It never gets old - reflections on Oct 17-20, 2004

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
It's fun to think about the contributions of each player on the playoff roster (alphabetical order):

Arroyo: After getting absolutely hammered in Game 3, came on to spell Foulke in the 10th inning of Game 5. Struck out A-Rod and Gary Sheffield.

Bellhorn: Was batting 0.080 for the playoffs after Game 4. In Game 6, hit into an inning ending double play in the 2nd with the bases loaded. But then hit the 3-run shot off nemesis John Lieber in Game 6. His HR in Game 7 was icing on the cake.

Cabrera: The Sox were down 2-0 in the 5th of Game 4 against El Duque when Cabrera drove in the team's first run, and subsequently scored a go-ahead run on Ortiz's single. Vital contribution given the margin of error at the time. And no fielding errors.

Damon: Went 3 for 29 (0.103) in the first 6 games. Got caught stealing in the bottom of the 9th of Game 5. Popped up a bunt in the 11th with 2 on and none out. Got thrown out at the plate in Game 7. But drew a key walk in the 14th of Game 5, scoring the winning run on Ortiz's walk off hit. And, of course, the salami.

Embree: Like the rest of the staff, got whacked in Game 3. But got some big outs (7 of them) in extra innings of Games 4 and 5.

Foulke: 5 of the highest leverage scoreless innings in 3 consecutive days. Although he owes a big drink to the short wall in Fenway's right field (Tony Clark)

Kapler: Not much impact, but did the job in his pinch running and hitting appearances, and in the field in relief.

Leskanic: Came on with the bases loaded in the 11th of Game 4, got Bernie Williams to fly out. Struck out Miguel Cairo with the final pitch of his career.

Derek Lowe: Two days rest. 'Nuff said.

Pedro: He wasn't anywhere close to vintage PEDRO. But he did keep things in control in his Game 5 start, his final at Fenway. And his Game 7 appearance gave us all something to talk about.

Mendoza: Someone had to pitch those 2 innings in those 2 blowout losses. That's about all I can say about the embedded Yankee.

Mientkiewicz: It wasn't his fault that he got stranded on 3rd in the 10th inning of Game 5. He was put in for defensive reasons, and did the job.

Millar: The WALK(!) was one his team leading 5 that series. Also scored the first Red Sox run in Game 6.

Mirabelli: After Wakefield sacrificed his planned Game 4 start, there was not much role for Mirabelli beyond 1 meaningless at-bat in Game 3. But he did catch Wake in Game 1 of the World Series, so honorable mention is noted.

Mueller: In addition to THE SINGLE(!!), he scored the first Red Sox run that same game.

Myers: Struck out the dangerous Matsui to lead off the 11th of Game 5. We'll take it.

Nixon: Score the 10th and final Red Sox run in Game 7. His main contributions that series were otherwise with his defense. And he won Game 4 of the World Series.

Papi: Costly pop fly in the 9th of Game 4. And a big base running blunder in the 12th of Game 5. But I guess he's forgiven....

Manny: His double in Game 2 was his only extra base hit. He didn't drive in a single run all series. But he got on base (0.400) to keep innings alive, and he scored on Papi's walk-off HR.

Pokey Reese: Didn't have a lot to do, but did give us peace of mind in the late innings.

Dave Roberts: Did not have an official at bat. But I guess he did something....

Schilling: Hard to believe, but he was a hero around these parts at one time.

Timlin: Would have been hard to see him get pinned with the loss in Game 4, so I really hope he buys Dave Roberts dinner and drinks whenever they're in the same town. But got some key outs in Game 5 despite struggling a bit. And consumed 5 and two-thirds innings.

Varitek: That sac fly against Mariano in Game 5 gets overshadowed by the WALK, the STEAL, the SINGLE, but was likely just as important to the series outcome.

Wakefield: The Sox don't win the series without those 3 innings in Game 5, despite the fact that they left Varitek in tears.
 

jaytftwofive

New Member
Jan 20, 2013
1,182
Drexel Hill Pa.
I think the biggest play that could have ended it for the Sox was Tony Clarke's ground rule double off Foulke in the 9th in Game 5. How close by a few inches or less then a foot that was from hitting the wall. If that stays in Sierra scores easily. But, thank God he had to stay at third and Kieth got the next batter out for the third out. Remember Kapler pointing at the wall with his glove to the ump? If that stays fair, Yanks take a one run lead and we probably lose in 5. Right then I said.....Wow!!! We may pull this series out. Maybe the biggest play of the series, like Roberts steal, Mueller's hit and Trots hit in game 5.
 

jaytftwofive

New Member
Jan 20, 2013
1,182
Drexel Hill Pa.
It's fun to think about the contributions of each player on the playoff roster (alphabetical order):

Arroyo: After getting absolutely hammered in Game 3, came on to spell Foulke in the 10th inning of Game 5. Struck out A-Rod and Gary Sheffield.

Bellhorn: Was batting 0.080 for the playoffs after Game 4. In Game 6, hit into an inning ending double play in the 2nd with the bases loaded. But then hit the 3-run shot off nemesis John Lieber in Game 6. His HR in Game 7 was icing on the cake.

Cabrera: The Sox were down 2-0 in the 5th of Game 4 against El Duque when Cabrera drove in the team's first run, and subsequently scored a go-ahead run on Ortiz's single. Vital contribution given the margin of error at the time. And no fielding errors.

Damon: Went 3 for 29 (0.103) in the first 6 games. Got caught stealing in the bottom of the 9th of Game 5. Popped up a bunt in the 11th with 2 on and none out. Got thrown out at the plate in Game 7. But drew a key walk in the 14th of Game 5, scoring the winning run on Ortiz's walk off hit. And, of course, the salami.

Embree: Like the rest of the staff, got whacked in Game 3. But got some big outs (7 of them) in extra innings of Games 4 and 5.

