Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BertoSoxFan. Show BertoSoxFan's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    Full disclosure: I'm biased.  I live in Corvallis, love the beavs, and was thrilled to see one of our kids make it to the sox, contribute instrumentally in winning a series (which means a lot me), and then break records for stealing bases/play some solid ball for a couple seasons.  I know he wasn't the second coming over those two years, but he helped us win a lot of games. 

    Last year, the man was hurt and nobody could shut up about what a warrior he was not.  I personally find those who prefer injured players to healthy players a little goofy in the head.  I like my team healthy.  I'd much prefer if Cameron hadn't tried to "contribute" last year in his old, stiff, crippled way.  Els doesn't lay up, so he needs to have unbroken ribs.  That was his problem last year.  I'd love to see all his haters try launching themselves into the air and landing on broken ribs.  It's not an awesome feeling. 

    This year, he has been key in almost all of our victories and has done a lot to set up victories that never happened.  How many times have we seen him standing on second or third this year with zero or one outs, only to watch him rot out there.  I don't understand how anyone who has been watching the guy swing the bat or chase down balls could argue he hasn't been helping us win.  He looks awesome (aside from that one ball he thought Pedroia was waving him off of--that sucked and then Beckett imploded).  Getting doubled up on a screaming line drive that looked hell-bent for center was not his fault--and he WAS safe. 

    And like I said, I'm biased, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't be royally disappointed if he had been a part of the problem in that horrible April we just had.  I always watch his at bats closely, and I feel like he's done a good job working up pitch counts and getting hits.  Stats be damned, he's been making this fan happy. 

    Sometimes I wonder whether or not some posters watch the games or just look at the numbers after the fact. 
     
    I say keep in the leadoff spot.  The more at bats the better.    
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    BaseballGM is right about what a baserunner should do on a line drive but wrong about the terminology.  On a line drive, a baserunner should stay put if he has a short lead or take a step back towards the base if he has a long lead -- until he's sure that the line drive has cleared the infield.  Getting "doubled up" on a line drive is a serious baserunning error. A runner is "picked" off on a throw from the pitcher.  The terminology is intended to distinguish one of these plays from the other. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    25 years from now, when Els is in the Hall of Fame

    25 years from now when "Els" is not on any ballot for the HOF............


    There is no official baseball terminology for the baserunning blunder of Ellsbury. But it is nice to see that expitch isn't scared to disagree with the buffalo.

    Max, if I'm "softlaw", you are smart. I don't think so.

    Now, Max, explain this baserunning comment of real men of genius:

    because runners are supposed to be thinking about getting to the next base, not staying next to the one they are on. 

    Don't you think there is a little more to baserunning decisions than that? Like, one out, based loaded, not running toward third before a line drive gets by the infield? No ill intentions, but you can't help it if you have cognitive issues. Work on it.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    BaseballGM, he wasn't running toward third base.  If he had been, the play at second would not have been close, which it was.

    I say again, the second baseman threw the ball immediately to the shortstop, who caught it and stepped on the bag--and Ellsbury was there, but not quite soon enough.  The fact that it was a close play belies the notion that Ellsbury was wandering around in no man's land or running toward third base.  If you say he was, you're not telling the truth, which is no surprise when it comes to Ellsbury. 

    I also say again, these kinds of double plays happen all the time.  Youk got caught last night or Sunday by the opposing first baseman who snared a liner and beat Youk to 1B by a mile. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position:
    [QUOTE]25 years from now, when Els is in the Hall of Fame 25 years from now when "Els" is not on any ballot for the HOF............ There is no official baseball terminology for the baserunning blunder of Ellsbury. But it is nice to see that expitch isn't scared to disagree with the buffalo. Max, if I'm "softlaw", you are smart. I don't think so. Now, Max, explain this baserunning comment of real men of genius: because runners are supposed to be thinking about getting to the next base, not staying next to the one they are on.   Don't you think there is a little more to baserunning decisions than that? Like, one out, based loaded, not running toward third before a line drive gets by the infield? No ill intentions, but you can't help it if you have cognitive issues. Work on it.
    Posted by BaseballGM[/QUOTE]
    You are right, GM.  First and foremost, a runner should be thinking, "I better not get doubled up on a line drive." ( It doesn't hurt either to have the coach yelling, "Watch the line drive." )  That is a bigger blunder than is getting picked off by the pitcher or catcher.  I'm not sure what you mean by "official terminology,"  but conventional terminology makes a distinction between the two baserunning mistakes. Only one term ( "picked off" ) would not allow the distinction to be made. It's been that way forever in baseball. 
    Similarly, the term "cutoff man" is often used where "relay man" is correct. The infielder who takes the first throw from an outfielder "relays" the throw to a base or to home. The man assigned to stop the throw from going through if told to is the "cutoff man." The reason for the two terms is obvious, as is, I think, the reason for the difference between "doubled off" and "picked off."   

