May 11, 200916 yr http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...0,2133168.story Asked if the two-out, ninth-inning pitch to Kinsler "got away from him," Jenks replied without hesitation: "No, I meant to. To send a message. Basically I was saying, 'I'm sick of seeing our guys get hit and hurt and almost get taken out of the game.' I threw it with intention."
May 11, 200916 yr Good to hear Bobby has his teammates' backs. Though he might get in trouble with MLB for saying that. Maybe this will spark the Sox hitters up a little bit
May 11, 200916 yr Good to see Bobby defend his teammates but still even if you did throw it with intention DON'T ADMIT IT!
May 11, 200916 yr Can you really suspend him for intentionally throwing behind someone? He didn't come out and say "I had full intentions to throw it up his ass, but I just missed." I'm sure they will, but all he was doing was throwing behind and not hurting him. I do love Jenks, and I love the attitude. It didn't exactly bring them together today though.
May 11, 200916 yr When I was watching the game, I sure as hell didn't think he meant to throw it behind Kinsler. Guess I (and just about everyone else) was wrong. I do love that he admitted it though.
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (whitesox32 @ May 11, 2009 -> 12:48 AM) Good to see Bobby defend his teammates but still even if you did throw it with intention DON'T ADMIT IT! Sometime you do, like when its gotten real out of hand with our guys getting hit. Someone needs to stand up and come right and say it and do it. Enough said
May 11, 200916 yr Bobby Jenks is better than Ian Kinsler. f*** you Ian Kinsler. I'd very much want you on my team, but b3ecause you are not then that mean you are the enemy. And f*** the Texas Rangers and that stadium you call a stadium, its not even a stadium, theres no f***ing grass there, grass doesnt even grow in that hellhole. And I fony dcare if you Rnagers think you can beat us at home, you only beat our s***ty ass pitchers, not our good one.s. Enjoy Brandon McCarthy.
May 11, 200916 yr Why does it seem like when our pitchers try to intentionally hit someone they always miss? I know it happened a few times last season. In my mind, throwing behind the runner looks more intentional then if he had actually hit him. Jenks would have just played it off as an pitch that slipped. Good pitchers like Jenks just dont miss two feet off the plate, behind the batter, on accident. If there is a program out there capable of tracking all of Jenks pitches as a major leaguer, I'd guess he has maybe thrown a pitch that far off the plate once or twice. And the other instances would probably be in scenarios he also tried to hit the batter and missed. Also, I always hate the argument that people use of, "well, why would he hit him in (insert situation) because (insert scenario in which runners on would be terrible)." That's EXACTLY the right moment to him someone, when you shouldn't do it. The entire point of Kinsler representing the tying run gave them plausible deniability. I really dont know how people, like Hawk for example, couldn't see through it. It reminds me of an excuse I used when I was younger, when I'd say "why would I do (act of mischief) because (scenario in which doing act would be terrible)" and people would buy it. Edited May 11, 200916 yr by Flash Tizzle
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ May 11, 2009 -> 06:46 AM) Why does it seem like when our pitchers try to intentionally hit someone they always miss? I know it happened a few times last season. In my mind, throwing behind the runner looks more intentional then if he had actually hit him. Jenks would have just played it off as an pitch that slipped. Good pitchers like Jenks just dont miss two feet off the plate, behind the batter, on accident. If there is a program out there capable of tracking all of Jenks pitches as a major leaguer, I'd guess he has maybe thrown a pitch that far off the plate once or twice. And the other instances would probably be in scenarios he also tried to hit the batter and missed. Also, I always hate the argument that people use of, "well, why would he hit him in (insert situation) because (insert scenario in which runners on would be terrible)." That's EXACTLY the right moment to him someone, when you shouldn't do it. The entire point of Kinsler representing the tying run gave them plausible deniability. I really dont know how people, like Hawk for example, couldn't see through it. It reminds me of an excuse I used when I was younger, when I'd say "why would I do (act of mischief) because (scenario in which doing act would be terrible)" and people would buy it. Supposedly, Jenks' point was not to hit him, just a pitch to say hello and the Sox had enough of getting hit.
