Jump to content

The Defense Thread, 2024

Frobby

By Frobby
in Orioles Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

DirtyBird Hangout Grand Counsel

DirtyBird

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Might want to look at that again.  Urias had no time to square up, and thus attempted to backhand the ball.  It was a short hop, on a wet field, with an extremely fast runner.

Could he have made the play?  Sure.

Should he have made the play? Not imo.

And to me that's the bar for assigning an error.

The ball was only hit 78 mph. It was a pretty clear error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 178
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Aristotelian
Aristotelian

Better view of it from this (incredible) camera angle. Mateo played it beautifully as he used the momentum from jumping for energy to put on the throw. Aside from the slight bobble I don't think it wa

KojiSplit
KojiSplit

Ridiculous defense tonight by Mateo and Gunnar -Mateo backed up a ball thrown past Mountcastle to get India at 2nd on a perfect throw; India himself was in complete disbelief he was out -Bot

Say O!
Say O!

The two plays last night which have generated some discussion are here — link to reels I thought his diving attempt in the first was great effort, his jump was solid, he tracked outstanding, just

Posted Images

DirtyBird Hangout Grand Counsel

DirtyBird

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Clearly, exit velocity is hardly the only factor in the difficulty of making a play.

Your quote: "Urias had no time to square up, and thus attempted to backhand the ball."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pickles Hangout Grand Counsel

Pickles

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

Your quote: "Urias had no time to square up, and thus attempted to backhand the ball."

 

He didn't have time to square up and thus attempted to backhand the ball.

Go watch the play.  79 MPH exit velocity at 85 feet is less than a 0.10th of a second.

I don't believe it should have been called an E, and the MASN crew said the same exact thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, Pickles said:

He didn't have time to square up and thus attempted to backhand the ball.

Go watch the play.  79 MPH exit velocity at 85 feet is less than a 0.10th of a second.

I don't believe it should have been called an E, and the MASN crew said the same exact thing.

Your math is pretty terribly flawed.  79 mph at 85 feet takes a bit more than 0.7 seconds, not less than a tenth of a second.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Malike Hangout Grand Counsel

Malike

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Your math is pretty terribly flawed.  79 mph at 85 feet takes a bit more than 0.7 seconds, not less than a tenth of a second.  

He was playing in on the grass so I don't know if that skews the numbers at all. I do believe he should have made the play but he was playing in due to the speed of the batter iirc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pickles Hangout Grand Counsel

Pickles

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Your math is pretty terribly flawed.  79 mph at 85 feet takes a bit more than 0.7 seconds, not less than a tenth of a second.  

My bad.  I moved a decimal.

All I can say, is go watch the play.  He didn't have time to get in front of that ball, and the announcers were as surprised as I was it was an E.

People want to say it was questionable is fine by me.

Saying it was "clearly an error" or he "had time to get in front of it" are not dealing with reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, Malike said:

He was playing in on the grass so I don't know if that skews the numbers at all. I do believe he should have made the play but he was playing in due to the speed of the batter iirc.

He’s the one who used 85 feet.   Anyway, I’m not arguing who’s right or wrong about the play, I’m just correcting the math.   It takes about 0.4 seconds for a 90 mph pitch to travel 60 feet, so a 79 mph grounder clearly isn’t going 85 feet in less than a tenth of a second.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Malike Hangout Grand Counsel

Malike

Posted
Posted
Just now, Frobby said:

He’s the one who used 85 feet.   Anyway, I’m not arguing who’s right or wrong about the play, I’m just correcting the math.   It takes about 0.4 seconds for a 90 mph pitch to travel 60 feet, so a 79 mph grounder clearly isn’t going 85 feet in less than a tenth of a second.  

Yeah, my point was more to the fact that if he's playing in, he has even less time on a ball at 79 mph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Malike Hangout Grand Counsel

Malike

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

Very fair. I actually missed the bloop. Where I still put it on Kimbrel is that he does nothing to hold runners and no longer has the swing and miss stuff to be able to completely ignore baserunners like Bautista.

