CardsFans » World Series Game 4

Max · 10/23/2011 10:29 pm

forsberg_us wrote:
"seriously fors, the first stroke out of holliday was fucking absurd, and that set the timbre for the game."

Bullshit. It was one at bat in a game in which the kid was otherwise unhittable. Sometimes you have to man up and admit the other guy was simply better. Tonight was one of those nights.

I didn't see it that way, Fors, and Fox made an unstated case when they were showing how "good" Holland had been, and they showed the Fox tracks of his strike outs, and a whopping percentage were not just borderline, but WAAAAAYYY the fuck off the plate on the inside. I stand by my judgement of bullshit.

Max · 10/23/2011 10:35 pm

Wait, I erred. Let me restate that.

What I saw was not just bullshit, it was tom glavine 1998, where any pitch that went where he intended was a strike. what we needed was not tim mccarver but joe morgan. we needed joe morgan saying: 'that's not a strike. see the rule book is very clear about what a strike is, and that ump doesn't have the right to just say, that was a good pitch so i'm calling it a strike. mlb needs to tell this ump that those pitches are not strikes.' THAT took balls, and it changed MLB.

ERA 1998 1999
Glavine 2.47 4.12
Maddux 2.22 3.57

forsberg_us · 10/23/2011 10:39 pm

Max wrote:
forsberg_us wrote:
"seriously fors, the first stroke out of holliday was fucking absurd, and that set the timbre for the game."

Bullshit. It was one at bat in a game in which the kid was otherwise unhittable. Sometimes you have to man up and admit the other guy was simply better. Tonight was one of those nights.
I didn't see it that way, Fors, and Fox made an unstated case when they were showing how "good" Holland had been, and they showed the Fox tracks of his strike outs, and a whopping percentage were not just borderline, but WAAAAAYYY the fuck off the plate on the inside. I stand by my judgement of bullshit.

Of course you don't Max. Just like the error at first last night had no effect on the game. You couldn't be wrong. How could I be so foolish?

Max · 10/23/2011 11:42 pm

I'm wrong all the time. The error last night did have an effect on pitching choices, a tiny bit, and maybe affected the readiness of their bullpen for the NEXT game (which they won), but it did not affect the outcome of game 3. The called strikes in this game were as verifiably fucked as I can ever recall, and mostly they came inside and early. And that fucked the Cardinal batters up from at least the 2nd inning (I didn't watch the 1st inning) and surely had an influence in the shut out of the team that scored 16 runs the night before.

artie_fufkin · 10/24/2011 8:10 am

APRTW wrote:
Is it just me or is Joe Buck the best play by play guy on TV. He doesnt try to act like he has played the game and doesnt make it about himself. To me he is just great to listen to.

I didn't really notice until one night a couple of years ago when he sat in for Dan McLaughlin on a Cardinals' broadcast. He's so much more professional than anyone else out there. He even makes McCarver sound intelligent. Sometimes.

artie_fufkin · 10/24/2011 8:12 am

forsberg_us wrote:
7 walks. Jesus, if we could somehow get out of this inning it'd be a miracle.

It's amazing he walked seven guys with that humungous strike zone. What's even more amazing is the Rangers didn't make him pay for it until the sixth inning.
I'll be glad when this series gets back to a real ballpark.

APIAD · 10/24/2011 9:09 am

Max wrote:
forsberg_us wrote:
"seriously fors, the first stroke out of holliday was fucking absurd, and that set the timbre for the game."

Bullshit. It was one at bat in a game in which the kid was otherwise unhittable. Sometimes you have to man up and admit the other guy was simply better. Tonight was one of those nights.
I didn't see it that way, Fors, and Fox made an unstated case when they were showing how "good" Holland had been, and they showed the Fox tracks of his strike outs, and a whopping percentage were not just borderline, but WAAAAAYYY the fuck off the plate on the inside. I stand by my judgement of bullshit.

He took advantage of the strike zone that wasbeing presented. FoxTracks is a stationary box that sas the same every game. In real life the strike zone isntlike that. It s what the Ump says it is. Instead of the Cardinals batters stompingtheir feet because they ddnt lik the zone Jackson should havetook advantage of it more.

APIAD · 10/24/2011 9:22 am

artie_fufkin wrote:
APRTW wrote:
Is it just me or is Joe Buck the best play by play guy on TV. He doesnt try to act like he has played the game and doesnt make it about himself. To me he is just great to listen to.
I didn't really notice until one night a couple of years ago when he sat in for Dan McLaughlin on a Cardinals' broadcast. He's so much more professional than anyone else out there. He even makes McCarver sound intelligent. Sometimes.

