Thank you Kolton Wong

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to 67redsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 67redsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to painter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    S5, I did notice that although in this case the throw did beat the runner plus it was right on the money.  The foot helped, but wasn't decisive. 

    In the Rays series I also noticed the SS or 2B, when taking a throw from home on an attempted steal of 2B, was also blocking 2B with their foot. 

    [/QUOTE]

    And praised by the Buck/McCarver duo.

    [/QUOTE]

    If you listened closely you could hear mccarver groan in the background when the play was first made, I wonder who he is rooting for

    [/QUOTE]

    He's rooting for Fox, his employers, and will do what he thinks is necessary, or channelled through his earpiece, to keep eyeballs on the game, and especially on the promos and commericials.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Naw, he is rooting against the sox no matter who they play, the yanks, tigers or cards.

    [/QUOTE]

    That must mean that rooting against the Red Sox works against Fox's bottom line.  In that case, I'll root against Fox, but how else am I gonna watch the game?  I guess I can boycott the products they promote.  Fortunately, I don't need pills to get a stiffy.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 67redsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 67redsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to painter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    S5, I did notice that although in this case the throw did beat the runner plus it was right on the money.  The foot helped, but wasn't decisive. 

    In the Rays series I also noticed the SS or 2B, when taking a throw from home on an attempted steal of 2B, was also blocking 2B with their foot. 

    [/QUOTE]

    And praised by the Buck/McCarver duo.

    [/QUOTE]

    If you listened closely you could hear mccarver groan in the background when the play was first made, I wonder who he is rooting for

    [/QUOTE]

    He's rooting for Fox, his employers, and will do what he thinks is necessary, or channelled through his earpiece, to keep eyeballs on the game, and especially on the promos and commericials.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Naw, he is rooting against the sox no matter who they play, the yanks, tigers or cards.

    [/QUOTE]

    That must mean that rooting against the Red Sox works against Fox's bottom line.  In that case, I'll root against Fox, but how else am I gonna watch the game?  I guess I can boycott the products they promote.  Fortunately, I don't need pills to get a stiffy.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow, someone has it out for capitalism.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to 67redsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 67redsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 67redsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to painter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    S5, I did notice that although in this case the throw did beat the runner plus it was right on the money.  The foot helped, but wasn't decisive. 

    In the Rays series I also noticed the SS or 2B, when taking a throw from home on an attempted steal of 2B, was also blocking 2B with their foot. 

    [/QUOTE]

    And praised by the Buck/McCarver duo.

    [/QUOTE]

    If you listened closely you could hear mccarver groan in the background when the play was first made, I wonder who he is rooting for

    [/QUOTE]

    He's rooting for Fox, his employers, and will do what he thinks is necessary, or channelled through his earpiece, to keep eyeballs on the game, and especially on the promos and commericials.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Naw, he is rooting against the sox no matter who they play, the yanks, tigers or cards.

    [/QUOTE]

    That must mean that rooting against the Red Sox works against Fox's bottom line.  In that case, I'll root against Fox, but how else am I gonna watch the game?  I guess I can boycott the products they promote.  Fortunately, I don't need pills to get a stiffy.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wow, someone has it out for capitalism.

    [/QUOTE]

    Your take, not mine.  I just don't hold it sacred.  For what it's worth, I feel the same way about all ideologies.

    Wow, someone has it out for irreverence.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    Was Wong crying during his post game interview?

    Tom Hanks anyone....

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to 67redsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jete02fan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    reminded me of the 2000 WS...Piazza wasn't even entertaining the thought of a steal attempt and still got picked by Andy...

    [/QUOTE]

    Re-living the good old days hey jete Tongue Out

    [/QUOTE]LOL...


     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from mrmojo1120. Show mrmojo1120's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    If loving that is Wong,I don't want to be right.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Think about it.  He's not even the friggn tying run, and the winning run in Carlos Friggn Belran is up at the plate.  

     [/QUOTE]

    this math doesn't compute.

    FTR - beltran was the tying run....

    wong should have cried.  that was idiotic.  I hope he is crying again wednesday around 11:30pm.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheGuyWithDaThing. Show TheGuyWithDaThing's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    It was stupid, but let's keep this in perspective here...it cost them a slight chance at winning the game, but it didn't absolutely cost them the game.

    I'm not sure what the odds of winning are when down 2 runs with a man on first when you're down 2 runs, but I'd venture to guess that it's no higher than 20-25%, particularly with Koji on the mound. Even if Beltran homered with Wong on first, do you realize that their chance of winning only comes to about 50% (maybe slightly higher, because they still have the one more out)?

    It was a total bonehead move, and his run "meant nothing", but it's not as though their chances were high there.

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

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    While the correct play is not to steal in that situation (which is what Wong admitted to, no intentions of stealing), therefore no need to hold (as McCarver and Cardinals broadcasters were suggesting, or laughing about), and not leave a big hole between 2B and 1B, it seemed obvious to me that Naps was holding the kid, not just guarding the line.  The only reason he could have been guarding is to catch the kid wandering too far and close the game the easier way than to pitch to Beltran.

