Tim McCarver

[Tyler Durden]

Anyone agree that he is far too analytical for the average fan?

[MrGo]

I think that's better than someone who always states the obvious.

I like McCarver..always have.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone agree that he is far too analytical for the average fan?

[/ QUOTE ]
what?

He sucks man.

[JinX11]

He is fawful. 2nd worst only to Joe Morgan.

[MrGo]

I agree with you on Joe Morgan. He fumbles for words an awful lot. No one was worse than Harry Carry though.

Worst announcer ever? Bill Walton. Hands down.

[BeerMoney]

He's totally annoying. Its not that his points are too analytical, its that he won't let up on them. I also think he's too critical of the players. When a guy strikes out, guess what, we all know he shouldn't have struck out, and it would have helped his team more if he got a base hit..

In golf, a player bangs a ball into the woods, and the commentators talk about what a mental breakdown it was.. Guess what?? If you hit it where you wanted to everytime the game would be easy.

McCarver needs to keep his mouth shut more.

[andyfox]

He's far too wrong for the average fan.

Among my favorites:

-"The longer the game goes, the more it favors the Yankees." OK, they tried 12 innings, and then they tried 14 innings. Maybe they could win a 16 inning game?

-He talked about "hanging" pitches and said it's not just curve balls, there are hanging fast balls too. No, there aren't.

[andyfox]

"McCarver needs to keep his mouth shut more."

They don't need three guys in the booth. McCarver and Leiter compete with each other. Personally, I'd rather have Leiter. When they had Boone in the booth last year, they needed McCarver, because Boone had absolutely nothing to say all the time.

But three guys are superfluous. We have a hundred and six camera angles and endless replays, so we don't need three guys to tell us what we saw.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]

-He talked about "hanging" pitches and said it's not just curve balls, there are hanging fast balls too. No, there aren't.

[/ QUOTE ]
Haha, I heard this too. Silly me, all this time I always thought that the pitcher missed his spot and pitched the fastball higher than he wanted, apparently, he is hanging the fastball.

McCarver is clearly the worst, by a long stretch.

[andyfox]

You know we're in trouble. Schilling today. If we lose today, who do we pitch tomorrow? My guess is Vasquez.

Gut-wrenching losses the last two days.

[ThaSaltCracka]

we are in trouble? I will take a healthy Lieber over a boot wearing ace. If I were a Boston fan, I wouldn't feel at all confident going into this game.

You are right though, who will pitch? Brown maybe?

[kerssens]

I think Leiter definately has a career after baseball, he's pretty damn good

[JinX11]

If you were a Boston fan (and I'm sure you will be at some point in the future, seeing as you find a way to root for the other 29 Major League Baseball teams), you would feel very fortunate to even be playing baseball right now, with the prospect of tying this thing up with your ace on the mound, doing something that no team has done before (even force a Game 7 when down 0-3), doing something else that no team has done before (win said Game 7), go to the World Series with a chance to do what no other Red Sox squad has done since 19xx...

All at the expense of the Yankees.

That, my friend, is how you would feel. Confident?? Maybe not - but I'll take it however I can get it.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
If you were a Boston fan (and I'm sure you will be at some point in the future, seeing as you find a way to root for the other 29 Major League Baseball teams),

[/ QUOTE ] This will never happen.

[ QUOTE ]
with the prospect of tying this thing up with your ace on the mound,

[/ QUOTE ] Thus far, during this series, Pedro has been the Ace and Schilling has been the gimp. I honestly wonder if he is good enough to pitch, or if he is being a "gamer". I don't expect Schilling to honestly tell the truth in this situation either.

[Boris]

Tim McCarver by himself is mediocre. Combined with Joe Buck that team really sucks. I wish John Miller and Joe Morgan could to the TV broadcast. Those guys are awesome. Joe knows his stuff and will compliment the players when they deserve it as well as criticize. A good example is when David Ortiz was caught stealing last night. Joe Morgan was the only commentator who said that the hitter must have missed the hit and run sign. You watch the Sportscenter hilights and they make it sound like Ortiz suddenly got a bee in his bonnet and decided to steal a base for the first time in two years.

