Login

vegascub · 07-28-2009, 01:52 PM

QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 10:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 12:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Butch, did you ever play baseball? Bunting is the easiest task on the planet. He should have made contact. PERIOD.
I played little league. But I never had to bunt a 95 mph fastball.

If bunting is the "easiest task on the planet," why do major league players fuck it up on a pretty regular basis?
</div>

Don't be intentionally dense. You may not have had to bunt a 95 MPH fastball, but every professional player has. That is relative, and you know it.

He should have made contact. Everyone should have made contact. He's been bunting since he was 6. It's not like he was summoned to come in a pitch that inning.
</div>
Whether he should have made contact (which he should have) is irrelevant though, he should have never been bunting in the first place.

Also, you guys are really over-simplifying the aspect of bunting. If it wasn't a difficult task to perform, major league players would be doing it with far more frequency than they do. After playing baseball for 15 years, I can tell you that there were many other skills which are far easier to perform than bunting (whether it's for a hit or as a sacrifice). Also, bunting in BP is not tantamount to bunting in a game situation, in fact, it's about the same as comparing playing long toss to trying to make a perfect relay throw to the plate to cut down a runner.
</div>

Please don't tell me you actually think people aren't up there bunting all the time because it is a more difficult task to perform. That's grade A retarded. Maybe because it's an out most of the time. Or maybe because you can only do it when there is zero or one strike on you. Or maybe because Lee or Ramirez bunting would be a ridiculous waste of resources. Or maybe because bunting has always been purely situational, aside from the Juan Pierre's of the world. Or maybe because...there's a million more reasons why people don't bunt regularly and it's difficulty is not one of them.
</div>
By that logic, and if the squeeze was the best play in that situation, shouldn't the Astros have been ready for it? Everyone was surprised by the call. Because it was retarded.
</div>

Where did I say the squeeze was the best play in that situation?
</div>
So...you're saying Lou made a bad call?
</div>

Did I say that either? Are you surmising that with the absence of something said I must have thought it? Are you Miss Cleo now?

I've only been talking about Fontenot's inability to lay down a fucking bunt. Something that you feel is impossible for him to do, yet, Sean Marshall could go in a fucking lay one down.
</div>

That's pretty much how I have been looking at this whole thing. For me, it's not about Lou's call for a squeeze. It is about Fontenot's ability to bunt the damn ball. If your manager calls for a sqeeze, whether it's the right call or not, you better put the damn bat on the ball. Especially if the pitch is right there.

***Butcher*** · 07-28-2009, 01:54 PM

QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 12:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Butch, did you ever play baseball? Bunting is the easiest task on the planet. He should have made contact. PERIOD.
I played little league. But I never had to bunt a 95 mph fastball.

If bunting is the "easiest task on the planet," why do major league players fuck it up on a pretty regular basis?
</div>

Don't be intentionally dense. You may not have had to bunt a 95 MPH fastball, but every professional player has. That is relative, and you know it.

He should have made contact. Everyone should have made contact. He's been bunting since he was 6. It's not like he was summoned to come in a pitch that inning.
</div>
Whether he should have made contact (which he should have) is irrelevant though, he should have never been bunting in the first place.

Also, you guys are really over-simplifying the aspect of bunting. If it wasn't a difficult task to perform, major league players would be doing it with far more frequency than they do. After playing baseball for 15 years, I can tell you that there were many other skills which are far easier to perform than bunting (whether it's for a hit or as a sacrifice). Also, bunting in BP is not tantamount to bunting in a game situation, in fact, it's about the same as comparing playing long toss to trying to make a perfect relay throw to the plate to cut down a runner.
</div>

Please don't tell me you actually think people aren't up there bunting all the time because it is a more difficult task to perform. That's grade A retarded. Maybe because it's an out most of the time. Or maybe because you can only do it when there is zero or one strike on you. Or maybe because Lee or Ramirez bunting would be a ridiculous waste of resources. Or maybe because bunting has always been purely situational, aside from the Juan Pierre's of the world. Or maybe because...there's a million more reasons why people don't bunt regularly and it's difficulty is not one of them.
</div>
By that logic, and if the squeeze was the best play in that situation, shouldn't the Astros have been ready for it? Everyone was surprised by the call. Because it was retarded.
</div>

Where did I say the squeeze was the best play in that situation?
</div>
So...you're saying Lou made a bad call?
</div>

Did I say that either? Are you surmising that with the absence of something said I must have thought it? Are you Miss Cleo now?