Foulke: 5 of the highest leverage scoreless innings in 3 consecutive days. Although he owes a big drink to the short wall in Fenway's right field (Tony Clark)

Kapler: Not much impact, but did the job in his pinch running and hitting appearances, and in the field in relief.

Leskanic: Came on with the bases loaded in the 11th of Game 4, got Bernie Williams to fly out. Struck out Miguel Cairo with the final pitch of his career.

Derek Lowe: Two days rest. 'Nuff said.

Pedro: He wasn't anywhere close to vintage PEDRO. But he did keep things in control in his Game 5 start, his final at Fenway. And his Game 7 appearance gave us all something to talk about.

Mendoza: Someone had to pitch those 2 innings in those 2 blowout losses. That's about all I can say about the embedded Yankee.

Mientkiewicz: It wasn't his fault that he got stranded on 3rd in the 10th inning of Game 5. He was put in for defensive reasons, and did the job.

Millar: The WALK(!) was one his team leading 5 that series. Also scored the first Red Sox run in Game 6.

Mirabelli: After Wakefield sacrificed his planned Game 4 start, there was not much role for Mirabelli beyond 1 meaningless at-bat in Game 3. But he did catch Wake in Game 1 of the World Series, so honorable mention is noted.

Mueller: In addition to THE SINGLE(!!), he scored the first Red Sox run that same game.

Myers: Struck out the dangerous Matsui to lead off the 11th of Game 5. We'll take it.

Nixon: Score the 10th and final Red Sox run in Game 7. His main contributions that series were otherwise with his defense. And he won Game 4 of the World Series.

Papi: Costly pop fly in the 9th of Game 4. And a big base running blunder in the 12th of Game 5. But I guess he's forgiven....

Manny: His double in Game 2 was his only extra base hit. He didn't drive in a single run all series. But he got on base (0.400) to keep innings alive, and he scored on Papi's walk-off HR.

Pokey Reese: Didn't have a lot to do, but did give us peace of mind in the late innings.

Dave Roberts: Did not have an official at bat. But I guess he did something....

Schilling: Hard to believe, but he was a hero around these parts at one time.

Timlin: Would have been hard to see him get pinned with the loss in Game 4, so I really hope he buys Dave Roberts dinner and drinks whenever they're in the same town. But got some key outs in Game 5 despite struggling a bit. And consumed 5 and two-thirds innings.

Varitek: That sac fly against Mariano in Game 5 gets overshadowed by the WALK, the STEAL, the SINGLE, but was likely just as important to the series outcome.

Wakefield: The Sox don't win the series without those 3 innings in Game 5, despite the fact that they left Varitek in tears.
If Clarkes ground rule double stays fair......I think the Sox lose that game and the series obviously. Maybe the most important play of series.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
I was expecting this to be the plan.... and was perpetually in shock when it never happened. I was watching this game at my local pub in Brooklyn- mix of good natured Yankee and Sox fans (and Yankee hating Mets fans) and EVERYONE there was asking the same question every time any MFY batter was up. Did Torre think it was unpolite or something?
1--Most MLB players can't bunt. AL sluggers are likely worse than most. Schilling/Tek could have switched the strategy up on pitches. I think in the end they'd end up giving away too many outs.
2--If you thought Schilling was hampered enough to want to do this, you'd also likely want guys in that lineup swinging away.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
Might be cliche, but I'd say when they ruled Arod out on the slap play. That never happened back in those days (but did twice that night) and I started to believe maybe they would come back. I felt the Yankee fans were cracking when they littered the field with crap later in that inning
Agreed 100%

And, Yankee fans don't get nearly enough grief for what spoiled brats they acted like.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
I was expecting this to be the plan.... and was perpetually in shock when it never happened. I was watching this game at my local pub in Brooklyn- mix of good natured Yankee and Sox fans (and Yankee hating Mets fans) and EVERYONE there was asking the same question every time any MFY batter was up. Did Torre think it was unpolite or something?
1--Most MLB players can't bunt. AL sluggers are likely worse than most. Schilling/Tek could have switched the strategy up on pitches. I think in the end they'd end up giving away too many outs.
2--If you thought Schilling was hampered enough to want to do this, you'd also likely want guys in that lineup swinging away.
Bunting opportunities were actually few and far between. Only Jeter and Cairo were any good at bunting; A-Rod was earlier in his career, but his last sacrifice hit was long since past.

First 2 innings were the time to see what Schilling had. After all, nobody knew if the impromptu surgery was going to work.

Cairo hit a 2 out double in the 3rd, which took away any bunting opportunity for Jeter.

In the 4th, A-Rod and Sheffield led off with singles. Definitely do not want Matsui, Williams, or Posada bunting in that circumstance, especially down by 4 runs.

In the 5th, the Yankees were still down 4. Neither Sierra nor Clark can bunt, and there were already 2 outs by the time Cairo stepped to the plate.

In the 6th, Jeter probably should have bunted to start the inning. Not sure they expected Schilling to still be in the game.

In the 7th, they chipped away with the Williams HR. But, again, they did not have anyone that could bunt due up.

I believe Torre also thought, rightfully, that the Sox bullpen was completely gassed, and so getting Schilling out of the game by the 5th or 6th was going to be their strategy. Not a bad idea, either. There was little chance that Schilling would have been allowed to go more than 100 pitches, and even 80 may have been a reasonable guess as an upper limit at the time. Schilling was able to keep the Yankee batters from working the count, however.

In a way, their strategy almost worked. They got to the bullpen in the 8th, and were facing Arroyo, a matchup that favored the Yankees at the time. But then came the slap play. And the Yankees were able to draw 2 walks from Foulke in the 9th, bringing the winning run to the plate. If Schilling is only able to go 6 instead of 7, it could have been a very different outcome. Instead, the Yankees essentially ran out of outs.