I also like John Miller's play by play. It seems that his enthusiasm for the game is genuine and I like that.

[kerssens]

Miller is good and Morgan can have his moments but I can't stand how he repeats his observations about 19 times.

[ThaSaltCracka]

I agree, I am also a big fan of the Jonny and Joe show.

[andyfox]

I like Miller a lot. Morgan is good with him only because of their comraderie. But Morgan is a terrible analyst and gets tongue-tied frequently. And he overemphasizes speed and stolen bases because that was his game when he played. He has a misunderstanding of how baseball teams score runs. Morgan was not a Hall of Famer because he stole bases and was fast. He was a Hall of Famer because he hit home runs and walked a lot. He was a high OPS guy.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
I like Miller a lot. Morgan is good with him only because of their comraderie. But Morgan is a terrible analyst and gets tongue-tied frequently. And he overemphasizes speed and stolen bases because that was his game when he played. He has a misunderstanding of how baseball teams score runs. Morgan was not a Hall of Famer because he stole bases and was fast. He was a Hall of Famer because he hit home runs and walked a lot. He was a high OPS guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree 100%. I mean, the guy still thinks Billy Beane wrote Moneyball. It's been funny that he criticizes the teams who approach the game the way he was successful at it, without the stolen bases.

I think Morgan's analysis is off the mark a lot, although he isn't nearly as annoying as McCarver. For example, I highly doubt that the Ortiz SB attempt last night was a missed hit and run sign. I really think Francona thought they'd catch the Yankees off guard, and that Posada might make a bad throw if he had to rush it, which is exactly what happened. I don't agree with sending Ortiz there, but I thought it was gutsy. And he was safe, the replay showed that.

[Boris]

Morgan is not a terrible analyst. He is old school so he loves the small ball too much. I would say that is one of his few faults and at least he doesn't come across as a whiny moron (like many TV announcers) when voicing his opinion. I also think there is merit to small ball and that the Sabermetricians discount it too much. Do you think the Red Sox kind of regret not being able to play small last night? I sure hope so.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
I also think there is merit to small ball and that the Sabermetricians discount it too much. Do you think the Red Sox kind of regret not being able to play small last night? I sure hope so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you give an example? Damon made a bad bunt attempt, but I can't think of a lot of other instances where they could have played things differently.

I don't think Sabermetrics is the end-all/be-all solution to baseball analysis, but you can't ignore some of the amazing statistical analysis of plays like the stolen base, and myth of the "productive out", and how teams can incorrectly use them.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Boston has become essentially a stations baseball team while on offense. How can they possibly have runners on 1st and 2nd with no outs, and not score? They run the bases poorely and can't bunt for [censored]. I would say, that Boston is a team that relies TOO MUCH on OPS.

[sublime]

Anyone agree that he is far too analytical for the average fan?

Your joking, right?

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you give an example? Damon made a bad bunt attempt...

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh you mean besides that crucial, monumental, Boston career defining screw-up if the Red Sox lose game 5? You mean that missed bunt?

Ok seriously, I was listening to the game on the radio while helping a friend move. It just seemed like Boston had men on base in every inning after the ninth and couldn't score. I interpreted that as meaning Boston couldn't play small ball to score one measly little run. I could be talking out of my ass.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
I could be talking out of my ass.

[/ QUOTE ] you are not, they couldn't.

[andyfox]

"Do you think the Red Sox kind of regret not being able to play small last night?"

