You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



10/10/2011 10:12 pm  #76


Re: NLCS Game 2

What's with all the broken bats???

 

10/10/2011 10:22 pm  #77


Re: NLCS Game 2

Jesus.  Which time zone did Fielder's ball land in?

 

10/10/2011 10:31 pm  #78


Re: NLCS Game 2

Whew.  Thank God we got THAT run back!

     Thread Starter
 

10/10/2011 10:33 pm  #79


Re: NLCS Game 2

Seriously, what's with all the check swong opposite field homers for Freese.  If that guy can ever learn to catch up to major league pitching he could have some serious power.

     Thread Starter
 

10/10/2011 10:44 pm  #80


Re: NLCS Game 2

OK folks.  Now it's a 5 game series and the Cardinals have home field.  Let's go Carp.

 

10/10/2011 10:46 pm  #81


Re: NLCS Game 2

Max wrote:

Seriously, what's with all the check swong opposite field homers for Freese.  If that guy can ever learn to catch up to major league pitching he could have some serious power.

For Freese to be able to pull pitches he's going to have to adjust his swing. Right now it's too long and he doesn't generate a lot of backspin. I cannot think of a single home run he's hit to left field.

 

10/10/2011 11:12 pm  #82


Re: NLCS Game 2

I see one to left , left center, and center, others to right . Tonights not included



http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.com/batter/501896/?pitchers=A&count=AA&pitches=AA&from=3%2F29%2F11&to=10%2F9%2F2011

 

10/10/2011 11:16 pm  #83


Re: NLCS Game 2

don.rob11 wrote:

I see one to left , left center, and center, others to right . Tonights not included



http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.com/batter/501896/?pitchers=A&count=AA&pitches=AA&from=3%2F29%2F11&to=10%2F9%2F2011

And FIVE to right field.  Look at that distribution!  He's even more shifted to opposite field than I thought.  Whaddya bet that HR to left was a change up that hung?

     Thread Starter
 

10/11/2011 8:01 am  #84


Re: NLCS Game 2

Notes: I watch games at a sports bar so I don't talk during games too much.

1) I agree with the strike zone,  the only consistency in the strike zone last night was dead red. If you put it there, it was a strike. Anything else was "at your own risk".
2) I don't understand why there's so much negativity around E-Jax in here. Is it that we're still pissed about the Rasmus trade? Let it go already. Get behind the guy, he's throwing well enough to win. If we don't have him next season, that shouldn't spoil the fact that he was a staple of a WIN in MILWAUKEE. Without Jackson, Philly bounces us in 4 games.
3) It'd been too long since we had another rehash of the Three Muskateers. This one is told from the viewpoint of Porthos' swordtip. Bring a vomit bag, it's going to be rough.
4) Thank God Pujols figured out how to clear a fence, that was concerning.
5) Back to St. Louis, where the Brewers are far less fearsome. Wednesday calling for rain, wary of that. We'll deal with Thursday on Thursday.
6) I'm so goddamned tired of that beast and belt dance I could punch someone. I understand if you jack a home run, but do we really need it after every goddamned single? Meh whatever, we just need to shut them up.
7) We have nothing to fear in Milwaukee. They have the record, we have homefield, and we have been the better team over the last 8 weeks. Let's get home and beat the shit out of those no-talent assclowns again.

 

10/11/2011 8:09 am  #85


Re: NLCS Game 2

forsberg_us wrote:

OK folks.  Now it's a 5 game series and the Cardinals have home field.  Let's go Carp.

I usually think Game 4 is the turning point of any series, but Game 3 might be the  pivotal game of this series. These are the only two starters who have been ace-like for their teams in the playoffs so far.
It's reasonable to assume this series is going back to Milwaukee. If they can take out Gallardo tomorrow night, it may not have to.

 

10/11/2011 8:10 am  #86


Re: NLCS Game 2

Max wrote:

What's with all the broken bats???

They're made of wood, so they occasionally break.

 

10/11/2011 8:15 am  #87


Re: NLCS Game 2

"I don't understand why there's so much negativity around E-Jax in here."

Most of it has been from TK, and my bad for not challenging him on it. Jackson has been their most consistent pitcher after Carpenter since they acquired him. I think he only had two bad starts before last night, if you want to count that as a bad start. I wish they could find a way to keep him next year, but they're already committed financially to five starting pitchers.

