Called in with lots of intelligent viewpoints, but Rongey talked right over him and assumed what he was going to say and then shouted it down.

Ancillary Douchebag to Rongey, which goes without saying. In full apology mode for Peavy because he doesn't really understand baseball. First, nobody said Peavy was "awful" tonight. He was just a fucking loser. Let's go back about four hours ago. A game was about to occur featuring Peavy and Doug Fister as the two most important players. Not Peavy and Walter Johnson. Not Peavy and Bob Gibson. Not Peavy and Justin Verlander. Not even Peavy and Max Scherzer. Peavy and Motherfucking Doug Fister. In the most important game of the season thus far for both of them. Fister stepped up. Peavy didn't. Don't talk about "run support." That's just what Peavy allowed and what Fister didn't.

Rongey should have heard DeAndre out. He might have learned something.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8

There tonight.

_________________
There goes one over the fence..Tru Link Fence..Beauty, Privacy Security....Call Tru Link.
Murph's Union 76 Truck Stop....A great Thanksgiving Tradition!!!!

WOO LIFE!!!!

I tend to be a sabermetrics guy, but the way people throw around the term "run support" has robbed it of any explanatory power it may once have had. Exactly how many runs worth of "support" does a pitcher need before we can reasonably expect him to win? Two? Three? Six? Who knows? It's just a crutch for lazy people who want to excuse a guy for taking a loss. Fister went 7.0 and gave up 2, which was good enough to win. Peavy went 5.2 and gave up 3, which wasn't. Regardless of what Baghdad Bob would have you believe, there's really not much more to it than that.

_________________
The Bulls haven't done anything wrong, and they're not going to do anything wrong.

Peavy is the new Javy


Maybe they should have bunted with Youk in the 8th

Agree, he had a 2 -0 lead, he couldnt hold it, he deserved to get tagged with the loss. Its no different than if he was up 4 and gave up 5 or up 7 and gave up 8. Once again he failed to outpitch his opponent. He's the guy with the motherfucking ball in his hand to initiate play, pitch better, jagoff.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

I was only listening on the radio when this happened, but it sounded like Cabrera had a home run taken away by the wind blowing in. So in terms of run support last night, I assume it was low because conditions were poor for hitters. Both pitchers face the same conditions, and like others have said, Fister was just better.

I too am sick of the whole run support thing and saber folks discounting wins. Pitchers that get wins tend to give up less runs and pitch deeper into games. Of course there are cases like Jason Marquis in his Cardinals days where an offense carries a pitcher for a whole season. But more times than not, the pitcher controls the bulk of his destiny.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

Exactly.

Rongey ranted about how Peavy went a complete game and lost 2-0 earlier this season and how he went seven another time and gave up one and lost that one. So what? That completely ignores the other guy(s) in the game who gave up less. He never mentioned the guys he faced. Guaranteed he doesn't remember who they even were. Why is that hard to understand?

A baseball game unfolds. It isn't a computer simulation. A pitcher knows the conditions of the game he is pitching at the time. Your team gave you a 2-0 lead. There's your "run support." Now don't put fucking Austin Jackson on base. Because Cabrera is going to follow soon thereafter.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8

Good point. You're not going to get 4 runs each night......hold them to zero and I bet you won't lose!

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

I'd also like to note, that I'm not even sure any of this is what DeAndre was going to say. Because Rongey wouldn't let him say it.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8

Also, how the fuck can a guy dismiss pitcher's wins and losses and then talk about "quality starts"? A "quality start" is simply another arbitrary construction, much like a pitcher's win, but with less rigorous standards.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8

Well, Quality starts does remove any direct connection to the offense.

I appreciate statistical enhancement of the game. However, playoff crunch is like the black hole in the baseball universe, the laws all change. In this type of situation (playoff run against the team chasing you) I demand nothing less than shutout baseball from my 17 million dollar pitcher. That really is the reason you are paying him 17 million. Plenty of keggers can go out and get you a win in April or during the summer against lesser competition. You break the bank for this type of guy with the understanding that he is the one who is going to shoulder all the pressure at the critical moments.

I think Peavy understands it and doesn't accept his performance. I don't know why Ranger needs to coddle him.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Yes, but it also ignores the fact that in some games three runs is a huge amount and in others it's not much at all.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8

I think this is what DeAndre was trying to get at. That you go into a game like this with a lot on the line, you can't expect a lot of "run support." When the games are this meaningful, the other guy is good too. And it doesn't get easier from here.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8

You are right. So in tight, important, games like these...it is probably wise to bunt more. Get em on, get em over, get em in.

_________________
Proud to be UNVERIFIED.

Exactly. They scored 9 the other night, and still lost. Isn't 9 runs enough "support"?

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

As dumb as I think "smallball" is, I probably wouldn't object nearly as much if they had someone who could actually get a bunt down.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8

If you have those type of players in that type of park, fine. But, to play smallball in a launching pad, with a lineup full of mashers, is dumb.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

Giving away outs is dumb 99% of the time.

with a guy who hasn't bunted, no once, the entire year

Hawk and Stone were basically calling Robin a dumbass from the booth yesterday

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Did not see the game or hear the call...and I agree in that ball park with that lineup bunting is not a wise move..but there is a place for small ball and getting a runner over and hitting a sac fly in a tight game in any park under the right circumstances..Peavy was out pitched ...run support had nothing to with the outcome but run support and wins being over valued are legit...just not in last nights game.

_________________

I would never bunt ever unless it was up the 1st base line with a runner on third.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

Coop said he couldn't wear his contacts when he had an infection or scratch a week or two ago. He does wear contacts normally.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

He was a dumbass, a HUGE one. And I am quite sure Youk and the other veterans on the team feel the same way today.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

Running Rios was dumb too. Chasing two runs. What difference does it make if he stands on first? It forced AJ to swing at a bullshit pitch.

_________________
Ecclesiastes 5:8

JORR, a couple Sox fans in my office are demanding MORE BUNTING


They say Cabrera cant field bunts

That only negates the fact that for the most part, the Sox can't get one down anyway.

_________________
1926-1931-1934-1942-1944-1946-1964-1967-1982-2006-2011

Yes, but it's not really a statistical anamoly, but rather an illustration of why run support is such an imperfect metric. Jason Marquis was usually matched up against the other team's 4th or 5th starter, who was probably not very good. Thus the Cardinals would rack up lots of "run support" when Marquis was on the mound. Conversely, as teams usually match up their aces, your team's top pitchers will get less run support than otherwise expected because they are facing the other team's best pitchers.

I haven't looked into this, but based on the proliferation of stats, I wouldn't be surprised if someone had come up with an "adjusted run support" metric that took into account the opposing pitcher's ERA.

_________________