Was I the only one who thought DJ had absolutely no idea what he was talking about in the 9th inning last night? He kept saying that it was better to let Perralta hit a bullet off the wall, rather than walking him leading off the inning. Did DJ know it was a one run game? If it's a two run game, that's a whole different story. However, a walk in that situation is much better than a leadoff double. I saw some people saying that they would have rather seen Jenks give up a homer than a walk? I know there's a big sense of doom with this team now, but YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME! I still vehemently disagree with Ozzie playing the infield back after the Rowand debacle. Oh well, we won....but DJ still has me shaking my head.

IMO it's just been a superstition thing. It seems lately anytime the Sox walk somebody, that somebody somehow scores.

I think it was the right decision to play the infield back. You can't afford to have the ball get through a drawn in infield. You're chances of getting to a ball are much better with the infield back and in that situation you don't want a run to score but you can afford to have 1 run score compared to 2 runs.

 

Oh yeah, on the whole walk vs a double thing, having a runner in scoring position to start off an innning is 1000X worse than having a runner on 1st, I don't give a s*** how they get on base.

Edited September 21, 200520 yr by Kalapse

I think it was the right decision to play the infield back. You can't afford to have the ball get through a drawn in infield. You're chances of getting to a ball are much better with the infield back and in that situation you don't want a run to score but you can afford to have 1 run score compared to 2 runs.

 

Oh yeah, on the whole walk vs a double thing, having a runner in scoring position to start off an innning is 1000X worse than having a runner on 1st, I don't give a s*** how they get on base.

 

Without hearing anything on this topic during the game, I would assume he meant it as he would rather give up a shot hit by throwing strikes as oppossed to walking someone. You can make a great play on a well hit ball. The walk has no defense.

DJ owns you, stop whining.

Without hearing anything on this topic during the game, I would assume he meant it as he would rather give up a shot hit by throwing strikes as oppossed to walking someone.  You can make a great play on a well hit ball.  The walk has no defense.

 

I think DJ actually said he would of rather gave up a shot off of the center feied wall. It made no sense to me at all. In fact, my girlfriend even said that was a rediculous statement.

I think DJ actually said he would of rather gave up a shot off of the center feied wall. It made no sense to me at all. In fact, my girlfriend even said that was a rediculous statement.

 

Yes, that's indeed what he said.

Was I the only one who thought DJ had absolutely no idea what he was talking about in the 9th inning last night?  He kept saying that it was better to let Perralta hit a bullet off the wall, rather than walking him leading off the inning.  Did DJ know it was a one run game?  If it's a two run game, that's a whole different story.  However, a walk in that situation is much better than a leadoff double.  I saw some people saying that they would have rather seen Jenks give up a homer than a walk?  I know there's a big sense of doom with this team now, but YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!  I still vehemently disagree with Ozzie playing the infield back after the Rowand debacle.  Oh well, we won....but DJ still has me shaking my head.

DJ's stupid sometimes, and when he made that comment that was one of the times, although I must admit he is a far better broadcaster now than he ever was, which really isn't saying much. I actually agreed with Ozzie playing the infield back, although the corners appeared to be in at least halfway. The infield in increases the chances of a hit, a hit that would have given Cleveland the lead. If there was no runner on second he would have had everyone up.

Without hearing anything on this topic during the game, I would assume he meant it as he would rather give up a shot hit by throwing strikes as oppossed to walking someone.  You can make a great play on a well hit ball.  The walk has no defense.

That is exactly right. And I agree with that line of thinking. He wants to at least give the defense a chance.

DJ's stupid sometimes, and when he made that comment that was one of the times, although I must admit he is a far better broadcaster now than he ever was,  which really isn't saying much. I actually agreed with Ozzie playing the infield back, although the corners appeared to be in at least halfway. The infield in increases the chances of a hit, a hit that would have given Cleveland the lead. If there was no runner on second he would have had everyone up.

 

The moved worked out for the best, as the Sox won. I just thought that Ozzie was more content with the tie then trying to win the game. Also, maybe it was for the best because Belliard basically gave himself up to get the run home, and he could have done more damage if he tried to get a hit.

 

And yes, DJ is much improved from the level he used to be at. Too bad the other announcer is the opposite.

That is exactly right.  And I agree with that line of thinking.  He wants to at least give the defense a chance.

 

Last time I checked, a walk isn't a guaranteed run. A homer is a guaranteed run. Also, a double puts the opposition in such a better position to score, as they don't even need another hit to get the runner in.

Last time I checked, a walk isn't a guaranteed run.  A homer is a guaranteed run.  Also, a double puts the opposition in such a better position to score, as they don't even need another hit to get the runner in.

Yes, but his point was put it in the strike zone where we can at least have a chance to get an out. And if he homers, fine, then we are tied. If he doubles, fine, then he beat you. But at least attack the strike zone and give us a chance to beat them, instead of giving a free pass.

