Show 182: Amazing Comebacks Mark the Braves’ Week
The sweep of the Rockies, the comeback against the Phillies and the uninspired losses.
125 Responses to “Show 182: Amazing Comebacks Mark the Braves’ Week”
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 » Show All
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 » Show All
May 8th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
@47: Heard Fredi on the radio yesterday talking about how he considered putting Prado lower down in the lineup (keeping Chipper at 2, I think was his point) but that “it didn’t look right.” He said the lineup looked “longer” with Prado in the 2 and Chipper and Heyward down lower.
I 100% agree that Prado and Heyward should switch. And switch Chipper and Uggla, too.
That said, we’ve scored the most runs in the majors, so do you think Fredi will really make any changes like that in the foreseeable future?
May 8th, 2012 at 7:21 pm
Steve please tell me you are joking. Please. “It didn’t look right”????
Longer?
His logic leaves me utterly speechless.
I’ll tell you what will look right. Seeing him unemployed after the season. How did he get this far?
And I don’t care if we have scored the most runs baseball, we can improve.
May 8th, 2012 at 7:30 pm
I was listening to the Baseball Today podcast not too long ago and remember them talking about the epidemic of clueless managers in the big leagues. I mean there are so many horrible managers in the game right now. It makes you wonder.
May 8th, 2012 at 8:24 pm
Anyone think McCaan should maybe move down in the order?
May 8th, 2012 at 8:51 pm
I know he’s struggling, but aside from switching he and Uggla maybe in the 4/5, I want to ride it out longer with Mac. He’s been too good.
May 8th, 2012 at 10:00 pm
4 HR for Josh Hamilton TONIGHT.
May 8th, 2012 at 10:53 pm
Yawn. First place.
May 8th, 2012 at 10:58 pm
oops, percentage points will keep the Nats in first.
May 9th, 2012 at 8:25 am
Bub — Nats are ahead in percentage points, but we’re tied otherwise. I think the determining factor is games above .500 — both teams are 7 games over .500. Nice to be in first, even if it is a tie!
By the way, isn’t that a bit of a misnomer to say that a team with a record of 19-12 is 7 games above .500? Shouldn’t it be 3.5 games above .500, where .500 would be…um…15.5-15.5? or 15-15-1? Ah, forget it.
May 9th, 2012 at 8:50 am
Of the clueless managers in the MLB, I wonder how many are former players? Many have said that Chipper would make a great batting coach…so many players DO go on to manage, but I wonder if the old adage, “Those who can’t – teach” might be the way to go. Guys who would otherwise be superfans or umpires? I dunno.
May 9th, 2012 at 1:23 pm
I think the ABT trio would make fantastic managers but not individually. Thay’d have to manage as a team….via Skype.
May 9th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
I have to say that I sort of agree with Fredi. While he may not have his bestest hitters at the right spot, it really is a nice feeling to have J-Hey and Chipper coming up late in the lineup. It feels like a luxury. And do you guys really have issues with a top 3 of Bourn, Prado, Freeman? Then Mac, Uggs, Chipper? I know you can make a case for mixing things up, but since we are leading the NL in runs scored, isn’t that a case for not changing things?
May 9th, 2012 at 4:31 pm
We suck at day games
May 9th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
ham @ 62, the players in the lineup mean more than the order. And the Braves’ top six or seven hitters are all somewhat similar in terms of overall quality.
I do think Heyward should be near the top of the order simply because I think he has the best on-base abilities. There are some other changes I would prefer, but I don’t have any big issues with the batting order.
Could it cost the Braves the few extra runs that could make a difference at the end of the season? Sure. And I think we should worry about that when it comes to things like batting the guy with tremendous on-base potential so low in the order so often. But that worry can be overblown, and we are probably all guilty of it as baseball fans.
The bigger concern for me is what batting order says about a manager, and what he values in players, not necessarily how many runs one batting order may cost over another.
May 9th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
Last year batting McLouth second to start the season was just weird and I was more concerned over what it said about Fredi: That he thought the second spot should be about speed, hitting behind the runner, bunts, etc.
May 9th, 2012 at 5:23 pm
62: I like your use of the word “bestest”
May 9th, 2012 at 7:14 pm
Not the series I had hoped for.
May 9th, 2012 at 9:36 pm
David, I agree about the misnomer. I’ve thought about that before. It’s so weird when the games back from first place is so different from how many games above .500 the one team is versus the other.
May 9th, 2012 at 9:57 pm
What a weird series. We were hot coming in against an obviously inferior team. Yet our offense was flat and had enormous bad luck. The Braves hit more line drives right at defenders than I’ve seen in awhile. It’s usually fun when the Braves go to Wrigley but this series sucked.
May 9th, 2012 at 11:23 pm
My sister is a huge Cardinals fan. I want to crush them this weekend.
May 10th, 2012 at 6:42 am
Took in Avengers last night. Holy cow, great.
May 10th, 2012 at 8:46 pm
All – check out Mike’s new blog. It’s about the Bryce Harper beaning and old school baseball.
May 10th, 2012 at 10:42 pm
Oh, the Hawks lost a first round series again? Yawn
May 11th, 2012 at 10:12 am
David “isn’t that a bit of a misnomer to say that a team with a record of 19-12 is 7 games above .500? Shouldn’t it be 3.5 games above .500, where .500 would be…um…15.5-15.5?”
If we are 19-12, how many games must we lose to be a .500 team? 7. Thats why we say 7 games over .500
May 11th, 2012 at 11:34 pm
I have little confidence in the outcome here.