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    Expitch, I'm sorry, but I think what you are saying is that Ellsbury should have stayed on second base or had a lead of no more than a stride or two.   

    I say again, it was a bam-bam play.  Gonzalez's liner went straight to the second baseman, who immediately threw it to the shortstop.  If Ellsbury was drifting, the play would not have been close, but it was.  And these kinds of double plays happen all the time. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    expitch, well said. Baseball jargon. "Pop" means long ball to me, and always had. Some think it includes gap extra base "power". "Power" to me simple means gap ability that doesn't necessary include long ball acumen. "Doubled off" can apply to a number of base running circumstances. When a player makes a base running mistake of straying to far from the bag, I call it "picked off".  If he failed to see that a fly ball was going to be caught and is running the bases, I call that "doubled off". But I see the point of your use of the terms as helping distinguish a pitcher picking off a runner  vs. a baserunning blunder and "doubled off".

    Max, I understand your impish love for "Ells", but after the ball is hit, he disappears from the screen as he heads toward 3rd on the crack of the bat. He's at least 2/5th's of the way toward 3rd. Watch the video, as embarrassing as it might be for your hero.

    http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=14365353
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position:
    [QUOTE]expitch, well said. Baseball jargon. "Pop" means long ball to me, and always had. Some think it includes gap extra base "power". "Power" to me simple means gap ability that doesn't necessary include long ball acumen. "Doubled off" can apply to a number of base running circumstances. When a player makes a base running mistake of straying to far from the bag, I call it "picked off".  If he failed to see that a fly ball was going to be caught and is running the bases, I call that "doubled off". But I see the point of your use of the terms as helping distinguish a pitcher picking off a runner  vs. a baserunning blunder and "doubled off". Max, I understand your impish love for "Ells", but after the ball is hit, he disappears from the screen as he heads toward 3rd on the crack of the bat. He's at least 2/5th's of the way toward 3rd. Watch the video, as embarrassing as it might be for your hero. http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=14365353
    Posted by BaseballGM[/QUOTE]

    As I said earlier, IF YOU LOOK AT THE REPLAY, ELLSBURY WAS ACTUALLY SAFE. Even both Mariners announcers said so. In the video itself:


    Why do I waste my time responding to a clinical liar. You picked the right career field Softy. The lawyer who lies the most generally wins right! It's a learned skill in your profession.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from M1A2. Show M1A2's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    Whoops.  Wells just got doubled off of first on a much harder play--the ball wasn't hit right to Pedroia--with a man on second and nobody out.  Wells must be really stupid to let that happen because, thanks to BaseballGM, we know that it never happens unless the baserunner is stupid.  Not. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from M1A2. Show M1A2's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    Whoops.  Ellsbury got the only extra base hit so far for the Sox and scored the first run.  Just luck, I guess.  Drew, the old pro, struck out again, this time with two men on base.  He was hoping so bad for a walk so that BaseballGM could say, "he can't bat guys in because they won't pitch to him and his great bat." 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    Expitch, I'm sorry, but I think what you are saying is that Ellsbury should have stayed on second base or had a lead of no more than a stride or two.   

    I say again, it was a bam-bam play.  Gonzalez's liner went straight to the second baseman, who immediately threw it to the shortstop.  If Ellsbury was drifting, the play would not have been close, but it was.  And these kinds of double plays happen all the time. 

    Iguess Expitch and softy are saying it's time to break a century long tradition of taking a sizable lead off a base in hopes of getting an extra base or even scoring a run that counters the few times you may end up getting picked off.