    Rookie mistakes can cost games in inopportune moments, that can become costly in post season.  But this was not costly because Cardinals tying and later winning the game from 2 runs behind with 1 out to give gets pretty remote, especially with Koji on the mound.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to blingblang's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    While the correct play is not to steal in that situation (which is what Wong admitted to, no intentions of stealing), therefore no need to hold (as McCarver and Cardinals broadcasters were suggesting, or laughing about), and not leave a big hole between 2B and 1B, it seemed obvious to me that Naps was holding the kid, not just guarding the line.  The only reason he could have been guarding is to catch the kid wandering too far and close the game the easier way than to pitch to Beltran.

    Rookie mistakes can cost games in inopportune moments, that can become costly in post season.  But this was not costly because Cardinals tying and later winning the game from 2 runs behind with 1 out to give gets pretty remote, especially with Koji on the mound.

    [/QUOTE] which begs the question of why he took that jab step...


     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to slasher9's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Think about it.  He's not even the friggn tying run, and the winning run in Carlos Friggn Belran is up at the plate.  

     [/QUOTE]

    this math doesn't compute.

    FTR - beltran was the tying run....

    wong should have cried.  that was idiotic.  I hope he is crying again wednesday around 11:30pm.

    [/QUOTE]

    Correction acknowledged.  I also understood, but just had a mind cramp and typed in the wrong word.  It doesn't change my point about Wong's boneheadedness.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to TheGuyWithDaThing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It was stupid, but let's keep this in perspective here...it cost them a slight chance at winning the game, but it didn't absolutely cost them the game.

    I'm not sure what the odds of winning are when down 2 runs with a man on first when you're down 2 runs, but I'd venture to guess that it's no higher than 20-25%, particularly with Koji on the mound. Even if Beltran homered with Wong on first, do you realize that their chance of winning only comes to about 50% (maybe slightly higher, because they still have the one more out)?

    It was a total bonehead move, and his run "meant nothing", but it's not as though their chances were high there.

    [/QUOTE]

    I never assumed that if Wong didn't get picked off the Cardinals would win.  However, even at your odds (20%-25%), which I guess is about right, that represents a decent chance to win a ballgame.  I disagree with your assessment of a 50% chance for a tie afterwards.  St. Louis was still in the heart of their order with Holliday coming up next.  The pick me up for the Cardinals would have been huge, especially at home, and would have been very difficult for the Red Sox overcome, especially after they had already used all of the best relievers (so had the Cardinals, I believe).  Saying it was 50% at that point is like saying the Red Sox had a 50% chance of winning Game 6 of the 1986 WS after the passed ball that tied the score, prior to Buckner's error.  Theoretically, you can argue yes, but I intuit that odds wouldn't account for emotional intangibles that are impossible to measure.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to blingblang's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    While the correct play is not to steal in that situation (which is what Wong admitted to, no intentions of stealing), therefore no need to hold (as McCarver and Cardinals broadcasters were suggesting, or laughing about), and not leave a big hole between 2B and 1B, it seemed obvious to me that Naps was holding the kid, not just guarding the line.  The only reason he could have been guarding is to catch the kid wandering too far and close the game the easier way than to pitch to Beltran.

    Rookie mistakes can cost games in inopportune moments, that can become costly in post season.  But this was not costly because Cardinals tying and later winning the game from 2 runs behind with 1 out to give gets pretty remote, especially with Koji on the mound.

    [/QUOTE]

    The odds were still definitely in the Red Sox favor, but I wouldn't exactly call them remote.  Strange things happen in baseball, especially in the World Series in the 9th inning.  Just ask Dennis Eckersley, who was considered about as lights out a closer as Koji was during the season when he gave up that dinger to an ailing Kirk Gibson.  Beltran, followed by Holliday, ain't exactly chopped liver.  Would you say the same thing if Quentin Berry was picked off first with two outs and behind by two and Pedroia was at the plate with Big Papi on deck?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Thank you Kolton Wong

    In response to TheGuyWithDaThing's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It was stupid, but let's keep this in perspective here...it cost them a slight chance at winning the game, but it didn't absolutely cost them the game.

    I'm not sure what the odds of winning are when down 2 runs with a man on first when you're down 2 runs, but I'd venture to guess that it's no higher than 20-25%, particularly with Koji on the mound. Even if Beltran homered with Wong on first, do you realize that their chance of winning only comes to about 50% (maybe slightly higher, because they still have the one more out)?

    It was a total bonehead move, and his run "meant nothing", but it's not as though their chances were high there.

    [/QUOTE]

    The 27th out pretty much ends any chance for a team to mount a come back and win. so Wong getting picked did in fact cause them to lose the game. When your trailing late in a game the goal is to get the tying run to the plate. The cards had the tying run at the plate with the middle of the order due up...Wong took the bat out of Beltran's hands...

     

Share