 

10/11/2011 8:38 am  #88


Re: NLCS Game 2

"It'd been too long since we had another rehash of the Three Muskateers. This one is told from the viewpoint of Porthos' swordtip. Bring a vomit bag, it's going to be rough."

Well, that's enlightening. And I didn't think there was any gold left in that mine. I can just imagine Dumas wherever he is stomping his feet, grabbing handfuls of hair and saying "THAT PASTY LIMEY MICHAEL YORK WAS ALMOST TOLERABLE, BUT THEN YOU MADE A VERSION WITH AN AMERICAN?!? AND THEN GABRIEL BYRNE WAS LOUIS XIV'S FATHER?!?!? D'ARTAGNAN ISN'T DARTH VADER!!! STOP CORRUPTING MY BOOK!!!!!"

 

10/11/2011 8:41 am  #89


Re: NLCS Game 2

artie_fufkin wrote:

I wish they could find a way to keep him next year, but they're already committed financially to five starting pitchers.

I echo this sentiment. I don't have a great love for Jackson. I think he's a decent run-of-the-mill pitcher, but he's loads better than Westbrook, and a bit more on the road than Garcia. Hard to part ways with a guy like that, settling for a downgrade in Westbrook.

I thought Jax played well last night considering the ump wanted the ball to be belt high before he'd call a strike. It's really tough to ask anyone to not get killed throwing the ball that high. He was keeping it down for the most part, just getting no love down there.

 

10/11/2011 8:45 am  #90


Re: NLCS Game 2

My daughter's name is Lyric Nora (I went for originality with Lyric, Nora is after my mother). Had she been a boy, my (now ex-)wife wanted to name him Tanner Phillip. This is somewhat normal, but the Tanner was short for D'artagnan. I told her I didn't think it was a good idea to do that to the boy, I didn't want to name my kid something with an apostrophe in it, he'd be 13 before he could spell it, and take no end of torment. She replied with "We don't have to spell it that way, we could use 'Dartanyan'."

My reply, which could have been the beginning of the end of that marriage was "Great so not only are we jackasses for doing that to our kid, now we're illiterate jackasses."

Thank the gods she was a baby girl....

Last edited by alz (10/11/2011 8:46 am)

 

10/11/2011 9:40 am  #91


Re: NLCS Game 2

"Thank the gods she was a baby girl...."

I enjoyed "The Count of Monte Cristo" so much when I was younger I would have thrown out "Edmond" as a baby name, but there's no way my wife wouldn't have exercised a peremptory challenge. She hates Dumas. I think it's a chick thing. "His work has no subtlety whatsoever," she says. Maybe not, but there's swordplay. They don't understand if we had our way, we'd all want to be Musketeers.

Last edited by artie_fufkin (10/11/2011 9:41 am)

 

10/11/2011 11:07 am  #92


Re: NLCS Game 2

alz wrote:

2) I don't understand why there's so much negativity around E-Jax in here. Is it that we're still pissed about the Rasmus trade? Let it go already. Get behind the guy, he's throwing well enough to win. If we don't have him next season, that shouldn't spoil the fact that he was a staple of a WIN in MILWAUKEE. Without Jackson, Philly bounces us in 4 games.

If I give off the impression that I don't like Jackson, that's my fault for not being clear. I actually like Jackson quite a bit. He was getting screwed by Timmons.

 

10/11/2011 11:24 am  #93


Re: NLCS Game 2

tkihshbt wrote:

alz wrote:

2) I don't understand why there's so much negativity around E-Jax in here. Is it that we're still pissed about the Rasmus trade? Let it go already. Get behind the guy, he's throwing well enough to win. If we don't have him next season, that shouldn't spoil the fact that he was a staple of a WIN in MILWAUKEE. Without Jackson, Philly bounces us in 4 games.

If I give off the impression that I don't like Jackson, that's my fault for not being clear. I actually like Jackson quite a bit. He was getting screwed by Timmons.

I had no idea what to make of that strike zone, maybe the ball just looked different coming from Jackson. He wouldn't get low or outside, and on the next two pitches miss the border on high or inside... Then Marcum would come up and throw low middle, out of the zone and below the knees, and get the call. Then it changed, and Marcum was getting squeezed too. There were even a few that were close to dead center that were not called strikes. I just found myself wondering if the ump had something else on his mind...

When I umpired there were two prime goals of being behind the plate.
1) Consistantly call the same zone for both teams. That zone doesn't even have to be right or good, but if you call it the same for both sides, it's still fair.
2) Give inside or outside to the pitcher, but never both. If you give neither, there's too much advantage to the hitter. If you give both, then there's too much advantage to the pitcher.