    What's most disturbing about this opinion, is that softy and expitch blame Ellsbury for not choosing to break the century long tradition on his own, against management's and MLB's base-running philosophy.

    I am 100% positive that had Ellsbury been standing just 2 feet off the base and was thrown out at home by a foot on a hit, softy would have been here criticizing Ellsbury for not taking the "standard lead" in tht situation.

    A good baserunning player on the basepaths takes as big a lead as possible to avoid the normal "pickoff" out. Tommy Harper was the master of the big lead, and was praised for it, even though he was "doubled off" more than his fair share for it. Good baserunnes are also leaning to the next base and even stepping that way as the ball reaches the plate. No sane manager would have his baserunners stand 3 feet off the bases.  Getting doubled off a base happens. Sometimes a baserunner misjudges by a foot or so and can be blamed for the out. My guess is if it was anyone but "Jake or Jed" we'd be heaing nothing but crickets about the play from softy.
     
    As for the "baseball terminology" debate: this is proof positive that GM is indeed softlawA, softlaw1A , softlaw__ fill in the blank. He alone decides what words like "pop" mean, he alone can change the meaning of "picked off" so as not to appear to have mispoken, he alone can determine who is a bust.

    He alone is the biggest clown on the board.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    expitch, as you can see, we have a lot delusional old ranting bully coots like Slav-slob. Since when does "century old" baserunning include leaving the screen and heading toward third at the crack of the bat, based loaded, one out, ball has not gone by the infield amount to "century old" baserunning.

    Slav, I'm not Softlaw, but you are "Idiot". Fortunately, expitch is one of the few posters who is above the idiocy on this board lead by two old coots going by Slav and "Hernianess". 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position:
    [QUOTE]expitch, as you can see, we have a lot delusional old ranting bully coots like Slav-slob. Since when does "century old" baserunning include leaving the screen and heading toward third at the crack of the bat, based loaded, one out, ball has not gone by the infield amount to "century old" baserunning. Slav, I'm not Softlaw, but you are "Idiot". Fortunately, expitch is one of the few posters who is above the idiocy on this board lead by two old coots going by Slav and "Hernianess". 
    Posted by BaseballGM[/QUOTE]

    Fine example of social graces...
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    You would not be suitable to sit at the dinner table in a barn.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position:
    [QUOTE]Expitch, I'm sorry, but I think what you are saying is that Ellsbury should have stayed on second base or had a lead of no more than a stride or two.    I say again, it was a bam-bam play.  Gonzalez's liner went straight to the second baseman, who immediately threw it to the shortstop.  If Ellsbury was drifting, the play would not have been close, but it was.  And these kinds of double plays happen all the time.  Iguess Expitch and softy are saying it's time to break a century long tradition of taking a sizable lead off a base in hopes of getting an extra base or even scoring a run that counters the few times you may end up getting picked off. What's most disturbing about this opinion, is that softy and expitch blame Ellsbury for not choosing to break the century long tradition on his own, against management's and MLB's base-running philosophy. I am 100% positive that had Ellsbury been standing just 2 feet off the base and was thrown out at home by a foot on a hit, softy would have been here criticizing Ellsbury for not taking the "standard lead" in tht situation. A good baserunning player on the basepaths takes as big a lead as possible to avoid the normal "pickoff" out. Tommy Harper was the master of the big lead, and was praised for it, even though he was "doubled off" more than his fair share for it. Good baserunnes are also leaning to the next base and even stepping that way as the ball reaches the plate. No sane manager would have his baserunners stand 3 feet off the bases.  Getting doubled off a base happens. Sometimes a baserunner misjudges by a foot or so and can be blamed for the out. My guess is if it was anyone but "Jake or Jed" we'd be heaing nothing but crickets about the play from softy.   As for the "baseball terminology" debate: this is proof positive that GM is indeed softlawA, softlaw1A , softlaw__ fill in the blank. He alone decides what words like "pop" mean, he alone can change the meaning of "picked off" so as not to appear to have mispoken, he alone can determine who is a bust. He alone is the biggest clown on the board.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    No need to be sorry -- unless you're apologizing for being wrong. On a line drive, the first step by the baserunner should be back towards the bag.  It's really as simple as that -- yesterday, today, and tomorrow. It doesn't matter which way the runner is leaning or stepping.  Drifting, too, has nothing to do with it -- except to stop as soon as the ball is seen as a line drive, unless it's clearly between fielders.   
    You're back to caricaturing the other man's position. Shame on you. I did not say the runner should stay on the bag or take a short lead.  You're saying that I said or implied that.  No matter where the runner is or what he's doing, the principle is the same: "Make the ball go through."
    If the runner takes the first step back towards the bag, very rarely if ever in mid-infield is a ball hit so hard or so directly that the runner doesn't have time to return to the bag. 
    The reasoning behind the correct way to make the play is obvious. The risk of a double play when you're in scoring position is too great to take; if the ball goes through you probably will score. That goes twice if your name is Ellsbury. 
    If these kinds of double plays "happen all the time," the main reason is that the runner made a mistake. 
    That is the overriding "century-old tradition."
    OK, since you've pushed me this far with your condescending tone and dishonest representation of my position, here goes. Casey Stengel and Rod Dedeaux, my college coach, were good friends. One night Casey was holding court in Rod's living room.  The upshot of his dissertation on baserunning was that there is no excuse for being doubled off base.  That's my source -- as if one needed a source -- what's yours?
    And, oh, please leave me out of your feud with GM.  In this instance, he's right. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    expitch, articulate and completely limited to taking this board bully to task. Whatever differences we may have, your intelligence and comprehensive grasp and communication on the issues is refeshingly a light in a very dark tunnel.

