6/28 Because somebody had to do it - Wacha vs. Strickling

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
41,635
Hmmm…..but it was a sticking point in the Story negotiations, right?

i guess a Yankee could really fight the beard thing too and file a grievance, too.

How many have?

I don’t really give a crap about a players personal opinions or research or whatever, but It’s about establishing team goals and doing what’s best for the team and I can’t figure out why Cora couldn’t get the team on the same page about this; last year or this year.

Hopefully it doesn’t matter. But last year came down to one game, right?
Yes. But also different situations.
Story was a FA and did not have to sign here. I have a feeling that many teams had that as a requirement for any FA they signed in the off-season.

Houck is under contract. Thus why punishing him (outside of being on the restricted list) or forcing him to get the vaccine would instantly draw a grievance from the union.

Re the yankees and the beard.
Yes I believe one could file a grievance if one wanted to. (Say someone who grows a beard for religious reasons (or other personal reasons) (like someone who is orthodox Jew)
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
5,250
Ok, sure. Have any players filed a grievance yet over the Yankees beard thing (it’s been going on at least a few decades, right) or over not being called up over vaccines? I mean, a Yankee player could make a huge deal about how unfair the shaving thing is right? Would you really want a guy who prioritizes facial hair over a team rule on the team, though?
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
78,135
Oregon
As awful as this was, as frustrated as I am with players who refuse to get vaccinated, and as much as having Houck tonight would have given them a better chance to win ... there's no guarantee they would have won had he been there and pitched.

It sucks that the Red Sox have to deal with this, and he deserves the scorn heaped upon him, but let's not make the leap to they lost because he wasn't there. They could have lost with him there as well.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
41,635
Ok, sure. Have any players filed a grievance yet over the Yankees beard thing (it’s been going on at least a few decades, right) or over not being called up over vaccines? I mean, a Yankee player could make a huge deal about how unfair the shaving thing is right? Would you really want a guy who prioritizes facial hair over a team rule on the team, though?
The reds had a facial hair policy similar to NYY until 1999 when Greg Vaughn defied the rule and dared the reds to punish him.
They (Cin) ended up scraping the rule because of him
But Vaughn’s goatee changed the Reds forever when he came to camp and broke the club’s longstanding policy against facial hair. He told owner Marge Schott he didn’t want to shave and she surprisingly acquiesced.
“Greg Vaughn came along and pretty much defied that [rule],” Reds Hall of Fame executive director Rick Walls said. “He was a dominant player with the Reds that year. He helped the team have one of the best seasons they’ve had in a while. That was pretty much the end of it after that.”
When the Red Stockings were founded in 1869 as baseball’s first professional franchise, nearly every player had facial hair. By the turn of the 20th century and keeping with the changing times, an unofficial clean-shaven policy took hold in Cincinnati.
In 1967, as the times were a changin’ again with hippie culture and long hair and beards becoming popular, the Reds went completely against the grain. That unofficial no facial hair policy became very official under general manager Bob Howsam and remained well after his departure -- for 32 years until Vaughn’s arrival.
https://www.mlb.com/news/greg-vaughn-reds-facial-hair-policy
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
33,970
AZ
I was going to be mean and bring that post back up ... but why deny you the joy of doing it yourself?
Very considerate. I have an uncanny way of being very specifically and decisively wrong in a variety of contexts.
 

SoxInTheMist

lurker
Jul 18, 2005
201
Woodinville, WA
I posted twice in the game thread. Post game. Pretty reasonable in my opinion. Unlike many other posts.

I’m vaccinated, but it just seems odd to me to have so much vitriol towards someone who chooses not to be.
because it's not just a decision that affects only yourself. why can't you see that? it's a selfish decision that affects others.
 

soxin6

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
5,472
Huntington Beach, CA
As awful as this was, as frustrated as I am with players who refuse to get vaccinated, and as much as having Houck tonight would have given them a better chance to win ... there's no guarantee they would have won had he been there and pitched.

It sucks that the Red Sox have to deal with this, and he deserves the scorn heaped upon him, but let's not make the leap to they lost because he wasn't there. They could have lost with him there as well.
It is absolutely true that the Sox could have lost this game with Houck out there in the ninth, but their chances of winning were about a million times higher with Houck on the mound instead of Danish and Robles. Once Danish took the mound in the ninth, no one thought the Sox would hold on.
 

DisgruntledSoxFan77

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2015
1,548
Quincy
I posted twice in the game thread. Post game. Pretty reasonable in my opinion. Unlike many other posts.

