PDA

View Full Version : EdE all over ESPN for the wrong reason



RedsMan3203
04-12-2007, 04:13 PM
They keep showing the pop out, and showing it, and dogging him... and giving major props to Jerry Narron.....


While I think its a big deal, i don't think its that big of a deal....

GoReds
04-12-2007, 04:14 PM
I'm betting EdE doesn't find his way into those types of highlights in the future...

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 04:16 PM
I am trying to figure out how this is such a big deal....

Doro
04-12-2007, 04:19 PM
I am trying to figure out how this is such a big deal....


why....... you'd never see a Yankee do that and if they did they would never see the field again. If they pop up happend to be dropped it not only makes EE but makes the rest of the staff look bad for not having discipline.

roby
04-12-2007, 04:24 PM
While Edwin messed up last night, we need to keep remembering what a good player he truly is. I believe that he is going to be a top-notch Red for a long time. Encarnacion has always been a hard worker, an eager learner, and has a world of potential. I don't disagree with Narron's decision last night... but i think we need to keep the whole thing in perspective. Without Edwin, the Reds future is not nearly so bright.

jojo
04-12-2007, 04:25 PM
I am trying to figure out how this is such a big deal....

I agree-to me it's not even a certainty that he dogged anything.....name me three big leaguers that routinely sprint to first on balls they think they've fouled out of play...

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 04:25 PM
why....... you'd never see a Yankee do that and if they did they would never see the field again. If they pop up happend to be dropped it not only makes EE but makes the rest of the staff look bad for not having discipline.

Let me pose this question to you....
Pop up to LF. Adam Dunn cant find the ball due to lights/dome/whatever and it drops in for a triple. Does Narron go pull him out of the game for not hustling? Do the fans go nuts? Does the national media make a big deal out of it? How are these two things any different?

Jefferson24
04-12-2007, 04:26 PM
If he were a big star it wouldn't be that big a deal. I could see Bonds doing it and they would say nothing.

Heck Kareem didn't even play defense the last couple years of his career. There are times he didn't even cross the time line. It all depends on your status. EE hasn't earned the right to misjudge a pop out yet and not hear about it.

Joseph
04-12-2007, 04:30 PM
why....... you'd never see a Yankee do that and if they did they would never see the field again. If they pop up happend to be dropped it not only makes EE but makes the rest of the staff look bad for not having discipline.

You'd never see a Yankee lose track of a ball they thought was foul and by the time he figured it out it was really too late to do anything? I bet it happens, and probably this season.

Thats the problem, this isn't a lazy thing, this isn't a poor work ethic, this is a mistake on the kids part, thats all.

FlightRick
04-12-2007, 04:36 PM
Let me pose this question to you....
Pop up to LF. Adam Dunn cant find the ball due to lights/dome/whatever and it drops in for a triple. Does Narron go pull him out of the game for not hustling? Do the fans go nuts? Does the national media make a big deal out of it? How are these two things any different?

Your attempted comparison case is, at best, spurious in its logic. To ask a fielder who is uncertain of the location of a batted ball to simply run, full speed, in some randomly proscribed direction (or in circles, or whatever) would be the hight of nincompoopery.

On the other hand, to ask a batter who is unceratin of the location of a batted ball to simply run towards first base (or at least, feign some interest towards first base once he has located the ball hovered 200 feet up in the air over the second baeman, as Edwin did last night) is just good common sense.

I agree this is not the end of the world. But Edwin fricked up twice. One: he had no clue where the ball was. Two: when he found it, he still didn't do anything. No long-standing grudges necessary. But no free passes allowed, either.

Doro
04-12-2007, 04:36 PM
Dunn not finding a ball in the lights is a lot different..... if you cant see the ball then you cant see it..... its a lot different that not caring to run.


The ball was still in the air when EE finally found it. He had time to make an effort.

BRM
04-12-2007, 04:39 PM
On the other hand, to ask a batter who is unceratin of the location of a batted ball to simply run towards first base (or at least, feign some interest towards first base once he has located the ball hovered 200 feet up in the air over the second baeman, as Edwin did last night) is just good common sense.


It was my impression that Edwin thought he fouled it straight back. It wasn't a matter of him not knowing where the ball was. In his mind, the ball had been fouled back. Not many guys are going to sprint to first base in that instance. Granted, I haven't seen the replay yet. I'm going off what I've read.

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 04:39 PM
Dunn not finding a ball in the lights is a lot different..... if you cant see the ball then you cant see it..... its a lot different that not caring to run.


The ball was still in the air when EE finally found it. He had time to make an effort.

in real time Edwin had about half a second before the guy caught the ball.

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 04:42 PM
Your attempted comparison case is, at best, spurious in its logic. To ask a fielder who is uncertain of the location of a batted ball to simply run, full speed, in some randomly proscribed direction (or in circles, or whatever) would be the hight of nincompoopery.

On the other hand, to ask a batter who is unceratin of the location of a batted ball to simply run towards first base (or at least, feign some interest towards first base once he has located the ball hovered 200 feet up in the air over the second baeman, as Edwin did last night) is just good common sense.

I agree this is not the end of the world. But Edwin fricked up twice. One: he had no clue where the ball was. Two: when he found it, he still didn't do anything. No long-standing grudges necessary. But no free passes allowed, either.

He thought it was out of play, which is why he actually stepped back into the batters box. He reached out across the plate to hit the ball, looked behind the dugout, turned and stepped back into the batters box. He thought the ball was out of play, so why would he run to first?

Caveat Emperor
04-12-2007, 04:42 PM
As long as its over and done with today and EE resumes his spot as the team's everyday 3rd baseman on Friday, I have no problem with Narron doing this.

FWIW, if I'm teaching kids to play ball I tell them: "When in doubt, run." If EE didn't know where the ball went, his first instinct should be to run and worry about being called back to the box later.

Just IMO.

Joseph
04-12-2007, 04:47 PM
As long as its over and done with today and EE resumes his spot as the team's everyday 3rd baseman on Friday, I have no problem with Narron doing this.

