Espn has Salazar as the starter tomorrow.HitsRus;1469965 wrote:I heard it's Bauer...and that he may get a chance to stick in the rotation.
I'm in your corner on this debate. However....he plays wayyyy to shallow in centerfield and needs to track backwards at least 10 feet. Lofton catches those balls including Victor's drive because he played the right depth. Bourn has been burned too many times on balls that would have been caught simply by playing where he should.Crimson streak;1470047 wrote:We must not have been watching the same game then. Both those balls were smoked. Victor's in extra innings Bourn was plying in a bit with the runner on 2nd and he got a pretty good jump on it and almost ran it down. I don't think anyone gets to that ball in the majors except for maybe mike trout. Peraltas was a line shot
Footwedge;1470534 wrote:I'm in your corner on this debate. However....he plays wayyyy to shallow in centerfield and needs to track backwards at least 10 feet. Lofton catches those balls including Victor's drive because he played the right depth. Bourn has been burned too many times on balls that would have been caught simply by playing where he should.
Actually, this was my point in my initial post. I didn't say he played too shallow, but I did say his angles are all wrong. Also, another point I made was that IMO, he shouldn't be leading off. In this role a player has to see as many pitches as he can to allow those hitting behind him to see what the pitcher's got on that particular night. He's not selective, he's over anxious, and he doesn't make solid contact when he does actually hit the ball. Again, jmo.Footwedge;1470534 wrote:I'm in your corner on this debate. However....he plays wayyyy to shallow in centerfield and needs to track backwards at least 10 feet. Lofton catches those balls including Victor's drive because he played the right depth. Bourn has been burned too many times on balls that would have been caught simply by playing where he should.
vball10set;1470546 wrote:Actually, this was my point in my initial post. I didn't say he played too shallow, but I did say his angles are all wrong. Also, another point I made was that IMO, he shouldn't be leading off. In this role a player has to see as many pitches as he can to allow those hitting behind him to see what the pitcher's got on that particular night. He's not selective, he's over anxious, and he doesn't make solid contact when he does actually hit the ball. Again, jmo.
Footwedge;1470534 wrote:I'm in your corner on this debate. However....he plays wayyyy to shallow in centerfield and needs to track backwards at least 10 feet. Lofton catches those balls including Victor's drive because he played the right depth. Bourn has been burned too many times on balls that would have been caught simply by playing where he should.
I was talking about him leading off the game when discussing taking a pitcher deep into the count. However, since a leadoff hitter has just as many, if not more, AB's than any other hitter, I added "He's not selective, he's over anxious, and he doesn't make solid contact when he does actually hit the ball". My opinion.TBone14;1470554 wrote:I disagree with this premise. He only really hits leadoff once a game on average. So when he comes up in the 3rd inning with a one out and a runner on first, you want him taking a bunch of pitches so everyone can see what the pitcher has that night? I don't care how many pitches anybody sees, what I care about is good at bats and getting on base. You can't just spot a guy a strike every at bat. If you never swing at the first pitch...the pitchers know that and you start every AB down 0-1 in the count.
The more I thought about it after I posted it, I agree that Brantley should stay put. I still would like to see someone else (Stubbs?) in the leadoff role.Laley23;1470556 wrote:Why would we move the guy who is 5th in the league in hitting with RISP to leadoff and out of a run producing spot in the order (5th)???
And while Brantley sees more pitches per AB, he doesnt get on base any more than Bourn.
They have the same average, same OBP, Brantley has a few more walks (9) in more games (23), Brantley does K a lot less but Bourn is the best base-stealer we have (Stubbs is close).
Brantley has more power (not just HR power), so I would not want to see him switched with Bourn.
Not saying that Brantley is a bad guy to hit leadoff, but Bourn is a bad guy to hit elsewhere (with Stubbs at 9) and is our best leadoff option in the team, imo.
Thats fair.vball10set;1470560 wrote:The more I thought about it after I posted it, I agree that Brantley should stay put. I still would like to see someone else (Stubbs?) in the leadoff role.
Laley23;1470556 wrote:Why would we move the guy who is 5th in the league in hitting with RISP to leadoff and out of a run producing spot in the order (5th)???
And while Brantley sees more pitches per AB, he doesnt get on base any more than Bourn.
They have the same average, same OBP, Brantley has a few more walks (9) in more games (23), Brantley does K a lot less but Bourn is the best base-stealer we have (Stubbs is close).
Brantley has more power (not just HR power), so I would not want to see him switched with Bourn.
Not saying that Brantley is a bad guy to hit leadoff, but Bourn is a bad guy to hit elsewhere (with Stubbs at 9) and is our best leadoff option in the team, imo.
???Ironman92;1470579 wrote:Lol.....we'll you could have a guy with a .260 OB% batting 2nd ever freaking game.
