Rangers Do Not Lose Series vs O's 6/30-7/3

[darrylgann]

@Evan_P_Grant: Forecast tonight at game time: Only 82 degrees. 69 percent humidity. 90 percent chance of rain.

Probably won't get this one in. Just as well. Pray for those on the east coast this Fourth of July weekend.

 

[darrylgann]

@Evan_P_Grant: Forecast tonight at game time: Only 82 degrees. 69 percent humidity. 90 percent chance of rain.

Probably won't get this one in. Just as well. Pray for those on the east coast this Fourth of July weekend.

The hurricane is probably looking for the rest of the Rangers.

 

[donaldson79]

He doesnt hit well in the 3 spot...

Taken from an article in May....

"The Rangers hope to get more production from Beltre in the No. 3 spot, but for his career he’s actually been far more effective hitting fourth. He has an .869 OPS for 2,756 plate appearances as the No. 4 hitter, compared with .711 for 861 plate appearances in the No. 3 spot."

OK....to me here is a perfect illustration of how baseball players are such creatures of habit. They are all about routines, getting in a rhythm and duplication. Agree?

If you do, then why are there some on here who think baseball in general is making a mistake by having closers, instead of just going with the hot hand to end a game? Players relish in following their routine day-after-day IMO.

Every other player/pitcher on the team has a somewhat designed role and know exactly what's expected of them every game of the season.

 

[TheRangerDude]

It's it crazy that this is results we are getting out of our highest payroll ever? I mean granted these results can mostly if not completely be attributed to injuries, besides maybe the bullpen, but that still doesn't take away from how much all of this costing- pretty wild but the amount of injuries we have endured are pretty wild as well.

I just wonder if ownership will pull back the reigns a little next season given the outcome of this one and this seasons investment not really panning out or if it will make them invest that much more.

 

[TheRangerDude]

OK....to me here is a perfect illustration of how baseball players are such creatures of habit. They are all about routines, getting in a rhythm and duplication. Agree?

If you do, then why are there some on here who think baseball in general is making a mistake by having closers, instead of just going with the hot hand to end a game? Players relish in following their routine day-after-day IMO.

Every other player/pitcher on the team has a somewhat designed role and know exactly what's expected of them every game of the season.

Personally, I can understand why people say go with the hot hand or that the closer in general is a mistake but I tend agree with what your saying much more. I think players do better when they have a role- many don't do well with surprises.

 

[TheRangerDude]

The hurricane is probably looking for the rest of the Rangers.

haha... I bet

 

[Al Falfa]

OK....to me here is a perfect illustration of how baseball players are such creatures of habit. They are all about routines, getting in a rhythm and duplication. Agree?

If you do, then why are there some on here who think baseball in general is making a mistake by having closers, instead of just going with the hot hand to end a game? Players relish in following their routine day-after-day IMO.

Every other player/pitcher on the team has a somewhat designed role and know exactly what's expected of them every game of the season.

Just read an interesting article on this subject that said since 1948 teams with leads going into the 9th inning have won 95% of their games, with or without a closer.
I've been watching baseball since the mid 1950's and I don't recall teams like the Yankees, Dodgers or Braves needing a closer to get to or win World Series.
The first two I recall being used in the closers roll (they were called fireman back then) in the early to mid
60's were Luis Arroyo of the Yankees and Dick Radatz (sp?) of the Red Sox. I'm not sure Arroyo was used strictly as a one inning specialist, though. It seemed to just evolve from there, but I don't recall why, other than baseball is notorious for it's copy cat thought process. Most of them were hard throwers and I guess a manager wanted heat to get what some consider to be the hardest outs to get...the last three.

 

[DT LUNA]

Personally, I can understand why people say go with the hot hand or that the closer in general is a mistake but I tend agree with what your saying much more. I think players do better when they have a role- many don't do well with surprises.

Players on this team, role or not are not doing very well. i.e. Elvis Rios Choo Martin BP etc so where do you go from here? Since this season is gone, make any adjustment to the line up that might get a win. # 2 3 are not doing anything so why would a change not be in order? What is your opinion?

 

[RevSader]

Just read an interesting article on this subject that said since 1948 teams with leads going into the 9th inning have won 95% of their games, with or without a closer.
I've been watching baseball since the mid 1950's and I don't recall teams like the Yankees, Dodgers or Braves needing a closer to get to or win World Series.
The first two I recall being used in the closers roll (they were called fireman back then) in the early to mid
60's were Luis Arroyo of the Yankees and Dick Radatz (sp?) of the Red Sox. I'm not sure Arroyo was used strictly as a one inning specialist, though. It seemed to just evolve from there, but I don't recall why, other than baseball is notorious for it's copy cat thought process. Most of them were hard throwers and I guess a manager wanted heat to get what some consider to be the hardest outs to get...the last three.

Closers were not really a thing until the save stat became popular in the league. It's a sad development that baseball needs to get away from. Closers make more money to do the same job that everyone else does. It's ridiculous.

 

[darrylgann]

@RangerBlake: Thu. at BAL: Choo dh, Andrus 6, Rios 9, Beltre 5, Martin 8, Gimenez 2, Pena 3, Choice 7, Odor 4, Darvish 1

Betting it will not come to this because of hurricane Andrew.