FWIW, if I'm teaching kids to play ball I tell them: "When in doubt, run." If EE didn't know where the ball went, his first instinct should be to run and worry about being called back to the box later.

Just IMO.

And thats absolutely the correct thing to teach them, and what EE should have done, BUT to see people [not you obviously] lambasting him is wrong. It was a mistake. Singular and isolated, not one in a series of mistakes he's constantly making, just one thing.

klw
04-12-2007, 04:47 PM
Let me pose this question to you....
Pop up to LF. Adam Dunn cant find the ball due to lights/dome/whatever and it drops in for a triple. Does Narron go pull him out of the game for not hustling? Do the fans go nuts? Does the national media make a big deal out of it? How are these two things any different?

The difference is that if a fielder loses sight of the ball, he doesn't know which way to move. A hitter who doesn't know where the ball is always knows what direction to run. They may look silly if the ball is foul but it isn't as if they need to decide whether to run to 3rd or 1st depending on where the ball is.

Dracodave
04-12-2007, 04:48 PM
Let me pose this question to you....
Pop up to LF. Adam Dunn cant find the ball due to lights/dome/whatever and it drops in for a triple. Does Narron go pull him out of the game for not hustling? Do the fans go nuts? Does the national media make a big deal out of it? How are these two things any different?

Actually, yes. Dunn gets strung up for everything. Duh!:p:

registerthis
04-12-2007, 04:53 PM
why....... you'd never see a Yankee do that and if they did they would never see the field again.

I'll bet the Yankees take away the clubhouse chairs of underperforming stars, too.

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 04:54 PM
The difference is that if a fielder loses sight of the ball, he doesn't know which way to move. A hitter who doesn't know where the ball is always knows what direction to run. They may look silly if the ball is foul but it isn't as if they need to decide whether to run to 3rd or 1st depending on where the ball is.

He thought it was foul though, and that is the difference in what happened and what you are saying. He stepped back into the batters box to get ready for the next pitch. That isnt a lack of hustle, its a mistake.

bounty37h
04-12-2007, 04:57 PM
Let me pose this question to you....
Pop up to LF. Adam Dunn cant find the ball due to lights/dome/whatever and it drops in for a triple. Does Narron go pull him out of the game for not hustling? Do the fans go nuts? Does the national media make a big deal out of it? How are these two things any different?

Are you seriously asking this?? Not that I think its as big a deal as its being made out to be, but 2 completely different things you are trying to compare, not even close to same. Fielding a ball, you have to know where it is to get to it. Hitting a ball and running to first, you run, thats it, nothing more, nothing less, you run, adn then let where the ball is work itself out, pretty simple stuff. I agree with Narrons choice to yank him, let him think about it, and bet we dont see him do it again.

FlightRick
04-12-2007, 05:00 PM
He thought it was out of play, which is why he actually stepped back into the batters box. He reached out across the plate to hit the ball, looked behind the dugout, turned and stepped back into the batters box. He thought the ball was out of play, so why would he run to first?

So the argument isn't that Edwin was In The Wrong for not running.

It's that he's In The Right for being totally wrong about where the ball was? Sorry: but if defending a guy for being A Different Kind of Wrong is the best you got, I again resort to the "spurious logic" label, and hope that is considered civil enough for these parts to not get me any further vilified than I already am.

Look, no matter how you slice it, SOMEthing in Edwin's judgment was off last night. And I refuse to get into a retarded debate over the difference between "half-a-second" and "one second," but watching the game, it was obvious that Edwin *did* locate the ball at some point before it was caught. And when the bases are 60 feet apart, and take about 3 seconds to move between, I'm sorry, but I say if there's a chance you can be 25% of the way to a base when you get your bearing, you get on your horse and you giddy-up.

Philosophically, this situation is no different that the '05 ALCS game where they had the "foul tip/dropped third strike" controversy... people tried to blame the umps, people tried to rationalize things six ways till Sunday, but the simple fact of the matter was that if the catcher had just thrown to first base like you're taught when you're 8 years old (instead of just sauntering towards the dugout like a lazy moron), there wouldn't have been any controversy to begin with. Poor fundamentals opened the door for the possibility of an ump blowing a call or the other team taking advantage... methinks the only *real* difference here is that Edwin Huggers (not that there's anything wrong with that) don't have to explain away any consequences of his (in)actions. His was, admittedly, a victimless crime.

But a crime nonetheless, even if only a petty misdemeanor good for what I'm sure will be nothing more than a 7-inning suspension.

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 05:01 PM
Are you seriously asking this?? Not that I think its as big a deal as its being made out to be, but 2 completely different things you are trying to compare, not even close to same. Fielding a ball, you have to know where it is to get to it. Hitting a ball and running to first, you run, thats it, nothing more, nothing less, you run, adn then let where the ball is work itself out, pretty simple stuff. I agree with Narrons choice to yank him, let him think about it, and bet we dont see him do it again.

Tell ya what, next time a guy runs to first base on a foul ball behind the first base dugout I will come back and say that they were two completely different things. Until then I dont see them as completely different things.

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 05:03 PM
So the argument isn't that Edwin was In The Wrong for not running.

It's that he's In The Right for being totally wrong about where the ball was? Sorry: but if defending a guy for being A Different Kind of Wrong is the best you got, I again resort to the "spurious logic" label, and hope that is considered civil enough for these parts to not get me any further vilified than I already am.

Look, no matter how you slice it, SOMEthing in Edwin's judgment was off last night. And I refuse to get into a retarded debate over the difference between "half-a-second" and "one second," but watching the game, it was obvious that Edwin *did* locate the ball at some point before it was caught. And when the bases are 60 feet apart, and take about 3 seconds to move between, I'm sorry, but I say if there's a chance you can be 25% of the way to a base when you get your bearing, you get on your horse and you giddy-up.

Philosophically, this situation is no different that the '05 ALCS game where they had the "foul tip/dropped third strike" controversy... people tried to blame the umps, people tried to rationalize things six ways till Sunday, but the simple fact of the matter was that if the catcher had just thrown to first base like you're taught when you're 8 years old (instead of just sauntering towards the dugout like a lazy moron), there wouldn't have been any controversy to begin with. Poor fundamentals opened the door for the possibility of an ump blowing a call or the other team taking advantage... methinks the only *real* difference here is that Edwin Huggers (not that there's anything wrong with that) don't have to explain away any consequences of his (in)actions. His was, admittedly, a victimless crime.