Maybe that is wrong I guess, but it seems to hold true for 75% of the umpires in the bigs.... Timmons on the other hand seriously made me think he was flipping a coin.

 

10/11/2011 11:34 am  #94


Re: NLCS Game 2

"He was getting screwed by Timmons."

He threw three straight strikes to Hart in the fifth that were called balls. There was a perfect 2-2 pitch on the corner (to Hairston?) earlier in the game that should have ended an inning.
I don't think Jackson was the only one pitching to a floating strike zone. He missed a few on Marcum. That might have been the worst non-Cuzzi zone I've ever seen in the playoffs.
I don't know how umpiring assignments are handed out. I thought at one point they were done on merit. But then I saw Angel Hernandez got a gig in the NLDS and I figured there has to be another method.
Fortunately, the Cardinals and the Phillies got out of there without Hernandez  trying to make it about himself. He only had one "look at me" moment when he mimicked the balk.

 

10/11/2011 11:57 am  #95


Re: NLCS Game 2

artie_fufkin wrote:

He only had one "look at me" moment when he mimicked the balk.

That was amusing, I didn't notice the balk call until after he got done with the little "hokey pokey" imitation. It was a good call, and nice of him to explain why he called it, but still funny.


"You put your left foot in! You put your left foot out! ..." All that was missing was the shake and spin.

 

10/11/2011 1:04 pm  #96


Re: NLCS Game 2

artie_fufkin wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

OK folks.  Now it's a 5 game series and the Cardinals have home field.  Let's go Carp.

I usually think Game 4 is the turning point of any series, but Game 3 might be the  pivotal game of this series. These are the only two starters who have been ace-like for their teams in the playoffs so far.
It's reasonable to assume this series is going back to Milwaukee. If they can take out Gallardo tomorrow night, it may not have to.

A sweep woud be alot to ask at this point.   Taking 2 of 3 put the Cardinals in position to only have to split when they got back to Milwaukee.  That is what I expect to happen.

 

10/11/2011 1:06 pm  #97


Re: NLCS Game 2

alz wrote:

I echo this sentiment. I don't have a great love for Jackson. I think he's a decent run-of-the-mill pitcher, but he's loads better than Westbrook, and a bit more on the road than Garcia. Hard to part ways with a guy like that, settling for a downgrade in Westbrook.

I thought Jax played well last night considering the ump wanted the ball to be belt high before he'd call a strike. It's really tough to ask anyone to not get killed throwing the ball that high. He was keeping it down for the most part, just getting no love down there.

This is why I was down on Jackson.  I think he is overrated.  He has been everything the Cardinals could expect of him.  He has been huge.  Still he isnt a the star that the talking head make him out to be.

 

10/11/2011 2:23 pm  #98


Re: NLCS Game 2

APRTW, I can see that. I tend to downplay what we paid instead of expecting more out of what we got, as evident from the Rasmus rage we all kicked off when the trade went down.

I never expected Jax to be a star. I saw decent numbers, that had the age and the raw tools to be something Duncan could make into a solid starting pitcher. I see Scrabble in the same light, with the benefit of throwing left handed! I think we've gotten that (albeit possibly short term with Jax).

I also have felt better and better about the deal with every failed appearance Colby has made since the trade. He was a .246 hitter with us (77Ks in 94 games), he hit .173 with Toronto (39Ks in 35 games). With or without tools, production on that level isn't something you can get a really great trade out of. I think we did okay in hindsight, the move hasn't been a brutal failure.

 

10/11/2011 5:24 pm  #99


Re: NLCS Game 2

alz wrote:

She replied with "We don't have to spell it that way, we could use 'Dartanyan'."

Is your wife from the rural midwest /border state region?

     Thread Starter
 

10/11/2011 8:10 pm  #100


Re: NLCS Game 2

alz wrote:

Timmons on the other hand seriously made me think he was flipping a coin.

PD writers are cribbin from us agin'.  C'mon now.  Which one of us is Bernie?


* Umpire Timmons should have just flipped a coin Monday night;

Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bernie-miklasz/article_ba8cff28-f3c4-11e0-94bb-0019bb30f31a.html#ixzz1aWdZMFkF

     Thread Starter
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum

Quotes = [quote][/quote] Bold = [b][/b] Underlined = [u][/u] Italic = [i][/i] Link = [url][/url] Code = [code][/code] Image = [img][/img] Video = [video][/video]