SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
4/21-4/23 Red Sox @ Orioles Series Thread
|
Post by thursty on Apr 24, 2017 11:02:17 GMT -5
The Red Sox end up looking ridiculous. First of all Barnes then Pedroia ("I love Manny Machado" really?) Rodriguez (whiffed when trying to tamely hit Machado) Farrell (focusing his anger on the umpires?) Hopefully it's over
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Apr 24, 2017 11:47:22 GMT -5
When Barnes came back for one more inning in a 6 run game and Machado was due up I knew what was going on and its proof that Farrell had arranged the entire thing.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 24, 2017 13:19:56 GMT -5
I just don't see how you toss Barnes there. Come on, man. So you think he was trying to hit him in his head? I just don't buy that. He clearly had no control what so ever of that pitch. If you want to send a message you do it the next game and you don't use one of your better relievers. Seems like a perfect job for a guy like Abad. So if Farrell did order that, it's just another in a long line of horrible moves.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 24, 2017 13:34:52 GMT -5
So you think he was trying to hit him in his head? I just don't buy that. He clearly had no control what so ever of that pitch. If you want to send a message you do it the next game and you don't use one of your better relievers. Seems like a perfect job for a guy like Abad. So if Farrell did order that, it's just another in a long line of horrible moves. You wouldn't do it that next game bc it was a close game and you were losing most of it. He tried to do something but I do not think he was trying to hit him in the head. It wasn't an innocent pitch tho.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 24, 2017 14:55:22 GMT -5
My sense is that very, very few pitchers actually go out and aim at a guy's head. But if you're aiming at his back, it's a very real risk that you might miss your location and come very close to hitting a guy in the head. Trying to hit someone is not a pitch anyone practices, and most pitchers aren't all that accurate with pitches that they do practice. That's why the retaliation system is dumb. Even if you're aiming to just plunk a batter in the ***, there's a real chance you might miss and put a guy's health at risk.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 24, 2017 15:22:25 GMT -5
If that's what Farrell ordered, why use Barnes? Why use one of our better relievers? That's what I just don't understand. If that's what you wanted to do, use Abad, get some value out of him. If he gets suspended it's no loss. Also if it's me I'm ordering him to pluck him in the knees. For one that's where the dirty play happend and second you just stay as far away from a guys head as possible.
I also don't think it being a close game should matter. If you need to send a massage, then send it the next game.
|
|
|
Post by braziliansox on Apr 24, 2017 15:24:07 GMT -5
My sense is that very, very few pitchers actually go out and aim at a guy's head. But if you're aiming at his back, it's a very real risk that you might miss your location and come very close to hitting a guy in the head. Trying to hit someone is not a pitch anyone practices, and most pitchers aren't all that accurate with pitches that they do practice. That's why the retaliation system is dumb. Even if you're aiming to just plunk a batter in the ***, there's a real chance you might miss and put a guy's health at risk. Just like when you do the "hard slide" you'll also "put a guy's health at risk". If Machado wants to play like that he has to be aware this kind of stuff might happen to him.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Apr 24, 2017 15:53:00 GMT -5
My sense is that very, very few pitchers actually go out and aim at a guy's head. But if you're aiming at his back, it's a very real risk that you might miss your location and come very close to hitting a guy in the head. Trying to hit someone is not a pitch anyone practices, and most pitchers aren't all that accurate with pitches that they do practice. That's why the retaliation system is dumb. Even if you're aiming to just plunk a batter in the ***, there's a real chance you might miss and put a guy's health at risk. That's the facile (and popular) take, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. By that reasoning, pitchers shouldn't intentionally pitch up and in - or inside at all; there's certainly no evidence that "retaliatory pitches" are more likely to end up hitting a batter's head than "pitching inside" pitches. The very same day, Jacoby Jones was hit in the face with a pitch that no one believes was "retaliatory". Where does it end? Why not put velocity restrictions on pitches? You can only throw 90 (80? 70?) because anything else is too dangerous and volatile. Gibberish. The stigma against throwing at someone's head is *precisely* because there is a working assumption that a major league pitcher can hit a batter in the head if they want to - and that's justifiably deemed over-the-line. And we need to distinguish between retaliation for pimping home runs (which don't involve injury ) and retaliation for dirty play (and Machado doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt); the Red Sox believe Machado's slide was dirty - retaliation was appropriate *within limits*
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 24, 2017 16:32:46 GMT -5
I don't like the idea of throwing at players at all, certainly not up near his head...but this is Matt Barnes we are talking about. When you look at the slide. you can reasonably conclude that is was a momentary lapse of reason from Machado, at a minimum, but he went in spikes up. Our 2nd baseman didn't play for the next 2 games.