Bunts can give up outs very quickly. One also needs a series of well placed bunts for it to work. Too soft and Varitek makes an easy play. Too hard, and even a hobbled Schilling can make a play just off the mound Bunting it down 3rd just pulls Mueller off the bag but otherwise doesn't accomplish much. Perhaps bunting down first pulls Millar off the bag, but it's likely that Bellhorn was instructed to cover first in that situation. Then there's the chance of popping up the bunt, which often leads to a double play if there's anyone on base. Bunts aren't easy.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
When the Slappy play got overturned, that's when I thought it might be real.
It's really hard for me to remember what I was feeling at the time and when. My best recollection is that even after stuff started breaking our way I still was aware that there was a long way to go.

I think the moment where I truly thought things were lined up for us was not until Belhorn's home run in game 7. Obviously, at 8-1 I was feeling pretty good. But then remember that the Red Sox had two very significant squanders in the 4th and 5th innings and failing to tack on in Yankee Stadium, given how fragile the bullpen was, was really not a great situation. We had already seen four runs scored on a Yankee Stadium special to the short right field porch and so I think I was probably really concerned, even with a 7 run lead, that the team was keeping the door open.

It's easy to look at a seven run lead and imagine that I must have been very confident but there had been so many high leverage pitches thrown in such a short period of time that every out counted and an implosion of the bullpen in that shoebox of a stadium was still a possibility. Then Lowe was just so incredible in the 5th and 6th though and it really calmed the nerves. I really think that getting the game to a 9 out game with a significant lead is when I finally started to breathe. Then the Pedro inning and nerves were a bit frazzled and then Belhorn just put it to bed. That was really the moment.
 

HriniakPosterChild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
14,841
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
That said, I'd pay a lot for HD versions. I wonder why you can't find them for sale on disc?
Anybody have an idea why all of NESN's rebroadcasts were/are in 4:3 SD (with the NESN bars down the side), but ESPNs of Game 4 last night was wide HD?
Or maybe Fox charges more for the HD and NESN is notoriously cheap.
Fox broadcast HD in 2004, but few consumers had HD sets and Blu-Ray hadn’t been invented yet.

I have seen what is obviously DVD content on network TV during retrospectives of 2004 (the logo in the corner gives it away).

I would gladly pay retail for an HD Blu-Ray set, but there aren’t enough people like me to make it a viable product.

I thought MLB owned all postseason games (per the announcement in every broadcast), not any network.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
But Sierra would have scored if it bounced off the wall and stayed in play. Because it went in the stands he had to stay at third since he was at first base.
DJ is not disagreeing with you on that. He was just gently correcting your misuse of the term "ground rule double." It was not a ground rule double. It was an automatic double. Runner placement is the same either way.

No doubt that was a very lucky play. It's hard to tell except on one replay but the amazing thing is that the ball bounced and actually did hit the wall but had enough spin to still carry over it sideways. It was also very very close to a home run.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
It's really hard for me to remember what I was feeling at the time and when. My best recollection is that even after stuff started breaking our way I still was aware that there was a long way to go.

I think the moment where I truly thought things were lined up for us was not until Belhorn's home run in game 7. Obviously, at 8-1 I was feeling pretty good. But then remember that the Red Sox had two very significant squanders in the 4th and 5th innings and failing to tack on in Yankee Stadium, given how fragile the bullpen was, was really not a great situation. We had already seen four runs scored on a Yankee Stadium special to the short right field porch and so I think I was probably really concerned, even with a 7 run lead, that the team was keeping the door open.

It's easy to look at a seven run lead and imagine that I must have been very confident but there had been so many high leverage pitches thrown in such a short period of time that every out counted and an implosion of the bullpen in that shoebox of a stadium was still a possibility. Then Lowe was just so incredible in the 5th and 6th though and it really calmed the nerves. I really think that getting the game to a 9 out game with a significant lead is when I finally started to breathe. Then the Pedro inning and nerves were a bit frazzled and then Belhorn just put it to bed. That was really the moment.
While Bellhorn's HR certainly clinched it, I exhaled after Pedro got the 1st out in the 7th after the 2 doubles. His stuff appeared better to the 3rd hitter (as though he wasn't fully warm) , and I was pretty confident by then he wouldn't give up more than 2 runs that inning, which wasn't concerning.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
717
I watched Game 7 this morning.

Is there a bigger play to play turnaround than the Damon Out at Home/Ortiz 2-run Bomb combo in recent memory? All of our mindsets went from "here we go again/why the F did Sveum send him/WTF with that relay to Jeter/Damon just run, don't hesitate" to "Hell Yeah/FU" in a matter of seconds.

Even the Butler play had a run play sandwiched between the stupidly lucky catch and the pick.

That Ortiz bomb was such a wonderful answer. It set the tone for the night. Now the Damon homers were what they were, things of destructive beauty. But David's first pitch laser....

Oh, and I will always love that Damon's granny was a classic RF cheapie at that hell hole of a stadium. Karma is a bitch, MFers.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
I watched Game 7 this morning.

Is there a bigger play to play turnaround than the Damon Out at Home/Ortiz 2-run Bomb combo in recent memory? All of our mindsets went from "here we go again/why the F did Sveum send him/WTF with that relay to Jeter/Damon just run, don't hesitate" to "Hell Yeah/FU" in a matter of seconds.

Even the Butler play had a run play sandwiched between the stupidly lucky catch and the pick.

That Ortiz bomb was such a wonderful answer. It set the tone for the night. Now the Damon homers were what they were, things of destructive beauty. But David's first pitch laser....

Oh, and I will always love that Damon's granny was a classic RF cheapie at that hell hole of a stadium. Karma is a bitch, MFers.
I love that Ortiz didn't make us wait too. I think it was the first pitch and they were still talking about the replay of the out at home and poof. The ball got out in about 1 second too.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
Bunting opportunities were actually few and far between. Only Jeter and Cairo were any good at bunting; A-Rod was earlier in his career, but his last sacrifice hit was long since past.

First 2 innings were the time to see what Schilling had. After all, nobody knew if the impromptu surgery was going to work.

Cairo hit a 2 out double in the 3rd, which took away any bunting opportunity for Jeter.

