Pearly Gates is...Quick ReferenceRecent postsLinksRichard's other blog:Hall Of Fame:
The "Real" Media:
Halosphere:
Minor League Affiliates:
Other Baseball Blogs:
Other Random Crap (in a good way):
Soccer:Archive
Blog*Spot ArchivesContactRichard Ceccarelli Josh Mandir |
Friday, April 30, 2004Olney and the productive outEveryone is chiming in on this Buster Olney thing, so I'm not going to waste your time by repeating what much smarter bloggers have already said. I do have one comment however. He lists the Angels and the Marlins as the epitome of "small ball" teams. I'm not quite sure Olney should bring the Angels into his little club. I'm not saying the Angels don't use the "productive outs" theory, because they do. I'm saying that the offence isn't necessarily built for, nor does it fit into, Olney's little theory. I get on Mike Scioscia a lot about his love of the small ball style of play, but I must admit he uses it fairly effectively most of the time. I have no problem with Darin Erstad or David Eckstein moving runners along because, quite frankly, that's all they're good for. I'm convinced that if Erstad isn't consciously trying to hit the ball to the right side with a runner on, he'd ground into a double play every time. He's that bad. "Productive Outs" are a good thing when your only other option is an out. Other then that, the Angels appear to have a good understanding of what makes an offence go. Now if Scioscia had his way I'm pretty sure everyone in the lineup would be moving runners along the entire game. But luckily for us, the middle of the lineup is so good it seems to have convinced him to take a more hands-off approach. All that matters is that what the Angels do is smart, whether they intend for it to be or not. We'll have a real problem when Vlad starts trying to hit behind the runners... |
