Petition

[bgfield]

Come on guys, Sam likes to play small ball, for better and worse. With Tejada coming up right behind him, the guy who is currently number 3 in the AL in hits and already had 3 hits that night - I would do the same thing. Take one out, get him in position for Tejada who is just as hot, if not HOTTER than Nick right now.

You're ignoring what was blatantly obvious to all of us. Just like you said, Tejada has been a hot hitter too. Who wouldn't want him at the plate with a runner in RISP? Who? Texas wouldn't, that's who. And that's why they'd intentionally walk him, putting us in the exact same situation.

The only justification I can see is Perlozzo KNEW this and did it so he could basically get a free base because he figured we'd need more than one run. And if that's the case, that's pretty stupid, too.

[bgfield]

SJ, I know you follow orange and black blindly, but really. Show me a number 3 hitter that gets up to bunt. It just doesn't exist.

David Ortiz has bunted for a base hit a couple of times this year But the defense doesn't play Nick like they do Ortiz.

[Flosman]

The other thing that plays in Sams favor is gibbons' record against the guy that was pitching,. The Tx Tv guys said Gibbons was 3 for 3 w/ 2HR and a 2B. Maybe it is the Rangers manager that needs to be fired. Heck the Rangers should have had Tex pitch to Gibby, Jk. I don't agree with the desicion but I generally like Sam and think he will be a good manager. We won, albeit with me almost suffering a stroke, so heres to watching Dcabs first no hitter tonight and Nick getting his OPS over 860.

[PaulFolk]

I agree that the bunt was just an abysmal, inexplicable decision. The kind of thing you'd laugh about and say "there goes good ol' Dusty Baker, managing like it's 1912" if some other team's manager had done it. Well... Sammy... you were managing like it's 1912 and the heart of your lineup has a .650 OPS. Some day he'll realize Markakis and Tejada aren't deadball era place-hitters.

But I also agree with those who don't think one strategic misstep is grounds for firing. Nor is a pattern of such missteps, such as regularly using Fahey in the #2 hole, bunting away your precious outs in the 1st inning. It's counterproductive, but in the grand scheme of things it's not nearly as important as:

• Keeping the players healthy and happy
• Keeping the media at bay
• Keeping Leo Mazzone here
• Keeping a sense or organization and stability on a team that's been mainly chaos for years

As I've said many times, Perlozzo can be frustrating at times, but he's way down on the list of problems here.

You took the words right out my mouth. I'm tired of seeing "Fire Perlozzo!" whenever he makes an strategical decision that someone doesn't like. Yes, the bunt was an abysmal call (assuming it was Perlozzo's decision and not Nick's...do we have confirmation of this?), but calling for the guy's firing is a ridiculous overreaction. From some of the reactions, you'd think Perlozzo actually murdered a guy on the field.

Every manager in baseball will make an awful strategic decision at some point. Whether it's bunting at the wrong time, bringing in the wrong pitcher, or whatever else, any manager in the bigs can be second-guessed.

As other posters have mentioned, as long as Perlozzo is doing a good job of handling the team and carries the respect of his players-- which he does-- then doing something like bunting with Nick Markakis can be forgiven.

[bgfield]

As other posters have mentioned, as long as Perlozzo is doing a good job of handling the team and carries the respect of his players-- which he does-- then doing something like bunting with Nick Markakis can be forgiven.

The problem is, Sam calls for bunts too often and for that reason they shouldn't be forgiven until he stops doing them. Wasn't it also against Texas, that last time we went into extras, when TWICE Brian was asked to lay down a sac bunt to get a guy into scoring position, only for an intentional walk to set up the double play?

I do agree that player respect is a very good thing to have as a manager. But when his strategies are so consistently bad then someone needs to smack Sam upside the head and ask him what the hell he's thinking. If we're ever in contention I don't want Sam asking the hottest hitter on the team to lay down a meaningless bunt. The call was so incredibly stupid, there's not one manager in baseball that should be let off the hook for making it, IMO. Fire him? That's overreacting. But someone does need to tell him that his love affair with the sac bunt has cost us more games than it's won us.

[Mark Carver]

What abt bringing Ardoin in for Hernandez as a defensive replacement w the game TIED and his spot coming up in the 10th? What abt planning to bring Chen in against a lineup that has completely torched him this year, e.g. Texeira's 5 home runs in 10 at-bats against him? What abt using a well-rested Ray for only 2/3 of an inning? What abt having Markakis bunt despite tapping him to bat third for the first time this season? One almost wonders if Markakis' poor attempts at bunts were done in resentment against the idiot orders.

And now we know the rest of the story... I'm Paul Harvey, good day.

From Orioles MLB.com

The Orioles did suffer a loss Wednesday. Their bench, already strained by injuries to outfielder Corey Patterson and catcher Chris Widger, took another hit when starting catcher Hernandez was lifted in the ninth with a strained intercostal muscle in his right rib cage.

Hernandez received an injection Wednesday night and will likely miss a couple of games. With Widger at less than 100 percent because of a pinched nerve in his shoulder, the starting job now falls to Ardoin, who was claimed off waivers before Wednesday's game.

[RustyMcNail]

But I also agree with those who don't think one strategic misstep is grounds for firing. Nor is a pattern of such missteps, such as regularly using Fahey in the #2 hole, bunting away your precious outs in the 1st inning. It's counterproductive, but in the grand scheme of things it's not nearly as important as:

• Keeping the players healthy and happy
• Keeping the media at bay
• Keeping Leo Mazzone here
• Keeping a sense or organization and stability on a team that's been mainly chaos for years

As I've said many times, Perlozzo can be frustrating at times, but he's way down on the list of problems here.

As usual, the voice of reason prevails. I am no more a fan of the sacrifice bunt than was Earl Weaver. That said, however, when you are playing for the tie or win in the final inning(s) bunting the man into scoring position with no outs makes sense. I would never bunt in the early innings, regardless of the score, but several times this season when Perlozzo was criticized for doing it, it turned out to be Mora and Fahey doing it on their own.

This team is playing better now in the second half than they have over the last several years under guys like Mazzilli, Hargrove and Miller. I give Sam a lot of credit for that. As far as I'm concerned he's the best guy we've had here since Davey Johnson. If the front office will do their job and give him a couple of bats and one more solid starter, he can help this team be a winner. Of course, a solid infusion of some bullpen talent would help also.

[DrungoHazewood]

The Orioles are 3rd in the AL in sac bunts, but the difference between 1st and 8th place is seven bunts. The O's have four more sac bunts than the Yanks.

It's annoying, but they're not out of line with most of the AL.

[bgfield]

The Orioles are 3rd in the AL in sac bunts, but the difference between 1st and 8th place is seven bunts. The O's have four more sac bunts than the Yanks.

It's annoying, but they're not out of line with most of the AL.

Yeah but how high up would our number go if you included all failed bunts?

[Ruzious]

That said, however, when you are playing for the tie or win in the final inning(s) bunting the man into scoring position with no outs makes sense.

I agree with that except... when you have a poor bunter up And not when you have one of your top 2 hitters up with the other one in the hole. Intentionally giving up both of your top hitters (in an otherwise mediocre lineup) doesn't make sense in any era, imo.

[YardBird]

Lets see.man on first (Mora) no one out tie game. Batter bunts (Nick) moves the guy to second so the man 2nd in the league in hits can score him, also the man leads the league in DP's (Miggy), dumb move? Would Texas be so dumb to walk Miggy and make it 1st and 2nd and 1 out?

The problem was Nick couldnt get down the bunt, Sammys fault? Come on.A manager makes moves to put his team in position to win, Sammy thought it was the right move, it didnt work. Miggy and the rest stepped up and made things right. Was it a bad move to have Newhan hit the ball back to the pitcher. when the number 1 job of a batter in that situation is to get the run home?

This is the best post in this thread.

