I Scored!

July 9, 2000

A little inter-league intrigue with the game as the Braves returned to Boston. Let’s dive right in.

The nicest part about this card is the pitchers section still having some room in it. If you only needed three pitchers, chances are you had a good game. And, that’s exactly what happened. Tim Wakefield had a great start, going seven strong innings. Rich Garces and Derek Lowe each pitched a scoreless inning to finish it out. I imagine that’s exactly how they drew it up before the game.

The other great part about the card is all the colored diamonds. When you have the pitching that the Sox got, and you see all those runs scored, you know it was a pretty good day.

The player of the game? Easily Nomar. He only had two hits, but both of them were home runs. He both scored and drove in three runs on the day. Since the Braves only scored two runs, Nomar was almost all the Sox needed.

The team goat? It’ll have to be Ed Sprague. He was the only player on the Sox without a hit on the day. He stumbled though the game going 0-4 with a strikeout. Even from the last spot in the order, you’d like more than that.

But, it didn’t matter. The Sox pounded their former cross-town rivals. The pitching held them down, while the offense couldn’t stop scoring. It was a fantastic team effort.

And the scorecard shows how it happened.

Sox Lower Magic Number to 28!

So, does John Lackey think he’s being punished for something? It’s just uncanny how the offense does him in game after game. Either they don’t score enough runs to win and he ends up with a 2-0 loss, or they wait until he leaves the game to score so he doesn’t get the win. While I know he’s fine as long as the team wins, it was to be pretty frustrating. When was the last time he finished his outing with the lead?

 

It’s not like it’s the Pedro factor either. Farrell isn’t resting all his stars on the day he’s pitching assuming they only need one run. That used to kill Pedro. All the best players kept sitting because, after all, Pedro only needed two runs to win. And then the team of scrubs would go out and get shutout. But lackey isn’t getting that treatment. The team just likes scoring in double digits the day before he pitches, and then getting shut down when he’s on the mound. It’s unbelievable.

 

Certainly not a bad start to the homestand. Looks like the Sox are trying to help the Orioles out with the decision I mentioned last time. If the Sox sweep, it’ll go a long way towards making those games in September meaningless for the Orioles. At the very least, the Sox will be doing their part to help themselves in more ways than one.

 

Once again the Sox took advantage of the Orioles bullpen. While taking pitches and grinding out at-bats might not be the most exciting thing in the world, you can’t argue with the results.

 

I thought it was interesting after Jacoby Ellsbury came out of the game. The radio guys made a point to mention that he stayed in the game after hitting the ball off his foot, stole a key base, and motored home with a key run. Even though he had to leave the game (or maybe even because he had to leave the game) they though that sequence really showed his toughness. They actually used that word.

 

Jacoby Ellsbury’s toughness.

 

Now, my thoughts on playing hurt are pretty well known. So, I don’t care if Jacoby is tough or not. But, for the broadcasters to use those words was interesting. Suddenly they felt the need to stick up for Ells. They needed to reverse some popular thinking on his dedication? Is there a reason for that? Is the team realizing that he might be cheaper in free agency than they feared? Are they realizing that Jackie Bradley Jr. isn’t quite ready to take his place next year? Do they need to do some damage control? After years of leaking how “soft” he was so we wouldn’t mind it when they let him go to another team, do they need to change our minds so we don’t revolt when they give him big money?

 

Was that a glimpse into their plans?

Coming Home Ready to Run

Can’t imagine getting more out of that road trip than what the Red Sox gave us. Winning both series would have been a best case scenario. That’s exactly what happened. Perfect.

While you had to like the Sox chances in San Francisco, expecting a sweep on the road is always risky. Going into LA to face the hottest team in the league was easily another possible series loss. To pull out the win was a wonderful bonus. And, yes, I know we missed the Dodgers top two pitchers. But, it’s not like the Sox were winning these games 8-7. The starting pitching took care of the Dodgers line-up as well. So, who’s to say how much better Kershaw would have done, if Peavy is spinning a gem of his own?

Which adds another interesting twist to the stretch run. The starting rotation had a pretty good turn there. Was it because they were pitching in NL West parks? That certainly helped. But, they still did what they needed to do. Which makes the return of Clay Buchholz all the more fascinating. If he comes back even close to what he was at the beginning of the year, that would be quite the boost to the staff. It would also make for some interesting decisions. Do the Sox drop Dempster from the rotation? With only a month left would they use a six-man rotation? Would they skip a starter here and there down the stretch? They would have lots of options. Lots of things to play around with.

So, what does that all mean?

No idea.

