Things Marty Loves to Complain about

[cumberlandreds]

When the Reds get on a losing jag like this, the Brennamen become unlistenable. I've got the Extra Innings package, so for the next few days I'll be tuning in to Kuiper and Krukow, no contest. Those guys are quality.

Same here. I have the MLBTV package and will always listen to the Giants announcers over just about anyone not named Vin Scully. On MLBTV you can do the audio overlay with radio too. Jon Miller is the Giants PBP man on radio and is excellent too. I think I will listen to him this week.
Like others said if Marty sticks to just PBP he is still very good. But he comes off as a jerk,grumpy old man when starts giving his opinion on just abut anything. That's when I turn him off. He didn't used to be that way at all. I think all of those losing seasons along with losing Nuxhall as a side kick made him bitter for whatever reason.
As for players trying to lift a fly ball for a sac fly, I do think some try to do it. I can remember years ago Pete Rose saying he would try to upper cut his swing when he was in sac fly situation. But I do think more than anything it depends on the pitch and where its located if they are able to get enough lift and distance for a SF.

[Hoosier Red]

I don't understand this. Power guys are trying to hit home runs. Line drive guys are trying to hit line drives and slap hitting guys are just punching the ball wherever they can. I don't know of any hitter who's aim is to loft a ball into the outfield where somebody can run under it.

I think either I explained it poorly or you're over complicating it. It's not like power guys simply choose to hit home runs. The home run is a result of getting a pitch in your zone and squaring the barrel on ball. Same with any hard hit ball, it's just a matter of trajectory.

Going to the plate looking specifically to "hit a sac fly" would be shooting yourself in the foot like we've already discussed. You may miss a pitch that you can actually hit more sharply with that approach. But, recognizing a pitch that will allow to you to get the runner in via sac fly and taking advantage of that is different.

You don't always get a pitch to drive in high level baseball. Especially in scoring situations. Not having to completely square it up and still get the run in is what I'm preaching.

It's my impression that the majority of the time where a batter doesn't square a ball up, he either hits a pop fly or a dribbler. Hitting the ball 250-300 feet in the air is no easy task.
If a hitter was acute enough to a)recognize a pitch that he might not be "good enough to drive" but was good enough to hit a lazy fly ball, deep enough to score a runner and b)skilled enough to do it consistently. He'd again be the greatest hitter in history.

What you're missing here is that sacrifice fly is a byproduct of a good hitter finding pitches they can drive and swinging well enough to at least hit the ball into the outfield. Of course sometimes hitters get fooled on what they think is a good enough pitch to drive, and they end up hitting a lazy fly ball. If a runner is on third base, mission accomplished. Sometimes a hitter picks the correct pitch, but just gets under it a little bit. Again, mission accomplished.

But if he swings at a pitch that he thinks he can lift to the outfield if he executes it exactly right, he'll usually end up popping out or grounding out.

[Raisor]

If you're skilled enough to hit a sac fly whenever you want you should still be trying to hit it out of the park.

Sac flies should always be failed home runs

[TSJ55]

If you're skilled enough to hit a sac fly whenever you want you should still be trying to hit it out of the park.

Sac flies should always be failed home runs

No. It takes less contact to hit a sac fly than to hit a home run. More margin for error. Failed home runs are strike outs. Which are completely useless in that situation.

Also, it's not "whenever you want", nor have I made that argument.

Last time for this as I realize we'ell never get anywhere:

If the first hittable pitch can be lifted into the outfield, do that, don't wait.

If the first hittable pitch is low and inside, and you can hit a double down the line, by all means, do that, but don't pass up a sac fly opportunity waiting for another opportunity that might not come along.

[LoganBuck]

If you're skilled enough to hit a sac fly whenever you want you should still be trying to hit it out of the park.

Sac flies should always be failed home runs

Some players hit sac flies to cover up their steroid use. Everybody knows that.

[dougdirt]

No. It takes less contact to hit a sac fly than to hit a home run. More margin for error. Failed home runs are strike outs. Which are completely useless in that situation.

Also, it's not "whenever you want", nor have I made that argument.

Last time for this as I realize we'ell never get anywhere:

If the first hittable pitch can be lifted into the outfield, do that, don't wait.

If the first hittable pitch is low and inside, and you can hit a double down the line, by all means, do that, but don't pass up a sac fly opportunity waiting for another opportunity that might not come along.

Failed home runs can also be triples, doubles, singles, sac flies, ground ball outs, line drive outs or errors.

Swinging at "a liftable" ball can result in a pop up. Try to get a hit if they throw you strikes. Accept a sac fly if it happens, but actively trying for one is stupid.

[TSJ55]

Failed home runs can also be triples, doubles, singles, sac flies, ground ball outs, line drive outs or errors.

Swinging at "a liftable" ball can result in a pop up. Try to get a hit if they throw you strikes. Accept a sac fly if it happens, but actively trying for one is stupid.

Been waiting for this self-righteous type of comment. Good work keeping it under wraps this long.

[RollyInRaleigh]

Stupid?

[CySeymour]

Been waiting for this self-righteous type of comment. Good work keeping it under wraps this long.

How was what Doug said "self-rightous?" If anything, you're the one coming off as such.

[dougdirt]

Been waiting for this self-righteous type of comment. Good work keeping it under wraps this long.

It isn't self-righteous. Purposely trying to make an out isn't smart. I can't see how anyone can argue that a failure, and making an out is absolutely a failure in the game of baseball, is the wrong move if you are purposefully trying to do it. Baseball is a game where failure happens more than it doesn't. A sac fly is a failure to do something better and more productive. Every player in the history of the game would rather have a single than a sac fly. All of them. A sac fly is a failure with a beneficial side to it, but no one should be actively trying for it. Try for the hit, accept that if you fail there could be a chance that something good could still be a by product.

Here is my question: Why is a sac fly not an official at bat, but if someone hits a groundball to the right side and the run scores, it is? It is like someone decided that you could purposefully hit a fly ball 275 feet but you couldn't purposefully hit a groundball to the right side. If a sac fly was counted as an at bat like the groundball to the right side, would people still complain about not having enough of them or saying they were successful plate appearances?

[REDREAD]

Don't forget every time a player strikes out 4 times, Marty awards him the "golden sombrero".

I got to hear Welsh doing play-by-play on the radio for the first time ever and was amazed at how good he actually is. He needs some polish, but overall it was an enjoyable listen. Of course I'd heard him on TV but it isn't the same because he's doing color with Thom handling PBP.

Yea, too bad we can't clone Welsh and have him on radio and TV. He's clearly the best announcer, IMO. Not only does he broadcast good, but Marty is much better behaved. Jim Kelch also to a lesser degree helps control Marty's rants.. Brantley and Thom will egg Marty on (or at least let the rant continue to go on)..

Honestly, I wonder. If Marty had not been partnered with Joe the majority of his career, I think Marty's ugly side would've come out a lot earlier and he wouldn't be such a legend now.

Also, last night, Marty made a comment that Joey Votto was on pace for something like 76 RBIs and "That's not getting it done"
I actually think RBI can be useful in some context, but people like Marty give the RBI a bad name.. People like Marty are the reason the stat-leaning people hate RBI so much.

[TSJ55]

Is that right Seymour? Without quoting myself I'm quite certain I asked Raisor to teach me something as well as commented to someone else about wanting to learn by other than "JUST" by playing the game.

If that's "self righteous" our definitions differ.

[CySeymour]

Is that right Seymour? Without quoting myself I'm quite certain I asked Raisor to teach me something as well as commented to someone else about wanting to learn by other than "JUST" by playing the game.

If that's "self righteous" our definitions differ.

Doug was sticking to his opinion, so he gets called self rightous. I pointed out that by sticking to yours, you are doing the same thing. Hey, good for you for not backing off your belief, I respect that. But don't call someone out for doing the same thing.

[dougdirt]

Stupid?

Yes, stupid.

Don't purposefully try to make outs. It is bad business. There is very little upside with such a move. If it happens as a side effect of trying to do something better, then awesome. But don't go up there trying to purposefully make an out. A success is still a failure in that situation. The failure has a side benefit to it, but of all of the outcomes you could have had, it was what, 5th or 6th best and you were trying to do that on purpose? Doesn't add up. The 1st through 4th or 5th other better options you could try for may all still accomplish the same goal, even if you fail at them. But at least try for them. A grounder to the right side still gets the job done most of the time. You may wind up hitting a sac fly as a result of trying to hit the ball hard and with authority going for a base hit. Go for options 1-4/5. Not option 5 or 6.

[TSJ55]

Doug was sticking to his opinion, so he gets called self rightous. I pointed out that by sticking to yours, you are doing the same thing. Hey, good for you for not backing off your belief, I respect that. But don't call someone out for doing the same thing.

No, Doug gets called self righteous for calling my opinion "stupid" because it doesn't line up with his. I'm sure he appreciates you sticking up for him but he's pretty smart and grown man to boot. My bet is he can handle it.