Jump to content

Erik Bedard


TyCobb

Recommended Posts

I would be buying Erik Bedard if he was a stock right now. I sense he is going to start one of his runs of being unhittable. He got crushed on his last start and tonight he was nasty.

8 ip 5 H 1 BB 2 ER and 10 SO (101 pitches)

Stuff wise he was great. 91-93 mph fastball that cuts in to RH batters. His two curves were nasty. I didn't see any change ups which is rare (normally gets 1-3 in a game), but it was a close game so I guess he didn't want to throw any.

The 2 ER came from a 2 run shot from A. Gonzalez. I thought the pitch was actually good letter high fastball on the outside of the plate, but some how A. Gonzalez got his barrel on it and lined it over the wall.

IMO Look out for Erik Bedard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His two curves were nasty.

I saw a couple of them where the poor batter swung and missed by about a foot. (Really.)

Most of the time, there was absolutely nothing the batter could do.

Tonight, the contest between Erik and the hitters was not a fair fight. Not even close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing this shows me is that he doesn't like answering inane questions.

Exactly. I've been saying that for years. I just can't believe that nobody's figured out that they have to ask better questions to get more than three words out of him.

Unlike most athletes, he won't give a socially gracious (and meaningless) answer. Figure it out, people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't see a thing wrong with that interview.

He's been criticized in the past for supposedly only caring about how many Ks he gets (which I never really believed). He makes it very clear in this interview that he doesn't care how many Ks he gets, but yet people will want to focus on the brevity of his answers.

What in this interview makes you think he doesn't like people? The only thing this shows me is that he doesn't like answering inane questions.

Inane questions? Most reporters ask most pitchers these questions after a great game in which they pitch. I edited my post of sayingn he did not like people, it was a little tongue in cheek..not overly serious. But anyway, he is a great pitcher, no doubt about it, but his brevity in the way he answers questions only puts more responsibilty for his teamates to speak for him, which is not always the best thing. I know the Orioles said they loved him as a teamate, and I am sure most of them did ( they would not say otherwise to the media anyhow). But this kind of thing has to wear on a clubhouse eventually, and I think him being gone is part of the reason the clubhouse is much looser and better atmosphere this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. I've been saying that for years. I just can't believe that nobody's figured out that they have to ask better questions to get more than three words out of him.

Unlike most athletes, he won't give a socially gracious (and meaningless) answer. Figure it out, people.

That just baloney, reporters ask more stupid questions to a ton of other players and they help the media get a few good quotes. This is nothing personal, I am sure he is a hell of a guy, and there is nothing to figure out....he just does not like giving post game pressers...Other interviews the Sun and other media outlets have done with him have been good, it just seems like after games he is not very open, that is all I am saying...guess I am the only one who finds it humerous with the way he handles these kind of "inane" questions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. I've been saying that for years. I just can't believe that nobody's figured out that they have to ask better questions to get more than three words out of him.

Unlike most athletes, he won't give a socially gracious (and meaningless) answer. Figure it out, people.

Sorry, but it is not an inane question to ask what was different between a game where he was knocked out after two innings and a game where he went eight innings and struck out 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I love both Millar and Bedard for how they handle the media. Each guy does what he does because of their individual personalities. I'd much rather see a guy be honest with how he feels than subscribe to the stale cliches that most guys spout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there is also the question you can't really ask and that would never be answered: what did the umpire contribute to tonight's game?

"Well, Bob, that blind SOB behind the plate was squeezing me like a MF in my last start, while tonight, the ump's zone was so freakin' big I only had to throw an actual strike six times all night!" :wedge:

That would go over really, really well...:rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it is. Not tough to figure out.

In one game he was able to throw a strike less than 50% of the time, as opposed to 64% the second game.

In one game, only 4 of 31 strikes came on a swing and miss, compared to 18 of 68 (wow!) the second game.

In one game, 4 of 10 balls hit against him were line drives, compared to 6 of 17.

Pretty obvious he had his good stuff in game 2, but his not so good stuff in game 1.

That's a simplistic answer, but one that Bedard wouldn't even confirm (he said nothing was different). He could have said which particular pitches were working well and how he tried to adjust to not having his best stuff. I'm not saying Bedard has any obligation to say any of this, but it was not an inane question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I started this thread it was designed to talk about Bedard's stuff not interviewing abilities.

I know and I watched the game to and he was nasty! When I posted the link to his comments, I had no idea a firestorm of opinions would ensue. I just posted it because I found it humerous because it was the same ole same ole with Bedard and thought some people on here would appreciate it.

But yes he was real nasty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...