Weird Strategy

jtur88 · 04-22-2007, 02:04 PM

Just watching Braves/Mets. Mets have runners 1/2, 1 out, Glavine the runner at first. Reyes grouinds to first, and they take the force of Glaving at second, leaving Reyes at first. Braves then let Reyes take second uncontested. So, they made two back-to-back strategy choices, that in effect placed Reyes at second instead of Glavine.
-----
I often see situations where the defense elects to make a play that removes the pitcher from th base paths. The reverse of the above situation is when the pitcher pops out with a runner on first. The defense can elect to force the runner and leave the pitcher on first, but they never do.

bedir than average · 04-22-2007, 02:59 PM

I'm wondering if this is some kind of gentleman's code. It just doesn't seem like any sane team would rather Jose Reyes on Second with one out than Tom Glavine on second with one out.

Nocahoma · 04-23-2007, 03:17 PM

I would think it was a judgement call to take the force out of a running Pitcher vs. a longer throw to try and nab the speedy Reyes at 1B. Granted, many time the 1B throw is taken because the cover man has yet to make it to 2B, but that would be my guess. Having the 1B-man play deep for Reyes' at-bat would also affect the decision.

fabio61 · 05-27-2007, 11:22 PM

Probably just the idea of getting the lead runner is so ingrained in infielders, that you might lose sight of who's on first.

jtur88 · 06-04-2007, 10:11 AM

Here's another one. Friday night, Proctor beans Youkilis, 5th hbp of the game. But no ejection. Next day, Proctor gets called in again. McCarver says "No way Proctor will risk an inside pitch--everything will be on outside corner." But every Sox batter stands normal depth in the box. Why wouldn't a hitter crowd in with his toes a fraction of an inch from the plate, knowing that every pitch will either be a ball outside, or come close to hitting him under a circumstance in which Proctor cannot afford a close pitch?

jtur88 · 08-26-2008, 11:12 PM

Bottom of 13th, Seanez, the Philies last pitcher, has just pitched one inning. The now have to start a starter warming up. Seanez is due to bat 4th. Victorino leads off with a triple, and the Mets walk the bases loaded to bring up the pitcher's spot. Charlie Manuel sends up Randy Myers (a pitcher) to bat for Seanez (with no pitchers left, and no position plyaer left)---Wait---and tells Myers not to swing and risk a DP. Now---why couldnt Seanez go up there and not swing, to avoid using a starting pitcher in relief? What is the advantage of using Myers to not swing for Seanez, when Seanez could have not swung for himself, and remained in the ballgame?

04-22-2007, 02:04 PM	#1 (permalink)
jtur88 Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: South Texas Posts: 7,661	Weird Strategy Just watching Braves/Mets. Mets have runners 1/2, 1 out, Glavine the runner at first. Reyes grouinds to first, and they take the force of Glaving at second, leaving Reyes at first. Braves then let Reyes take second uncontested. So, they made two back-to-back strategy choices, that in effect placed Reyes at second instead of Glavine. ----- I often see situations where the defense elects to make a play that removes the pitcher from th base paths. The reverse of the above situation is when the pitcher pops out with a runner on first. The defense can elect to force the runner and leave the pitcher on first, but they never do.

04-22-2007, 02:59 PM	#2 (permalink)
bedir than average Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,256	I'm wondering if this is some kind of gentleman's code. It just doesn't seem like any sane team would rather Jose Reyes on Second with one out than Tom Glavine on second with one out. __________________ US Men's National Team World Cup Qualifying \| Democracy in Sports Meets My First Campaign "You're only so sure you're right because they're so sure you're wrong." Orson Scott Card in Xenocide

08-26-2008, 11:12 PM	#6 (permalink)
jtur88 Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: South Texas Posts: 7,661	Bottom of 13th, Seanez, the Philies last pitcher, has just pitched one inning. The now have to start a starter warming up. Seanez is due to bat 4th. Victorino leads off with a triple, and the Mets walk the bases loaded to bring up the pitcher's spot. Charlie Manuel sends up Randy Myers (a pitcher) to bat for Seanez (with no pitchers left, and no position plyaer left)---Wait---and tells Myers not to swing and risk a DP. Now---why couldnt Seanez go up there and not swing, to avoid using a starting pitcher in relief? What is the advantage of using Myers to not swing for Seanez, when Seanez could have not swung for himself, and remained in the ballgame? __________________ ------------------ "Capitalism is morally neutral."

04-23-2007, 03:17 PM	#3 (permalink)
Nocahoma Moderator Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 1,238	I would think it was a judgement call to take the force out of a running Pitcher vs. a longer throw to try and nab the speedy Reyes at 1B. Granted, many time the 1B throw is taken because the cover man has yet to make it to 2B, but that would be my guess. Having the 1B-man play deep for Reyes' at-bat would also affect the decision.

05-27-2007, 11:22 PM	#4 (permalink)
fabio61 Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 64	Probably just the idea of getting the lead runner is so ingrained in infielders, that you might lose sight of who's on first.

06-04-2007, 10:11 AM	#5 (permalink)
jtur88 Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: South Texas Posts: 7,661	Here's another one. Friday night, Proctor beans Youkilis, 5th hbp of the game. But no ejection. Next day, Proctor gets called in again. McCarver says "No way Proctor will risk an inside pitch--everything will be on outside corner." But every Sox batter stands normal depth in the box. Why wouldn't a hitter crowd in with his toes a fraction of an inch from the plate, knowing that every pitch will either be a ball outside, or come close to hitting him under a circumstance in which Proctor cannot afford a close pitch?