Come on people, you really gonna jump on Farrell and Barnes. Whose side are you on anyways? Noone wants to see anyone get injured, but everyone knew, including Machado, that something was going to happen. To his credit, he didn't escalate. But I don't believe Barnes was throwing at the guys head. While I do believe that Machado's spikes were up. There is a difference.
Also, really surprised at Pedroia's response. I don't really know what to think about it.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 24, 2017 17:21:35 GMT -5
My sense is that very, very few pitchers actually go out and aim at a guy's head. But if you're aiming at his back, it's a very real risk that you might miss your location and come very close to hitting a guy in the head. Trying to hit someone is not a pitch anyone practices, and most pitchers aren't all that accurate with pitches that they do practice. That's why the retaliation system is dumb. Even if you're aiming to just plunk a batter in the ***, there's a real chance you might miss and put a guy's health at risk. That's the facile (and popular) take, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. By that reasoning, pitchers shouldn't intentionally pitch up and in - or inside at all; there's certainly no evidence that "retaliatory pitches" are more likely to end up hitting a batter's head than "pitching inside" pitches. The very same day, Jacoby Jones was hit in the face with a pitch that no one believes was "retaliatory". Where does it end? Why not put velocity restrictions on pitches? You can only throw 90 (80? 70?) because anything else is too dangerous and volatile. Gibberish. The stigma against throwing at someone's head is *precisely* because there is a working assumption that a major league pitcher can hit a batter in the head if they want to - and that's justifiably deemed over-the-line. And we need to distinguish between retaliation for pimping home runs (which don't involve injury ) and retaliation for dirty play (and Machado doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt); the Red Sox believe Machado's slide was dirty - retaliation was appropriate *within limits* Intent. Same reason someone who accidentally shoots their buddy on a hunting trip doesn't go to jail while someone who accidentally shoots a liquor store clerk during a hold-up gets 20 to life. There are legitimate baseball reasons for throwing inside pitches. There is no legitimate baseball reason for throwing at a guy (in my opinion). Whether a play is dirty is something that should be evaluated by umpires and the league office and penalized with fines and suspensions, not with retaliatory violence. All the current system does is perpetuate downward spirals of retaliation. Almost a lock that a Red Sox player gets hit during the next series. Is that a good result for anyone?
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 24, 2017 17:49:00 GMT -5
Intent. Same reason someone who accidentally shoots their buddy on a hunting trip doesn't go to jail while someone who accidentally shoots a liquor store clerk during a hold-up gets 20 to life. There are legitimate baseball reasons for throwing inside pitches. There is no legitimate baseball reason for throwing at a guy (in my opinion). Whether a play is dirty is something that should be evaluated by umpires and the league office and penalized with fines and suspensions, not with retaliatory violence. All the current system does is perpetuate downward spirals of retaliation. Almost a lock that a Red Sox player gets hit during the next series. Is that a good result for anyone? Honest question. Do you think the league would have suspended Machado? The umpires did nothing, we know that. And I don't think it is a lock a Sox will get hit, either. For all we know members of the Orioles felt the slide deserved a response. Not all of life's difficulties can be answered by penal and/or legislative action. It's a world fraught with rules and regulations and laws, yet humans sometimes take matters in their own hands, despite those recommendations. I also get worried for players safety when they police themselves, but I think it is a bit naive to think the league will do it's part correctly all the time. Lastly, whom do the Sox seek for redress on the 2 games lost by their 2nd baseman because of their opponents reckless, if not intentional, slide?