I've only been talking about Fontenot's inability to lay down a fucking bunt. Something that you feel is impossible for him to do, yet, Sean Marshall could go in a fucking lay one down.
</div>
Interesting that you're putting words into my mouth after accusing me of doing the same to you.

I've never said it was "impossible" for Fontenot to do. I've only said that it was one of the least desirable options of many Lou could have chosen in that situation. Even if you remove the fact that Fox should have been at the plate, using Fontenot to bunt instead of swing away was a bad decision.

Could Marshall lay down a bunt in that situation? Perhaps. Would it have been a good move? No. Just like having Fontenot bunt in that situation was a bad move.

Croz · 07-28-2009, 01:55 PM

I guess my whole slant is the ball was right down the middle and a fastball none the less. I don't care who you are, you get the bat on the ball for a bunt attempt.

I'm going to agree to disagree because I don't think anyone is getting anywhere with this debate.

veryzer · 07-28-2009, 01:57 PM

QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Your job, as a manager, is to put your players in the best situation possible for a successful outcome to result. Lou did not even come close to doing that with Fontenot in the 9th last night. Having Blanco try to bunt, PHing with Fox, letting Fontenot swing away, sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand, etc., etc., etc. would have all been better choices than doing what he did. Sure, Fontenot should have been able to make contact on a bunt attempt, but he should have never been bunting in the first place since it was about the 15th best option at that point.
Boom.

ruby gets it, big time. In fact, ruby has been on fire for about two weeks straight.

QUOTE sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
</div>

Bam! ruby doesn't get it just because you say he gets it.

it's entirely possible that neither of you get it. a suicide squeeze with the infield back in double play posisition is not a bad move, especially when the pitch is right down the middle. all he had to do was make contact. period. he could have conceivably popped the ball up and still had a successful squeeze due to the fact the infield was back and not expecting it.

was batting fox a good move? yes. was letting fontenot swing a good move? yes. was bunting blanco a good move? maybe, maybe not. was trying a suicide with fontenot a good move? yes. too bad font fucked it up.

***Butcher*** · 07-28-2009, 01:58 PM

QUOTE (Croz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I guess my whole slant is the ball was right down the middle and a fastball none the less. I don't care who you are, you get the bat on the ball for a bunt attempt.

I'm going to agree to disagree because I don't think anyone is getting anywhere with this debate.
What the pitch ended up being and what Fontenot did with that pitch is beside the point. Even if Fontenot executed the squeeze perfectly, it was still the wrong decision.

bz · 07-28-2009, 01:58 PM

QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 12:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 12:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Butch, did you ever play baseball? Bunting is the easiest task on the planet. He should have made contact. PERIOD.
I played little league. But I never had to bunt a 95 mph fastball.

If bunting is the "easiest task on the planet," why do major league players fuck it up on a pretty regular basis?
</div>

Don't be intentionally dense. You may not have had to bunt a 95 MPH fastball, but every professional player has. That is relative, and you know it.

He should have made contact. Everyone should have made contact. He's been bunting since he was 6. It's not like he was summoned to come in a pitch that inning.
</div>
Whether he should have made contact (which he should have) is irrelevant though, he should have never been bunting in the first place.

Also, you guys are really over-simplifying the aspect of bunting. If it wasn't a difficult task to perform, major league players would be doing it with far more frequency than they do. After playing baseball for 15 years, I can tell you that there were many other skills which are far easier to perform than bunting (whether it's for a hit or as a sacrifice). Also, bunting in BP is not tantamount to bunting in a game situation, in fact, it's about the same as comparing playing long toss to trying to make a perfect relay throw to the plate to cut down a runner.
</div>

Please don't tell me you actually think people aren't up there bunting all the time because it is a more difficult task to perform. That's grade A retarded. Maybe because it's an out most of the time. Or maybe because you can only do it when there is zero or one strike on you. Or maybe because Lee or Ramirez bunting would be a ridiculous waste of resources. Or maybe because bunting has always been purely situational, aside from the Juan Pierre's of the world. Or maybe because...there's a million more reasons why people don't bunt regularly and it's difficulty is not one of them.
</div>
By that logic, and if the squeeze was the best play in that situation, shouldn't the Astros have been ready for it? Everyone was surprised by the call. Because it was retarded.
</div>

Where did I say the squeeze was the best play in that situation?
</div>
So...you're saying Lou made a bad call?
</div>

Did I say that either? Are you surmising that with the absence of something said I must have thought it? Are you Miss Cleo now?