But a crime nonetheless, even if only a petty misdemeanor good for what I'm sure will be nothing more than a 7-inning suspension.

Its not that he was a different kind of wrong.... why run to first base on a ball that you thought was foul? There is no point to it.
As for the AJ thing.... why throw it to first base if you are certain you caught the ball?

texasdave
04-12-2007, 05:03 PM
I did not get to see the game but am curious about one thing. I would imagine most balls that are popped up stay in the air for about 4 or 5 seconds at least. It would not seem like a pop fly early in the game would cause the crowd to roar in a deafening manner. If anyone was watching the game did they notice the base coaches or the batter on deck or the players and coaches in the dugout or either of the two base runners or Marty screaming into the banana phone, "Run, Eddie, run!"? Just curious, that's all.

Ron Madden
04-12-2007, 05:04 PM
So the argument isn't that Edwin was In The Wrong for not running.

It's that he's In The Right for being totally wrong about where the ball was? Sorry: but if defending a guy for being A Different Kind of Wrong is the best you got, I again resort to the "spurious logic" label, and hope that is considered civil enough for these parts to not get me any further vilified than I already am.

Look, no matter how you slice it, SOMEthing in Edwin's judgment was off last night. And I refuse to get into a retarded debate over the difference between "half-a-second" and "one second," but watching the game, it was obvious that Edwin *did* locate the ball at some point before it was caught. And when the bases are 60 feet apart, and take about 3 seconds to move between, I'm sorry, but I say if there's a chance you can be 25% of the way to a base when you get your bearing, you get on your horse and you giddy-up.

Philosophically, this situation is no different that the '05 ALCS game where they had the "foul tip/dropped third strike" controversy... people tried to blame the umps, people tried to rationalize things six ways till Sunday, but the simple fact of the matter was that if the catcher had just thrown to first base like you're taught when you're 8 years old (instead of just sauntering towards the dugout like a lazy moron), there wouldn't have been any controversy to begin with. Poor fundamentals opened the door for the possibility of an ump blowing a call or the other team taking advantage... methinks the only *real* difference here is that Edwin Huggers (not that there's anything wrong with that) don't have to explain away any consequences of his (in)actions. His was, admittedly, a victimless crime.

But a crime nonetheless, even if only a petty misdemeanor good for what I'm sure will be nothing more than a 7-inning suspension.

The bases are 90 feet apart. :rolleyes:

Team Clark
04-12-2007, 05:05 PM
I am trying to figure out how this is such a big deal....

I agree with the move but certainly do not see it as a MAJOR deal. Must be a slow day at ESPN.

osuceltic
04-12-2007, 05:08 PM
This isn't rocket science. Encarnacion is a young player. Narron is trying desperately to teach him the right way to play. It's important to reach him now. They tried last season to get his attention when it comes to being dedicated to improving his defense. That seemed to work. Now Narron is trying to stress the importance of hustling at all times. And it IS important.

There seems to be this "hustle isn't cool or statistically significant" attitude on this board. The thing is, you can't selectively hustle. You never know when running hard is going to pay off. But it will. And when you have 25 guys hustling all the time, those occasions when it pays off start to add up.

It's imperative that Encarnacion and other young players in this organization understand what is expected of them. There are a couple of established players here who can't be touched. But it's not too late for Edwin (or Votto or Bruce or Stubbs, etc.).

bounty37h
04-12-2007, 05:11 PM
Not trying to pick on ya at all, and to a degree, I can see what your trying to say, but your not even close on that comparison, which is what you asked in your original question, whats the difference between a batter and a fielder....

osuceltic
04-12-2007, 05:11 PM
Its not that he was a different kind of wrong.... why run to first base on a ball that you thought was foul? There is no point to it.

No. There is no point to running to first base on a ball that IS foul. If you just "think" the ball is foul, but you don't really know, you better be running toward first base.

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 05:12 PM
I agree with the move but certainly do not see it as a MAJOR deal. Must be a slow day at ESPN.

I wasnt there in between the innings, but I wonder what Narrons initial reaction was. I agree that Narron should have gone to him and said something. I dont think it warranted taking him out since he made a mistake in identifying where the ball was, barring some type of exchange between Narron and Edwin that I am unsure of happening, because like I said, I was not there.

Dracodave
04-12-2007, 05:13 PM
There seems to be this "hustle isn't cool or statistically significant" attitude on this board. The thing is, you can't selectively hustle. You never know when running hard is going to pay off. But it will. And when you have 25 guys hustling all the time, those occasions when it pays off start to add up.


The probem with hustling is this..There is no bench if said hustler gets injured. Who do you replace both batting wise and fielding wise for EE? Castro? Freel? You just the only good right-handed power in that line up.

Thats my reason for whinning about hustling...It pays off, but if they get hurt, where does this team go? Except down to last place..fast.

FlightRick
04-12-2007, 05:13 PM
The bases are 90 feet apart. :rolleyes:

Why yes, yes, they are.

And also, there was no "foul tip" component to the '05 ALCS play that I referenced, once I actually stopped to remember it fully.

I was going to edit and fix those errors, but why bother now? I have not mocked Ladyboy Bronson Arroyo, I have not besmirched vegetarians, I have not sided with Noted Ay-hole Ozzie Guillen, and for the first time ever, I definitely deserve it if somebody wants to dock me those Sweet Sweet Reputation Points that I obviously crave so much.

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 05:14 PM
No. There is no point to running to first base on a ball that IS foul. If you just "think" the ball is foul, but you don't really know, you better be running toward first base.

Thing is Edwin DID think it was foul. That is why he returned to the batters box. Its not that he was unsure, in his mind he was very sure it was foul.

Dracodave
04-12-2007, 05:16 PM
Thing is Edwin DID think it was foul. That is why he returned to the batters box. Its not that he was unsure, in his mind he was very sure it was foul.