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Apr 24, 2017 18:14:00 GMT -5
If that's what Farrell ordered, why use Barnes? Why use one of our better relievers? That's what I just don't understand. If that's what you wanted to do, use Abad, get some value out of him. If he gets suspended it's no loss. Also if it's me I'm ordering him to pluck him in the knees. For one that's where the dirty play happend and second you just stay as far away from a guys head as possible. I also don't think it being a close game should matter. If you need to send a massage, then send it the next game. Especially because Abad threw at Machado in the past and Machado struck out and threw his bat back at Abad when he was on the A's (video below) that would be the perfect guy to put in there at that time.
|
|
|
Post by taftreign on Apr 24, 2017 18:14:04 GMT -5
Barnes 4 games plus a fine. He is appealing to no ones surprise.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 24, 2017 18:49:27 GMT -5
Intent. Same reason someone who accidentally shoots their buddy on a hunting trip doesn't go to jail while someone who accidentally shoots a liquor store clerk during a hold-up gets 20 to life. There are legitimate baseball reasons for throwing inside pitches. There is no legitimate baseball reason for throwing at a guy (in my opinion). Whether a play is dirty is something that should be evaluated by umpires and the league office and penalized with fines and suspensions, not with retaliatory violence. All the current system does is perpetuate downward spirals of retaliation. Almost a lock that a Red Sox player gets hit during the next series. Is that a good result for anyone? Honest question. Do you think the league would have suspended Machado? The umpires did nothing, we know that. And I don't think it is a lock a Sox will get hit, either. For all we know members of the Orioles felt the slide deserved a response. Not all of life's difficulties can be answered by penal and/or legislative action. It's a world fraught with rules and regulations and laws, yet humans sometimes take matters in their own hands, despite those recommendations. I also get worried for players safety when they police themselves, but I think it is a bit naive to think the league will do it's part correctly all the time. Lastly, whom do the Sox seek for redress on the 2 games lost by their 2nd baseman because of their opponents reckless, if not intentional, slide? I think under the current rules, the runner at first base should have been ruled out and Machado should have received a modest fine. Of course, that did not ultimately happen. The fact that our institutions are imperfect does not mean that we should resort to vigilante justice. The reaction to, say, a guilty man being found innocent is not to go out and lynch him; it should be to do what we can to make sure the rules work better next time (in this case, have Farrell and the players publicly voice their grievances, as opposed to beaning him and losing the moral high ground). Did throwing at Machado get Pedroia on the field sooner? Did it help the Red Sox at all? I'm not sure there's any deterrent effect. Meanwhile, I think it's close to a guarantee that a Red Sox hitter gets plunked by an Orioles pitcher this season as a result of yesterday's game.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Apr 24, 2017 18:56:09 GMT -5
To an assertion that an appeal of the suspension will follow...
Why?....because all suspensions are appealed?....or because the totality of circumstances point to lack of intent?
The Sox announcers (one a former long time player) clearly expected some form of retaliation...baseball's unwritten rules... and pointed to prior efforts of Rodriguez. Prior actions of Machado added to perception of intent and outrage.
When I looked at the video, it reminded me of Rondo's actions in sticking out his leg on Crowder. Was it or was it not intentional? Rondo was fined but nothing happened to several time miscreant Machado.
IMO the Sox took matters in their own hands. With a target outside, Barnes threw high and tight and with his best fastball. This was too much for baseball to ignore...understandably. I think his action was more clearly intentional than Machado's.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 24, 2017 19:15:21 GMT -5
Honest question. Do you think the league would have suspended Machado? The umpires did nothing, we know that. And I don't think it is a lock a Sox will get hit, either. For all we know members of the Orioles felt the slide deserved a response. Not all of life's difficulties can be answered by penal and/or legislative action. It's a world fraught with rules and regulations and laws, yet humans sometimes take matters in their own hands, despite those recommendations. I also get worried for players safety when they police themselves, but I think it is a bit naive to think the league will do it's part correctly all the time. Lastly, whom do the Sox seek for redress on the 2 games lost by their 2nd baseman because of their opponents reckless, if not intentional, slide? I think under the current rules, the runner at first base should have been ruled out and Machado should have received a modest fine. Of course, that did not ultimately happen. The fact that our institutions are imperfect does not mean that we should resort to vigilante justice. The reaction to, say, a guilty man being found innocent is not to go out and lynch him; it should be to do what we can to make sure the rules work better next time (in this case, have Farrell and the players publicly voice their