Small ball is a good weapon to have when you only need one run. So it's ideal for extra innings, especially when you're the home team. Neither the Red Sox nor Yankees have a team designed to play small ball. Yet they finished one-two in runs scored this year. The Sox have Damon and Roberts on the bench. The Yankees have A-Rod and Jeter, and Lofton on the bench. Not exactly two teams loaded with rabbits. Damon, one would think, is normally a good bunter. Only Jeter and Cairo sacrifice for the Yankees. And Jeter had a high number of sacrifices this year because he was hitting .169 for about a month and a half at the start of the year so Torre had him sacrifice quite a bit when he wasn't hitting.

[J.R.]

"Small ball is a good weapon to have when you only need one run"...or when your batters don't mash.

To be fair, doesn't small ball also encompass more than bunting, things like hitting the ball to the right side (which damon didn't do after the bellhorn leadoff double), running bases well (cairo's slide on the jeter double- although this is fundamental skill that should be the same in either approach it is probably stressed more by small ball teams), stealing bases (and not just stealing but getting into the pitchers head as Roberts did to Gordon, thus given the batter an advantage in addition to earning the hitter more fastballs).

And isn't a corollary to small ball that you play fundamentally sound defense (something that should be the same regardless of approach but is stressed by small ball teams), so you can protect the precious extra runs, hence cabrerra, minkeivitz(sp), and kapler. Kapler made a nice running catch last night on Jeter's liner with Cairo on second in the 12th that doesn't get made if kapler isn't pinch run for trot nixon in the 8th.

Small ball gets knocked, and much of it is desevedly so, but small ball presents a lot of intabgibles that get overlooked (such as this one (http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/neyer_rob/1420573.html) ).

Anti-small ball arguably kept varitek in the game (Francona presumably wanted his bat in there, in addition to the pokey reese is the 3rd stringer reason) and his inability to handle Wakefield almost cost them (although mirabeli had better power stats/AB than varitek)

[andyfox]

They led the league in runs scored.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
They led the league in runs scored.

[/ QUOTE ]
I realize this. But their ineffeciency to manufacture runs(in a tight game) could(or will) come back to haunt them.

[andyfox]

Yeah, every team has weaknesses. But the best way to win games is to either score a lot of runs or give up few. I think the Sox had the greatest runs scored/runs allowed differential in the league, so for whatever they're doing wrong, they're doing a lot of things right.

[andyfox]

Well, they just couldn't get a key hit. They also have a lineup with a lot of guys who could hit the ball out of the park and Rivera was already out of the game, so they had the weakest Yankee pitchers in there. The Yankees were shut out over the last 8 innings by guys who gave them 19 runs a few days before. Give the Sox some credit here.

[andyfox]

Yes, I agree with your definition of small ball: pitching, defense, fundamentals, doing the "little things." I think it's overrated, but not by as much as the sabermeticians think.

Note that the Yankees used the same 9-man lineup throughout the 12-inning game and throughout the 14-inning game. I had posted about hitting Lofton for Cairo at one point in the 12-inning game and pinch-running for Posada, who's slow as molasses. You can run Enrique Wilson for Posada and then put him in to play second base. I know Torre doesn't trust Wilson because he's a dreadful fielder, but Cairo isn't exactly Bill Mazeroski either. And take a chance, geez, you win and you win the pennant. Flaherty can't hit a lick but he can catch fine.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, they just couldn't get a key hit. They also have a lineup with a lot of guys who could hit the ball out of the park and Rivera was already out of the game, so they had the weakest Yankee pitchers in there. The Yankees were shut out over the last 8 innings by guys who gave them 19 runs a few days before. Give the Sox some credit here.

[/ QUOTE ]
Give the Yankees pen some credit too. They have effectively shut down one of baseballs most effective offenses. Other than the HR in game 4, I hadn't seen Ortiz hit the ball well all series, even that bloop single in game 5 was terrible. Lucky he got less of the ball otherwise that would have been a routine fly out. In games 4 nd 5, the sox could have easily of won those games in much less time than they did, instead they let all their hitters go up and try to hit HR's. A few well placed hits and/or sacrifices, and those games are over in 10 or 11 innings.