As did Snyder and Owings.

klw
04-12-2007, 05:17 PM
The dumbest thing Edwin did was to do this on the day before an off day when their is a light schedule all around.

jpurdy974
04-12-2007, 05:17 PM
Seems to me that I saw Griffey run a double into a single the other day and he stayed in the game. Guess there's a double standard on this team.

Scrap Irony
04-12-2007, 05:18 PM
Encarnacion saw the ball in fair territory and chose not to run to first base. It was not "half a second." It was (in real time) better than two seconds. (I timed it, and, yes, I have no life.) Two seconds is enough to get twenty feet down the line at a slight jog.

Edwin chose not to do that and to, instead, stand at home plate until the ball was caught, then to head to the dugout.

It was a bush league thing to do.

He got caught.

In the interviews afterward, he seems to be contrite and understands he needs to focus. Good for him. However, Narron absolutely did the right thing. First base is always 90 feet from home plate and you are always supposed to run after hitting a ball.

It's something you're taught as a T-baller and something you never forget.

To say he thought it foul is correct. For about half a second. He then had a choice and chose wrongly. Narron called him on it.

Good for Narron.

And, BTW, I stand by my statement made last night saying I would send him down for the week if I had Arizona's pipeline. They have two kids who are ready right now and can't find positions on the major league field. Both kids have EdE's ceiling. It wouldn't have hurt much and would have eventually paid off.

Even if I'm Cincinnati, I'm tempted to sit him through the weekend.

A mistake? Absolutely.

But that's the only thing we agree on, in this instance.

AccordinglyReds
04-12-2007, 05:18 PM
Is ESPN really blowing this up? I haven't caught any of it today, but jeez half the time ESPN can't even get his name right, consistently calling him "Juan Encarnacion"... :rolleyes:

dabvu2498
04-12-2007, 05:20 PM
I wasnt there in between the innings, but I wonder what Narrons initial reaction was. I agree that Narron should have gone to him and said something. I dont think it warranted taking him out since he made a mistake in identifying where the ball was, barring some type of exchange between Narron and Edwin that I am unsure of happening, because like I said, I was not there.

I tend to think this is what happened. My hypothesis is that Narron went to him for an explanation, didn't like the one he got and pulled him. But we'll never really know.

Ron Madden
04-12-2007, 05:22 PM
Why yes, yes, they are.

And also, there was no "foul tip" component to the '05 ALCS play that I referenced, once I actually stopped to remember it fully.

I was going to edit and fix those errors, but why bother now? I have not mocked Ladyboy Bronson Arroyo, I have not besmirched vegetarians, I have not sided with Noted Ay-hole Ozzie Guillen, and for the first time ever, I definitely deserve it if somebody wants to dock me those Sweet Sweet Reputation Points that I obviously crave so much.

I never negged you. Just pointing out a 30 ft. difference.

Redlegs
04-12-2007, 05:27 PM
Jerry Narron did the absolute right thing last night. You cannot have a guy fail to run out a pop up. He may have thought it was fouled at first, but A) when you don't know where the ball is, you run it out, and B) he saw the 2nd baseman make a play for the ball and had plenty of time to drop his bat and begin running to first. He did neither.

Good to see Narron take a stand. It will pay off in the end for Edwin and the Reds.

smith288
04-12-2007, 05:29 PM
Let me pose this question to you....
Pop up to LF. Adam Dunn cant find the ball due to lights/dome/whatever and it drops in for a triple. Does Narron go pull him out of the game for not hustling? Do the fans go nuts? Does the national media make a big deal out of it? How are these two things any different?
Lost ball in lights: You dont have to run anywhere (but when you do find it, you bust your arse getting it where it needs to go)

Lost ball after hitting it somewhere: Run to first!

There is your difference

FlightRick
04-12-2007, 05:29 PM
Its not that he was a different kind of wrong.... why run to first base on a ball that you thought was foul? There is no point to it.
As for the AJ thing.... why throw it to first base if you are certain you caught the ball?

Then the following two defenses are OK, as well?

(1) "I think I saw 'Speed Limit 55' on that sign, Officer, why in the blue hell would I try to keep it under 35?"

(2) "I'm certain that 31.35% multiplied by my income equals $0.00, Mr. IRS Man, so surely you can't be serious about arresting me for failing to pay these alleged 'taxes' of which you speak!"

In baseball, my friend, the difference between Perception and Reality is the same as it is anywhere else. Like someone else already said in this thread, if Edwin ACTUALLY hits a foul ball out of play, fine. If he just THINKS he has, but can't see it/doesn't know for sure, then he does have an obligation to look lively.

And trust me: you don't even want me to get started on that ALCS play... and if you do, I'll just cut and paste you the 5000 words I wrote about it back then, when I couldn't believe how asshatted some people were being about it....

Redlegs
04-12-2007, 05:29 PM
Seems to me that I saw Griffey run a double into a single the other day and he stayed in the game. Guess there's a double standard on this team.

I agree that Griffey should have been on 2nd base the other day. Having said that, what Edwin did was worse. He didn't even leave the box. Both plays should be unacceptable, however.

registerthis
04-12-2007, 05:30 PM
your not even close on that comparison, which is what you asked in your original question, whats the difference between a batter and a fielder....

The question is one of effort and preparedness. That applies equally to fielders and batters.

Chip R
04-12-2007, 05:31 PM
Is ESPN really blowing this up? I haven't caught any of it today, but jeez half the time ESPN can't even get his name right, consistently calling him "Juan Encarnacion"... :rolleyes:


It wouldn't have been a big deal if Narron hadn't pulled EE from the game.

Tom Servo
04-12-2007, 05:32 PM
Encarnacion saw the ball in fair territory and chose not to run to first base. It was not "half a second." It was (in real time) better than two seconds. (I timed it, and, yes, I have no life.) Two seconds is enough to get twenty feet down the line at a slight jog.

Edwin chose not to do that and to, instead, stand at home plate until the ball was caught, then to head to the dugout.

It was a bush league thing to do.

He got caught.