Small ball does work. So what if Markakis didn't know how to lay down the bunt in a pressure situation? Now Perlozzo knows that and can have Nick work on his bunting for the next time it's needed.

If that had costs the O's the game, so what? So they finish 10 games under .500 this year instead of 9? Big deal.

I'd rather lose every game the rest of the season and learn something about what players can and can't do for next year, than win every game and learn nothing we didn't already know.

Bunting in that situation would have advanced a runner to scoring position with less than 2 outs and 2 guys up that could easily get a base hit without the threat of grounding into a double play.

Bunting a runner over has a statisticly better odds of working than getting a base hit. Think about it. How often do sac bunts work out? Most of the time....how often do the best hitters in the history of baseball get hits? 35% of the time or so.

If Markakis came up there and got a base hit, it's be runners at the corners with no outs. Obviously that's a better situation than a runner at 2nd with 1 out.

But there's a 50% or better chance of getting that runner to 2nd with 1 out and only a 35% chance of getting runners at the corners with no outs. Not to mention the hitting option always gives the chance of a rally killing double play as well.

Then whether the runner is at 2nd or 3rd, a base hit is going to score him. The disadvantage of the runner at 2nd is that a sac fly won't bring him home. But with Tejada and Gibbons coming up I'll take that chance.

Bunting is a good stategy to keep the defense guessing. If they are playing deep, I'll bunt every time. I don't understand why Jason Giambi doesn't have a .900 average all from bunting the way teams take away all defense on the 3rd base side to put the shift on.

The baseball wide opposition to bunting that's come into baseball lately in absurd.

[RustyMcNail]

The baseball wide opposition to bunting that's come into baseball lately in absurd.

There is room in baseball for the sacrifice. Using it automatically "by the book" is what is maddening!

[Frobby]

I agree with that except... when you have a poor bunter up And not when you have one of your top 2 hitters up with the other one in the hole.

I want to take issue with the statement that Nick is a poor bunter. It is true that he made 2 poor attempts last night. But he has 3 sacrifices on the year. I believe I saw two of those (I think they were in the same game) and he looked very comfortable and they were textbook.

So, while it still may have been the wrong strategy to bunt in that situation, I do not think people should assume Nick is a bad bunter just because he made two poor attempts last night.

[Flosman]

I want to take issue with the statement that Nick is a poor bunter. It is true that he made 2 poor attempts last night. But he has 3 sacrifices on the year. I believe I saw two of those (I think they were in the same game) and he looked very comfortable and they were textbook.

So, while it still may have been the wrong strategy to bunt in that situation, I do not think people should assume Nick is a bad bunter just because he made two poor attempts last night.

Frobby I think you are right and I was as bad as everyone else last night saying he can't bunt. I was about to have a stoke and my judgement was impaired. I think it was not the correct play and I hope Sam thinks he can't bunt now. I think it was the equivelent of ask Pujols to bunt in that situation, unless you are trying to use trickery just not the best move. I don't know if his heart was completely into the bunt attempts and I kinda understant if it was not. When you are on a roll like he has been he has to think he is going to win the game there if he gets to hit, and I want him to think that that is one of the things that make the great ones great.

[Frobby]

Frobby I think you are right and I was as bad as everyone else last night saying he can't bunt. I was about to have a stoke and my judgement was impaired. I think it was not the correct play and I hope Sam thinks he can't bunt now. I think it was the equivelent of ask Pujols to bunt in that situation, unless you are trying to use trickery just not the best move.

I agree. The way Nick has been hitting you just can't take the bat out of his hands.

As as aside, I remember a game sometime in the 1970's where Frank Robinson had a sacrifice bunt, and the newspaper said it was the first one he had laid down in 14 YEARS! (just checked my memory and he had no bunts between 1957 and 1971.) It's kind of funny since he orders players to bunt all the time.

FYI, Miguel Tejada hasn't had a sac bunt since 2001. Eddie Murray never had a sac bunt after 1979 (he had a career total of 2). From 1983 through 1997, Cal had one sac bunt.

Hopefully Nick achieves this status soon.