grievances, as opposed to beaning him and losing the moral high ground). Did throwing at Machado get Pedroia on the field sooner? Did it help the Red Sox at all? I'm not sure there's any deterrent effect. Meanwhile, I think it's close to a guarantee that a Red Sox hitter gets plunked by an Orioles pitcher this season as a result of yesterday's game. So Pedroia gets injured on a play some think was dirty and we shouldn't do anything. Red Sox pitchers are so bad that can't even hit Machado, but come close to his head. Red Sox lose one of there better relievers for 4 games. Now it's close to a guarantee that Orioles will go after a Red Sox hitter. That just makes no sense. If the Orioles feel the need to go after a Red Sox hitter after nothing happend to Machado, then the Red Sox were 100% right. Heck they still owe Machado in my opinion. Next time just use Abad and aim low.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 24, 2017 19:29:32 GMT -5
I think under the current rules, the runner at first base should have been ruled out and Machado should have received a modest fine. Of course, that did not ultimately happen. The fact that our institutions are imperfect does not mean that we should resort to vigilante justice. The reaction to, say, a guilty man being found innocent is not to go out and lynch him; it should be to do what we can to make sure the rules work better next time (in this case, have Farrell and the players publicly voice their grievances, as opposed to beaning him and losing the moral high ground). Did throwing at Machado get Pedroia on the field sooner? Did it help the Red Sox at all? I'm not sure there's any deterrent effect. Meanwhile, I think it's close to a guarantee that a Red Sox hitter gets plunked by an Orioles pitcher this season as a result of yesterday's game. Yet, we have a situation where the initiator of all the problems will apparently go without penalty. I ask, is that justice? I think calling it vigilante justice is a misnomer also. These matters have been handled previously within the group and things return to normal. I share your concern for safety, and I do think that is a priority. The fact that Machado has had previous, documented misconduct, along with the league not mentioning that, is upsetting to me. Let's hope it ends after Barnes.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Apr 24, 2017 20:36:09 GMT -5
Here's the probability that there will be no Red Sox HBP in the 14 games remaining between the Red Sox and Orioles using 2016 HBP rates:
2.4214001930652946E-7
Out on a limb
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 24, 2017 22:30:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Apr 24, 2017 22:48:13 GMT -5
Get those extra protective helmets with the face flap! A giant shipment and pass them around the clubhouse.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 25, 2017 0:03:06 GMT -5
The whole thing is dumb. Retaliate by hitting a guy where it hurts least? So it's, what, symbolic? I am not suggesting headhunting... I'm saying why bother? I pitched through college: it isn't that easy to hit a guy. The surest way is behind the head (because the instinctive first move is back). But aim at the beltline? Tougher to execute, easier for hitter to evade. So you end up looking like a fool, bungling the "retaliation" and not just getting the guy out.
How about try striking him out, yelling that he sucks, win the game?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 25, 2017 8:51:27 GMT -5
My sense is that very, very few pitchers actually go out and aim at a guy's head. But if you're aiming at his back, it's a very real risk that you might miss your location and come very close to hitting a guy in the head. Trying to hit someone is not a pitch anyone practices, and most pitchers aren't all that accurate with pitches that they do practice. That's why the retaliation system is dumb. Even if you're aiming to just plunk a batter in the ***, there's a real chance you might miss and put a guy's health at risk. So then the Red Sox should just take whatever Machado does to hurt fielders while sliding since MLB won't stop it.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 25, 2017 9:08:31 GMT -5
If Pedroia has no issue then that should tell us all we need to know. Time to move on.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Apr 25, 2017 10:10:47 GMT -5
If someone pushes you and you push them back you are not a vigilante. If your neighbor calls the town about the length of your grass so you call a noise complaint on their family picnic, your not a vigilante. You're just petty.
I'm generally against purposely throwing at someone because I feel it's somewhat cowardly (thinking Dempster hittinng A-Rod, Price hitting Ortiz) but I think there is some room for retaliation against a dirty play. That being said I don't think Machado was intentional, he actually tried holding Pedroia up after the slide. If Pedroia was OK with the slide you could move on there. Having one of your better relievers suspended is not worth it at that point.
Putting my morals aside I am entertained by the violence. I think we could all agree with that.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,754
|
Post by nomar on Apr 25, 2017 10:13:30 GMT -5
I just hate everything about it.
Hate that the pitch was up near the head.
But I also hate the "holier than thou" attitude the Oriole's have now too. Buck thinks he's the league's moral compass now. Give me a break.
I hope nobody gets injured on either side, but there's going to be major tension with Baltimore this year.
|
|
|