Comments on: Stop the insanity: No more second-guessing ‘the squeeze’

By: Todd Smith

Todd Smith — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:01:55 +0000

Meant to say i am glad they made Scioscia a fixture…it’s late…sorry

By: Todd Smith

Todd Smith — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:59:46 +0000

With all due respect Earl, I did not suggest the Sox might have been pitching around Aybar to get to Figgins, but rather were putting on a runner to set up a double play perhaps while not giving anything to make decent contact. Considering not much was around the plate I think it appears quite possible that a strike was no where in their plans. It was a tough pitch to put wood on. Count being conventional or not isn’t at issue with my theory.

Appreciate the clarification. I think we see that differently. However I hope the Angels make Scioscia a fixture. I like Stability with coaches and leaders and Scioscia is a great manager.

By: Halocidal

Halocidal — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:06:22 +0000

Earl, I wasn’t referring to any of your other posts, just this one (and it lacks contextual links).

“Adult Leagues?” C’mon now Earl, is that the “advanced level” to which you’re referring?

I’ve got no problem with the suicide squeeze, by the way. What I have a problem with is you patronizing your readers. It obviously burns you and Whicker up that you’ve got to be down here in the mud with us regular folk.

Incidentally, for a guy with “20 years” experience covering MLB and “35 years” coaching baseball, it seems odd that you haven’t left a mark in either field. Jack of all trades, huh?

By: scottduncan

scottduncan — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:55:36 +0000

But Earl, you do have something against ‘mis-guided second-guessers’ who likely did not ‘ wear a protective cup after the age of 12.’ I think it’s surprising that a journalist would rail so emotionally against democratic fair comment. Of the 40 thousand paying folks for a typical home Angels game on a given night, are only those who ‘played the game’ allowed to have a credible opinion? Why don’t you criticize DiGiovanna at LAT, who keeps bringing it up, if it so steams you? No guts? Meanwhile, no one is asking Scioscia to be fired; as Stephen points out, it’s the timing of the call. And it gets to an interesting point about Scioscia’s whole-season approach to managing, versus the short-term playoff decision-making.

By: Earl Bloom, staff writer

Earl Bloom, staff writer — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:43:50 +0000

Just a note to most of those commenting. Great points for the most part. I have nothing against second guessing. I have a problem with folks demanding an excellent manager be fired for a decision they didn’t agree with or understand, or for making a strategy that didn’t work a consideration for his contract extension. … For the record, the three best counts to squeeze are 2-0, 3-0 and 3-2 (no one will pitch out then) … but nobody at the major league level does it on the last two. … and I seriously doubt the Red Sox were “pitching around” Aybar to get to Figgins. If so, that last pitch was way too close. Regardless, as long as it isn’t bounced or thrown over your head, you have to make contact on a squeeze.

By: Earl Bloom, staff writer

Earl Bloom, staff writer — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:34:25 +0000

Dear Halocidal: Thanks for bringing sciencespeak into a rant about baseball strategy. Maybe I should reference Sun Tzu’s Art of War on my next one.
Trolls generally don’t use their real names. I guess Halocidal is yours. Hmmm …
As for topics, try clicking on the boldface words in my posts. Not many in this one I admit … it’s strictly an opinion piece based on my 20 years covering major league baseball and 35 years coaching baseball including at the high school and adult levels. The Vladdy-Manny piece is also an opinion piece based on my observations and experience. Feel free to share yours.
But try my other Angels or NBA posts, there are plenty of links. Most of my sports news posts, I am blogging. Finding an article, linking to it, adding an opinion or spin or attempt at humor as I see fit. Sorry you haven’t noticed. Can you say “new concept?”

By: Seitz

Seitz — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:32:20 +0000

I’m not sure how age at which I stopped playing baseball is relevant to any of this.

Sorry. Me no speak or write good.

By: Todd Smith

Todd Smith — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:21:24 +0000

I have argued the squeeze call not because of the call (loved it) but because of the timing of it. The whole world knows Scioscia likes the squeeze. What was going on with Aybar to no surprise was with 1B open and a man on 3rd with one out was the old unintentional intentional walk ( setting up a DP if he wanted and giving no pitch to hit a fly or put inplay with authority). That is don’t give him anything to hit, which they didn’t. Very hard to get a bunt down on the fastball high and tight or off the shoe tops. Scioscia put the light on with the traditional 2-0 “hitters count” that didn’t exist in this situation as the give nothing to hit was logically in play. He should have seen a strike first. That is a fair and legitimate question of the situation.

Also, Earl, Scioscia as is his style routinely if not always sends the runner on third home on contact. That is not a reach. The debate is healthy and appropriate as it is at the very enjoyment of such a strategic game. It is done as suggested out of passion and love of the game. No one here thinks less of Scioscia for it.

If you want to go back, I thought Mauch should have left Mike WItt in the game AT THE TIME. THe HR was a mistake not fatigue of Witt. However today Witt would not have started the inning at all and Mauch made a good call that didn’t work. The game is full of those game changing decisions where there are many choices. Isn’t it great to discussit or better yet learn from discussing it?

Thanks

By: Seitz

Seitz — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:07:24 +0000

I should clarify this. Per the play by play data, never once did he actually get a bunt down in this situation. He may have been asked to bunt, failed to get it down, and got a hit, etc., anyway, but I think that probably strengthens my point.

By: Seitz

Seitz — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:04:41 +0000

As for a sacrifice fly, Aybar had one in 375 plate appearances last season.

Which is completely meaningless, unless you tell us how many opportunities he had. I’ll do it for you. Per baseball reference, he came up with runner on third and less than two out exactly 19 times. Never once was he asked to bunt. And you’re right, only once did he get the runner home via sac fly.

Unfortunately, what you leave out is that 14 of the other 18 chances, the runner still scored from third (1x each by SF, error, and HBP; 3x via ground-out/FC; 9x via base hit). The other four times consisted of two strike outs (both with the bases loaded) and two times when the runner was cut off at the plate. So over the course of the season, he got the runner home from third with less than two outs without bunting almost 80% of the time.

That said, I had no problem with the decision to squeeze before the first pitch was thrown. But when the first pitch came high and tight, it was pretty clear that the Red Sox were looking for the squeeze, and he probably wasn’t going to see a pitch in strike zone in the first two or three pitches. After the first pitch, Scioscia should have given him the take sign until the Sox showed a willingness to throw one near the strike zone. Once he had taken a strike, I would have agreed with putting the squeeze back on. I thought the Sox actually did the Angels a favor with that first pitch, because they tipped their hand. I’m not sure why Scioscia didn’t accept the gift. I don’t so much question the concept of the squeeze there as the timing of still calling for it on the second pitch.

And for the record, I’m not sure how age at which I stopped playing baseball is relevant to any of this.