 

[DT LUNA]

Just read an interesting article on this subject that said since 1948 teams with leads going into the 9th inning have won 95% of their games, with or without a closer.
I've been watching baseball since the mid 1950's and I don't recall teams like the Yankees, Dodgers or Braves needing a closer to get to or win World Series.
The first two I recall being used in the closers roll (they were called fireman back then) in the early to mid
60's were Luis Arroyo of the Yankees and Dick Radatz (sp?) of the Red Sox. I'm not sure Arroyo was used strictly as a one inning specialist, though. It seemed to just evolve from there, but I don't recall why, other than baseball is notorious for it's copy cat thought process. Most of them were hard throwers and I guess a manager wanted heat to get what some consider to be the hardest outs to get...the last three.

Excellent point and recollection. I remember Arroyo very well. Seems he was mostly a late inning reliever that finished the game. Do not remember having many relievers as today. I think he was a lefty and relieved for Ford when necessary. Been a while. Thanks for the memory

 

[darrylgann]

@RangerBlake: Thu. at BAL: Choo dh, Andrus 6, Rios 9, Beltre 5, Martin 8, Gimenez 2, Pena 3, Choice 7, Odor 4, Darvish 1

Betting it will not come to this because of hurricane Andrew.

Arthur, that is.

 

[RevSader]

Excellent point and recollection. I remember Arroyo very well. Seems he was mostly a late inning reliever that finished the game. Do not remember having many relievers as today. I think he was a lefty and relieved for Ford when necessary. Been a while. Thanks for the memory

The good thing about having more relievers these days is that there is way more guys in the league that throw 95-96 than there ever has been. That's not something you saw 10+ plus years ago. Now every team has 1 or 2 arms that come in pumping serious heat out of the BP.

 

[DT LUNA]

The good thing about having more relievers these days is that there is way more guys in the league that throw 95-96 than there ever has been. That's not something you saw 10+ plus years ago. Now every team has 1 or 2 arms that come in pumping serious heat out of the BP.

Agree. That is one of the more significant changes since the Arroyo days.

 

[Al Falfa]

Excellent point and recollection. I remember Arroyo very well. Seems he was mostly a late inning reliever that finished the game. Do not remember having many relievers as today. I think he was a lefty and relieved for Ford when necessary. Been a while. Thanks for the memory

I really don't have much recollection of relief pitchers from that era. Pitchers went a lot deeper in games back them so relievers weren't as specialized.
I think you are right about how Arroyo was used, but as I recall Radatz became strictly a 9th inning man. I remember the term fireman started popping up about his time.
One other late inning pitcher I forgot about was Elroy Face of the Pirates and I think he goes back further than Arroyo and Radatz. I 'm not sure if he was strictly a one inning guy because I remember him winning an ungodly amount of games in a row in the late 1950's.
It was a different animal back then. Hell, I remember Casey Stengel using a pitcher, Don Larsen, who was a damn good hitter, in left field one game.

 

[WastinSomeTime]

Closers were not really a thing until the save stat became popular in the league. It's a sad development that baseball needs to get away from. Closers make more money to do the same job that everyone else does. It's ridiculous.

Even the guys who came on later like Goose Gossage and Rollie Fingers and a guy most people forget in Mike Marshall who won the Cy Young threw a lot of innings closing out a game. In fact Marshall I believe threw over 200 innings the year he won the Cy. The manager who I think really started the change where your closer became just a 9th inning guy was La Russa with Eckersley.

 

[Al Falfa]

The good thing about having more relievers these days is that there is way more guys in the league that throw 95-96 than there ever has been. That's not something you saw 10+ plus years ago. Now every team has 1 or 2 arms that come in pumping serious heat out of the BP.

Yep. Tommy Hunter used to throw 90-92 when he was a starter here. I saw him a while back closing a game and he was hitting 97.

 

[donaldson79]

Glad to see I got so many of ya's wheels turning with the closer/defined role question.

One thing about the 1960's or earlier was the starters pitched so much longer and the 100 pitch count wall was not even invented. Back in 1982 a guy from the Senators no less named Cheney threw 228 pitches in 16 innings. And in 63 Juan Marichal vs Warren Spahn 16 innings each and both had over 200 pitches.

But that was a long time ago and the game has evolved - not necessarily for the best mind ya - and we've got such defined roles, and all this lefty-lefty matchup stuff makes me a little nuts at times.

 

[BLeslie59Rangers]

Even the guys who came on later like Goose Gossage and Rollie Fingers and a guy most people forget in Mike Marshall who won the Cy Young threw a lot of innings closing out a game. In fact Marshall I believe threw over 200 innings the year he won the Cy. The manager who I think really started the change where your closer became just a 9th inning guy was La Russa with Eckersley.

Do you remember Marshall being a Ranger for a short while? I had forgot the years, so I had to look it up -1977. Looks like he was a half year rental..don't recall why he was here such a short time.

 

[Justinkm83]

Rua hit his 2nd HR last night in his 1st 5 games at AAA. He's also batting .350 w/ a .435 OBP. He's been playing a lot of 3B.