I’m vaccinated, but it just seems odd to me to have so much vitriol towards someone who chooses not to be.
I’ll take one for the team here:

The vitriol is because his decision directly cost us a fucking game against a division rival. What is so hard to understand??
 

normstalls

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 15, 2004
4,128
I’ll take one for the team here:

The vitriol is because his decision directly cost us a fucking game against a division rival. What is so hard to understand??
Sports are more important than health/body/life decisions?

wow. I’m as big a Sox fan as there is on this board. Trust me. But that is just a ridiculous thought process.You might need to reconsider your priorities.
(Also, We can’t definitively say his decision cost us anything)
 

DisgruntledSoxFan77

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2015
1,548
Quincy
Sports are more important than health/body/life decisions?

wow. I’m as big a Sox fan as there is on this board. Trust me. But that is just a ridiculous thought process.You might need to reconsider your priorities.
(Also, We can’t definitively say his decision cost us anything)
The vast majority of his teammates (along with what percentage of the “regular population”?) has gotten the vaccine. He’s free to continue to refuse to get one, and we’re free to continue to call him out for being a selfish know-it-all asshole. What did you expect to happen in this instance? They were gonna blow a game he should have been pitching in and we were going to applaud his stance? We’re fans. It’s what we do
 
Last edited:

pk1627

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 24, 2003
2,104
Cambridge
Well I guess the good news is the team deliberately shorts itself only one more game (tonight) until October.

I disagree with Houck’s decision but this is a team sport. Last year the team held on through all sorts of adversity. They need to do so again.
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
34,791
Pioneer Valley
Two with Danish is stupid. Strahm is fine against righties. And I'd steal a couple more outs from Schreiber. Use your assets.
Last series, I inferred that Cora was saving Schreiber for Toronto. I understand why he used him in the seventh. But as he pitches so few per inning, I think he could have gone three. I would have liked to have seen how that worked out. I don't think he would be "Proctored" by one game. On the other hand, I am always aware that Cora et al know more about their guys than I do. But what a miserable team it is, so dependent on a couple of good relievers that one of them electing to be an idiot puts the kibosh on an important series.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
699
Even though Houck does play a role in this due to his refusal to get vaccinated, it is important to also acknowledge Cora's role in this. First off he needs to stop pinch hitting Dalbec for Franchy against lefties. Franchy does not have enough at bats against lefties in his career to determine if he is able to hit them or not. Based on a small sample size this season he seems to have done well against lefties. If the game had gone into extras, I would have preferred Franchy come up rather then see Dalbec flail away. Lastly Strahm should have been in. Perhaps the Blue Jays hit lefties well, but everybody hits Danish and Robles well. I am not sure if there is any other manager that would have wanted to have Danish facing Springer over Strahm facing Springer. To be clear I like Cora and there are not many managers that I would pick over him, but he does make some bone headed decisions from time to time.
 

moretsyndrome

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 24, 2006
1,500
Pawtucket
Even though Houck does play a role in this due to his refusal to get vaccinated, it is important to also acknowledge Cora's role in this. First off he needs to stop pinch hitting Dalbec for Franchy against lefties. Franchy does not have enough at bats against lefties in his career to determine if he is able to hit them or not. Based on a small sample size this season he seems to have done well against lefties. If the game had gone into extras, I would have preferred Franchy come up rather then see Dalbec flail away. Lastly Strahm should have been in. Perhaps the Blue Jays hit lefties well, but everybody hits Danish and Robles well. I am not sure if there is any other manager that would have wanted to have Danish facing Springer over Strahm facing Springer. To be clear I like Cora and there are not many managers that I would pick over him, but he does make some bone headed decisions from time to time.
I think you've got your complaints reversed. Certainly, Dalbec's BB didn't contribute to this loss, and there's a negligible difference in expected outcome between letting him hit there vs Franchy. I don't see the complaint on that one unless it's trying to get a better long-term view on Franchy's ability to hit LHP.

The bullpen, on the other hand, was just weird. I know there are a million things going on behind the scenes that we're not aware of and probably influenced the bullpen management last night. But still, it was just weird, and unlucky at the same time. Many key Toronto hits were not well-struck balls at all, including the last one.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
699
I think you've got your complaints reversed. Certainly, Dalbec's BB didn't contribute to this loss, and there's a negligible difference in expected outcome between letting him hit there vs Franchy. I don't see the complaint on that one unless it's trying to get a better long-term view on Franchy's ability to hit LHP.

The bullpen, on the other hand, was just weird. I know there are a million things going on behind the scenes that we're not aware of and probably influenced the bullpen management last night. But still, it was just weird, and unlucky at the same time. Many key Toronto hits were not well-struck balls at all, including the last one.
I think getting a better view of Franchy's ability to hit LHP is what i was going for. it seems based on how hard Franchy has been hitting the ball that he is posed to break out and he could possibly be a long term piece for this team. Limiting what pitchers he can face based on a small sample size does not seem smart.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
31,462
When he skipped the four game series in April, he reportedly lost a total of $15,315.
Did he essentially lose his rotation spot after not going to Toronto the first trip north? Will Cora bump him out of the closer role now?
 

catsooey

lurker
Jun 27, 2019
100
Sorry, I know this is yesterdays thread but I think the blame for these blown saves falls on Chaim and the front office. They didn’t put together a complete team. I’m not advocating for any one particular philosophy for team building, but they needed a solid closer and a stronger bullpen this year and they didn’t do it, for whatever reason. To me it seems like they’re throwing whoever they can get within a bargain basement price range out there and seeing who sticks. And they’ve had some hits, but to me you need to make sure you’ve got reliable players that have a good chance of helping you win. This “wait and see” approach cost them the game last night imo, not Houck’s vaccination status.