SB Nation User Blog: jrams33

OT- Fake to 3rd, then to 1st

jrams33 — Mon, 18 May 2009 23:10:27 -0000

Though I have been a member here for a few years, I rarely post to the board. My contribution to the discourse would be little more than half-baked opinions or poorly thought-out editorials, since I don't have the extensive knowledge of the organization many of you do. (Additionally, I am not techno-savvy enough to make any of those cool gifs.

I would like to draw from some of yours' knowledge of baseball rules to solve a conundrum that has bugged me for some time now. Its an off day and there is little to do but bask in the glow of a seven game winning streak, which is not to scoff at that, because I have been around long enough to not take it for granted, but it seemed an appropriate time to bring this up.

So the question alluded to in the title has to do with clarification of a bizarre rule that says a pitcher with a man on first and third may disengage the rubber and fake toward third and then again towards first. Precisely why is this not a balk, and with that said why does there have to be a man on third and first for a pitcher to use this strategy? Couldn't a RHP (without a man on third and only one on second) lift his leg and then, if the runner tried to steal second, disengage the plate by stepping toward third and then whirl to throw the runner out at second? What stipulation exists that allows this strategy when a runner is on third but not when third base is vacant? And if there is a stipulation, is it only because "that's what the rule says" or is there any underlying logic to why its ok in situation A but not in B?

Thanks in advance for any insight.

listening to hitzges gives me an ulcer...

jrams33 — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:36:33 -0000

Norm Hitzges of 1310 The Ticket just finished giving an "expert" opinion on young moving to third base. He says its a dumb decision for the Rangers and young should instead go to second. He then lists some statistics comparing him to other third basemen in the league, offensively. (He would have been in the bottom third by the way)

I think it is ridiculous to suggest that the reason Young should move to third instead of Second is because at second he compares better offensively to others in the league than at third. Judging in a vacuum like that without considering the obvious question of who of Young or Kinsler would be the better third baseman completely discredits Hitzges much like Reeves saying, those defending Daniels exist only on the fringe, discredits him.

Another slightly less obvious but more pertinent question than whether or not Young will be below average offensively at third, is why would you disrupt the infield even more by having three infielders go through adjustments next season with the other (Davis) not having had a full season to become acclimated.

Hitzges goes onto say that Young prevents Davis from playing third base for the Rangers in the future and will make things difficult once Smoak challenges for the First base job. (Yeah, that is going to be soooo rough. I would hate to be the manager forced to ask the question, which of the perennial .900+ OPS first basemen will I play today? )

The final straw is Hitzges saying he rejects the idea of a player under the age of 25 playing DH "out of hand," or absolutely. But then, not a minute later, Hitzges includes Max Ramirez as his DH for the Rangers this season. Ramirez age on opening day? 24.

Help us Ben & Skin, you're our only hope.

Main question

jrams33 — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 21:20:32 -0000

Actually two questions: after seeing him placed at the top of our prospect list by the BTiA guys, I got to thinking about the 2006 draft and was puzzled about why he fell to us at 24. It was a pretty deep draft, but after hearing the comments from guys like MJH and Adair's praise recently, I believe we pulled off quite a coup to get this guy at #24. He was the 13th pitcher taken and the 7th RHP when he came off the board to us. He signed quickly so signability was one of the draws to him, and I don't remember anything negative coming out about him physically. So now the questions

Why did he drop to 24?

If we were to redraft the first round of 2006 today, where do you think he would go? Ahead of Alderson and Savery surely?

I can hardly wait to see him in Frisco next year and eagerly await the reports coming from our various and asundry perspectives hopelessly addicted to covering the entire Rangers organization.

Sabathia likes the Giants? -Heyman article

jrams33 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:45:09 -0000

Jon Heyman thinks Sabathia wants to go to SF. He even says that comes from someone who knows Sabathia well. I know that it is early to talk about this, but with Zito's contract is there much chance the Giants pony up for Sabathia this off-season?

Heyman article: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/jon_heyman/08/25/heyman.scoop/index.html

AND if he does go to the giants, doesn't that create a logjam on their rotation? I am unfamiliar with their pirching besides Lincecum, but they do have needs in their lineup. Like at shortstop and the outfield. Tampa Bay isn't going to give us any of their young pitching, because they have no needs in the farm system, generally speaking. Would the Giants part with Cain or Sanchez if Andrus/ a ML( or ML ready) OF, and a promising pitching prospect were offered?

I may be way overvaluing Sanchez and Cain. i throw that possibility out off the cuff, but I wanted to get the board's opinion on the Giants, in light of Sabathias desire to play closer to where he grew up, being a trade partner for us?

AJM's stock phrases

jrams33 — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:28:25 -0000

If there was a Word document with responses that Adam gives by default to people who ask the same question, what would be some of your favorites?

I am sure I will think of more, but here's one.

"Dice-K

You think Hicks bid $27 million knowing that it wouldn't be good enough?

The thinking by most people was that the bid would be around $20 million."

(attempted block quotes but suck at life.)

best case scenario?

jrams33 — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 04:39:37 -0000

Has anyone thought about what they would like to see the Rangers look like on Tuesday afternoon? I have heard a lot of different proposals thrown around and have tried to keep up with all of the opinions. Its been a fun few days in Ranger-land and we have dropped two to the Royals. Weird. But from what I can judge here is what I would love to see happen. (Also, no pie in the sky offers either. Lastings Milledge will not be had for the Sooser. sorry to burst the bubble)

Tex for.....hmmm, this is VERY tough. Loney, Ethier, and Kershaw.