I've only been talking about Fontenot's inability to lay down a fucking bunt. Something that you feel is impossible for him to do, yet, Sean Marshall could go in a fucking lay one down.
</div>
Interesting that you're putting words into my mouth after accusing me of doing the same to you.

I've never said it was "impossible" for Fontenot to do. I've only said that it was one of the least desirable options of many Lou could have chosen in that situation. Even if you remove the fact that Fox should have been at the plate, using Fontenot to bunt instead of swing away was a bad decision.

Could Marshall lay down a bunt in that situation? Perhaps. Would it have been a good move? No. Just like having Fontenot bunt in that situation was a bad move.
</div>
Cool. I could give a shit about the call itself. No one expected it, because it is unorthodox there so I could have worked. Or it could have not worked. He's a hero or a dope.

But like Vegas said, regardless, Fontenot should have executed when he is called to do so.

***Butcher*** · 07-28-2009, 02:00 PM

QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 12:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Your job, as a manager, is to put your players in the best situation possible for a successful outcome to result. Lou did not even come close to doing that with Fontenot in the 9th last night. Having Blanco try to bunt, PHing with Fox, letting Fontenot swing away, sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand, etc., etc., etc. would have all been better choices than doing what he did. Sure, Fontenot should have been able to make contact on a bunt attempt, but he should have never been bunting in the first place since it was about the 15th best option at that point.
Boom.

ruby gets it, big time. In fact, ruby has been on fire for about two weeks straight.

QUOTE sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
</div>

Bam! ruby doesn't get it just because you say he gets it.

it's entirely possible that neither of you get it. a suicide squeeze with the infield back in double play posisition is not a bad move, especially when the pitch is right down the middle. all he had to do was make contact. period. he could have conceivably popped the ball up and still had a successful squeeze due to the fact the infield was back and not expecting it.

was batting fox a good move? yes. was letting fontenot swing a good move? yes. was bunting blanco a good move? maybe, maybe not. was trying a suicide with fontenot a good move? yes. too bad font fucked it up.
</div>
When you have other, better options at your disposal and you choose the least likely "good" option to succeed, that makes it a bad decision. Regardless of the outcome.

And ruby doesn't get it because I say he does. He gets it because he's right.

veryzer · 07-28-2009, 02:03 PM

QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>It's a fucking BUNT! Am I going absolutely crazy here! IT'S A FUCKING BUNT! I could send Veryzer out there with two chicks in bondage fucking eachother on 2nd, while he's eating a fucking hoagie and he could lay down a fucking bunt!

you know whats funny? on that particular pitch, i'm fairly certain i could at least have made contact.

the fact that it was a suicide means to me it should have been easier, because he didn't have to lay down a perfect bunt. bradley was 2/3 the way there. it just had to hit the ground.

my 13 year old daughter bunts successfully all the time. lou should have called her.

bz · 07-28-2009, 02:04 PM

QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 12:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Your job, as a manager, is to put your players in the best situation possible for a successful outcome to result. Lou did not even come close to doing that with Fontenot in the 9th last night. Having Blanco try to bunt, PHing with Fox, letting Fontenot swing away, sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand, etc., etc., etc. would have all been better choices than doing what he did. Sure, Fontenot should have been able to make contact on a bunt attempt, but he should have never been bunting in the first place since it was about the 15th best option at that point.
Boom.

ruby gets it, big time. In fact, ruby has been on fire for about two weeks straight.

QUOTE sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
</div>

Bam! ruby doesn't get it just because you say he gets it.

it's entirely possible that neither of you get it. a suicide squeeze with the infield back in double play posisition is not a bad move, especially when the pitch is right down the middle. all he had to do was make contact. period. he could have conceivably popped the ball up and still had a successful squeeze due to the fact the infield was back and not expecting it.

was batting fox a good move? yes. was letting fontenot swing a good move? yes. was bunting blanco a good move? maybe, maybe not. was trying a suicide with fontenot a good move? yes. too bad font fucked it up.
</div>
When you have other, better options at your disposal and you choose the least likely "good" option to succeed, that makes it a bad decision. Regardless of the outcome.

And ruby doesn't get it because I say he does. He gets it because he's right.
</div>

[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img]

So the most obvious choice should be used at all times. When has surprise ever worked in the history of anything?

veryzer · 07-28-2009, 02:06 PM

QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 12:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Your job, as a manager, is to put your players in the best situation possible for a successful outcome to result. Lou did not even come close to doing that with Fontenot in the 9th last night. Having Blanco try to bunt, PHing with Fox, letting Fontenot swing away, sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand, etc., etc., etc. would have all been better choices than doing what he did. Sure, Fontenot should have been able to make contact on a bunt attempt, but he should have never been bunting in the first place since it was about the 15th best option at that point.
Boom.

ruby gets it, big time. In fact, ruby has been on fire for about two weeks straight.

QUOTE sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
</div>

Bam! ruby doesn't get it just because you say he gets it.

it's entirely possible that neither of you get it. a suicide squeeze with the infield back in double play posisition is not a bad move, especially when the pitch is right down the middle. all he had to do was make contact. period. he could have conceivably popped the ball up and still had a successful squeeze due to the fact the infield was back and not expecting it.

was batting fox a good move? yes. was letting fontenot swing a good move? yes. was bunting blanco a good move? maybe, maybe not. was trying a suicide with fontenot a good move? yes. too bad font fucked it up.
</div>
When you have other, better options at your disposal and you choose the least likely "good" option to succeed, that makes it a bad decision. Regardless of the outcome.

And ruby doesn't get it because I say he does. He gets it because he's right.
</div>

no, you think ruby gets it because you think he's right. i don't think he's right, therefore bz gets it.

fastball down the middle. make contact, win the game, nobody argues. fontenot fucked up. it was his fault, not lou's.

***Butcher*** · 07-28-2009, 02:09 PM

QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 01:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 12:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Your job, as a manager, is to put your players in the best situation possible for a successful outcome to result. Lou did not even come close to doing that with Fontenot in the 9th last night. Having Blanco try to bunt, PHing with Fox, letting Fontenot swing away, sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand, etc., etc., etc. would have all been better choices than doing what he did. Sure, Fontenot should have been able to make contact on a bunt attempt, but he should have never been bunting in the first place since it was about the 15th best option at that point.
Boom.

ruby gets it, big time. In fact, ruby has been on fire for about two weeks straight.

QUOTE sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
</div>

Bam! ruby doesn't get it just because you say he gets it.

it's entirely possible that neither of you get it. a suicide squeeze with the infield back in double play posisition is not a bad move, especially when the pitch is right down the middle. all he had to do was make contact. period. he could have conceivably popped the ball up and still had a successful squeeze due to the fact the infield was back and not expecting it.

was batting fox a good move? yes. was letting fontenot swing a good move? yes. was bunting blanco a good move? maybe, maybe not. was trying a suicide with fontenot a good move? yes. too bad font fucked it up.
</div>
When you have other, better options at your disposal and you choose the least likely "good" option to succeed, that makes it a bad decision. Regardless of the outcome.

And ruby doesn't get it because I say he does. He gets it because he's right.
</div>

[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ruby.gif[/img]

So the most obvious choice should be used at all times. When has surprise ever worked in the history of anything?
</div>
The choice with the highest probability of success should be used at all times.

***Butcher*** · 07-28-2009, 02:11 PM

QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 01:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 12:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Your job, as a manager, is to put your players in the best situation possible for a successful outcome to result. Lou did not even come close to doing that with Fontenot in the 9th last night. Having Blanco try to bunt, PHing with Fox, letting Fontenot swing away, sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand, etc., etc., etc. would have all been better choices than doing what he did. Sure, Fontenot should have been able to make contact on a bunt attempt, but he should have never been bunting in the first place since it was about the 15th best option at that point.
Boom.

ruby gets it, big time. In fact, ruby has been on fire for about two weeks straight.

QUOTE sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
</div>

Bam! ruby doesn't get it just because you say he gets it.

it's entirely possible that neither of you get it. a suicide squeeze with the infield back in double play posisition is not a bad move, especially when the pitch is right down the middle. all he had to do was make contact. period. he could have conceivably popped the ball up and still had a successful squeeze due to the fact the infield was back and not expecting it.

was batting fox a good move? yes. was letting fontenot swing a good move? yes. was bunting blanco a good move? maybe, maybe not. was trying a suicide with fontenot a good move? yes. too bad font fucked it up.
</div>
When you have other, better options at your disposal and you choose the least likely "good" option to succeed, that makes it a bad decision. Regardless of the outcome.

And ruby doesn't get it because I say he does. He gets it because he's right.
</div>

no, you think ruby gets it because you think he's right. i don't think he's right, therefore bz gets it.

fastball down the middle. make contact, win the game, nobody argues. fontenot fucked up. it was his fault, not lou's.
</div>
For the billionth time, the outcome of the play or what pitch Fontenot ultimately saw in that situation has no bearing on whether or not it was a wise move.