    Being an island is necessary in the search for truth. Being unpopular is usually a virtue, given the human flaws of man.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    How can you even post the word truth without breaking down?
    Your island isn't a search for truth. It's an all-out avoidance of it.
    You alienate yourself from people who can't stand being around you.
    Yet you think it's them.

    Of course it'll make you unpopular. But the self-image of a martyr is nothing more than a refusing to get help. Don't you see the same pattern in every circle you draw? Get some help, man. I mean this in all sincerity.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    The upshot of his dissertation on baserunning was that there is no excuse for being doubled off base.  That's my source -- as if one needed a source -- what's yours?

    So, you go out of your way to state your point, then say this. Do you really believe there can never be a wicke line shot that ends up doubling off a runner?

    I never said Ellbury was not at fault for getting doubled off, he clearly was. It was still a close play, so his "judgement" or lack there of, was not way off.

    Sorry for linking you with the absurd clown.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    This is what GM has been reduced too :) :) :)

    Absolutely MIOPIC MICRO-ANALYSIS of Elsbury's game.  He has been reduced, now that Els. looks healthy, to franticly searching for SOMETHING, ANYTHING to hang his hat on to "prove" his point.  

    GM doesn't bother me!  I find it absolutely hysterical, watching him scramble from one RS player to the next, looking for one of the guys he is want to BASH make SOME, ANY mistake, NO MATTER HOW TRIVIAL, that he can use to support his thesis on said player.

    Sure, it's pathological, BUT come on!!!!!!  You have to admit that it's pretty funny........ :)  

    GM, you keep on keepin on..........  & we'll keep on laughing!!!!!  You do realize that you have completely marginalize yourself........  The only problem with that, is that even when you stumble onto a good point, NOBODY'S LISTENING!!!!  :(

    I will say this..........  About the only point that I am HOPING that you might be right about??????  IS that Salty might actually have SOME promise!!!!  I honestly hope the kid can pull it together & learn while sharing the duty with Tek!!!  We are clearly gonna need the kid, as there doesn't seem to be many, if any, good options out there.  At least the kid's bat is showing some promise?  If his catching of a game & general defense can improve??????  The kid might work!  At least in the short run!

    :)  Let's enjoy this run by the Sox!!!!!!!  



