Buck Showalter will not be back with the team in any capacity

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, foxfield said:

 

I agree with the second statement.  But that is moving the goal posts from the first, which I think is incorrect.

I haven't changed my mind and I did say it was a big deal which is not inconsistent with top 10.

[foxfield]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I haven't changed my mind and I did say it was a big deal which is not inconsistent with top 10.

No biggie, it's not a federal case.  It is a big deal, and it will be remembered as a major bullpen management error..benchmark.  It is not and never will be considered a top ten playoff blunder in the full history of baseball....outside of here.

 

I thought I was wrong once...but I was mistaken.

[tntoriole]

12 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think the magnitude of the error is going to make it an evergreen reference.  I think this is true not just for Oriole fans but baseball fans in general.

It might be a top ten playoff blunder of all time.

 

Fred Merkle says hello. 

[weams]

13 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think the magnitude of the error is going to make it an evergreen reference.  I think this is true not just for Oriole fans but baseball fans in general.

It might be a top ten playoff blunder of all time.

 

Britton gave up two playoff homers...

[OFFNY]

14 hours ago, Redskins Rick said:

 

I wouldn't call it a top ten blunder.

Bill Buckner blunder at 1st in the WS counts as one.

Todd Zeile throwing the ball into the dirt during the 1996 ALCS counts ........ and so on, and so on.

Leaving the closer in the bullpen in a tied game in extra innings is a non-call.

Of course, hindsight allows us to flame away, and I was right there yelling at my TV to put Britton in, but I don't think it constitutes a blunder.

 

o

 

Historically, the infamous Bill Buckner play is one of the most overblown and misinterpreted issues of all-time.

 

To this day, there are people who still believe that the Red Sox were winning the game when Buckner made that error, and that the Mets scored 2 runs on said play.

 

The reality is that the Red Sox had already blown a seemingly insurmountable lead (2 outs, a 2-run lead, and nobody on base) in such a horrific fashion ........ 3 consecutive singles ceded by their best reliever (Calvin Schiraldi), and then the wild pitch by their 2nd-best reliever (Bob Stanley) WHICH GAVE THE METS THE TYING RUN, subsequently taking all of the pressure off of them. Even if Dave Stapleton were on the field and had made that play, it would not have saved the game for the Red Sox ........ THE GAME WAS ALREADY TIED, and the Red Sox, at that point, had emotionally just had their lungs ripped out.

Would the Red Sox still have had a chance to win that game had Stapleton been on the field, made the play, and the game went to the 11th inning ??? Technically, yes. But if I were a bookie laying odds on that game at that precise moment (right after Stapleton made the play and extended the game into an 11th inning), I would be laying the odds heavily in favor of the Mets.

Buckner's error (and/or McNamara's failure to have inserted Dave Stapleton as a defensive replacement for Buckner) was just the final nail in the coffin of what was a disastrous collapse by the Red Sox as a team overall in that game.

 

o

[NashLumber]

54 minutes ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

Historically, the infamous Bill Buckner play is one of the most overblown and misinterpreted issues of all-time.

 

To this day, there are people who still believe that the Red Sox were winning the game when Buckner made that error, and that the Mets scored 2 runs on said play.

 

The reality is that the Red Sox had already blown a seemingly insurmountable lead (2 outs, a 2-run lead, and nobody on base) in such a horrific fashion ........ 3 consecutive singles ceded by their best reliever (Calvin Schiraldi), and then the wild pitch by their 2nd-best reliever (Bob Stanley) WHICH GAVE THE METS THE TYING RUN, subsequently taking all of the pressure off of them. Even if Dave Stapleton were on the field and had made that play, it would not have saved the game for the Red Sox ........ THE GAME WAS ALREADY TIED, and the Red Sox, at that point, had emotionally just had their lungs ripped out.

Would the Red Sox still have had a chance to win that game had Stapleton been on the field, made the play, and the game went to the 11th inning ??? Technically, yes. But if I were a bookie laying odds on that game at that precise moment (right after Stapleton made the play and extended the game into an 11th inning), I would be laying the odds heavily in favor of the Mets.

Buckner's error (and/or McNamara's failure to have inserted Dave Stapleton as a defensive replacement for Buckner) was just the final nail in the coffin of what was a disastrous collapse by the Red Sox as a team overall in that game.

 

o

Sammy Stewart (God rest his soul) would tell you McNamara blundered by not having him pitching in that game. I have to agree with him. 

[Chromehill]

5 hours ago, NashLumber said:

Sammy Stewart (God rest his soul) would tell you McNamara blundered by not having him pitching in that game. I have to agree with him. 

Roger Clemens would tell you McNamara blundered by taking him out of the game.  Clemens had a blister on his finger that prevented him from throwing anything other than fastballs.  Clemens insisted he could get the Mets out with just using his fastball.   In that situation, my ace who was 24-4 with a WHIP below 1 insists he can get the job done, I am leaving him in the game. 

[Redskins Rick]

7 hours ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

Historically, the infamous Bill Buckner play is one of the most overblown and misinterpreted issues of all-time.

 

To this day, there are people who still believe that the Red Sox were winning the game when Buckner made that error, and that the Mets scored 2 runs on said play.

 

The reality is that the Red Sox had already blown a seemingly insurmountable lead (2 outs, a 2-run lead, and nobody on base) in such a horrific fashion ........ 3 consecutive singles ceded by their best reliever (Calvin Schiraldi), and then the wild pitch by their 2nd-best reliever (Bob Stanley) WHICH GAVE THE METS THE TYING RUN, subsequently taking all of the pressure off of them. Even if Dave Stapleton were on the field and had made that play, it would not have saved the game for the Red Sox ........ THE GAME WAS ALREADY TIED, and the Red Sox, at that point, had emotionally just had their lungs ripped out.

Would the Red Sox still have had a chance to win that game had Stapleton been on the field, made the play, and the game went to the 11th inning ??? Technically, yes. But if I were a bookie laying odds on that game at that precise moment (right after Stapleton made the play and extended the game into an 11th inning), I would be laying the odds heavily in favor of the Mets.

Buckner's error (and/or McNamara's failure to have inserted Dave Stapleton as a defensive replacement for Buckner) was just the final nail in the coffin of what was a disastrous collapse by the Red Sox as a team overall in that game.

 

o

Everything you said is true.

But, back to the perception. Boston fans hated his guts for years and years.

Quote

They wrote about him,
mocked, and degraded him as if he weren't a human being.
They buried a career that was just 285 hits from being
enshrined in the Hall of Fame. No town creates a scapegoat
better than Boston and they had one of epic proportions.
And it is sad how they treated Buckner, really sad.