Master Index of Archived Threads


I didn't have a problem with Clark's dash home

Frayed Knot Apr 13 2008 07:11 PM

There, I said it. You see that kind of GiDP about once a season at most and only tried a scant few times more than that ... I WANT the runner breaking on contact there. If they go for the 1st-home DP they probably won't get it (turned out to be tailor-made for Prince). If they go for 2 the coventional way and don't get it you score, and if they do get it it doesn't matter what you did. The worst would be to wait to see what they'd do and THEN go -- I saw Barry Bonds run into a triple play like that once. btw, I was OK with his slide too. He had nowhere to go. Just shit luck all around IMO. 14 hits and 8 BBs and "only" 7 runs on account of 5 DPs of varying descriptions.

metirish Apr 13 2008 07:47 PM

I didn't expect him to do anything else but go on contact, isn't that the way that plays out just about every time? , maybe if he was a speedster he makes it home and IIRC the catcher was out in front of the plate and not on top of it so running him over was not an option for Clarke.

AG/DC Apr 13 2008 08:57 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 14 2008 09:29 AM

Reason not to... There were no outs, so he had two chances to score on an out, which means watch the ball go through the first time. He wasn't the tying runner, suggesting that to be aggressive compromises the more important runner behind you. They were playing back up the middle, so they're giving you a run under certain circumstances. You'd do well to make certain those circumstances come up. Good batters due up. Good good batters. Dance off third. If Fielder goes to second with the ball, then maybe break. You're still in trouble, but can maybe protect the team from the double play, and maybe even leave a guy in scoring position. At least you cause them to do a throw or two more and Weeks and Hardy don't look good up the middle at all. But, yeah, I don't wanna hang him too much. About time he got a Metly hit.

Grote15 Apr 14 2008 09:23 AM

Clark kent would have made it.

Frayed Knot Apr 14 2008 10:01 AM

"There were no outs, so he had two chances to score on an out, which means watch the ball go through the first time." But again, if he stays the Brews likely just turn two the other way and then there aren't two chances to get him in anymore. The bottom line for me is that the probable result to staying {runner on 3rd - 2 out} is just slightly better than the downside to going and not making it {runner on 2nd - 2 outs} while the upside is much better.

AG/DC Apr 14 2008 10:04 AM

Well, my plan is that a good lead baserunner there either creates enough of a distraction to buy enough time for the trailing baserunners to stay out of the doubleplay, or scores when he breaks on the throw to second.

Frayed Knot Apr 14 2008 10:19 AM

btw, the worse Brady baserunning move that inning was stealing 2nd in the first place. He made it as it turned out -- but THAT was one where failing would have been inexcusable.

AG/DC Apr 14 2008 10:23 AM

Yup.

Frayed Knot Apr 14 2008 11:20 AM

Turns out I'm defending Brady more than he's defending himself, fron the NYPost: "I screwed it up," Clark said after the Mets ended up stranding three runners without scoring in that inning. "My instincts told me to go, and by the time I thought better of it, it was too late." I still don't think it was a bad move.

Zvon Apr 14 2008 02:41 PM

Good points all here. I don't think it was a horrible move. I don't think it was a great move. I do think if the inning eventually ended with him still on third (assuming the wild pitch and walk that followed went differently) I would have been wondering if maybe he could have scored on that grounder. Thats one less thing I have to wonder about regarding that awful game. *spits in the dirt* *rubs it into the ground*

themetfairy Apr 14 2008 02:51 PM

From the Mezzanine, it looked like a mistake as the play was unfolding.

Frayed Knot Apr 16 2008 07:44 AM

Just to flog the already deceased equine a bit more on this play; I saw a replay last night from a 'high-home' angle which showed most of the infield as that play developed and what it shows is that it appears Clark got a late break from 3rd. You don't see the runners at the point of contact, but Pagan's slide into 2nd is well ahead (maybe 15 ft) of Clark's attempted barrel-roll around the catcher and Pagan can't be that much faster than him. So if we want to hang that particular GiDP (of that day's five) on bad baserunning the screw-up looks to be that Clark didn't get a good enough jump off of 3rd and, on that kind of play, you've either got to go immediately on not go at all. So I hereby withdraw my subject heading that began this thread.

m.e.t.b.o.t. Apr 16 2008 07:57 AM

as m.e.t.b.o.t. has stated in the schaefer business thread, m.e.t.b.o.t. is having difficulty appropriately evaluating the play in question. m.e.t.b.o.t. currently cannot discredit baserunners for baserunning errors, and as a result discredits the batter for baserunning errors that occur while the batter's batted ball is in play. this play, however, strikes m.e.t.b.o.t. as a different kettle of fish, as me.t.b.o.t. is programmed to say. m.e.t.b.o.t. has currently incorporated an exception into me.t.b.o.t.'s programming to allow brady clark to be held partly responsible for the decrease in win expectancy as a result of this play, and requests validation that this approach does not violate the stated purpose for the existence of m.e.t.b.o.t. as it may present a slippery slope down which increased subjectivity might slide into m.e.t.b.o.t.'s schaeffer voting.