In the 4th, A-Rod and Sheffield led off with singles. Definitely do not want Matsui, Williams, or Posada bunting in that circumstance, especially down by 4 runs.

In the 5th, the Yankees were still down 4. Neither Sierra nor Clark can bunt, and there were already 2 outs by the time Cairo stepped to the plate.

In the 6th, Jeter probably should have bunted to start the inning. Not sure they expected Schilling to still be in the game.

In the 7th, they chipped away with the Williams HR. But, again, they did not have anyone that could bunt due up.

I believe Torre also thought, rightfully, that the Sox bullpen was completely gassed, and so getting Schilling out of the game by the 5th or 6th was going to be their strategy. Not a bad idea, either. There was little chance that Schilling would have been allowed to go more than 100 pitches, and even 80 may have been a reasonable guess as an upper limit at the time. Schilling was able to keep the Yankee batters from working the count, however.

In a way, their strategy almost worked. They got to the bullpen in the 8th, and were facing Arroyo, a matchup that favored the Yankees at the time. But then came the slap play. And the Yankees were able to draw 2 walks from Foulke in the 9th, bringing the winning run to the plate. If Schilling is only able to go 6 instead of 7, it could have been a very different outcome. Instead, the Yankees essentially ran out of outs.

Bunts can give up outs very quickly. One also needs a series of well placed bunts for it to work. Too soft and Varitek makes an easy play. Too hard, and even a hobbled Schilling can make a play just off the mound Bunting it down 3rd just pulls Mueller off the bag but otherwise doesn't accomplish much. Perhaps bunting down first pulls Millar off the bag, but it's likely that Bellhorn was instructed to cover first in that situation. Then there's the chance of popping up the bunt, which often leads to a double play if there's anyone on base. Bunts aren't easy.
I don’t understand any of this. You gloss over the first 3innings, which are exactly when they should have been testing him. And it’s not about any individual outcome. Even Cairos’s double. A bunt + injured/out-of-game Schilling is waaaay better than a double in that situation. The whole point was to physically test Schilling early, try to knock him out, and get to the taxed bullpen. They didn’t do it. They didn’t even try.

Saying major leaguers can’t bunt isn’t a valid excuse. Every major leaguer lays down a bunt or two in BP. Lay down a few more. It’s not that freakin hard. Schilling couldn’t move/field. One bad step and he’s done. It didn‘t require perfection to test him. And if he proved he could do it, fine, go back to hitting. They squandered a clearly valuable opportunity.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
I don’t understand any of this. You gloss over the first 3innings, which are exactly when they should have been testing him. And it’s not about any individual outcome. Even Cairos’s double. A bunt + injured/out-of-game Schilling is waaaay better than a double in that situation. The whole point was to physically test Schilling early, try to knock him out, and get to the taxed bullpen. They didn’t do it. They didn’t even try.

Saying major leaguers can’t bunt isn’t a valid excuse. Every major leaguer lays down a bunt or two in BP. Lay down a few more. It’s not that freakin hard. Schilling couldn’t move/field. One bad step and he’s done. It didn‘t require perfection to test him. And if he proved he could do it, fine, go back to hitting. They squandered a clearly valuable opportunity.
Bunts can lead to outs. That's the main problem with a bunt first strategy. The Yankees hit Schilling hard in Game 1, so I think it made sense to make him prove in the first inning that he could actually pitch. Cairo could have bunted with 2 outs; chances were really good that would end the inning. Having Jeter see Schilling the second time that game isn't the worst strategy in that situation.

Schilling was probably told to only field bunt attempts that come directly his way, and give up the base. Putting together a string of 4 successful bunts is much harder than it looks. Especially since Schilling would then throw it high and force them to foul it off or pop it up. Most bunts would be fielded by Varitek for the force play at first. So many players are so bad at bunting these days, as it's no longer used. Torre eschewed bunting (and for good reason).
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
I was fortunate to be at game 6. Mueller was cheating way in on everyone who might bunt. It really wouldn’t have worked—Yankees played the percentages given the defense
 

jaytftwofive

New Member
Jan 20, 2013
1,182
Drexel Hill Pa.
DJ is not disagreeing with you on that. He was just gently correcting your misuse of the term "ground rule double." It was not a ground rule double. It was an automatic double. Runner placement is the same either way.

No doubt that was a very lucky play. It's hard to tell except on one replay but the amazing thing is that the ball bounced and actually did hit the wall but had enough spin to still carry over it sideways. It was also very very close to a home run.
Sorry, I've never heard of an automatic double till now.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,770
Pittsburgh, PA
But Sierra would have scored if it bounced off the wall and stayed in play. Because it went in the stands he had to stay at third since he was at first base.
A fair ball bouncing into the stands on the hop is an automatic double in every park in the majors and minors, because it's a baseball rule. It is not grounds-dependent.

A ball getting lost in the ivy vines at Wrigley: two bases, per its ground rules. No other park has to worry about such a thing; hence, it's a rule specific to the grounds.

DJ is giving you very mild crap because it's common for baseball fans to refer to a fair ball bouncing into the stands as a "ground-rule double", despite the fact that, by the terminology of the rules, it's more properly termed an automatic double. One of those hazing rituals for the true nerds.

---

Anyway, for me the series turning point was Bellhorn's HR in Game 6. I was at the game with two other SoSHers and could hardly sit still for a moment I was so nervous. The first 3 innings were a combination of Schilling getting it done by apparent voodoo (10 batters, 9 outs, but only 1 K), and the Sox threatening but squandering. Bellhorn did the squandering in the 2nd, actually: bases loaded, 1 out... GIDP.