In the interviews afterward, he seems to be contrite and understands he needs to focus. Good for him. However, Narron absolutely did the right thing. First base is always 90 feet from home plate and you are always supposed to run after hitting a ball.

It's something you're taught as a T-baller and something you never forget.

To say he thought it foul is correct. For about half a second. He then had a choice and chose wrongly. Narron called him on it.

Good for Narron.

And, BTW, I stand by my statement made last night saying I would send him down for the week if I had Arizona's pipeline. They have two kids who are ready right now and can't find positions on the major league field. Both kids have EdE's ceiling. It wouldn't have hurt much and would have eventually paid off.

Even if I'm Cincinnati, I'm tempted to sit him through the weekend.

A mistake? Absolutely.

But that's the only thing we agree on, in this instance.
Griffey had a choice to run as soon as he hit the ball on Sunday, but instead he stood there and watched it. Sure Griffey's been around longer but it was still a mistake. Why not bench Griffey the next day for that bush league move of not hustling?

DeadRedinCT
04-12-2007, 05:34 PM
Somehow this is Bob Boone's fault.

Caveat Emperor
04-12-2007, 05:34 PM
Seems to me that I saw Griffey run a double into a single the other day and he stayed in the game. Guess there's a double standard on this team.

He ran. Encarnacion didn't. I think even jogging down towards first base on the popup would've saved any of this from happening.

I'm not saying Edwin was dogging it, but I'll bet even he'd admit he didn't have his head completely in the game, since he didn't move out of the box even as a fielder was going to make a play on the ball.

It was a mistake and Narron used it as an opportunity to send a message to him -- pay attention and keep your head up. If ESPN wants to try and blow this up, good for them. Its not a story from New York, Boston or L.A., which means that it'll have a shelf life of maybe 24 hours at most.

smith288
04-12-2007, 05:36 PM
Griffey had a choice to run as soon as he hit the ball on Sunday, but instead he stood there and watched it. Sure Griffey's been around longer but it was still a mistake. Why not bench Griffey the next day for that bush league move of not hustling?
Simple and I know you wont like the answer

Griffey is Griffey
Edwin is NOT Griffey

Sucks, I know, but nobody said life was fair. Had Griffey did that when he was in his second year, he would have ridden the pines for the game too. No doubt in my mind.

bounty37h
04-12-2007, 05:38 PM
The probem with hustling is this..There is no bench if said hustler gets injured. Who do you replace both batting wise and fielding wise for EE? Castro? Freel? You just the only good right-handed power in that line up.

Thats my reason for whinning about hustling...It pays off, but if they get hurt, where does this team go? Except down to last place..fast.

^If this team doesnt hustle, we will be in last place more then 10 games out before injuries can make a difference anyway.

bounty37h
04-12-2007, 05:42 PM
The question is one of effort and preparedness. That applies equally to fielders and batters.

I think its more a question of action, and the 2 actions taken in the given examples are as opposite as can be

smith288
04-12-2007, 05:47 PM
ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2834516)


PHOENIX -- Cincinnati manager Jerry Narron benched cleanup hitter Edwin Encarnacion after he failed to run out a pop fly in the first inning of the Reds' 3-2 victory over Arizona on Wednesday night.

Edwin Encarnacion
Encarnacion

"I don't care if we lose every game, we're not going to play guys that don't hustle," Narron said. "Simple as that."

After popping to Arizona second baseman Orlando Hudson with runners at first and third and one out, Encarnacion returned to the dugout with his bat in his hand. Narron, who had been watching the flight of the ball, allowed Encarnacion to take the field in the bottom of the inning. But the manager went back to his office after the inning and looked at a videotape that showed Encarnacion had not run to first.

"I was watching the ball," Narron said. "I wasn't watching Eddie. If I'd have been watching Eddie, he would have never taken the field.

"He told me he did not see the ball where it was, but you've still got to run," Narron said.

Narron said the 24-year-old Encarnacion, in his third big league season, has always hustled for him. He added that Encarnacion likely would be back in the lineup when the Reds open a three-game series against the Chicago Cubs in Wrigley Field on Friday.

"I love him," Narron said. "I think he's going to be a great player. He messed up. But doggone it, you can't be messing up in this game like that by not hustling. If you don't know where the ball is, you run until you find out where it is.

"He has never dogged it," Narron said. "It was probably an honest mistake, but it was a mistake."

Encarnacion offered no argument, although he said he didn't run because he thought he had fouled the ball out of play.

"I understand," Encarnacion said. "He likes everybody to play hard, run the bases and hustle in the game."

After speaking to reporters, Narron called Encarnacion into his office for a brief chat.

"He told me to keep playing hard," Encarnacion said.

Sounds like Encarnacion understands why he was benched and doesn't have a huge hissy about it.

MartyFan
04-12-2007, 06:01 PM
It's a big deal because a manager actually took the time to demand something from his players.

I know the whole double standard with Junior and all that but honestly when is anything ever fair across the board? NEVER...I think this is a good example and a good athlete to make an example of within this organization...Dunn got it last year when they traded Kearns and had the come to Jesus talk with him.

registerthis
04-12-2007, 06:05 PM
I think its more a question of action, and the 2 actions taken in the given examples are as opposite as can be

You asked what the difference between a batter and a fielder is. Concerning what E-E did (or didn't do) it was a question of being mentally in the game, which both batters and fielders need to be.

FWIW, I think this is a big blow up over nothing, and within a couple of weeks won't even be worth mentioning.

Degenerate39
04-12-2007, 06:06 PM
Griffey had a choice to run as soon as he hit the ball on Sunday, but instead he stood there and watched it. Sure Griffey's been around longer but it was still a mistake. Why not bench Griffey the next day for that bush league move of not hustling?

Griffey is a hall of famer

UGADaddy
04-12-2007, 06:15 PM
If he were a big star it wouldn't be that big a deal. I could see Bonds doing it and they would say nothing.

Griffey does it every play he's on the field. I don't think I've ever seen him run unless there's a chance he can make a great play that ESPN can praise him for.

