First dumb Hurdle move of the season....

[indianadrew]

hiaspire,

i read the same post as you did and i do not think that he was refering to spring training as meaningless. i think that he was refering to that particular game as it does not matter. nobody is going to say that SP is meaningless.

there are diffrent types of fans who place diffrent amounts of importance on diffrent aspects of the game. as for the core of this board i have to say that there is a diverse mix. i find myself learning alot from the statheads.
go rockies

[hiaspire]

Originally Posted by indianadrew

i think that he was refering to that particular game as it does not matter.

That's the point, though. It does matter. That's what a young developing team is trying to accomplish as they prepare for the season. And the attitude and determination and toughness they show on the field, whether spring training or not, does matter and does influence how they develop as big leaguers. It impacts their clubhouse and collective attitudes going forward.

Are they going to be a bunch of stat accumulating individuals who don't stand up for their teammates and only care about their individual number of hits in a game and how that relates to a formula for expected wins so they can say they did their individual part and that's all that matters? Are our young pitchers not going to defend our hitter's in the batting box making them constant targets and injury risks? Are we going to be a team of intelligent pacifists turning the other cheak as it gets hit over and over again while players careers are put at risk, or are we going to stand up for ourselves when the bully picks a fight?

Are they going to stand together as a unified group, and have each other's backs as teammates fighting together to earn their respect and show that they aren't kids who can be pushed around any more.

This young club's identity is very important as they mature into big leaguers. Should they be the Colorado Wussies? Maybe mathmatically, but not on the field and I certainly don't have a problem with the young players deciding enough is enough when the bullies start pushing them around. Time for this team to grow up.

For those who don't agree (and that is certainly allowed in America), throw a couple key injuries to your best hitters into your formulas instead and see how that calculates. The math there is seriously flawed and missing a big piece of the puzzle to this very issue. That unwritten rule on the field (as pointless as it may seem outside the game) is a big reason why you don't see more top hitters being beamed - because it absolutely makes mathematical sense to eliminate the best hitter from your opposition for the rest of the series. If you won't protect your own because of philosophical differences or math conclusions, then better buy better helmets for Atkins, Helton, and Holliday - and plug in a AAA replacement's numbers instead for all the time they'll be missing due to broken wrists and concussions.

[Heltonfan]

Because it absolutely makes mathematical sense to eliminate the best hitter from your opposition for the rest of the game.

No, it doesn't. That's why we have suspensions, to ensure that it isn't profitable to deliberately injure the opposition or just to engage in this kind of behavior in general. There's no need to resort to vigilante justice when you have the law on your side. This is a civilized sport, not some chaotic, lawless cage match.

[hiaspire]

Originally Posted by Heltonfan

No, it doesn't. That's why we have suspensions, to ensure that it isn't profitable to deliberately injure the opposition or just to engage in this kind of behavior in general. There's no need to resort to vigilante justice when you have the law on your side. This is a civilized sport, not some chaotic, lawless cage match.

That's absolutely wrong. Just have some AAA callup throw at Albert Pujuols on his first at bat of a series if the Cardinals have declared that they have ordered their pitchers never to protect their hitters because of "intelligent" philosophical objections. Suspend the manager and suspend the AAA pitcher with little talent. Big deal. Pujols missing the rest of the series is a big deal though. And teams DON'T do that because they KNOW that their hitters also have to face the opposing team. Pointless... hardly.

Outside of the numbers, ALL SPORTS WORK LIKE THAT. If Gretzky didn't have enforcers he would have never been allowed to skate as freely and set so many scoring records. Teams would have roughed him up much more.

Traditional baseball with its unwritten enforcement is not pointless and uncivilized chaos. These are men playing on the field, not chess pieces being moved. Sports is physical. Sports involves intimidation - even baseball (just ask anyone who faced Bob Gibson in this "civilized" sport of intelligence). Sports are often decided by those uncalculatable intangibles that effect confidence and attitudes and momentum.

[hiaspire]

Do the math, but at least put in the real world implications and not just mathematical scoring outcomes involving baserunners. That's never the point of any of it. Ever in those situations. There are bigger issues at stake than one base runner for one half inning. That's why everyone is so upset at those times, and injury risk is usually a primary concern.

If every other team in baseball will protect their hitters but you are the only team that won't, take a poll of your best hitters and ask them if they are at any raised risk from that situation. Or if they will be as comfortable (and possibly productive) at the plate knowing nobody's got their back. Measure your team's clubhouse satisfaction levels as you allow your best hitter to get beamed and take no action otherwise. Now try to go sign yourself some big bat free agents if you are the only team that won't protect your own hitters from harm.

You have the wrong formula if that situation looks positive, or maybe it is the right formula afterall but it is missing a huge chunk of very relevant reality that needs to be added to the mix as it is on the field.

[Roxpert]

When I wrote that I thought getting Francis suspended in a "meaningless spring training game" was dumb, I hardly meant to imply that spring training itself is meaningless. So when HiAspire cuts and pastes what I wrote, which is far different than how he characterized it, it proves he twisted my words.