Then the 4th begins so innocuously, with 2 quick outs. Millar gets a double, a wild pitch sends him to 3rd, Varitek slogs through a 10-pitch at-bat before a solid single up the middle sends him through. We're ahead, barely, but that could be gone in a flash. O-Cab then keeps it going, floats a blooper to get on, but it's still 2 outs. Bellhorn gets down 0-2, fouls a few off, and then *CRACK* I can still see it flying out to left, underneath me from the 3B upper deck. To say it felt unlikely was an understatement. But while a 4-0 lead wasn't safe, it meant we were in the driver's seat for that game, and thus to level the series. That was the moment that let me dream about actually pulling it off, rather than just salvaging some dignity.
 

Wallball Tingle

union soap
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
2,518
When Foulke struck out Clark (I was smoking cigarettes back then and that 9th inning must have been at least 3 or 4 cigarettes' worth of stress), I believed it was possible. When Damon hit the granny, I thought it was likely.
 

Hyde Park Factor

token lebanese
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2008
2,795
Manchvegas
What was the single moment where it changed? What was the single moment where the tides shifted from, "It's going to go tits up at some point" to "we're winning this f%&#ing game"?

It wasn't until the beginning of Game 7 that I allowed myself to even briefly think the Sox might complete the comeback. Up until that point it was "just don't get swept" or "just don't lose in Boston"

Flash forward a decade and I knew, deep down I knew, that the Pats were coming back from 28-3. And even though I was biting my nails watching Kimbrel struggle in Game 4, I knew they were going to rip the Yankees' hearts out.

So now I look back and I wonder, where did that paradigm shift? Part of me thinks it was Ortiz's first inning home run in Game 7. The Yankees had a bit of momentum going with throwing Damon out at home, and immediately Ortiz shuts it down
Swear to God, when Ortiz hit the HR in game 4 of the ALCS, I looked at my wife and said, "we're gonna win the World Series. It's all different now."

And it was.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
I had a business trip that first took me to New Jersey (near Princeton) and then to southern CT. I watched Game 6 from a hotel in NJ. When Bellhorn hit the HR, I felt for the first time that the impossible had become possible, but still highly unlikely. They still had to get through 15 innings at the place where dreams go to die, and the Sox bullpen was absolutely shot.

When A-Rod slapped the ball out of Arroyo's glove, I thought Ed Armbister all over again. But when the zebras called A-Rod for interference, I thought it had become a 50/50 chance, although I was still worried about how Foulke was going to fare in the 9th. When Clark struck out, I was wondering if any team had pulled it off before, but I refused to look that fact up. And I was still worried about Game 7.

To me, the "they're going to win this thing" came when I was driving from NJ to CT through, guess what, traffic. I was listening to WFAN; Suzyn Walden was basically trying her best not to say "we're totally fucked". She was absolutely furious that Kevin Brown and Javy Vazquez would be counted on to win Game 7. When it switched to Mike & Mad Dog, the hosts reminded everyone that it was Mickey Mantle's birthday, and so the Yankees were guaranteed to win. That's when I knew it was over for NY.

Damon's slam was hardly a formality, but was seemingly pre-ordained, when I watched it from my hotel in CT. My meeting the next morning was with someone from St. Louis; we had a lot of fun talking about the game and the upcoming Series.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
...Cairo could have bunted with 2 outs; chances were really good that would end the inning. ...

Schilling was probably told to only field bunt attempts that come directly his way, and give up the base....
Cairo had about an overall 35% chance of getting on base. (If you want to use slugging, your target is 40%.). If you’re right about Schilling’s marching orders, Cairo’s chances of getting on by bunting were far greater than usual, probably better than that 35% or even 40%. Just push it far enough out from the catcher. Corners playing back, pitcher not likely to field it. Look at Mientkiewicz’s sac bunt in game 4. That bunt is likely a hit here for Cairo.

So just as an attempt to get on base, bunting in that specific scenario with no one on (no force out option) made the most sense. That he would have possibly tested Schilling, get him to try to make a play he couldn’t physically make, made it an even smarter option. And they didn’t do it.

Sierra batting lefty leading off that inning would have also been a good time to bunt. Frankly, as Sox fans, we were constantly relieved to see them not squaring around. It was like knowing your cornerback has a leg injury, but for some reason, the offense isn’t throwing at him. They’re just sticking to their typical game plan. Well, that’s questionable game planning at best.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Cairo had about an overall 35% chance of getting on base. (If you want to use slugging, your target is 40%.). If you’re right about Schilling’s marching orders, Cairo’s chances of getting on by bunting were far greater than usual, probably better than that 35% or even 40%.
Yeah, you're pulling these numbers from what?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
Cairo had about an overall 35% chance of getting on base. (If you want to use slugging, your target is 40%.). If you’re right about Schilling’s marching orders, Cairo’s chances of getting on by bunting were far greater than usual, probably better than that 35% or even 40%. Just push it far enough out from the catcher. Corners playing back, pitcher not likely to field it. Look at Mientkiewicz’s sac bunt in game 4. That bunt is likely a hit here for Cairo.

So just as an attempt to get on base, bunting in that specific scenario with no one on (no force out option) made the most sense. That he would have possibly tested Schilling, get him to try to make a play he couldn’t physically make, made it an even smarter option. And they didn’t do it.

Sierra batting lefty leading off that inning would have also been a good time to bunt. Frankly, as Sox fans, we were constantly relieved to see them not squaring around. It was like knowing your cornerback has a leg injury, but for some reason, the offense isn’t throwing at him. They’re just sticking to their typical game plan. Well, that’s questionable game planning at best.
I think the "should have bunted a lot more" camp is overlooking the fact that the Yankees had every reason to believe Schilling would be ineffective again and that gave them at least as much of a chance at a better result than bunting for a hit, a skill not in every hitter's toolbox
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
I think the "should have bunted a lot more" camp is overlooking the fact that the Yankees had every reason to believe Schilling would be ineffective again and that gave them at least as much of a chance at a better result than bunting for a hit, a skill not in every hitter's toolbox
Exactly. If the Yankees had a 40% success rate bunting this would lead to a .400 SLG, and OPS of .800. The MFY's had a team OPS of .811 that season. To me it makes much more sense playing it straight against a potentially weakened Schilling.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Miguel Cairo had a 0.346 OBP in 2004, but that was among one his best years career wise. It was 0.289 and 0.296 the year prior and after.