     
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position:
    [QUOTE]The upshot of his dissertation on baserunning was that there is no excuse for being doubled off base.  That's my source -- as if one needed a source -- what's yours? So, you go out of your way to state your point, then say this. Do you really believe there can never be a wicke line shot that ends up doubling off a runner? I never said Ellbury was not at fault for getting doubled off, he clearly was. It was still a close play, so his "judgement" or lack there of, was not way off. Sorry for linking you with the absurd clown.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    I made a long ( long-winded? ) reply to this post, including a response specifically to your question about a wicked line drive; but it has not appeared. The short answer is that yes, of course, I believe that in peculiar circumstances a man might be doubled up excusably, but even that I might, and did, qualify somewhat.  It is a major baserunning blunder 95% of the time.
    On a personal note, no harm, no foul. We both got a little chippy. That's that.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    m
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    I suppose isolating a single play over the last 14 days is the best one can do if they dislike Ellsbury with passion in the face of:

    Ellsbury has gotten on base 23 times in 51 PAs

    He has scored 12 times he has gotten on base and driven in another 5

    I'll take the base running gaff of getting double up for those 17 runs in 14 days myself.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    More than 14 days to it, 5. Unfortunately, the leadoff hitter has one of the lowest OBP's of the everyday players. His popularity dates back to 2007, and has never had anything to do with substance. From a gold glover who simply didn't get one becuase he wasn't known well enough, to "on-base machine", to the neutered and meaningless "creates havoc". Not surprising that, unlike other players, a hot streak has the drones in full blown mania.

    Now, this comment is complete nonsense, as ex-pitch and I have exposed:

    What's most disturbing about this opinion... is... blame Ellsbury for not choosing to break the century long tradition on his own, against management's and MLB's base-running philosophy.

    Look, you old coot, the above statement is the only "clown". "Century long tradition", you just make this garbage up as you go. You are a catatonic hack. And note how this board bully went to "clown" as his 5th grader attack label, as if his idiocy is even on the level of a clown.


     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    In Response to Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position : No need to be sorry -- unless you're apologizing for being wrong. On a line drive, the first step by the baserunner should be back towards the bag.  It's really as simple as that -- yesterday, today, and tomorrow. It doesn't matter which way the runner is leaning or stepping.  Drifting, too, has nothing to do with it -- except to stop as soon as the ball is seen as a line drive, unless it's clearly between fielders.    You're back to caricaturing the other man's position. Shame on you. I did not say the runner should stay on the bag or take a short lead.  You're saying that I said or implied that.  No matter where the runner is or what he's doing, the principle is the same: "Make the ball go through." If the runner takes the first step back towards the bag, very rarely if ever in mid-infield is a ball hit so hard or so directly that the runner doesn't have time to return to the bag.  The reasoning behind the correct way to make the play is obvious. The risk of a double play when you're in scoring position is too great to take; if the ball goes through you probably will score. That goes twice if your name is Ellsbury.  If these kinds of double plays "happen all the time," the main reason is that the runner made a mistake.  That is the overriding "century-old tradition." OK, since you've pushed me this far with your condescending tone and dishonest representation of my position, here goes. Casey Stengel and Rod Dedeaux, my college coach, were good friends. One night Casey was holding court in Rod's living room.  The upshot of his dissertation on baserunning was that there is no excuse for being doubled off base.  That's my source -- as if one needed a source -- what's yours? And, oh, please leave me out of your feud with GM.  In this instance, he's right. 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    Everone respects Rod Dedeaux but it would seem to me that if you are trying to score it would be better to at least be leaning forward when a ball is hit. Ellsbury actually did get back to the base before the ball reached the base. He was at the limit of his ability but he did get back and the ump just made the wrong call. It was right there clear as day on the replay and he did more than lean towards 3rd. He had at least 1-2 running steps towards 3rd and he still got back in time on a bang bang play. 

    Ellsbury doesn't take enough risks to me. He is generally very risk adverse. Look at Pedroia climbing up his back scoring on a double the other day from 1st. Look at how he plays CF, being unable to get the short flies very well because he plays too deep in CF, affecting his UZR/150 numbers big time. I wish he would take more chances, not fewer.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from adam4522. Show adam4522's posts

    Re: Ellsbury Excelling at Leadoff Position

    His 275 doesn't bother me.  his 330 obp does.  He needs to be more selective at the plate.  He has to work more walks.  He has to bunt for more hits.  He has to simply get on base more.  In this lineup he needs to be 380-400 obp.  The hitters behind him are just too potent to stay down for long.  Look at Youk.  He is hitting like garbage, but is getting on base.  Once Crawford et all in the bottow of the order start to hit Youk will hit better as they get more pitches to hit.  Same with HR numbers.  Adrian, youk and papi will get more balls to drive when there are more runners in front of them.  Jake has to get on at a 380+ rate.
     

Share