The comment he made last night about being criticized for being a fan of every team was pretty good. His dry self deprecating sense of hummor is refreshing. For being a Cardinals fan, season ticket holder, son of ahallof fam broadcaster he doesnt show it at all. The only time he really shows he is a Cardinals fan is whenhe made comments about players or in game moves that a far to intelligent fo someone on a national broadcast crew. You would think McCarver would be alittle more in tune with what the Cardinals do.

tkihshbt · 10/24/2011 9:34 am

My thoughts:

-Holland was on his game, but the Cardinals helped him out tremendously. Once Holliday and Freese got jobbed on those inside strikes, they were out of synch. Getting shut down so easily by Holland was a lot easier to swallow than what we saw a week ago against Randy Wolf. La Russa should've called Leyland last night since they knew what to do against Holland.

-Jackson was just terrible. Again. With command that lousy, I'm surprised the Rangers didn't hang 10 on him. Maybe it was just me, but if he didn't throw it in the dirt or 10 inches off the plate, he threw it in the middle of the plate and the Rangers just missed.

alz · 10/24/2011 9:45 am

Who knew Holland would do what he did, cap tipping performance.

Holliday is starting to really piss me off. That's a lot of money for very little clutch.

Apparently the boys spent all their runs in game 3. However, Carpenter in game 5 means good things for us. If we can win tonight, we're in really great shape. If we lose, we're in DEEP shit. Garcia can get us a win for game 6, but in game 7, we're screwed.

I have no idea how "un-calibrated" that K zone was, but it's pretty clear to me if you give someone a strike on the inside (and according to the zone, about 4-5 inches inside), you can't fucking give them 4-5 inches outside as a strike too.... Jackson pitched really well for being so goddamned bad with getting strikes. Walked 7, and really only gave up 1 run. Boggs came in and made sure he paid for leaving him baserunners, which is vintage Boggs. TK, I don't mean this to read Jax was good. Jax was shit, and getting squeezed. Still though, to escape with just the 1 run after that kind of traffic.... We should thank our lucky stars they didn't beat us by 12...

Did it look like Westbrook was on his game? Did I really see that? I didn't see any of the laboring bullshit that I had to endure from him the last 2 months of the season... Guess he needed some rest. Maybe he'll be a viable mid-reliever the rest of the series, assuming his arm can stand the strain of 2-3 innings over 3 games.

Last edited by alz (10/24/2011 9:49 am)

Max · 10/24/2011 9:48 am

APRTW wrote:
Max wrote:
forsberg_us wrote:
"seriously fors, the first stroke out of holliday was fucking absurd, and that set the timbre for the game."

Bullshit. It was one at bat in a game in which the kid was otherwise unhittable. Sometimes you have to man up and admit the other guy was simply better. Tonight was one of those nights.
I didn't see it that way, Fors, and Fox made an unstated case when they were showing how "good" Holland had been, and they showed the Fox tracks of his strike outs, and a whopping percentage were not just borderline, but WAAAAAYYY the fuck off the plate on the inside. I stand by my judgement of bullshit.
He took advantage of the strike zone that wasbeing presented. FoxTracks is a stationary box that sas the same every game. In real life the strike zone isntlike that. It s what the Ump says it is. Instead of the Cardinals batters stompingtheir feet because they ddnt lik the zone Jackson should havetook advantage of it more.

If you believe that, then you obviously need a good talkin' to from Joe Morgan. An ump has every right in the world to call a strike zone like that . . . once.

artie_fufkin · 10/24/2011 9:50 am

"You would think McCarver would be alittle more in tune with what the Cardinals do."

McCarver has no connection to the Cardinals anymore.

alz · 10/24/2011 9:52 am

Max, I could see that some balls coming in from a lefty have the angle to make the inside look worse than it is... I just don't understand how he got that kind of room on both sides. Maybe I was watching with rose-colored glasses, but it didn't seem like Jackson got any kind of zone like that, on either side of the plate.

Jackson however was up early, and that's a big no-no. As the game went on, he missed a bunch, but for the most part he was missing down, which minimizes the potential that the fucking ball is going to end up in Houston.