Gagne/ Laird for Pie

Benoit and/or Eyre to the Dodgers for prospect(s)

Sosa to Mets for the remains of Howard Johnson's corked bats.

Discuss

Rangers in 08

jrams33 — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 05:40:07 -0000

So as I've been following the conversation about how sorry the Rangers are and how they won't be competetive for another 2 or 3 years, I decided to look at what we do have for next year and I am not as discouraged about '08 as before.

I look at our starting pitching which has been atrocious and I think some changes need to be made. So with the understanding that the powers that be must look at Connors and Laird, I can't help but feel hopeful with Millwood, McCarthy, Tejeda and Hurley that next years staff can fulfill the expectations we had for them at the beginning of the season. If you add a guy like Lester, Buchholz, or Hughes to that, wonderful. Padilla and to some degree Tejeda are wearing thin with me, and I really only want to have one if either of them on our staff next year. One nutcase is enough.

Now our OF is still poor but if we can procure Ellsbury, and fit him in with Diaz and someone else like Dunn, then we might have the seeds of something good out there. I will say I am leary of FA signings for awhile, so I am on the fence about Dunn or Hunter, so if not those guys then the best guy in ST (wouldn't mind it being Cruz or Byrd because then at least we would have a plus outfield defensively)

The IF is set except for 1B, and I don't know where we could go for that. It seems irrational that a guy as athletic as Botts could not pull off a serviceable 1B, because unless his "newly shortened" swing is the real deal and he knocks the cover off the ball the 2nd half of this season, I don't feel he is the answer at DH, and I think if he wants to be a starter for us, he has to learn what the leather on his off hand is for.

Across the board we are below average in the infield defensively, but my hope is that with Blalock and Kinz taking to some of Wash's ideas, we might be able to improve the unit so our groundball pitchers have more confidence with the guys behind them.

The bullpen will be a strength even if we lose Aki along with Gagne, and if FF gets the chance to take that closers role we could see a group that doesn't skip a beat from this year to next.

We have a team next year, and though I don't think we will win the division unless things go just right, I believe that this team can finish above .500.

Finally, we have SOOOOOO many guys who are underachieving this year and most will either gain from experience (Kinz, Laird, McCarthy, Tejeda, Diaz) or won't decline significantly but instead should bounce back (Milly, Blalock, Cat, Padilla) so I think that building for 2009 is what we need to be doing, but having a fire sale for everything not bolted to the floor is foolish.

Oh and don't fire Daniels. Give Wash another year and give him his choice of staff.

40 days

jrams33 — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 06:03:10 -0000

I cannot say how much it warms my heart to leave home for five hours and have an hours worth of Ranger's material to read and process when I get back. Perhaps the contrast to January and the desert poor Adam had to wade through to tide us hopeless saps over have made the excitement of the recent Ranger goings-on slightly exaggerated, but with that proviso, I for one want to say that the feast of updates and commentary has been nothing short of sublime.

If you asked me what my projection for Gerald Laird is tonight, I would say it would be something like .300/.400/.550, but that is probably because the feast I have engorged myself on during the last few days makes me want to give out praise like Lloyd Christmas passing out Benjamins in Aspen, CA.

However, I must pause. Like Josh Rupe, I don't want to get into regular season form in the first two days of Spring training with only half the team in camp. I am grateful for the sane (cynical) perspectives of a few of my comrades, because without them how could I not already crown Brandon McCarthy the Cy Young award winner for 2007 taking down the first of a half dozen in Ranger uniform by barely nosing out Vinny Padilla in the closest vote in Cy Young history. Thank you for that....imagine my disappointment when some rube named Santana or Verlander gets it.

Now its still forty days away, the start of the Rangers season, and as a religious guy desperate to spiritualize everything in my life in hopes to discover significance in the mundaneness of my everyday, I can't help but think of Lent, or the Israelites sojourning in the wilderness (40 YEARS mind you, January seemed long but not that long) or Jesus fasting in the desert. Now I am thankful that thanks to Adam I won't have to fast from Rangers news for the next six weeks or so. Now, please believe that I would if I thought it would win us the West, but thankfully we are entering a season of Anti-Lent. Now I think as the training reports become more repetitive and the same tired storylines get resurrected (there you go another religious theme) by writers short on time before deadline and fresh baseball news, my initial titillation about the impending season, like the first time I hear Christmas music in late-OCTOBER, will fade into just out an out frustration at how long its taking for that damned ticker to get to zero hour.

But that day is not today and as we look forward to the start of a new season, when everyone is undefeated and no team is without hope that the promised land is just around that next corner, let me say how FREAKING EXCITED I am to be a Rangers fan.

(Now please no injuries tomorrow)

Jon

most hated owners in MLB history

jrams33 — Thu, 18 Jan 2007 18:12:28 -0000

All of the criticism of Hicks makes me wonder where he ranks among owners who were hated by the fans of their team or as we look back deserve the most contempt for being avaricious and miserly megalomaniacs.

Charlie O Finley must be up there.

Comiskey for the White Sox deserves mention.

Maybe we can get some nominees and make a poll.

Botts, Cat, Cruz, and Wilk

jrams33 — Fri, 05 Jan 2007 15:48:00 -0000

I am curious to see how Washington uses this group to fill his OF spots and DH. That there will be no fall off if one of these guyus get injured is encouraging. However, it is also discouraging that the guys filling these spots are mediocre enought that any of them could step in in the case of injury and there would not be a significant drop in production.

My questions are:

How will those guys be utilized versus RH/LH pitching? Who will play when in other words.

Which is the most valuable in a package for a more productive bat?

Which one are we most inclined to give up?

How many ABs this season can we expect from each one?