witesoxfan 0 Posted September 4, 2003 That was a Wavin' Wally call right there :fyou Kimm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SoxFan1 2 Posted September 4, 2003 That was a Wavin' Wally call right there :fyou Kimm He's still a Scrub in his heart! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Molto 0 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cwsox 0 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
witesoxfan 0 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next And if Harris strikes out like he did in his at bat, we have Paul Konerko up next. Konerko has been nothing short of scorching over the past week or two. And no one is ruleing out us sending up Rios to try to get a little air under it either....he can play a little CF as well. I have no problem being agressive.....I have a big problem with Kimm sending a guy and hoping he breaks the catcher's arm by running into him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bulokis 6 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next But why did JM let Harris bat? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
southsider2k5 11,116 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next But why did JM let Harris bat? Who would have played CF if we pinchhit for Harris and tied the game? That is why we didn't PH for Willie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cwsox 0 Posted September 4, 2003 I have no problem being agressive.....I have a big problem with Kimm sending a guy and hoping he breaks the catcher's arm by running into him. well, it worked for the twins today! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
witesoxfan 0 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next But why did JM let Harris bat? Who would have played CF if we pinchhit for Harris and tied the game? That is why we didn't PH for Willie However, if there is 1 out and runners on 2nd and 3rd, a risk you take is sending Rios up there and hoping he can hit a flyball medium deep. He doesn't do that, you still have a scorching hot Konerko coming up, and he could have gotten a basehit very easily. What Kimm did was very, very dumb. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
witesoxfan 0 Posted September 4, 2003 I have no problem being agressive.....I have a big problem with Kimm sending a guy and hoping he breaks the catcher's arm by running into him. well, it worked for the twins today! Yeah, I know, that's why I said it! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cwsox 0 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next But why did JM let Harris bat? Who would have played CF if we pinchhit for Harris and tied the game? That is why we didn't PH for Willie could Rowand have stayed in the game and played cf if anyone pich hit for Harris? Not sure, just asking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
southsider2k5 11,116 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next But why did JM let Harris bat? Who would have played CF if we pinchhit for Harris and tied the game? That is why we didn't PH for Willie could Rowand have stayed in the game and played cf if anyone pich hit for Harris? Not sure, just asking. Because Rowand is in at the DH, if he goes out to play the field we lose the DH for the rest of the game and the pitcher would have to hit, if that slot came up again, or have someone pinchhit for the pitcher, thus using two more players. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
witesoxfan 0 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next But why did JM let Harris bat? Who would have played CF if we pinchhit for Harris and tied the game? That is why we didn't PH for Willie could Rowand have stayed in the game and played cf if anyone pich hit for Harris? Not sure, just asking. He could have, but he would have been brought out of the DH spot, which means the DH would be taken out of eligibility to use in the lineup. In other words, we take Rowand from DH to CF, we're seeing Tom Gordon or Scott Schoenweis batting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whitesoxfan99 109 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I would agree with you if it was a bang bang play at the plate but Rowand was out by a good 7 or 8 feet and I have seen Nomar throw out runners on a fairly consistent basis. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cwsox 0 Posted September 4, 2003 thank you southsider2k3 and witesoxfan for kindly pointing out for me what I should have realized Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
southsider2k5 11,116 Posted September 4, 2003 thank you southsider2k3 and witesoxfan for kindly pointing out for me what I should have realized It is obscure at best. I'd be willing to bet 90% of people who watch baseball have no idea how that works. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soxplosion 0 Posted September 4, 2003 See "this team is depressing" for my thoughts on the matter... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmmmmbeeer 265 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. That was an absolutely HORRIBLE call. I watched the game on ESPN2 and the ONLY thing that they said that could come positive out of Rowand being sent was the fact that could've intentionally walked Harris, setting up the DP. Hardly justification in my opinion. I was already disgusted and thoroughly surprised that the game was tied in the 9th. We played a horrible clutch game. Just when I didn't think I could get anymore pissed off, Kimm sends Rowand. My wall about had the pleasure of meeting my coffee cup. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
witesoxfan 0 Posted September 4, 2003 It is obscure at best. I'd be willing to bet 90% of people who watch baseball have no idea how that works. I just learned that earlier this year. So you're probably right that 90% of people don't know that. I'd say it is atleast 90%....maybe more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cerbaho-WG 43 Posted September 4, 2003 ...he was running on Manny Ramirez. I would have done the same thing if I were Kimm. Instead of b****ing at Kimm, how about we b**** at all the runners left in scoring position by some players. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winninguglyin83 0 Posted September 4, 2003 plenty of blame to go around for this loss plenty just wasn't meant to be Manny somehow made a decent sidearm relay. Nomar has a gun the ESPN replay sure seemed to show that Rowand was only three or four steps past third when Nomar got the ball the odds were not good at that point Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capn12 1,417 Posted September 4, 2003 ...he was running on Manny Ramirez. I would have done the same thing if I were Kimm. Instead of b****ing at Kimm, how about we b**** at all the runners left in scoring position by some players. nawww, that makes too much sense...come on Cerbaho Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mmmmmbeeer 265 Posted September 4, 2003 ...he was running on Manny Ramirez. I would have done the same thing if I were Kimm. Instead of b****ing at Kimm, how about we b**** at all the runners left in scoring position by some players. He wasn't running on Manny, he was running on Nomar. Nomar had the ball when Rowand was about 2 steps past 3rd. I agree, if Manny needs to throw all the way home, a SAC fly kind of deal, you send him. But you don't run on Nomar. I agree with you 100% though. Sox were far from clutch tonight and it cost us big time. With all that awful hitting though, we had a GOLDEN opportunity to STILL win the game. And there is no denying that Kimm choked when it counted. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dick Allen 5,396 Posted September 4, 2003 we've been stranding runners on base all series, why in the hell should we think it would change there? it was a good call, sometimes you gotta be aggressive to score runs. I agree, Harris was up next But why did JM let Harris bat? Who would have played CF if we pinchhit for Harris and tied the game? That is why we didn't PH for Willie Rowand could have played CF, then you would have the pitcher hitting, but with the recent call ups the Sox would have been set for about 6 more innings.I don't blame Kimm for running on Nomar, his throwing hasn't been that accurate the last couple of years. He made a perfect throw. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cerbaho-WG 43 Posted September 4, 2003 He wasn't running on Manny, he was running on Nomar. Nomar had the ball when Rowand was about 2 steps past 3rd. I agree, if Manny needs to throw all the way home, a SAC fly kind of deal, you send him. But you don't run on Nomar. I agree with you 100% though. Sox were far from clutch tonight and it cost us big time. With all that awful hitting though, we had a GOLDEN opportunity to STILL win the game. And there is no denying that Kimm choked when it counted. Manny still has to get the ball in, and his arm is sub-par at best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