Max · 10/24/2011 9:52 am

alz wrote:
I have no idea how "un-calibrated" that K zone was, but it's pretty clear to me if you give someone a strike on the inside (and according to the zone, about 4-5 inches inside), you can't fucking give them 4-5 inches outside as a strike too.... Jackson pitched really well for being so goddamned bad with getting strikes. Walked 7, and really only gave up 1 run.

as i said earlier, the most dominating 3H, 7BB, 5.1 IP performance in WS history.

frankly, i don't recall jackson getting the same strike zone, and this is all very ironic coming the day that torre said that questioning the umps integrity was out of line (because a st. louis based ump called holliday safe the day before).

Max · 10/24/2011 9:55 am

C'mon, the whole world saw it, but nobody's talking about it. I guess no one has the courage of Joe Morgan. But we need that kind of frank criticism, lest baseball umps go the way of NBA refs.

artie_fufkin · 10/24/2011 9:57 am

"Did it look like Westbrook was on his game? Did I really see that? I didn't see any of the laboring bullshit that I had to endure from him the last 2 months of the season..."

He threw two changeups that were probably the best pitches I've seen him throw all season. But otherwise it was a typical Westbrook inning, he tried to get cute with his sinker, went too deep in counts, walked a guy and worked harder than he should have.
I'll second your point that the path is pretty clear at this point - Carpenter wins tonight and Garcia takes Game 6. The prospects of a Game 7 are pretty bleak, though Washington will have to make an interesting decision between Holland on short rest or Harrison.

Max · 10/24/2011 10:01 am

alz wrote:
Max, I could see that some balls coming in from a lefty have the angle to make the inside look worse than it is

But not THAT far inside. That was no trick of the cameras. That was balls being called strikes.

alz wrote:
... I just don't understand how he got that kind of room on both sides.

and then on the bottom, too. The strike zone kept growing, those strikes on Molina were crazy.

alz wrote:
Maybe I was watching with rose-colored glasses, but it didn't seem like Jackson got any kind of zone like that, on either side of the plate. Jackson however was up early, and that's a big no-no. As the game went on, he missed a bunch, but for the most part he was missing down, which minimizes the potential that the fucking ball is going to end up in Houston.

That's where the whole thing threatens to become NBA-like, where nothing is a foul if it looked good. Recalling the the inferred message of Morgan from the 1998 WS, it was that an unstated code had entered the game to reward pinpoint location, and as long as it was meant to be a strike on the corner, it was called as such. and if it was meant to be outside of the strike zone, i.e. to cause a swing and miss or to set up a different pitch, it was called a ball. So . . . Holland was putting them where he wanted them and was rewarded. Jackson was a bit wilder and did not get the benefit of 'the strike zone', because there was no 'zone' per se. It was just the ump rewarding well-located pitches.

Last edited by Max (10/24/2011 10:01 am)

artie_fufkin · 10/24/2011 10:10 am

"i don't recall jackson getting the same strike zone"

It was big for both guys, but it's hard to tell if there are two different zones when you've got one guy throwing a big hook from the left side and a guy who is throwing sliders from the right side.
Max is right about Joe Morgan's mentality that the strike zone can be as big as Russia as long as it's consistent being a bunch of hogwash. It's like an NFL official suddenly deciding, say, a receiver only needs to get one foot in bounds, or a ball that's knocked out of the quarterback's hands when he's holding it in front of his chest is a forward pass.
But I digress ...

APIAD · 10/24/2011 10:34 am

Max wrote:
If you believe that, then you obviously need a good talkin' to from Joe Morgan. An ump has every right in the world to call a strike zone like that . . . once.

You deal with what you are given. Huffing and puffing around doesnt put runs on the board.

APIAD · 10/24/2011 10:37 am

alz wrote:
Max, I could see that some balls coming in from a lefty have the angle to make the inside look worse than it is... I just don't understand how he got that kind of room on both sides. Maybe I was watching with rose-colored glasses, but it didn't seem like Jackson got any kind of zone like that, on either side of the plate.

Jackson however was up early, and that's a big no-no. As the game went on, he missed a bunch, but for the most part he was missing down, which minimizes the potential that the fucking ball is going to end up in Houston.

To me Jackson was missng the zone up an down. He wasnt trying to use he wide stike zone much. Plus like TK said, Jacksn was bounce every third pitch. You can expect to get to many borderline calls if your doing that.

Max · 10/24/2011 11:01 am

APRTW wrote:
You can expect to get to many borderline calls if your doing that.