Yes, but his point was put it in the strike zone where we can at least have a chance to get an out.  And if he homers, fine, then we are tied.  If he doubles, fine, then he beat you.  But at least attack the strike zone and give us a chance to beat them, instead of giving a free pass.

 

You may very well be right. It was just phrased very poorly. I hate walks as much as the next, but I think Hawk and DJ harp on it a little too much, at times. IMHO

You may very well be right. It was just phrased very poorly. I hate walks as much as the next, but I think Hawk and DJ harp on it a little too much, at times. IMHO

I think he presented it the wrong way during the game, but I knew what he meant. I would rather get beat trying to attack the hitter than walking him and having him score later.

I think he presented it the wrong way during the game, but I knew what he meant.  I would rather get beat trying to attack the hitter than walking him and having him score later.

 

I know this is simple and may sound arrogant, but I just want my closer to get 3 outs without allowing a run. Contrary to popular belief, a leadoff double has a much greater chance of scoring than a leadoff walk. I know leadoff walks always seem to kill teams, but a double not only avoids the double play, but it allows the other team to execute well and get a run without having to get a hit.

I know this is simple and may sound arrogant, but I just want my closer to get 3 outs without allowing a run.  Contrary to popular belief, a leadoff double has a much greater chance of scoring than a leadoff walk.  I know leadoff walks always seem to kill teams, but a double not only avoids the double play, but it allows the other team to execute well and get a run without having to get a hit.

True that, but I would rather him just retire the side 1, 2, 3.

True that, but I would rather him just retire the side 1, 2, 3.

 

HA! There's a better chance that Dye gets a bunt down than that happening against the Indians.

Was I the only one who thought DJ had absolutely no idea what he was talking about in the 9th inning last night?  He kept saying that it was better to let Perralta hit a bullet off the wall, rather than walking him leading off the inning.  Did DJ know it was a one run game?  If it's a two run game, that's a whole different story.  However, a walk in that situation is much better than a leadoff double.  I saw some people saying that they would have rather seen Jenks give up a homer than a walk?  I know there's a big sense of doom with this team now, but YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!  I still vehemently disagree with Ozzie playing the infield back after the Rowand debacle.  Oh well, we won....but DJ still has me shaking my head.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I guess when one runs out of things to complain about, complaining about the announcers takes center stage.

 

If DJ has you shaking your head, maybe it's because he played the game and what he's saying might be over your head?

 

Quit complaining for once, sheesh.

I guess when one runs out of things to complain about, complaining about the announcers takes center stage.

 

If DJ has you shaking your head, maybe it's because he played the game and what he's saying might be over your head?

 

Quit complaining for once, sheesh.

 

Seriously, get the f*** off my back. I know personal attacks aren't allowed, but if you have ABSOLUTELY nothing to contribute to a thread, then just stay the f*** out of it. I haven't seen you do anything but b**** about people b****ing for the last few weeks.

The point I made about what DJ said is a very valid point worthy of being discussed. I know I wasn't the only one who was scratching my head when he said it.

Edited September 21, 200520 yr by fathom

Seriously, get the f*** off my back.  I know personal attacks aren't allowed, but if you have ABSOLUTELY nothing to contribute to a thread, then just stay the f*** out of it.  I haven't seen you do anything but b**** about people b****ing for the last few weeks.

The point I made about what DJ said is a very valid point worthy of being discussed.  I know I wasn't the only one who was scratching my head when he said it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

You

 

_________________________________

 

I have added more to this site than you ever will with your constant whining and b****ing, so I suggest you get the f*** off of everybody's back.

 

I thought your point was ridiculous, and pointed it out.

 

Don't like it? Too bad.

 

The game is starting, time for you to get into the game thread ... which you said you weren't gonna do for the rest of the season. Gee, go figure ... can't believe a word of what you say.

I'm just going to back away.

 

I'm just going to back away. 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's why there's a private message feature on this site, if you feel the need to start getting profane, i.e. your post, you can always handle it in private.

Was I the only one who thought DJ had absolutely no idea what he was talking about in the 9th inning last night?  He kept saying that it was better to let Perralta hit a bullet off the wall, rather than walking him leading off the inning.  Did DJ know it was a one run game?  If it's a two run game, that's a whole different story.  However, a walk in that situation is much better than a leadoff double.  I saw some people saying that they would have rather seen Jenks give up a homer than a walk?  I know there's a big sense of doom with this team now, but YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!  I still vehemently disagree with Ozzie playing the infield back after the Rowand debacle.  Oh well, we won....but DJ still has me shaking my head.

 

 

What he's trying to say is, that the batter sould earn his way on, by geing the basehit than the pitcher just giving him the base by walking him

What he's trying to say is, that the batter sould earn his way on, by geing the basehit than the pitcher just giving him the base by walking him

 

And if that's what he actually said, it would have been clear what he meant. However, he definitely said that he had no problem if Perralta lined a ball off the fence for a double.

And if that's what he actually said, it would have been clear what he meant.  However, he definitely said that he had no problem if Perralta lined a ball off the fence for a double.

 

 

DJ makes me sometimes