Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Running Stop Signs, Winning Games

Geoff Jenkins capped a dramatic ninth-inning comeback last night against the Houston Astros.

22 comments

Running Stop Signs, Winning Games

POSTED: Wednesday, April 16, 2008, 9:20 AM

Geoff Jenkins runs through a stop sign to score the winning run, which is decidedly better than running through a stop sign and not scoring.Jose Valverde's first pitch last night landed in the right-field stands at Citizens Bank Park.

His second pitch hit Chase Utley.

I had a feeling then that something crazy could happen last night in that ninth inning. Sure enough, two batters later Pat Burrell hit a two-run opposite field home run to tie the game, 3-3. Geoff Jenkins followed and struck out, but Brad Ausmus' passed ball allowed him to reach first base. Pedro Feliz then ripped a ball down the left-field line and into the corner, putting Jenkins in position to score the winning run in a 4-3 victory over the Astros.

That last play couldn't have been crazier.

Jenkins hauled himself from first to third. Third base coach Steve Smith initially waved him home, but threw up the stop sign once he saw Carlos Lee field the ball cleanly and get the ball to shortstop Miguel Tejada. But Jenkins never saw the stop sign, kept running and scored on a bang-bang play at the plate.

"I tried to get in front of him and he ran by," Smith said. "Thank goodness it worked out. You always wave him early, and then when they got [the ball] clean, you have to stop him with one out. If it's two outs, I would have sent him."

"You go hard, hard, hard," Jenkins said. "When you supposedly pick up the third-base coach and he throws the stop sign up, you stop. I just was in that tweener part where I had the head down, hit third and go. I didn't see it."

*

In the Phillies Notebook, Jimmy Rollins thinks he's closer to returning to the lineup. But he's still not there yet. Tonight? Maybe, but I would doubt it.

22 comments
Comments  (22)
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 1:59 PM, 04/16/2008
    OK, so I'm no baseball strategist, but Smith said, "If it's two outs, I would have sent him." If you truly think the throw is gonna beat the guy to the plate, why would you send him with 2 outs?? I'd rather take the chance with one out and live to try and score another runner if he gets pegged at the plate.
    bobby
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:02 PM, 04/16/2008
    Don't get me wrong, I;m not saying that sending him with one out is the smartest move either. I realize that being on 3rd with one out allows for them to win the game on a fly ball. My issue is sending him with 2 outs when you think there's a good chance he gets nailed at the plate.
    bobby
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:28 PM, 04/16/2008
    The bottome line is R. Howard, Victorino,Myers or Dobbs et al are not nearly as bad as there numbers would indicate. Eaton, Burrell et al are not nearly as good as there's would. That is why baseball is the greatest statiscal sport (if not athletic) ever created. Over 162 gms the numbers will avg. out to exactly where they are supposed to be. Get off Howard's back. There is only one player on that team that is whee they should be and thats Hamels!
    Truth
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 3:27 PM, 04/16/2008
    Bobby, if you determine a play at the plate will be bang-bang, you send the guy with two outs in a tie game because the chances of him scoring from third with two outs aren't great. It would take a base hit. With less than two out, you generally hold him up because a fly ball or a grounder through the drawn in infield would allow you to score him and win the game. No sure thing, of course, but if you are playing the percentages, that's the way to go.
    Dave
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 3:43 PM, 04/16/2008
    Hey, we were on Burrel's and Eaton's back when thay didn't produce, so Howard doesn't get a free pass. As far as you feeling paronoid, it is because everyone is out to get you...LOL
    jimmymack
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 4:23 PM, 04/16/2008
    Truth: another post down to your usual standard. The First Amendment (I assume that's the basis of your comment of "unconstitional") only deals with governmental interference with speech, right of assembly, free practice of religion,etc. A private entity, such as this site, can pretty much do what it wants in this area, restrained only by the market and the laws regarding defamation and copyright. The board is not a decision-making body so the concept of "democracy" does not apply.
    judas_priest
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 4:37 PM, 04/17/2008
    Then explain to me why schools have the right to regulate what students wear-etc? They consistently get sued b/c they are violating a students right to expression(speech). They are not a governmental entity. You have no clue as to what your talking about-moron.
    Truth


View comments: 1  |  2
About this blog
The Phillies Zone is the place for up-to-the-minute Phillies coverage from the Inquirer.

Matt Gelb Inquirer Staff Writer
Bob Brookover Inquirer Baseball Columnist
Philly.com Sports Videos
Blog archives:
Past Archives: