Gene Honda Civic Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Here's Neal Cotts' line from last night - Cotts 0.0IP 0H 1R 1ER 0BB Neal Cotts faced one batter, threw one pitch, induced what should have been a double play, but Willie Harris muffed the ball failing to record an out. Willie was charged with an error on the play. How does that player who reached base, and subsequently scored on a Michael Cuddyer single off of Jon Adkins, count as an earned run against Cotts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Here's Neal Cotts' line from last night - Cotts 0.0IP 0H 1R 1ER 0BB Neal Cotts faced one batter, threw one pitch, induced what should have been a double play, but Willie Harris muffed the ball failing to record an out. Willie was charged with an error on the play. How does that player who reached base, and subsequently scored on a Michael Cuddyer single off of Jon Adkins, count as an earned run against Cotts? If I understand the play correctly ( I didn't see it) there is one way this can happen. When it comes to runners on you can't assume a DP. If the error was made at second, that runner becomes an unearned runner, but you can't assume Willie would have turned the DP if he hadn't have screwed up whatever he did. So the runner at first gets credited with a FC and is an earned runner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valponick Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 If I understand the play correctly ( I didn't see it) there is one way this can happen. When it comes to runners on you can't assume a DP. If the error was made at second, that runner becomes an unearned runner, but you can't assume Willie would have turned the DP if he hadn't have screwed up whatever he did. So the runner at first gets credited with a FC and is an earned runner. That's correct. Although it is BS that Willie couldn't make the play you can't ever assume a double play when you are figuring earned runs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 They are always picking on poor Neal... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 They are always picking on poor Neal... Like I said in another thread. I would like to know how many of Neals ER are from inherited runners scoring while another pitcher is on the mound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted September 15, 2004 Author Share Posted September 15, 2004 Like I said in another thread. I would like to know how many of Neals ER are from inherited runners scoring while another pitcher is on the mound. at lest 12 -- I may have missed one -- that's at least 12 of the 33 runs he's allowed. BP hasn't updated their reliever report in over a month, but I'd think he's been among the relievers who recieved the least help from their counterparts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Like I said in another thread. I would like to know how many of Neals ER are from inherited runners scoring while another pitcher is on the mound. I know there's a fair share of Neal Cotts Koolaid produced on Soxtalk, and granted he has been at the unfortunate end of the Jackson experiment, but you can't blame all his struggles on others. Besides yesterdays unfortunate ruling Neal has had to put baserunners on in order to score, no? Blame him for giving up the walk or hit proceeding his removal. Or if you choose to avert Cotts of any responsibility shoulder some of his failures on Guillens mismangement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Someone ban Flash... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Someone ban Flash... Off with his head! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 One thing about Cotts is, by and large he's the best the Sox have in pressure situations. I can't think of many guys the Sox have had that have been good with runners on base (ie, coming out of the pen with inherited guys aboard). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 One thing about Cotts is, by and large he's the best the Sox have in pressure situations. I can't think of many guys the Sox have had that have been good with runners on base (ie, coming out of the pen with inherited guys aboard). Hmmm.. good in pressure situations. First the comment about wanting Hunter.. now you know about Neal dealing under pressure... I'm worried about you Jason.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Hmmm.. good in pressure situations. First the comment about wanting Hunter.. now you know about Neal dealing under pressure... I'm worried about you Jason.. Steff, I don't think it's Jason's issue, maybe more of where your mind is at today? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Steff, I don't think it's Jason's issue, maybe more of where your mind is at today? Tanks for blowing ( :rolly ) my cover Jim... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 at lest 12 -- I may have missed one -- that's at least 12 of the 33 runs he's allowed. BP hasn't updated their reliever report in over a month, but I'd think he's been among the relievers who recieved the least help from their counterparts. Well what the hell is he doing allowing those guys to get on base? Oh yeah, not throwing the ball in the strike zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted September 15, 2004 Author Share Posted September 15, 2004 Well what the hell is he doing allowing those guys to get on base? Oh yeah, not throwing the ball in the strike zone. Only Marte and Shingo have a better WHIP (baserunners per 9) than Neal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Only Marte and Shingo have a better WHIP (baserunners per 9) than Neal. People constantly say that he needs to start the year in triple a to work on control yet he is one of the best on the team. Makes no sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Only Marte and Shingo have a better WHIP (baserunners per 9) than Neal. That also says something about our crappy bullpen if a 1.35 WHIP is the third best. A 1.35 ranks around 120th best in the MLB for relievers. He also leads the team with 7 WP. That's tied for 4th worst in the MLB among relievers-only. I like Neal, but he still has a lot to work on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 People constantly say that he needs to start the year in triple a to work on control yet he is one of the best on the team. He leads all Sox relievers in walks. That control is hardly 'the best'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 He leads all Sox relievers in walks. That control is hardly 'the best'. Marte is tied with him, does marte have alot to work on also to you? Also did not say the best i said'' one of the best''. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Marte's probably thrown at least 10 more innings than Cotts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Marte's probably thrown at least 10 more innings than Cotts. 8.1 innings more, yet his WHIP is .18 less than Neal's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 8.1 innings more, yet his WHIP is .18 less than Neal's. Marte's baa against is also lower than cotts. But cott's baa is still very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Marte's baa against is also lower than cotts. But cott's baa is still very good. The problem is a.) he walks himself into trouble and b.) Ozzie still doesn't know how to manage a bullpen, consequently someone like Mike Jackson allows all of Neal's runners to score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted September 15, 2004 Author Share Posted September 15, 2004 The problem is a.) he walks himself into trouble and b.) Ozzie still doesn't know how to manage a bullpen, consequently someone like Mike Jackson allows all of Neal's runners to score. This is my criticism too... I mean do we really know what Neal can do? I trumpet him as being underrated, but there's a chance that he's not. I mean he very well could have let those runners score, though i think it's unlikely. The point is we don't really know what neal is capable of even after a full season in the majors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 This is my criticism too... I mean do we really know what Neal can do? I trumpet him as being underrated, but there's a chance that he's not. I mean he very well could have let those runners score, though i think it's unlikely. The point is we don't really know what neal is capable of even after a full season in the majors. I agree if he finished all the innings that he got into troubleand there was still the same outcome then we would really have something to b**** about. I know he let's people on but is it really that hard to let him finish an inning that he gets into trouble? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.