I can see highlight shows mentioning the EdE benching during the clip, but to go on about it after the highlight after the game seems a bit much. Possibly just a slow news day in sports. Either way, it'll go away by tomorrow.

registerthis
04-12-2007, 06:16 PM
Griffey does it every play he's on the field. I don't think I've ever seen him run unless there's a chance he can make a great play that ESPN can praise him for.

Oh yeah! And I heard he watches too much TV in the clubhouse and hogs the Wii. The jerk.

LincolnparkRed
04-12-2007, 06:16 PM
This episode just got play here in Chicago. The WSCR guys are high fiving Narron and saying that this was the right call and said they really enjoy him and are impressed by what he did.

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 06:18 PM
Griffey does it every play he's on the field. I don't think I've ever seen him run unless there's a chance he can make a great play that ESPN can praise him for.


Yeah, he sure showed that when he scored on a sac fly to the second baseman the other night.....:thumbdown

reds44
04-12-2007, 06:19 PM
Who cares what ESPN says?

Narron has moved on, as has Edwin. It was a mistake, he was punished, and now we move on.

gonelong
04-12-2007, 07:27 PM
In baseball, my friend, the difference between Perception and Reality is the same as it is anywhere else. Like someone else already said in this thread, if Edwin ACTUALLY hits a foul ball out of play, fine. If he just THINKS he has, but can't see it/doesn't know for sure, then he does have an obligation to look lively.


The other day someone asked me for my phone number. I gave it to them. My wife looked at me and said "thats not our phone number". I said sure it is and repeated it back. She said, "no its not".

I "know" our phone number ... except that I was giving someone the phone number of the house we lived at a few years back and not the number of the one we lived in now.

In my mind, there is no doubt I have the correct phone number. Would you accuse me of lying? Did I have an obligation to "look lively" after I had already given the person my phone number?

GL

reds44
04-12-2007, 07:28 PM
The other day someone asked me for my phone number. I gave it to them. My wife looked at me and said "thats not our phone number". I said sure it is and repeated it back. She said, "no its not".

I "know" our phone number ... except that I was giving someone the phone number of the house we lived at a few years back and not the number of the one we lived in now.

In my mind, there is no doubt I have the correct phone number. Would you accuse me of lying? Did I have an obligation to "look lively" after I had already given the person my phone number?

GL
Couldn't agree more.

jojo
04-12-2007, 08:08 PM
So the argument isn't that Edwin was In The Wrong for not running. It's that he's In The Right for being totally wrong about where the ball was?

Lets pause for a second and actually use a little perspective here rather than try to win an argument...

EE failed to run to first on a ball he thought was fouled out of play behind home plate.... nobody runs to first in that situation (not even Charlie Hustle).


Sorry: but if defending a guy for being A Different Kind of Wrong is the best you got, I again resort to the "spurious logic" label, and hope that is considered civil enough for these parts to not get me any further vilified than I already am.

Look, no matter how you slice it, SOMEthing in Edwin's judgment was off last night.

Right but there's a huge difference in intent/attitude in that something. Thats the real issue here.

Really the logical conclusion to your argument is that EE has an attitude problem regardless of that something... he either was a spoiled brat for not running initially while recognizing where he hit the pop up or he's a spoiled brat for not running 15 feet toward first during the half second after he realized the ball wasn't popped out of play behind home plate.

I'd suggest that's some real serious hair splitting in your position.... In the very least it's not a fair stance to take.


And I refuse to get into a retarded debate over the difference between "half-a-second" and "one second," but watching the game, it was obvious that Edwin *did* locate the ball at some point before it was caught. And when the bases are 60 feet apart, and take about 3 seconds to move between, I'm sorry, but I say if there's a chance you can be 25% of the way to a base when you get your bearing, you get on your horse and you giddy-up.

You refuse to get into a "retarded debate" about tenths of seconds yet you clearly think he should've at least have been 22.5 feet done the basepath..

even you admit that the replay indicates that initially he behaved as if he'd hit a ball out of play. That's the point... how is not running to first on a ball you've thought was out of play indicative of an attitude problem (or analogous to a crime)?


But a crime nonetheless, even if only a petty misdemeanor good for what I'm sure will be nothing more than a 7-inning suspension.

Well you lose your right to criticize others' analogies...

jojo
04-12-2007, 08:14 PM
If EE didn't know where the ball went, his first instinct should be to run and worry about being called back to the box later.

Just IMO.

I agree. However from his initial behavior it seems pretty clear to me that EE had no doubt that he'd fouled the ball out of play. Why would he run to first then? Just saying is all...

jojo
04-12-2007, 08:21 PM
No. There is no point to running to first base on a ball that IS foul. If you just "think" the ball is foul, but you don't really know, you better be running toward first base.

:eek:


I'm thinkin' EE was pretty convinced... it's not like he was debating whether it was fair or foul as he stepped back into the box and began to settle into his stance....

6-4-3
04-12-2007, 08:23 PM
I agree. However from his initial behavior it seems pretty clear to me that EE had no doubt that he'd fouled the ball out of play. Why would he run to first then? Just saying is all...


I agree, IMO things that needed to be taken into consideration before benching a player in the middle of a game. (What Narron should've asked himself about EE)

1) Has EE been a player that has always hustled day in and day out.
2) Has EE kept his mouth shut about playing time, when it was obvious to some that he should've been playing.
3) How will this move affect the players mental make up.

After taking the approach if the manager still thinks something needs to be said, then take the player aside and discuss the play with him. Tell him that if a similar situation happens, then he'll be removed from the game.

Like it or not in the MLB more times than not the managers not going to "send a message". Players will tune that type of thing out. It will turn both vets and young players off to the manager and sometimes the mental approach they bring to the park daily.

Chip R
04-12-2007, 08:29 PM
I agree. However from his initial behavior it seems pretty clear to me that EE had no doubt that he'd fouled the ball out of play. Why would he run to first then? Just saying is all...


