Jump to content

5/22 - Baltimore @ Washington Game 2


alaniee

Recommended Posts

Watching the replay provided by IHeartMASN, I can see why you could think it didn't hit the glove, however, I know from watching the game on my TV. It did in fact hit the glove. It looks uncertain on the replay online but yes it hit the glove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply
If you saw the other angle, you'd see it hit his glove.

Edit:Pause the replay at right at the 6 second mark, it hits his glove.

I respectfully disagree: go to large-screen and tell me what you think after taking a look at the close-up replay at 00:52-00:53.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching the replay provided by IHeartMASN, I can see why you could think it didn't hit the glove, however, I know from watching the game on my TV. It did in fact hit the glove. It looks uncertain on the replay online but yes it hit the glove.

Yep it definitely hit his glove. I think that's why he was pissed, because he thought he helped the ball get over when it really didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching the replay provided by IHeartMASN, I can see why you could think it didn't hit the glove, however, I know from watching the game on my TV. It did in fact hit the glove. It looks uncertain on the replay online but yes it hit the glove.

OK, if you guys have better angles I'll trust your eyes. But did it actually go into the glove or just graze its fingertips?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, if you guys have better angles I'll trust your eyes. But did it actually go into the glove or just graze its fingertips?

I don't 100% remember but I do know he didn't have it fully caught. That's why I called it 1/2 caught, it kinda was in the upper part of the glove with his glove 1/2 way open (not closed to call it caught). Could say it was 1/2 caught and 1/2 grazed. I don't know but I do know that the ball did touch the glove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He looks terrible. And has been largely lucky all day.

Agreed, the first few innings he looked bad and good on different AB's but mostly looked below average and just got worse as his pitch count went up.

I was surprised to see him hitting last inning as I knew he was almost done and had a pitch count in the 90s so why not just pinch hit for him with a RISP opportunity and bring in Berken or Hendrickson for a few innings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised to find out that Bergy was still in the game. As mentioned earlier, assumed he wd be lifted after five innings (and 8 hits and a walk).

Down to a one-run lead with a runner on and one out. Pretty much starting over even after being gifted the inside-the-parker. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't 100% remember but I do know he didn't have it fully caught. That's why I called it 1/2 caught, it kinda was in the upper part of the glove with his glove 1/2 way open (not closed to call it caught). Could say it was 1/2 caught and 1/2 grazed. I don't know but I do know that the ball did touch the glove.

Thanks!

(chinese) characters

漢字

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • Posts

    • Or the Williams sisters, but I doubt he'd mention girls.  
    • Possible? Sure. Yet, I'd be surprised by any trades in the divisions, unless it was considered a minor one.  I doubt Elias would want to see any of his prospects helping an AL East rival when he can get similar players elsewhere.
    • Tiger Woods, of course, standing as an excellent example of a guy who was precociously skilled at a sport at a very young age (because his dad made him play) but never quite got there as a pro. There’s some merit to what you’re referencing here. I would absolutely buy that his lifelong exposure to baseball is a significant factor in his success at a young age. But I think that type of thing is far more applicable when evaluating youth or high school, maybe college level players. At lower levels and younger ages, I suspect extreme advantages in experience, practice time, and hands-on coaching can absolutely give a less talented kid a leg up. However, I think there’s a ceiling for how far a ho-hum kid can go on the back of force-fed baseball obsession — and I’m pretty sure that ceiling is a lot lower than “excellent hitter at AAA at age 20.“ I think you have to have the goods to reach that level, no matter how much baseball your daddy exposed you to as a kid. Ceiling-wise, as I’ve said, I do think he’s probably lower than some of these absolute tool demons like Gunnar and Witt and Acuna. I would not trade Gunnar for him, for example. But lots of these guys I’ve compared him to as 2Bs (Cano, Utley, Altuve, Pedroia, Kinsler) were not super tooled-up guys, and they’re all among the 25-50 most valuable players of the last 25 years or so. I don’t know that you have to be a Greek god to be a perennial All-Star type player, at least at that particular position.  
    • Why do you want to elevate the opposing pitcher's pitch count?
    • I really hope that doesn't happen. Hyde said that the 6-man rotation was not going to be a permanent thing, nor should it with our schedule and our bullpen situation. The pen needs a long man. Suarez is a maybe to complete five innings. Suarez should be in the pen, not starting at Yankee Stadium.
    • If a team is not getting walks, they aren't elevating the opponent pitcher's pitch count. They are also having quicker innings and taxing their own pitchers.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...