BruisedCrew

If the Brewers are going to put together a winning streak against the weaker teams they’re going to have to win some games without needing the top 3 relievers every time. And expecting them to be perfect isn’t always going to work either.

Those quick outs were just what Burnes needed. Now get some runs.

Not exactly the way to take advantage of a terrible bullpen.

Ah, way to squirt one through the infield. Need more.

I know where his pitch count is. But he has had a lot of high stress pitches because of all the traffic on the bases. If puts the leadoff man on in the 6th he’s going to be going over 100.

The lucky Reds are up a quick 3-0 over the Cubs.

Might have to retract what I said before. Burnes may not make it through 6 and the Nats may be putting it away this inning.

And Butnes puts the runner right back on.

He’s out. Slid around the bag.

Burnes has had to work hard the last few innings with early baserunners and now Adames puts him in another hole. Burnes pitch count is getting up there; not likely going more than 6 tonight so more strain on the bullpen.

Have to chuckle at Rotino breaking down the Nats offense and saying they don’t have a good recipe for scoring runs and are 22nd in MLB in runs per game. Didn’t mention that the Brewers at 25th have a worse recipe.

Why would Santana not step on the bag instead of tagging the runner?

Playing from behind. Not good for a bad offense.

I hesitate to engage with you again, but if you have been following my comments on this, you would know that this is not just about the call in yesterday’s game or whether or not that pitch showed as nipping the strike zone in 4 different two dimensional presentations on TV and websites. I do know for a fact that on, at least one occasion, and maybe some others you have declared something to absolutely be a strike, and Gameday showed it outside the strike zone and Umpire Scorecards (which I don’t think comes out until the next day) did not show the pitch as a missed call. I don’t go to Baseball Savant very often so I don’t know if their strike zone box is any different or better than the others. You also seem to be missing or ignoring the real point that I made yesterday that you found to be funny. In addition to not knowing how accurate those sites are at depicting the actual strike zone, we don’t know how the strike zone would be set in any automated system that MLB would adopt. I concede (and never disagreed) that that pitch touched the edge of the estimated strike zone in all of those media. Though some of them could have been used to illustrate the geometric concept of a straight line being tangent to a circle and having an intersection of one point of no dimension. Whether those estimated strike zones are accurate presentations of the strike zone as stated in the rule book and as interpreted by umpires is something else again. You and I are obviously going to have different reactions to pitches like that that are so close to the edge of the TV and website strike zones. While you claim “It Was a Strike”, I’m going to think “Damn, that could have been a strike”. I save my more indignant comments for the more obvious ones that look bad on TV (with or without a box on the screen) and that are more like a full ball width inside or outside of the box. If you think that the controversy over calls on borderline pitches like this is going to be resolved by some form of automated call or challenge system I suspect you are going to be very disappointed. Like other replays, the controversy just takes a different form.

Except that the instant reactions do come from just the telecast. There have been times this season when a specific poster has declared emphatically “It was a strike” when some of the other sources have indicated otherwise. Even then, a pitch like this that is so close begs the question of how accurate any of the two dimensional strike zone boxes

It’s a strike/It’s a ball A Player’s Perspective Some additional food for thought for fans who think they know with absolute certainty if a pitch should be called a ball or a strike based only on the strike zone box on TV.

I’ll hope for 2-2 so I won’t be rooting for anyone until one team has won 2. The much more important things is for the Brewers to win at least 7 of their next 10 games

Here are some crazy numbers. On June 2 the Brewers played the first of their 13 games against the Reds. At the time the Brewers were in first place, a half game ahead of the Pirates, who hadn’t started their big slide, and 3 games ahead of the Reds. Since that date, and assuming the Reds hold on to their big lead today, the Reds have gone 32-19 and gained 3.5 games on the Brewers, who are 28-22. In other words, despite losing 7 games to the Brewers in the head to head games, the Reds have gained 10.5 in all other games. Also, in the Reds 37 games (not counting today) not against the Brewers, they have averaged 5.9 runs per game. In the 13 against the Brewers they averaged 2.7. runs. I don’t know what this means going forward now that the Reds and Brewers are done with their second series. But, if I were a Reds fan I’d be feeling pretty good about a team that is winning series against teams like the Dodgers (twice), Astros (sweep on road), Orioles, and DBacks (sweep at home) now that they are done with the one team that had had their number over the last two months. They even slugged it out with the Braves, losing 2 out of 3 games that were all decided by one run.

So, it made you laugh that I have an opinion that the strike zones on TV and other sites are not necessarily an accurate presentation of the actual strike zone? Sounds kind of dismissive doesn’t it?

Hustling to first on a grounder apparently isn’t in Acuna’s job description. Though I suppose he was still off balance trying to hit the ball into orbit. ETA- nope they showed the replay and he was just dogging it.

That didn’t work so well with a one run lead last Sunday and it won’t today either.

I wasn’t triggered by the LOL, but I noted it because it was so strange in that context. You’re laughing at me because I don’t blindly accept as gospel those strike zones that you see on TV and other sites? If you hadn’t included that cute little item, I would still have responded to your frequent insistence that you are always right about what is and isn’t a strike based on what you see on TV. I refer you back to a thread on this subject from a few weeks ago that cites an article on how not everyone agrees on exactly what the strike zone should be and states that the boxes you see on TV are not accurate. I’m sure the same applies to the two dimensional boxes on other sites For your convenience I bumped that thread.

In light of the excitement on today’s game thread I thought it would be a good time to call up this thread.

I am perfectly calm so no need for you (of all people) to tell me to take a deep breath.

LOL back. You still don’t know how an official MLB approved robot and review system would address a pitch like that and how it would ultimately be called. It would all depend on where the strike zone is defined and where the position of the ball is measured.