You're right. CE said his first instinct should have been to run. But if he had no doubt it was foul - and, right or wrong, he thought it was foul - his first instinct should have been to not run. I saw plenty of no doubt about it foul balls last night afterwards by both teams and not one player started running towards 1st. Their first instinct was to stay and not run. EE's instinct was right for what he believed it was. Just like what happened to Sean Casey last year when he got thrown out at 1st on a hit to the left fielder. The difference was that when Casey realized his mistake, he started running to 1st. I don't remember Leyland benching him because of that. Both incidents were honest mistakes. Unfortunastely, I think EE is going to get tagged with being a "lazy player" by most of the non-Cincinnati media and a lot of casual fans.

jojo
04-12-2007, 08:30 PM
Then the following two defenses are OK, as well?

(1) "I think I saw 'Speed Limit 55' on that sign, Officer, why in the blue hell would I try to keep it under 35?"

(2) "I'm certain that 31.35% multiplied by my income equals $0.00, Mr. IRS Man, so surely you can't be serious about arresting me for failing to pay these alleged 'taxes' of which you speak!"

In baseball, my friend, the difference between Perception and Reality is the same as it is anywhere else. Like someone else already said in this thread, if Edwin ACTUALLY hits a foul ball out of play, fine. If he just THINKS he has, but can't see it/doesn't know for sure, then he does have an obligation to look lively.

Your arguing that since EE perceived that he'd hit a ball out of play, he's guilty of having an attitude problem and should be treated as such by "the man"... that's just....well...... silly.

cacollinsmba
04-12-2007, 08:31 PM
I view this as one of those situations where, you basically ride somebody's butt because you know they have potential.

I'm sure all of us at some point have had a coworker, a kid we were tutoring, a little leaguer, somebody we rode hard. Why? Because we knew that greatness lies within them and we push them to reach it.

Even if this was not Narron's intention, I still think the result could be similar to the situations above.

Will
04-12-2007, 08:33 PM
I agree, IMO things that needed to be taken into consideration before benching a player in the middle of a game. (What Narron should've asked himself about EE)

1) Has EE been a player that has always hustled day in and day out.
2) Has EE kept his mouth shut about playing time, when it was obvious to some that he should've been playing.
3) How will this move affect the players mental make up.

After taking the approach if the manager still thinks something needs to be said, then take the player aside and discuss the play with him. Tell him that if a similar situation happens, then he'll be removed from the game.

Like it or not in the MLB more times than not the managers not going to "send a message". Players will tune that type of thing out. It will turn both vets and young players off to the manager and sometimes the mental approach they bring to the park daily.

Seems that Narron may have jumped the gun a little due to the 2 previous games and his frustration over their out come. EE made a mistake and admitted it, Narron probably did too by benching him and embarrasing him on TV.

jojo
04-12-2007, 08:34 PM
It's a big deal because a manager actually took the time to demand something from his players.

I know the whole double standard with Junior and all that but honestly when is anything ever fair across the board? NEVER...I think this is a good example and a good athlete to make an example of within this organization...Dunn got it last year when they traded Kearns and had the come to Jesus talk with him.

If you buy this argument though, isn't Narron a wussy man then for putting the hammer down on EE for what he thinks was EE dogging it? If Narron would've called Jr out with a consequence, then EE wouldn't have *dogged it*...

That's not really leadership in my book....

FlightRick
04-12-2007, 09:11 PM
Your arguing that since EE perceived that he'd hit a ball out of play, he's guilty of having an attitude problem and should be treated as such by "the man"... that's just....well...... silly.

Ummm, that's precisely what I've been very careful NOT to say.

I've made no sweeping generalizations about "attitude," I don't care for the Kreskins out there who think they've successfully deduced another Narron Plot against Edwin... I just said that the guy made a bush league play in this one and singular situation, and further opined that the punishment fit the crime. I stand by these statements, but cannot say the same for any additonal ones which you may have inferred or imagined on your own.

If there were to be further punishment (reports are there won't be), then we might have a problem where those involved can't get past a real-but-relatively-minor issue. Bit instead, we've got this on-going debate, where those who are NOT involved seem intent on not getting past this real-but-relatively-minor issue by continuing to kvetch about a benching that was seemingly justified and which has already been announced as a One Time Only Thing.

Nee haw?

PS: Much to my surprise, it was the same jojo who also posted this second, other, different (yet, not really different) response to me:


Really the logical conclusion to your argument is that EE has an attitude problem regardless of that something... he either was a spoiled brat for not running initially while recognizing where he hit the pop up or he's a spoiled brat for not running 15 feet toward first during the half second after he realized the ball wasn't popped out of play behind home plate.

Rather than do a whole second pos of my ownt, I'll just underscore what I wrote above about faulty inferences and assumptions about the "logical conclusion" to my argument... because I happen to believe that I'm a talented enough wordsmith that I'll provide you with My Logical Conclusion without leaving too much room for doubt and uncertainty. Logical conclusion: Edwin made one bone-headed play. Anything beyond that? You're on your own, Potsie.

Look, nobody's arguing that Edwin should have bolted for first base the second he made contact, at a full sprint. He brainfarted, he thought he fouled it back. But whether it's "half a second" or "two seconds" (as somebody who claimed to stop-watch it says), the point is he eventually DID get his bearings, and some combination of having people shouting at him from the dugout, or noticing the D-Backs defense was in motion, or realizing the ump (who tends to be quite attentive in such matters) never shouted out "foul ball, out of play," should have spurred him into some kind of awareness and action. Instead, he just sort of stood around like a boob. Pointing out this one bone-headed move is fair, and a manager sanctioning him for it it strikes me as fair, too. And in neither case is it a Scathing Subliminal Indictment on Edwin's worth as a person.

fisch11
04-12-2007, 09:25 PM
This has happened before. Doesn't anyone remember last season when Freel got thrown out at second trying to stretch a single into a double when the team was down 3 or so? Narron pulled him for it, saying it was boneheaded. Same thing here, no big deal. He sits, comes back Friday, end of discussion.

jojo
04-12-2007, 09:34 PM
Ummm, that's precisely what I've been very careful NOT to say.

I've made no sweeping generalizations about "attitude," I don't care for the Kreskins out there who think they've successfully deduced another Narron Plot against Edwin... I just said that the guy made a bush league play in this one and singular situation, and further opined that the punishment fit the crime. I stand by these statements, but cannot say the same for any additonal ones which you may have inferred or imagined on your own.