He then writes a lecture after IndianaDrew stood up for me. And he probably wonders why we get annoyed.

BTW, spring training isn't for macho brushback pitches and getting #2 starters suspended to start the season. Sort of a dumb "bonding strategy" by our manager, which was the whole point of this thread I started to begin with.

(In case you're curious, HiAspire, spring training GAMES are for getting your work in, NOT for gaining respect. To use one of your words, that notion is a bunch of "crock".)

[hiaspire]

That game and situation with a division rival was not meaningless, and there certainly are many players on the field every spring training game who are trying to earn respect and show they belong. The players on the field felt disrespected and that their teammates were being thrown at and that made them mad as hell.

Originally Posted by Roxpert

(In case you're curious, HiAspire, spring training GAMES are for getting your work in, NOT for gaining respect. To use one of your words, that notion is a bunch of "crock".)

In case you are curious as well as condescending, those games aren't for throwing at the opposition's hitters either. The Rox collectively were upset about a situation that developed created by someone else. It wasn't a "bonding strategy" they set out to create. They didn't start anything, but just reacted to a situation.

And you still put it all on the manager when there is no proof of any such thing. The PLAYERS on the field were ticked themselves. The players have emotions. Pitchers feel a sense of responsibility for protecting their hitters. At the very least, there is a possibility that the players who were fighting mad on the field were still mad when the game was back on. At the very least, we know that part of the pitchers job traditionally in such situations is to protect their teammates, and that is often unspoken as well as an unwritten rule that everyone on the field just feels is required response.

[indianadrew]

its like arguing which came first the chicken or the egg. the games matter in a sense that they give the organization an idea of where the team is. the games do not matter as far as stats and records go. a person could feasibly take eithor side of this debate and argue it effectively.

[hiaspire]

Originally Posted by indianadrew

a person could feasibly take eithor side of this debate and argue it effectively.

That isn't really the "debate", though. That's just a side tangent because of a poster's reaction and propensity for accusation. I read meaningless spring training game and just disagree generally about that label being attached to the issue, especially with a young developing team. That's just a small point in it, though, as we cannot just automatically assume this is all Hurdle's calculated doing when players on the field were upset also and there is a history in the game of pitchers defending their teammates when they are being thrown at.

These key moments as this young team grows into big leaguers are not minor or meaningless concerns, even in spring training. Their reaction to other teams possibly bullying them is significant IMO. That's the point against adding a meaningless description to this event. Youngsters who first come up to the big leagues have to prove themselves and show their toughness. They can be more easily intimidated because of their lack of experience and other veterans are going to sometimes take advantage of that. If the young Rox players stepped up to defend themselves, I don't see that as something to get so upset about or automatically pin on our favorite target only.

[hiaspire]

The quotes from the players THEMSELVES back up the fact that it may have all come from them standing up for themselves on the field, and not being ordered to do something for someone else in the dugout.

For the better part of a decade, the Rockies have been treated like the National League West's homecoming opponent.

If they are going to be taken seriously again, they have to push back.

"I think that's true. I don't think you should be able to get away with hitting our players and throwing high and tight without their hitters feeling the same sort of thing," Rockies outfielder Matt Holliday said. "That's part of the game. If they are going to do that to us, we can't just sit around and let our players wear it."

...After speaking with a handful of his teammates, turns out Francis was mad he didn't throw with more accuracy at Kouzmanoff.

"I have no problem sticking up for my teammates," Francis said. "It's kind of an ugly situation, but we are not going be shoved around."

These are the players speaking for themselves about their own anger at the situation and their own feelings toward responding in kind. The hitters and pitchers both feel the need to take care of business in such situations.

[Heltonfan]

Yes, I know that the players feel that way. That's a large part of the problem. I'm advocating a level of maturity that is, sadly, unrealistic to expect of most 20-something-year-old males, particularly 20-something-year-old male athletes, people whose profession naturally inspires the macho ethic. But just because it's natural doesn't mean it shouldn't be controlled.

[Roxpert]

I see HiAspire is once again engaged in selective cut-and-paste mode. I read that article, in which Troy Renck also wrote THIS:

I would have had reliever Danny Graves or Mike Gallo fire the purpose pitch rather than risk losing Francis to league discipline. Francis was upset and wouldn't discuss the pitch.

The interpretation? The left- hander was mad for being asked to throw at Kouzmanoff. After speaking with a handful of his teammates, turns out Francis was mad he didn't throw with more accuracy at Kouzmanoff.

Funny how you left that out, HiAspire. Renck is TELLING you there two things: 1) Hurdle ordered the brush-back pitch, and 2) Francis was more than happy to oblige. In fact, Francis wanted to HIT the batter once given the order by Hurdle.

That's the only way to interpret this. If Francis had the idea on his own and carried it out, it would even show more incompetence by Hurdle as manager than if he ordered it. Managers are supposed to control their players and PROTECT them from getting suspended. Even if you think Francis did this of his own volition, you should then criticize Hurdle for not going to Jeff in the dugout before taking the mound and TELLING him NOT to be the "hit-man" at that time......to control the situation and save his pitcher from suspension.