Bunting for a hit is not all that easy when there's noone on base. Even the best bunters usually succeed via surprise. So, maybe he bunts and gets on first. Can Jeter do the same and avoid a force out at either first or 2nd? And can then A-Rod do the same when Schilling figures out what's going on and starts throwing high fastballs? The degree of difficulty is a lot higher than it looks.

Schilling got absolutely shelled in Game 1.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,386
I don't think the goal was necessarily to get a hit; it was to make Schilling move and make that ankle worse, which would likely have made his overall effectiveness decrease maybe considerably. I'm surprised that they didn't try it even once.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
14,946
Silver Spring, MD
A fair ball bouncing into the stands on the hop is an automatic double in every park in the majors and minors, because it's a baseball rule. It is not grounds-dependent.

A ball getting lost in the ivy vines at Wrigley: two bases, per its ground rules. No other park has to worry about such a thing; hence, it's a rule specific to the grounds.

DJ is giving you very mild crap because it's common for baseball fans to refer to a fair ball bouncing into the stands as a "ground-rule double", despite the fact that, by the terminology of the rules, it's more properly termed an automatic double. One of those hazing rituals for the true nerds.
What about cases where the ball gets stuck somewhere, like under the outfield wall's cushioning? Or like what happened twice in the NLDS last year when the ball went thru an opening in the Dodger Stadium chain link OF fencing?

Ground rule or automatic?
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,681
What was the single moment where it changed? What was the single moment where the tides shifted from, "It's going to go tits up at some point" to "we're winning this f%&#ing game"?
For me, it was a gradual dawning more than any single moment. Winning game 4 was all about avoiding embarrassment - it just felt like too much of an uphill climb to think about pulling off the impossible and winning the series. Clark's ball bouncing into the stands was probably the first moment that I dared to dream about winning the series - instead of the normal hard-earned feeling that the MFY's get every goddamn break, I started to experience wonder that for once things were going our way. That feeling persisted throughout that long evening and gave me a lot more hope heading into game 6 than I ever expected to have. The belief that maybe, just maybe, this was going to happen built throughout game 6, but there was a little voice in the back of my mind that started to remind me that, hey, wouldn't it be the ultimate kick in the nads to let the Sox start to believe that they were going to pull this out and then have the rug pulled out in game 7 with a NY beatdown? The true 'we're winning this f%&# game' moment came with Damon's grand slam, although I didn't start to truly exhale until Bellhorn clanged one off the foul pole.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
I don't think the goal was necessarily to get a hit; it was to make Schilling move and make that ankle worse, which would likely have made his overall effectiveness decrease maybe considerably. I'm surprised that they didn't try it even once.
I have to believe Schilling was told to give up the bunt unless it was an easy play for him.

I don't disagree that there were times they probably could have tried it. I just don't think it was necessarily as obvious as a solution as some in the media portrayed it. I really do think the Yankees thought they could get hits on him like they did in Game 1, or that he would be so limited in pitch count that they would still have a few innings to work against the Sox bullpen. They probably thought that Cairo's double would lead to the end of his outing shortly afterwards. Or that he would be finished sometime in the 4th when the Yankees got the first 2 runners on with none out. Or again with Williams' home run in the 7th.

I really don't believe anyone on either side expected 99 pitches and 67 strikes from Schilling, until it actually happened. That expectation probably had a lot to do with the decisions Torre made.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
46,775
Hartford, CT
Also, how many of NY’s hitters could bunt well? The idea that baseball players in the modern era were proficient to excellent hunters is misplaced, and it isn’t as easy to accurately place a bunt as the argument presumes.

I think it’s a fair observation to make (e.g. why didn’t Miguel Cairo try a bunt?) but it has been way overblown by those invoking it as a reason for the Yankees’ loss in that game or a basis to criticize Torre.
 

LoweTek

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 30, 2005
2,183
Central Florida
A fair ball bouncing into the stands on the hop is an automatic double in every park in the majors and minors, because it's a baseball rule. It is not grounds-dependent.

A ball getting lost in the ivy vines at Wrigley: two bases, per its ground rules. No other park has to worry about such a thing; hence, it's a rule specific to the grounds.

DJ is giving you very mild crap because it's common for baseball fans to refer to a fair ball bouncing into the stands as a "ground-rule double", despite the fact that, by the terminology of the rules, it's more properly termed an automatic double. One of those hazing rituals for the true nerds.
Most every announcer gets it wrong too. It's really not surprising so many people call it that. When I get a new team of kids to coach I usually have a parents meeting. I always ask this question and nobody has ever answered correctly. I have done probably 25 of those meetings. usually 15-20 people who have been around baseball for at least the 5-8 years their kid has played. So at the low end 375 adults were oh for 375.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,770
Pittsburgh, PA
What about cases where the ball gets stuck somewhere, like under the outfield wall's cushioning? Or like what happened twice in the NLDS last year when the ball went thru an opening in the Dodger Stadium chain link OF fencing?

Ground rule or automatic?
If there is a grounds-specific rule covering it (here's Dodger Stadium's), then it's whatever the ground rule says. In this case there isn't, it's just a generic situation where a fair ball leaves play in circumstances that don't merit a home run, and so in this case it's an automatic double.

Here's Wikipedia:
A ground rule double is a baseball rule that awards two bases from the time of pitch to all baserunners including the batter-runner, as a result of the ball leaving play after being hit fairly and leaving the field under a condition of the ground rules in effect at the field where the game is being played. An automatic double is the term used to refer to a fairly hit ball leaving the field in circumstances that do not merit a home run. The automatic double (or rule-book double) is quite often mistakenly called a ground rule double.[1]
Fun fact from that page that I didn't know until just now: a batted ball clearing the outfield fence on the bounce was a home run in the majors until 1929 (AL) / 1931 (NL), which included most of Babe Ruth's career. That's way later than I would have guessed.
 