PcB · 07-28-2009, 02:11 PM

QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 01:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 12:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Your job, as a manager, is to put your players in the best situation possible for a successful outcome to result. Lou did not even come close to doing that with Fontenot in the 9th last night. Having Blanco try to bunt, PHing with Fox, letting Fontenot swing away, sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand, etc., etc., etc. would have all been better choices than doing what he did. Sure, Fontenot should have been able to make contact on a bunt attempt, but he should have never been bunting in the first place since it was about the 15th best option at that point.
Boom.

ruby gets it, big time. In fact, ruby has been on fire for about two weeks straight.

QUOTE sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
</div>

Bam! ruby doesn't get it just because you say he gets it.

it's entirely possible that neither of you get it. a suicide squeeze with the infield back in double play posisition is not a bad move, especially when the pitch is right down the middle. all he had to do was make contact. period. he could have conceivably popped the ball up and still had a successful squeeze due to the fact the infield was back and not expecting it.

was batting fox a good move? yes. was letting fontenot swing a good move? yes. was bunting blanco a good move? maybe, maybe not. was trying a suicide with fontenot a good move? yes. too bad font fucked it up.
</div>
When you have other, better options at your disposal and you choose the least likely "good" option to succeed, that makes it a bad decision. Regardless of the outcome.

And ruby doesn't get it because I say he does. He gets it because he's right.
</div>

no, you think ruby gets it because you think he's right. i don't think he's right, therefore bz gets it.

fastball down the middle. make contact, win the game, nobody argues. fontenot fucked up. it was his fault, not lou's.
</div>
I hate to say this because I haven't been a fan of veryzer for a few days, but he gets it. Along with Bz.

***Butcher*** · 07-28-2009, 02:12 PM

QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 01:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bz @ Jul 28 2009, 12:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>It's a fucking BUNT! Am I going absolutely crazy here! IT'S A FUCKING BUNT! I could send Veryzer out there with two chicks in bondage fucking eachother on 2nd, while he's eating a fucking hoagie and he could lay down a fucking bunt!

you know whats funny? on that particular pitch, i'm fairly certain i could at least have made contact.

the fact that it was a suicide means to me it should have been easier, because he didn't have to lay down a perfect bunt. bradley was 2/3 the way there. it just had to hit the ground.

my 13 year old daughter bunts successfully all the time. lou should have called her.
</div>
On that particular pitch, you would've shit in your pants and died of a heart attack on the spot.

bz · 07-28-2009, 02:14 PM

QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 01:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 01:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jul 28 2009, 12:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 28 2009, 11:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jul 28 2009, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Your job, as a manager, is to put your players in the best situation possible for a successful outcome to result. Lou did not even come close to doing that with Fontenot in the 9th last night. Having Blanco try to bunt, PHing with Fox, letting Fontenot swing away, sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand, etc., etc., etc. would have all been better choices than doing what he did. Sure, Fontenot should have been able to make contact on a bunt attempt, but he should have never been bunting in the first place since it was about the 15th best option at that point.
Boom.

ruby gets it, big time. In fact, ruby has been on fire for about two weeks straight.

QUOTE sending Fontenot up there without a bat in his hand
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
</div>

Bam! ruby doesn't get it just because you say he gets it.

it's entirely possible that neither of you get it. a suicide squeeze with the infield back in double play posisition is not a bad move, especially when the pitch is right down the middle. all he had to do was make contact. period. he could have conceivably popped the ball up and still had a successful squeeze due to the fact the infield was back and not expecting it.

was batting fox a good move? yes. was letting fontenot swing a good move? yes. was bunting blanco a good move? maybe, maybe not. was trying a suicide with fontenot a good move? yes. too bad font fucked it up.
</div>
When you have other, better options at your disposal and you choose the least likely "good" option to succeed, that makes it a bad decision. Regardless of the outcome.

And ruby doesn't get it because I say he does. He gets it because he's right.
</div>

no, you think ruby gets it because you think he's right. i don't think he's right, therefore bz gets it.

fastball down the middle. make contact, win the game, nobody argues. fontenot fucked up. it was his fault, not lou's.
</div>
For the billionth time, the outcome of the play or what pitch Fontenot ultimately saw in that situation has no bearing on whether or not it was a wise move.
</div>
So you've moved completely away from defending Fontenot's ability to bunt when it suits your argument best. Nice.

We wouldn't be talking about this right now if Fontenot executed. End of story.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me