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 11, 2009 -> 06:55 AM) Supposedly, Jenks' point was not to hit him, just a pitch to say hello and the Sox had enough of getting hit. That's what they're saying, but it's not the truth. This is point I was making in my previous post of people believing lies that, to me, seem so blatantly obvious. Just think about it -- they thought about sending a message to the Rangers that they're tired of being targets, so instead of hitting one of their batters, which is really the best way of conveying that message, they throw behind him? If such a belief was held true by the ballclub that you can miss the play and still send the same message, then why did Guillen yell at Sean Tracey a few years ago when he couldn't hit the opposing batters ? Guillen should have been happy the message was sent, yet no baserunners were aboard, right? Edited May 11, 200916 yr by Flash Tizzle
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ May 11, 2009 -> 06:35 AM) Bobby Jenks is better than Ian Kinsler. f*** you Ian Kinsler. I'd very much want you on my team, but b3ecause you are not then that mean you are the enemy. And f*** the Texas Rangers and that stadium you call a stadium, its not even a stadium, theres no f***ing grass there, grass doesnt even grow in that hellhole. And I fony dcare if you Rnagers think you can beat us at home, you only beat our s***ty ass pitchers, not our good one.s. Enjoy Brandon McCarthy. After this and your Steven Upchurch worship thread in FS, I am starting to wonder if you had a very late night, that is still going at 7am.
May 11, 200916 yr good to see the "message sent" really carried over into Sunday. Texas hitters looked really uncomfortable.
May 11, 200916 yr Bobbie Jenks did it the right way when throwing at or behind Kinsler. He was sending a message but wasn't trying to harm Kinsler. He aimed at his rear and the only damage if he hit Ian was that the guy might feel uncomfortable for awhile when sitting on the pot. Bobbie Jenks is a class act in my opinion
May 11, 200916 yr We're the only team I know that needs to send a message that they were trying to send a message. I applaud Jenks for doing what he did (especially that it was low enough not to even threaten Kinsler's head), but there's no reason for him to publically admit he did this.
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (elrockinMT @ May 11, 2009 -> 09:42 AM) Bobbie Jenks did it the right way when throwing at or behind Kinsler. He was sending a message but wasn't trying to harm Kinsler. He aimed at his rear and the only damage if he hit Ian was that the guy might feel uncomfortable for awhile when sitting on the pot. Bobbie Jenks is a class act in my opinion Bobbie
May 11, 200916 yr No way Jenks was trying to hit Kinsler. It was the 9th inning of a one run game. It made perfect sense to throw one behind his back, both to send a message in response to Sox batters getting hit, and to unnerve a very good hitter during a key at bat.
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (Paint it Black @ May 11, 2009 -> 08:49 AM) good to see the "message sent" really carried over into Sunday. Texas hitters looked really uncomfortable. Thats my thought on this stuff. It really is a tree falling in a forest. More than 'send a message' it'll just be forgotten soon enough. In fact the only real result that could come of it will be a negative one. Edited May 11, 200916 yr by Princess Dye
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (SoxPride56 @ May 11, 2009 -> 04:24 PM) Then there is this... http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4157644 Ugh, he's going to get a suspension for this. If Ozzie would have just taken care of this in Texas, none of this would have ever happened. A player finally sticks up for his teammates, and Ozzie disagrees with the timing. BTW, Jenks should get warned every time he's on the mound, as he was really firing his fastball after the incident. Edited May 11, 200916 yr by fathom
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (fathom @ May 11, 2009 -> 10:27 AM) Ugh, he's going to get a suspension for this. If Ozzie would have just taken care of this in Texas, none of this would have ever happened. The good news is the Sox apparently have no use for a closer at the present time.
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 11, 2009 -> 10:31 AM) The good news is the Sox apparently have no use for a closer at the present time. When you rarely score or have the lead then yeah, you don't really need a closer.
May 11, 200916 yr QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 11, 2009 -> 10:31 AM) The good news is the Sox apparently have no use for a closer at the present time. Ozzie's comments in that ESPN article piss me off. I mean really, what happened to the old Oz?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.