First, I like the dialogue of the past few posts. And, most impressively, other than the very good ideas exchanged, it is civil. Keep it up. You guys are teaching me things and giving me much to think about.
Send in the clowns. That's about all I can say after last night's charade of a debate. Granted, it didn't watch it, but heard many exchanges, from all sides, on the radio this AM. It confirmed my view that the Presidential race is know-nothing vs do-nothing-good. See my earlier blog posts, any number of them, to see specific.
I am reminded, too, of the large disconnect there is between not just the political establishment and the common people, but between the LameStream media and we plebeians. I awoke this AM to newspaper and radio reports of the Clinton victory in the debate. From what I understand from callers to radio stations, multi-stations, not to mention almost every single poll (outside of CNN), Trump was the clear-cut winner. I guess that shows another thing, too. People likely hear and see what they want to hear and see.
From what I gather, too, the moderator wasn't really a moderator, that is not one who "arbitrates or mediates." He took sides, if not blatantly, at least by omission. Where Trump was confronted half a dozen times or more over his responses, Clinton was never challenged, not even with her lie that she didn't really call the TPP "the gold standard" by which trade agreements should be judged. (Interesting how some Michigan Dem candidates for Congress are railing against their Rep opponents for supporting the TPP. Maybe the Dems should get their stories straight.) Play fair. And do they still wonder why the American public doesn't trust the LameStreams, why network news ratings are in toilet?
The entire fiasco called the Presidential Campaign/Election has me upset, sometimes close to physically upset. I am serious. If I might borrow a phrase I read online this AM, it's the equivalent of "an American colonoscopy."
On to less sickening matters, baseball. I watch more of the Tigers than I used to watch. I remain in awe, often, of their raw abilities. I know what it takes to be a good ballplayer, at least the skill to be one. And then to make the Major Leagues?????? Wow. I've often remarked how much I enjoy seeing Cabrera bat. I think he is injured, not severely, but enough to make a difference, how matter small. I think his foot/leg still bother him. I went to a game a few weeks ago and he was wearing a brace over his ankle. And that was the night after he was limping on and off the field. Watch his swing. Sometimes it really seems out of whack (whatever a "whack" is). I think he also has hand and finger issues. Try swinging a bat with sore hands. Still he's hitting over .300, with 30-some HRs and is closing in on 100 RBIs. Think, too, how many hits are taken from him. One game last week he took the collar, but could easily had 3 hits, 3 balls hit right on the nose right at someone. On Sat, he lined to 3B, the fielder driving to his left to catch the ball after it had passed him! On Sun, the left fielder, maybe the best in the league, made a diving catch on his flair (which would have also added an RBI). That happens frequently, very frequently. I think Justin Verlander (I couldn't, just now, remember his first name for a few moments!) has pitched remarkably well this year. Other than that former Tiger pitcher who is 22-4, Verlander is certainly a Cy Young candidate. He deserves several more wins, not getting them because of little run support or blown games by the bullpen. His ERA is quite low and, if just two games are removed, it goes quite a bit lower. I like watching Ian Kinsler and Julio Iglesias. They are so smooth and play the game the right way, even though with his flair, Iggy is on the verge of being a hot dog. But he's so darn quick! How Victor Martinez hits it so hard and so far is also a wonder. I watched, in slow-motion, two of his HRs last week. Both of them seemed to be hit off his front foot, his body leaning out past his front foot! He's fun to watch hit, too, although I know he's struggling with physical ailments. AJ Martinez is someone to watch, too. I think he's learned a lot from Miggy, how to wait on pitches and hit them to RF. He now realizes he can hit HRs to right just as well as to left. Fullmer has an odd delivery. It seems like his body, legs, and arm don't really work together. It's as if he lunges when he throws the ball--that is, throws the ball at 96 and 97 mph! Toss in that often very wicked slider and, well, if I a hitter I 'm hoping the manager goes to the bullpen early.
And these guys often hit the ball so far and so hard! Lasers, BBs, frozen ropes, clothes lines, blue darters......none of these seem to fit any more. I presume it's the stronger players and lighter bats with their whip. I presume it's the pitchers throwing faster. Last week someone suggested the ball is wound a little tighter this season. Still it's amazing how hard and how far they hit the ball. A 5' 10" 150-pound outfielder doesn't stand much of a chance unless he can run like the wind. If he can't, and with a fair arm, he stands no chance.
But it's an odd game. Why, in a single game, can every pitcher get shelled? That is, like Sunday's game, each pitcher was wracked for a lot of runs. Is every one of those pitchers having an off day, all 11 or 12 of them--on the same day!?!?!? Is every hitter tuned in, all on the same day?
I still wonder sometimes at how the game is played at that level. I have several examples. With all of those shifts, can't any of the players, at least once in a while, drive the ball to the opposite field? How many hits are taken away because of the shifts? Might driving the ball the other way lead to a couple of hits that defeats the shift and cause it to be taken off? If, as the color guys on the boob tube and radio constantly tell us, these guys are the hitters they are supposed to be, why can't they shoot a couple the wrong way? I know the money is in home runs, but don't we often hear about "winning is number one?" Also, why do the outfielders play so deep? Not all of them do. The best ones don't; they play more shallow. For every home run that might be taken away, how many balls fall 5 or 10 feet in front of outfielders, base hits? And, for that matter, why can't they still get back for the long fly ball home runs that might still be caught? If they are such great athletes, with far better than average speed, can't they make up ground behind them, esp if they are taught, instinctually, to take the first step backward, regardless? And why do so few players know how to bunt, specifically bunt for a hit? Andrew Romine had a great idea the other day. With two outs and the bases loaded, he dropped a bunt. But he sacrificed, with two outs!, and the play failed. As soon as he squared away, the infielders knew to charge. A pretty good bunt still led to a force out at the plate. It was a great idea, esp for a guy who is hitting in the low .200s. But it's execution left much to be desired and led to an easy out. Had he bunted for a hit, that is, not squared around at all, the play might well have succeeded, even with a less than perfect bunt. Do managers and coaches not at all teach that skill? Is there no time, even if it might make the difference in a game or two? (Look at how the wild cards races are going this season. "...a game or two?")
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I love the baseball talk....that joke of a debate isn't even worth discussing. You reminded me of a game we played in '78, my junior year. I believe it was at Waterford Kettering. You called my number to take the hill, and I was having a nice day. It was late in the game, and we were up a run or two (3-1 maybe?). We got a runner on third, and my life long best friend Mike Oldfield came to the plate with nobody out. After a pitch or two, you gave him the suicide squeeze sign, AND HE MISSED IT!! Not the ball, THE SIGN!! We all saw it on the bench, and when he didn't square around, we collectively gasped. Our eyes were so wide open. Oh my God were you pissed, but to your credit, you really contained yourself well. Oh, you let him have it, but in a very professional way. When I see major leagers make unbelievable mental and fundamental mistakes, I always think of you because those two things were the most important to you. Very fond memories Coach. Thanks!!
"not to mention almost every single poll (outside of CNN), Trump was the clear-cut winner."
No, that is not true at all. Trump won according to internet survey sites. Those are not scientific polls. All of the scientific polls showed that Clinton won the debate, even if we all lose.
http://www.businessinsider.com/who-won-first-hillary-trump-debate-2016-9
http://www.npr.org/2016/09/28/495805190/no-donald-trump-didnt-win-post-debate-polls
Post a Comment