other than a long fly ball.

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=14532725

Last edited by Max (7/03/2011 12:30 am)

forsberg_us wrote:

1:07 & 1:09. You've obviously got a handle on posting pictures. Let's see where he was the second before and the second after.

"I respect that when you are unequivocally wrong, such as when Ludwick got traded last season, that you are quick to acknowledge it.  But you defend any take that is even a bit subjective to the point that it seems like you are out to 'win' rather than to educate and learn."

Look at how and where his left leg is planted in the two pictures of triples: it's still planted in the stance position (behind and to the left of home plate) . . . in his right leg and body lean we are seeing his break to first.  Look at his left leg in the HR: that is his first full stride to first . . . and he's walking (AND looking at his home run as he walks . . . and holding his bat)!

And for the record, the triple with the lean was an opposite field hit, which might account for the off balance lean.  The HR and the other triple were both to the right field corner, and his swing and follow through should all have been fairly similar . . .  but his feet positions are WAY different.

Nobody said he pulled a Bonds, I just said there was a mini-admiration thing as he watched his hit leave the park.  I think I said he flipped his bat, which he did not, but he tossed it aside pretty conspicuously.  This is so obvious, Fors, why not just admit that on this one point my observation was right?  We can still argue whether he's a prima donna or over-rated or anything else.

Last edited by Max (7/03/2011 1:08 pm)

Non-responsive.  1:07 & 1:09.

1:07 & 1:09.