Bowhemian

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2015
5,701
Bow, NH
I gave up on them. There, I said it.
After the game 3 blowout, I gave up on the ‘04 Red Sox.*

I didn’t watch game 4.
I didn’t watch game 5.
I did watch game 6, and they sucked me back in. It was starting to feel like things could break our way.
I did watch game 7 with a few friends, and right from the start, we knew the Red Sox would win the series.

I will never forget the euphoric feeling, just the overall vibe at work the next day. Everyone was just so happy. Exhausted, but so, so happy. It seemed like the World Series was a foregone conclusion at that point.

*I blame Grady Little for this.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
Yeah, you're pulling these numbers from what?
His overall OBP and slugging that year (approximate #s).

I have no good idea what the success rate is for bunting-for-a-base-hit when the defense isn’t playing for the bunt. (This suggests it’s perhaps higher than 50% for really good bunters, but we’re not talking about those guys here: https://www.parkspresidentsandparks.com/blog-page/2018/4/30/the-bunt ). In the third inning of that game, our guys were not playing up. So if Sierra or Cairo tries to bunt, what are his chances? He needs to get it down, so there’s that obstacle. Maybe people are right, that most hitters, including these two in particular, literally can’t bunt. I think that also is unlikely and overblown. I think they don’t bunt because (1) they’re not Carew, LH with good speed and superb bat control allowing them to place the ball, and (2) their reasonable best case scenario is a base hit (forgoing extra bases).

But in most “surprise” scenarios, you’re trying to beat two guys - the pitcher and the catcher. (Lots of guys nowadays don’t bunt when there’s a shift on because they don’t think they can clearly beat those two guys.) However, in Game 4, there was every reason to believe or at least suspect that, except for balls hit right to him, Schilling wouldn’t be able to field the ball, leaving ONE guy to field your bunt - the catcher. You don’t need accuracy. You've 90 degrees of fair territory to play with. Avoid the 10% that are right at Schilling, get it more than 40 or so feet from home plate, and You don’t have to be Carew. You’re on. Or - significantly here - you’re forcing Schilling to do something physically that could easily compromise him (run 3-4 steps, plant, pivot and throw, with a bad ankle).

I’m certainly not saying this cost the Yankees the game. It was just an obvious opportunity for them that, for whatever reason, they didn’t take. To our everlasting benefit. (So I’m also not complaining!)
 
Last edited:

jaytftwofive

New Member
Jan 20, 2013
1,182
Drexel Hill Pa.
I gave up on them. There, I said it.
After the game 3 blowout, I gave up on the ‘04 Red Sox.*

I didn’t watch game 4.
I didn’t watch game 5.
I did watch game 6, and they sucked me back in. It was starting to feel like things could break our way.
I did watch game 7 with a few friends, and right from the start, we knew the Red Sox would win the series.

I will never forget the euphoric feeling, just the overall vibe at work the next day. Everyone was just so happy. Exhausted, but so, so happy. It seemed like the World Series was a foregone conclusion at that point.

*I blame Grady Little for this.
To quote Yogi: "It ain't over till it's over." I guess you'll never do that again. Hell in 2013 when the Celtics were down 3 to 0, to the Knicks the players were quoting Kevin Millar "Don't let us win tonight". They did make it to 3 to 2 then lost in 6.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
I gave up on them. There, I said it.
After the game 3 blowout, I gave up on the ‘04 Red Sox.*

I didn’t watch game 4.
I didn’t watch game 5.
I did watch game 6, and they sucked me back in. It was starting to feel like things could break our way.
I did watch game 7 with a few friends, and right from the start, we knew the Red Sox would win the series.

I will never forget the euphoric feeling, just the overall vibe at work the next day. Everyone was just so happy. Exhausted, but so, so happy. It seemed like the World Series was a foregone conclusion at that point.

*I blame Grady Little for this.
You were not alone. Though I didn't give up quite to the extent that you did, I admit I fell asleep around the 6th inning of Game 4. So I slept through the walk, the steal, the single, and Ortiz's HR. I let myself fall asleep where I would normally be making a point of watching to the end because at least a part of me had given up, and I wasn't keen to watch the Yankees celebrate a sweep on the Fenway grass. That was the last time I missed a moment of the rest of that post-season, or any, really.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
But in most “surprise” scenarios, you’re trying to beat two guys - the pitcher and the catcher. (Lots of guys nowadays don’t bunt when there’s a shift on because they don’t think they can clearly beat those two guys.) However, in Game 4, there was every reason to believe or at least suspect that, except for balls hit right to him, Schilling wouldn’t be able to field the ball, leaving ONE guy to field your bunt - the catcher. You don’t need accuracy. You've 90 degrees of fair territory to play with. Avoid the 10% that are right at Schilling, get it more than 40 or so feet from home plate, and You don’t have to be Carew. You’re on. Or - significantly here - you’re forcing Schilling to do something physically that could easily compromise him (run 3-4 steps, plant, pivot and throw, with a bad ankle).

I’m certainly not saying this cost the Yankees the game. It was just an obvious opportunity for them that, for whatever reason, they didn’t take. To our everlasting benefit. (So I’m also not complaining!)
A bunt towards Schilling anytime in Game 4 would have been a foul ball.

Anyway, as the thread title says, discussing the bunting strategy in the Bloody Sock game is like discussing the relative importance of the WALK, the STOLEN BASE, or the SINGLE. It never, ever gets old.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
717
I gave up on them. There, I said it.
After the game 3 blowout, I gave up on the ‘04 Red Sox.*

I didn’t watch game 4.
I didn’t watch game 5.
I did watch game 6, and they sucked me back in. It was starting to feel like things could break our way.
I did watch game 7 with a few friends, and right from the start, we knew the Red Sox would win the series.