But I don't doubt for a minute that Clint ordered the hit. Renck seems to confirm that.

[hiaspire]

The minute they replace players with robots, we'll probably be in high heaven here. No more of that human emotional reaction stuff and much more control. Can't wait. But you are still missing the huge piece of the puzzle in your equations that say letting your hitters get beaned without reaction is a good thing. It isn't for a wide variety of reasons that can even be numerically represented.

Roxpert, I didn't leave out anything factual and I am sick of such allegations. I wasn't going to reprint the entire article word for word (and don't think it is even allowed to do so entirely), as I really don't care what Renck initially thought personally and then found out something different otherwise later after talking to some players. That's about the author more than anything. All that is is Renck is telling you HIS initial interpretation and placing himself into that situation and what he'd do, and then admiting that he was wrong after speaking to some players and "turns out" that Francis actually was mad about something entirely different (not drilling the batter instead) and not for what he initially thought previously. I don't care about Renck's personal journey on that issue as it has nothing to do with the facts and doesn't get to the actual point of what really happened as he concludes with. That's why I went straight to the actual concluding facts he found after reasearching it beyond just his initial feelings without any evidence - like we get here a lot unfortunately as people jump to convenient conclusions that match their personal stances. Players get mad and players do things on the field when they feel disrespected. The players speak to that in volumes for this event as Renck found out ultimately at the end of that process after doing his research.

Take the human element out and sports is no longer interesting IMO. If we wanted to, we could compare the pure production statistics from robots in one factory versus another using all sorts of formulas, but to me that wouldn't be as much fun as watching the players and the human drama that is sports unfold on the field.

[Roxpert]

Originally Posted by hiaspire

The quotes from the players THEMSELVES back up the fact that it may have all come from them standing up for themselves on the field, and not being ordered to do something for someone else in the dugout.

So, the quotes that you cherry-picked from the Renck article back up "THE FACT" that it may have not come from Hurdle's orders? I have news for you; It's your OPINION, not "fact", that it may not have been on Hurdle's orders. And I think its unsupported opinion that flies in the face of normal circumstances in these situations in which managers DO typically order the retribution. That's why the commisioner's office automatically suspends the manager with the player. More often than not, managers order this stuff.

I really don't care what Renck initially thought personally and then found out otherwise later after talking to some players.

Did Renck say he found out "otherwise"? No, he didn't take back that Hurdle ordered the pitch. Re-read the article. He said he changed his mind about Francis being angry about missing on the what he termed an ordered pitch, which he never took back. He just told us that Francis was happy to comply with the order, in essence, since he never corrected the record about who ordered (or didn't order) what.

That's why I went straight to the actual concluding facts he found after reasearching it beyond just his initial feelings without any evidence - like we get here a lot unfortunately as people jump to convenient conclusions that match their personal stances.

Actual "concluding facts"??? Did the players you quoted say that Francis made the decision himself to throw that pitch? No they didn't. There is absolutely no indication that this was anything but ordered retribution by the manager. It's ironic you chide others for jumping to "convenent conclusions" when this is exactly what you've done by reading and posting a few quotes from that article. You did so to defend your stance that this may have come from the players and not "someone else in the dugout", but nothing in that article supports your "personal stance" and, if anything, the article strongly suggests that Hurdle ordered the pitch. Otherwise, Renck would have later made clear that the manager, in fact, did not order Francis to do something that cost him a suspension.

Two final questions for you on this issue:

1) If you knew for a fact that Hurdle ordered the pitch (which I think you acknowledge is at least possible), would that not be a dumb move that caused Francis to miss a turn in the rotation?

2) If it turned out you were right and Francis came up with the idea (highly unlikely), don't you think this shows that Hurdle isn't controlling his players properly to at least protect them from being suspended?

Either way, don't you think Hurdle is due some criticism rather than the constant apologist explanations you provide for him???

[hiaspire]

Originally Posted by Roxpert

I have news for you; It's your OPINION, not "fact" that it may not have been on Hurdle's orders.

It's not news to me. Of course it is my opinion (almost everything here is from all varying perspectives), and that was my very point from the start. Throughout this I've spoken of possibilities otherwise that must be considered also because they are commonplace in baseball when players get upset and pitchers defend their teammates. My point from the start was that you were NOT in the dugout and have no evidence of Hurdle personally calling this dumb move. It is more than reasonable, especially in talking to the players and understanding the history of these things happening on the field amongst players with tempers flairing, that it is a case of players getting angry and doing what often happens in the game in such situations for all teams that have ever played the game - not just something stupid that only would happen to us with this manager. In sports, tempers get upset and players fight. In baseball (and all around baseball everywhere) when one team is having their hitters being thrown at, just as Matt Holliday and all the players say, there is going to be a reaction. The players on the field expect it, and demand it as teammates protecting each other.