The Rays loss last night gives the Sox a 1.5 game lead in the division. Obviously, that’s not a ton. Especially with three games at the Rays left to play. Unfortunately, this could come down to how hard the other teams are trying in September. The Sox finish up with three in Baltimore. Will the Orioles be in the playoff hunt then? Will they be playing rookies to get them experience? They face the O’s for three at Fenway the week before that. Will they still be trying then? How about the Rays. How many of the teams they play from here on out will have given up? Remember the 2011 “collapse”? A lot of that was due to teams not trying. The Yankees had the division sewed up. So, when they played the Rays all through September, they sent out the B line-up. Especially in that last critical series. Same went for the Red Sox. They assumed they had the wild card well in hand. So, they didn’t mind that Kyle Weiland kept getting starts against the Rays in September. If that happens again, obviously, all bets are off. It’s going to come down to match-ups, schedules, and injuries. Thankfully, the Sox have a majority of their remaining games at home. While that’s not a huge advantage, it’s better than traveling.

We’re heading into the last homestand in August, and the Sox find themselves in first place.

Can’t ask for much more than that.

From the Pedro Binder

2000 Topps Divisional Playoff Highlight

Right off the bat, I need to apologize for my scanner. This card has a chrome effect that the scanner has no idea what to do with. It makes Pedro’s face a little blobbier than it really is.

OK. That’s out of the way.

I love this card. Love it for many reasons. The first of which is the simplicity. Player name and team logo show up on the bottom. Subset name and company logo tucked in the top. Notice anything missing?

They don’t tell you what the highlight is. It’s perfect. They don’t need to tease you with a headline, “Pedro Shuts Down Tribe!” or a full description “Pedro sends the Red Sox on to the ALCS with a victory.” You know what the highlight is just by looking at the card. That’s because it’s an actual highlight. It’s not a picture of some guy getting an RBI because they needed a card from each game. It’s not a stock photo of Pedro winding up that requires a caption. If I showed you this picture with no set-up, you’d know it was game five of the 1999 ALDS. So, Topps left good enough alone. Wonderful.

Of course, the highlight it’s referring to is one of the great games of its time. If anything shows just how good Pedro was, it was this game. The Indians ad Sox were slugging back and forth, and were tied 8-8 after three innings. That’s when the television cameras showed two things. Pedro walking out of the bullpen door, and Cleveland fan’s faces turning to absolute fear. It was one of the most incredible sequences I’ve ever seen. Naturally, the fans were right to be scared. Pedro proceeded to finish out the game without allowing a hit. Against the greatest offensive team in 50 years…that already scored 8 runs in three innings. And did it while he was injured.

Sometimes it just wasn’t fair.

What’s Wrong with a Pink Hat?

I know that the term “pink hat” has evolved away from strictly meaning someone who wears a hat that it pink. I know there a deeper meaning that implies a dedication, or attention span. But, I’m looking at the creation of the term.

Why is a “pink” hat the opposite of a “blue” hat? Why do the pink hats represent the clueless, and the blue hats the diehards?

(I’m going to ignore the most “obvious” answer to that. That girls wear pink, and know nothing about sports. It takes about 2 seconds to realize there’s nothing to that impression whatsoever. We’re done with that.)

So, what was it about the people wearing pink hats that helped coin the term?

Was it their less than official nature? On the field the Red Sox wear blue hats. (They don’t wear those hideous white ones anymore, do they?) So, if you’re a true fan, you wear blue hats just like them. But, not all blue hats are just like them. I see plenty of blue hats around the park that aren’t the official version. (Or the alternate hanging sox version that is my personal choice.) Some of them have numbers on them. Or, writing on them. Maybe they’re Fenway Park hats. Or just have a design that isn’t solely a B. Maybe there are stripes or checks. Take a look at the souvenir store. There’s a whole wall of blue hats that aren’t the official versions. Are those somehow better than a pink hat with a B on the front? What about black hats? Do they show dedication? Green Fenway Park hats? Patchwork hats?

Is it the impression that people who wear a pink hat are more interested in the fashion than the team? That they want to wear a pink hat, but also want people to think they like the team. So, they hide the B on a hat they were wearing anyway? But, wouldn’t that also apply to anyone wearing a different hat? What about the blue hats with sparkly B’s? Are those OK? Those are pretty fashionable…to some people. If you wear that, does that make you a fan? Wouldn’t that same theory apply to other articles of clothing too? If you wear a t-shirt with a Red Sox logo on the chest, is that OK? Or, a pair of shorts with the hanging sox on them. The players don’t wear those. So, isn’t that a fashion statement more than team support? Why can’t it be both?

What’s wrong with the idea that wearing anything displaying your team’s logo is ok? After all, I don’t think every member of the Red Sox has the logo tattooed on their leg. But, a Sox tattoo would imply a pretty strong dedication to the team. It’s definitely not official though. (What if you tattooed a pink B on your shoulder?)

What caused wearing a pink hat to become a negative thing?