I will never forget the euphoric feeling, just the overall vibe at work the next day. Everyone was just so happy. Exhausted, but so, so happy. It seemed like the World Series was a foregone conclusion at that point.

*I blame Grady Little for this.
I didn't give up on them. In fact, I went to game 4. But I only went because i had gone to the Pats-Seattle game that day and was feeling sports euphoric that the Pats had won, and had a what the hell attitude.

In the bottom of the 9th, I joined many other bleachers people by the TVs near the exits. If the Yankees won, I was damned if I was going to watch them celebrate at Fenway. I stayed there until Mueller knocked the Fruit Bat on his ass. I think I was running up the ramp as Roberts hit home plate, and never left my seat other than to take a leak for the rest of the night.

I also made Game 6 at the Toilet, and enjoyed every minute of it.

Such good times.
 

Norm Siebern

Member
SoSH Member
May 12, 2003
7,123
Western MD
Watching the Fox broadcast of game 3 o the Series on NESN. The level of sadness in Buck's and McCarver's voices is obvious and real following the Supan base running fiasco. Their open favoritism towards the Cardinals and their subsequent dour demeanor makes the end results even more delicious. Fuck McCarver and Buck.
 

ToeKneeArmAss

Paul Byrd's pitching coach
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I didn't give up on them. In fact, I went to game 4. But I only went because i had gone to the Pats-Seattle game that day and was feeling sports euphoric that the Pats had won, and had a what the hell attitude.

In the bottom of the 9th, I joined many other bleachers people by the TVs near the exits. If the Yankees won, I was damned if I was going to watch them celebrate at Fenway. I stayed there until Mueller knocked the Fruit Bat on his ass. I think I was running up the ramp as Roberts hit home plate, and never left my seat other than to take a leak for the rest of the night.

I also made Game 6 at the Toilet, and enjoyed every minute of it.

Such good times.
I gave up on them. Didn't stop me from watching though.
 

ToeKneeArmAss

Paul Byrd's pitching coach
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Watching the Fox broadcast of game 3 o the Series on NESN. The level of sadness in Buck's and McCarver's voices is obvious and real following the Supan base running fiasco. Their open favoritism towards the Cardinals and their subsequent dour demeanor makes the end results even more delicious. Fuck McCarver and Buck.
I would never be mistaken for a Buck or McCarver fan. That said, they did both have credible reasons to be rooting for St. Louis in their hearts. Still shouldn't have influenced how they called the games but on this one issue I can cut them a little slack.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
I would never be mistaken for a Buck or McCarver fan. That said, they did both have credible reasons to be rooting for St. Louis in their hearts. Still shouldn't have influenced how they called the games but on this one issue I can cut them a little slack.
Then they should have done us all a favour and recused themselves from calling the series and paid money to go sit in the stands.

WEEI audio overlay is the only way to watch that series.
 

jaytftwofive

New Member
Jan 20, 2013
1,182
Drexel Hill Pa.
A fair ball bouncing into the stands on the hop is an automatic double in every park in the majors and minors, because it's a baseball rule. It is not grounds-dependent.

A ball getting lost in the ivy vines at Wrigley: two bases, per its ground rules. No other park has to worry about such a thing; hence, it's a rule specific to the grounds.

DJ is giving you very mild crap because it's common for baseball fans to refer to a fair ball bouncing into the stands as a "ground-rule double", despite the fact that, by the terminology of the rules, it's more properly termed an automatic double. One of those hazing rituals for the true nerds.

---

Anyway, for me the series turning point was Bellhorn's HR in Game 6. I was at the game with two other SoSHers and could hardly sit still for a moment I was so nervous. The first 3 innings were a combination of Schilling getting it done by apparent voodoo (10 batters, 9 outs, but only 1 K), and the Sox threatening but squandering. Bellhorn did the squandering in the 2nd, actually: bases loaded, 1 out... GIDP.

Then the 4th begins so innocuously, with 2 quick outs. Millar gets a double, a wild pitch sends him to 3rd, Varitek slogs through a 10-pitch at-bat before a solid single up the middle sends him through. We're ahead, barely, but that could be gone in a flash. O-Cab then keeps it going, floats a blooper to get on, but it's still 2 outs. Bellhorn gets down 0-2, fouls a few off, and then *CRACK* I can still see it flying out to left, underneath me from the 3B upper deck. To say it felt unlikely was an understatement. But while a 4-0 lead wasn't safe, it meant we were in the driver's seat for that game, and thus to level the series. That was the moment that let me dream about actually pulling it off, rather than just salvaging some dignity.
Ok I didn't know about an automatic double. But do you agree if that ball hits the wall and stays in, Sierra scores easily and our team probably loses in bottom of the ninth?
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,770
Pittsburgh, PA
Ok I didn't know about an automatic double. But do you agree if that ball hits the wall and stays in, Sierra scores easily and our team probably loses in bottom of the ninth?
Sure, no doubt, we've been saying that since the moment it happened.

A higher power evened out all our baseball karma and our parents' baseball karma in the space of 4 days. It's not like it didn't take some doing.
 

HriniakPosterChild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
14,841
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
Didn’t he try to quit baseball in the middle of a game during the regular season, and Torre had to talk him off the ledge?
He punched the clubhouse wall with his non-pitching hand in September of that year and broke two bones.
Why yes, he did, and Torre must have forgotten the “let it stay here when you leave here” rule, because he put it in his book.

Though he accuses Kevin Brown of “pitching stupid” by taking the ball in Game 7 of the 2004 A.L.C.S. despite an ailing back, Torre expresses more pity than anger at the troubled right-hander. “There were a lot of demons in this guy,” Torre says, and he mentions that after Brown allowed six runs in the first inning of this 2005 game, he stormed into the visitors clubhouse at Tropicana Field, curled up on the floor in a corner of a storage area and told Torre, “I’m going to go home.” Torre told Brown that if he did that -– if he quit on his teammates — he would never be welcomed back.
https://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/torre-on-jeter-a-rod-beltran-pavano-brown-and-more/