Comments on: Manuel’s Call For Aggression Misguided

By: Don M

Don M — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:17:44 +0000

I just got around to reading this now.. and have to say that I’ve noticed a definite change in Tim’s view of this team.. everyday I read knit-picking at comments and blasting people for what YOU think they meant by whatever quote they made..

This ANTI-NOW.. and GUNG-HO-FUTURE stance has got to change, Tim.

We all want our prospects to be great.. but the daily updates on how dominate a guy was in Low-A Minor Leagues, combined with a rant about how we havn’t won the 2010 World Series yet is getting tougher and tougher to read..

Lets go one game at a time, like this had done for the past few years… pick out the good things instead of the bad.. maybe a nice little article on how Ryan Madson, how you “expect to blow saves” has been a lot better as of late

By: Bruce

Bruce — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 22:39:00 +0000

Tim, I believe you are in the minority here. Good points were made in interpreting Manuel’s comments on “defensive” hitting. Manuel, who knows something about hitting as a former hitting coach was obviously disappointed in the team’s lack of aggression with Marlin’s pitcher (Bush) offerings. While I was not able to watch the game, I think if there were a sizable number of hitter’s count (2-1 or 3-1), opportunites were missed by not taking advantage or swinging for mere contact. At the same time, you must give some credit to Bush in mixing his pitches well and keeping the hitters off balanced. After all, he did have a NO HITTER going into the 8th inning. That’s saying something.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 21:36:26 +0000

Tim you got it all wrong man. Charlie didn’t say that the Phils approach at the plate was defensive. He said they were swinging the bat defensively which are two entirely different things. They may have had an aggressive approach, i.e. swinging early in the count, and be putting defensive swings on the ball at the same time. Your attempt to discount Charlie failed, and in trying to make him look stupid you only succeeded in doing that to yourself. Charlie Manuel forgot more about baseball than you will ever know. Stop being an idiot

By: Chuck P

Chuck P — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:37:25 +0000

It’s kind of funny… we’re sitting here analyzing Charlie’s comments. I doubt that Charlie has ever thought about what he says before he opens his mouth. Analyzing his comments would be, you know like, not a great idea, like.

To lighten the mood state, someone should send a stripper to the clubhouse.

By: Woodman

Woodman — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:19:16 +0000

What number pitch you swing at, be it the first pitch or the 10th pitch, has nothing to do with the “type of swing” you put on the pitch. A defensive swing can happen on ANY pitch, as can an aggressive swing. I think that’s what Charlie is talking about.

By: Georgie

Georgie — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:11:38 +0000

You can’t always take what Charlie says too literally. I agree with Derek, I think Charlie means they look like they’re playing with their heads up their a$$es, no fire, no passion, just going through the motions. Charlie is trying any way he can to light a fire under their butts, but he doesn’t like to call individuals out, so he phrases it like this. Anyway, that’s my take on it.

By: Derek

Derek — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:58:17 +0000

He wasn’t saying to swing at the first pitch every at bat. Being aggressive means taking good strong swings at the pitch, as opposed to a swing where you’re just trying to make contact. You can be patient and aggressive at the same time (as wrong as that sounds). I agree that they need to be more patient than yesterday’s debacle, but when they do swing they need to be AGGRESSIVE swings, not just put it in play half a**ed swings.

By: Double Farts

Double Farts — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:15:18 +0000

Can someone please explain to me where the hell the running game is this year. They had the perfect opportunity to straight steal or hit and run (especially with an 0-2 count to Vic where offspeed is probable) yesterday in the first and did not do it. I undertstand you dont want to run into outs with Utley and Howard coming up, but their running game and agressiveness is part of why they were successful last year.

By: Memphis

Memphis — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:05:45 +0000

Yeah, that’s how I took it, too. Bush isn’t going to dominate you, we should be able to make good contact, not just put the ball in play. Charlie made an effort to not disrespect Bush, but he expected better swings, attacking the ball, whether it was first-pitch swinging or working the count. Bush came into the game giving up 16 hits in 13 innings, so it’s not like he’s suddenly Greg Maddux.

I think some guys (like Rollins) might be a little tight at this point. And I wonder if the poor pitching has put stress on the offense. It’s like we have to score every time the top of the order comes up.

By: Chuck P

Chuck P — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:51:03 +0000

That’s what I was thinking, Chooch… maybe he’s saying that they were swinging the bats just to put the wood on the ball rather than swinging to drive the ball (I did’t see the game yesterday).

Swinging at the first pitch is a sign of impatience… that being said, I agree with Tim that Cha’lie missed the boat on this one. Their biggest problem thus far has been their impatience. Swinging at bad pitches and not waiting for the right pitch causes you to reach and that might seem defensive but the underlying problem is the impatient mentality. They’re forcing the issue and the less runs they score, the worse it will get. You can be aggressive and still look bad. Being aggressive and impatient is a recipe for disaster; being patient and aggressive is what you really want. I didn’t see the game yesterday but our hitters are generally pretty aggressive… we have a lot of guys that try to hit every pitch out of the park that is thrown near the plate. Those guys need to relax and start playing baseball… that clubhouse is usually light-hearted but it seems to be really tense right now. Where’s HK when you need him?

By: Chooch's cooches

Chooch's cooches — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:30:32 +0000

Maybe charlies referring to how they swung more than when they did.

By: DHall

DHall — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:27:58 +0000

Charlie’s comment makes no sense…but that’s not a surprise. That’s one of the biggest things that drives me nuts about the Phillies hitters. They don’t take pitches. There are a couple guys that have a game plan when they come to the plate, but not many. How many times do you see a pitcher laboring with his control, walks a couple guys and then the next hitter comes up and swings at the first pitch. That makes me insane!! You are taught that in little league for crying out loud! Watch Johnny Damon when he is at bat. Now there’s someone who works a pitcher.

By: Ben

Ben — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:57:28 +0000

I totally agree, I was at the game and it just seemed like the Phillies were playing like if they kept hacking at pitches they will eventually fall instead of trying to be an MLB caliber hitter and work the pitcher. Bush was throwing well and I don’t think the Phillies gave him enough respect at the plate for the kind of outing he was having. Not many good swings and not many hard hit balls. There were a few though.