Red Sox - 000 001 000 - 1 4 2 Athletics - 104 010 10x - 7 11 0Griffin (7-3-1-0-5, 91) retired the first 14 Red Sox batters before Jarrod Saltalamacchia enraged the locals by dropping down a bunt single. Jacoby Ellsbury, Dustin Pedroia, and Ryan Lavarnway had Boston's other three singles.
The Red Sox have lost seven straight games to the A's for the first time since dropping eight in a row to Philadelphia Athletics in 1932.
Doubront threw 77 pitches, but lasted only three innings (3-6-5-2-6). Two former Red Sox - Coco Crisp (3-for-4) and Chris Carter - hit home runs.
The Red Sox have lost 21 of their last 30 games.
Ellsbury, CFIf you are wondering how the Red Sox could lose a game 20-2, Nick Cafardo has the answer - because Jacoby Ellsbury can't bunt.
Pedroia, 2B
Podsednik, LF
Ross, RF
Loney, 1B
Saltalamacchia, C
Aviles, SS
Lavarnway, DH
Ciriaco, 3B
When the Red Sox put two base runners on with nobody out in the first inning Friday night against Oakland, Jacoby Ellsbury couldn't get a bunt down. This is a professional baseball player, who until last season was someone who relied on his legs. Players with speed should know how to bunt.Note: That wayward "f" was in the original Globe article.
Ellsbury could have changed the course of the game had he been able to execute a basic task. f He eventually grounded into a double play.
4 comments:
The thought came to me today, what if we just signed Papelbon?
Aceves would have been in a different role completely.
Ross never signs here.
Reddick may have his breakout year here.
Bard might have still been viable setup guy
Sweeney never breaks his hand.
Team has a different vibe.
I dont know how Pap was in the clubhouse but I assume he kept it light, and usally answered for his mistakes.
I am sure you can go back and look at every deal made , that one just stuck out to me.
When people always ragged on Pap a few us always said be careful what you wish for. You never know what you got til its gone...
I have no idea if the outcome would have been different it was just a thought...
When people always ragged on Pap a few us always said be careful what you wish for
As I recall, it was the other way around. A few people ragged on him incessantly, and the rest of us said, he's a damn good closer, we are better with him than without him.
Just to clarify a few things: 1. The reason Aceves has been the closer has nothing to do with Papelbon. Bailey was acquired to be the closer after Pap left but got injured right before the season.
2. And didn't the team think Kalish was a year away or less from being the RF? Hence getting rid of Reddick. (Though I always liked Reddick.)
3. Since Bard was moved to starter knowing we had a closer (Bailey at the time), doesn't that mean that still would have happened had Pap stayed? Since it also would have meant there's no closing spot available?
Anyway, you know I agree with you that we should have kept Pap regardless of all the other stuff. To me that was a guy where you say "we'll do anything to sign him." We can't really judge if it was a good move until we see a full year of Bailey, but it is a good thing to note when people are talking about getting rid of good players just because they have big contracts. Guys get big contracts because they're good. It obviously doesn't always work out, but you can't assume a small contract, good chemistry guy is better for your team than a superstar dick. (Besides, wasn't Punto brought in because he was a good clubhouse guy? And he didn't give us much. And, ironically, he was part of the "culture change" trade!)
you can't assume a small contract, good chemistry guy is better for your team than a superstar dick
I wish so much that people would stop assuming this.
Post a Comment