You've equated his actions to a crime, you've suggested he should've been at least a quarter of the way down the line, and now you've just described his at bat as bush league...

You've posited premises 1,2 and 3. I don't think I'm incorrectly carrying out your argument to it's logical conclusion....

You've just said that the punishment fit the crime. So if the crime wasn't bad attitude, what was it? Reds players had better not misjudge the flight of a ball or they'll be benched. Is that the underlying lesson?

wink, wink...nee haw....

Hoosier Red
04-12-2007, 09:44 PM
Seems that Narron may have jumped the gun a little due to the 2 previous games and his frustration over their out come. EE made a mistake and admitted it, Narron probably did too by benching him and embarrasing him on TV.

I think that's the point too. They had lost 3 games in a row, much do to poor execution and failing to do the little things.
If he plays Mr. Awshucks on this, when does he really rip into a team.

It's not really fair for EE to be the tipping point for Narron's frustration, but someone was going to be at some point fair or not.

I think no matter what EE was at fault for, the team as a whole is served well by people paying a little more attention to detail.

I think this is actually a slightly calculated move in that it's on the heels of a three game losing streak, but still early in the season so it can get attention for a while now. Again it's all about the ends, not necessarily the means.
I'm pretty sure that's what Narron said to EE when he brought him into the office, don't worry about it, we'll move on.

Hoosier Red
04-12-2007, 09:52 PM
Also, I think its a faulty argument to say, every "mistake" from every player should have the exact same punishment.

Good managers know when to press the team as a whole, and when to tweak one individual player.
You see it in basketball more than other sports, but the great coaches like Pitino, Knight, and Coach K are renowned for yelling at one player (guilty or not) to get the point across to the entire team.

Not everyone who misjudges the flight of the ball is going to be benched, not everyone who doesn't bust it down the line is going to be yelled at. Not everyone who misses a sign is going to get a lecture, but at some point Narron's going to reach his boiling point again and there will be some repercussions.

The key is to know when and how to dole them out.
If you bench every player who makes a mistake, the players will be uptight and afraid to screw up.
If you always look the other way and say "well we'll get them next time" you'll have a team that plays sloppy and undisciplined.

UGADaddy
04-12-2007, 11:22 PM
Yeah, he sure showed that when he scored on a sac fly to the second baseman the other night.....:thumbdown

OMG! Let us all bow down to Junior! He scored on a SAC fly! Yay! Let's forget about the payroll that he's been tying up for eight years and all the injuries and letdowns for the past decade and celebrate The Kid for scoring on one SAC fly!

dougdirt
04-12-2007, 11:27 PM
OMG! Let us all bow down to Junior! He scored on a SAC fly! Yay! Let's forget about the payroll that he's been tying up for eight years and all the injuries and letdowns for the past decade and celebrate The Kid for scoring on one SAC fly!
If someone is going to get on him for 1 play, I will bring up 1 play. As for the payroll he tied up.... don't get me started on that because Ive already had enough arguing over stupid things today. Griffey didnt live up to YOUR expectations as a Red? Big deal. You are the only one who cares.

DTCromer
04-13-2007, 12:27 AM
They keep showing the pop out, and showing it, and dogging him... and giving major props to Jerry Narron.....


While I think its a big deal, i don't think its that big of a deal....

Good. I know I'm late into this thread, but these are the things that drive me absolutely crazy about this team. The little things they consistently fail to do.

Razor Shines
04-13-2007, 02:07 AM
OMG! Let us all bow down to Junior! He scored on a SAC fly! Yay! Let's forget about the payroll that he's been tying up for eight years and all the injuries and letdowns for the past decade and celebrate The Kid for scoring on one SAC fly!

What do payroll and injuries have to do with any of this? Oh, that's right you look to turn any situation into something you can blame Jr. for. My bad. Good points then I guess.

membengal
04-13-2007, 10:52 AM
Everyone done blowing this out of proportion and context yet? ESPN? Reds announcers? Talk show hosts? This board? Narron? Everyone got it out of their system? Just checking.

He lost a ball he thought was out of play. Period. When he located it he should have taken a few steps toward first. That Narron yanked him at that point is, I suspect, because he didn't realize EE had initially lost the ball. I hope this isn't the beginning of another of Narron's cycles where he mothballs EE. We have some precedent for that. I hope in everyone's rush to find a new favorite whipping boy on this team, EE isn't affected. A better course, from my view, would have been for Narron to deal with it after the game when he had all the facts. As it stands, the perception now is that EE dogs it. Which is simply BS of the first order. But that's where it is now. Which is unfortunate.

registerthis
04-13-2007, 11:07 AM
OMG! Let us all bow down to Junior!

Blah blah blah.

How's the watermelon smashing these days?

Scrap Irony
04-13-2007, 12:38 PM
jojo,

I think you're missing the main point here.

Did EdE think it was initially foul? Yes, obviously.

Did he then pick the ball up in fair territory and choose not to run, despite a window of opportunity of at least two seconds?

Yes.

The point isn't that he midjudged the foul; it's that he chose not to run after he knew the ball was fair.

jojo
04-13-2007, 12:46 PM
jojo,

I think you're missing the main point here.

Did EdE think it was initially foul? Yes, obviously.

Did he then pick the ball up in fair territory and choose not to run, despite a window of opportunity of at least two seconds?

Yes.

The point isn't that he midjudged the foul; it's that he chose not to run after he knew the ball was fair.

The point is that based on a split second, people are deciding he has an attitude problem.... sorry, that's not practical.

You're suggesting he should've went from thinking about the next pitch as he settles into the batters box to realizing he didn't actually hit the previous pitch out of play (and probably not believing his eyes as the defense settles under the ball) to full out sprinting at least a quarter of the way down the line to first...

come on... maybe in bazaro world.

Hey Meat
04-13-2007, 01:57 PM
Hopefully he doesn't do it again. The next example that will be made is when he gets a disgusted look or shakes his head when he is given a sign that he doesn't like, for instance the bunt sign.