He had more than 12K/9 last year and has 2 Ks in 1 inning this year. Bautista couldn't hold runners on at all, they ran at will. If Hays calls off Gunnar he easily makes that play and Kimbrel gets a save and nobody complains. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
interloper Hangout Grand Counsel

interloper

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Malike said:

He had more than 12K/9 last year and has 2 Ks in 1 inning this year. Bautista couldn't hold runners on at all, they ran at will. If Hays calls off Gunnar he easily makes that play and Kimbrel gets a save and nobody complains. 

The difference with Bautista is it doesn't matter because a strikeout is coming almost no matter what. That's why we won so many tie games on the road - he was a cheat code against the ghost runner rule. It just didn't really matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • casadeozo
      The 2024 Trade Deadline

      By casadeozo · Posted

      I dont think it matters in the playoffs. You need a little bit of luck in a 5 or a 3 game series.
    • Can_of_corn
      Interesting Article About Scott Boras and Orioles

      By Can_of_corn · Posted

      I don't think most of the issues with Rays attendance and engagement is because of the roster churn. It's because of the stadium, the competition from the Lightning and Bucs for entertainment dollars and the transient fanbase mostly having allegiances to other teams. 
    • Aristotelian
      The 2024 Trade Deadline

      By Aristotelian · Posted

      Would you rather have Atlanta's roster or Texas?
    • casadeozo
      The 2024 Trade Deadline

      By casadeozo · Posted

      It's been said many times already but the Rangers won with pitchers NO ONE would have said were much better than Cole Irvin last year. In addition, Atlanta lost in the NLDS despite having maybe one of the best rosters ever assembled. As for ownership,  as stated all evidence is Elias is not going chips all in on one season as much as you may want him to. Rubenstein has said hes taking a hands off approach especially in this first season as has totally faith in the front office.  Unless you want a repeat of the Duquette years, going all in, prospects be damned, is a strategy from a bygone era.
    • Just Regular
      The 2024 Trade Deadline

      By Just Regular · Posted

      Is Justin Verlander toast?     Maybe the future resembles the past. In Bradish's presumed absence, he's an interesting possible character as one of the three lead SP. I do believe the Astros staggered his start this year knowing at his age 26 weeks + October is too heavy a lift.    He's presently sidelined with a sore neck after getting scratched a couple days ago (and the Astros getting routed when they had to accelerate a kiddo).  Last October he had two good games and one bad game against MIN and TEX. Astros this week have a cold/hot mix with the White Sox before us this weekend, when we might get a live look.
    • Bemorewins
      Interesting Article About Scott Boras and Orioles

      By Bemorewins · Posted

      IMO because all big contracts come with various degrees of risk. The wisest course is to spend on the best/most talented player. They are the ones who most likely have the longest run of great to good in them, even if they cost the most. What you don't want to do is spend money on guys who fall off of cliffs early or are injury prone or who do not have the mentality to handle success or who do not have very strong work habits and will likely become comfortable after getting paid. That is why I think (like many others) that Gunnar is the guy you want to extend even if you have to move heaven and earth to do so. I just don't see anything in his profile/short history that are any kind of "red flags". It is likely to be worth it (at least for a long time - at least next decade). Also taking into account the momentum that the O's are riding with winning, so many young homegrown stars, and new ownership. IF they were to extend a Henderson and/or Rustchman IMO it will take the org to a new level and provide even greater momentum and fan interest/marketplace growth. That is how you become the next "big player/franchise" that can sustain winning beyond a short/6 yr team control window. I've stated before that I worry that a Rays model of ongoing rebuilding, never spending meaningfully, and never being invested enough as an org to be fully committed to winning sends the wrong message to your customer/fanbase and will never really engage a community/marketplace fully. 
    • Malike
      Kyle Stowers 2024

      By Malike · Posted

      I doubt they give him a 2-3 year deal, I do think if he's here it's because they give a QO and he takes it, which I also doubt he'd do, because someone is going to pay him more for longer.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...