Umps aren't supposed to be subject to that human frailty. It's like a ref saying, 'this guy travels all the time, so when he moves with the ball, i'm calling it traveling whether it is or isn't'. Or the much more common, 'this guy's move looks fabulous, so 'm not calling it traveling whether it is or it isn't.'

Max · 10/24/2011 11:04 am

artie_fufkin wrote:
"i don't recall jackson getting the same strike zone"

It was big for both guys, but it's hard to tell if there are two different zones when you've got one guy throwing a big hook from the left side and a guy who is throwing sliders from the right side.
Max is right about Joe Morgan's mentality that the strike zone can be as big as Russia as long as it's consistent being a bunch of hogwash. It's like an NFL official suddenly deciding, say, a receiver only needs to get one foot in bounds, or a ball that's knocked out of the quarterback's hands when he's holding it in front of his chest is a forward pass.
But I digress ...

and for all the crap that morgan gets from people on this board, he had the courage to punch MLB in the nose, during the world series, on national tv, when it deserved it.

artie_fufkin · 10/24/2011 11:28 am

"Umps aren't supposed to be subject to that human frailty. It's like a ref saying, 'this guy travels all the time, so when he moves with the ball, i'm calling it traveling whether it is or isn't'. Or the much more common, 'this guy's move looks fabulous, so 'm not calling it traveling whether it is or it isn't.'"

Which brings up back to Michael Jordan ...
The strike zone is supposed to be the strike zone. It doesn't float, it doesn't expand when the game gets out of hand, and a 3-0 pitch isn't automatic.
I've never bought the crap that some announcers spew about "He's not going to get that call because he hasn't established any consistency." A pitch is either in the strike zone, or it's not.
I remember playing once and not getting a call because it fooled the umpire. My mentality at one point toward right-handed batters was fastball away, and curve down and in. For lefties, I'd start the curve at their hip and have it break down the middle. We got to about the third inning and I hadn't faced a lefty, until the bases were loaded with two outs. The first pitch I threw was a curve that broke right down the middle of the plate. The umpire called it a ball. When the catcher complained, the ump said "He hasn't established that pitch in that spot." I still have no idea what that means.

artie_fufkin · 10/24/2011 11:30 am

Max wrote:
artie_fufkin wrote:
"i don't recall jackson getting the same strike zone"

It was big for both guys, but it's hard to tell if there are two different zones when you've got one guy throwing a big hook from the left side and a guy who is throwing sliders from the right side.
Max is right about Joe Morgan's mentality that the strike zone can be as big as Russia as long as it's consistent being a bunch of hogwash. It's like an NFL official suddenly deciding, say, a receiver only needs to get one foot in bounds, or a ball that's knocked out of the quarterback's hands when he's holding it in front of his chest is a forward pass.
But I digress ...
and for all the crap that morgan gets from people on this board, he had the courage to punch MLB in the nose, during the world series, on national tv, when it deserved it.

The reason I give Morgan crap 99 percent of the time is because he talks about himself and/or the Big Red Machine. If you listened to only broadcasts of Joe Morgan, you'd think Davey Concepcion was the greatest shortstop who ever lived.

Max · 10/24/2011 12:03 pm

Historic decline, my ass.

From: Bill Selig <mrbill@mlb.com>
Subject: World Series 2011
Date: October 22, 2011 10:14:16 PM PDT
To: MLB UMPS <ump-serve@mlb.com>

Need I remind you that a five-game series would be VERY BAD four mlb revenue and our profit sharing deal? Oh, and by the way, the Cardinals have led this series for 26 out of 27 innings.

xoxo,
Bill

"Cardinals' bats suffer historic decline
Sixteen-run dropoff from Saturday's win matches Series mark"

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20111023&content_id=25765568&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

Last edited by Max (10/24/2011 12:04 pm)

Index » Cardinals/MLB » World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

forsberg_us wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

APRTW wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

forsberg_us wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

artie_fufkin wrote:

APRTW wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

APRTW wrote:

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

alz wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

alz wrote:

alz wrote:

alz wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

Max wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

alz wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

APRTW wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

artie_fufkin wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Re: World Series Game 4

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

Re: World Series Game 4

Index » Cardinals/MLB » World Series Game 4

Board footera

Index
» Cardinals/MLB
» World Series Game 4

Index
» Cardinals/MLB
» World Series Game 4