I do understand the notion of criticizing a manager. For instance, “Argh, why not put the hit and run on there?” or “Remove the pitcher now and bring in another one”. But it seems to me highly problematic when people criticize the manager first and foremost AFTER a player has done poorly.

For example, let’s say Vizquel is removed for PH Jones, who promptly strikes out. As far as I can tell, the first level of blame in that situation goes to Jones, and only secondarily to the manager, since it cannot be known what the original hitter would have done in that situation anyway. I think you can ponder or second-guess him, sure. But to do as I have read and heard many fans do (not necessarily most people here), to take such things as *concrete evidence* of Washington “not having a clue” is beyond disingenuous.

When decisions are made, blame the manager, but only until the player in question does or does not get it done. When the players don’t get it done, they get the blame.

I’ll be the first to tell you the guy has struggled greatly this season, and I’m not going to complain when he gets benched or shipped off to Oklahoma City to figure out how to hit again if his average doesn’t head north very soon.

That being said, what if Davis hits a fly ball to right? None of you have a thing to complain about, even if it’s not a home run. To the people who expect guys like Davis or any other power hitter to bunt in that situation, GIVE ME A BREAK! They are on the team because they hit the ball in the outfield – period!

I like the fact that people care about this team. Just remember that baseball isn’t a chess match. You don’t automatically win or lose games because you put the pieces in a certain spot. Strategy goes into every single pitch, but in the end, if our players make plays when they have an opportunity, Rangers win. When everything was said and done last night, that’s exactly what the Rangers did at bat and in the field.

Question (and I’ll ask again on the game blog):

Why does throwing a 4 seam fastball buildup velocity? I read that the Rangers are asking Beavan to throw more 4 seamer to “build” up velocity. This doesn’t make sense to me. A 4 seamer does have more velocity, because not held as tight and therefore not as much friction. But how does it increase arm strength/velocity?

Anybody have an idea?

What’s really neat is this team is good, but NOT NEAR AS GREAT as it can be over the next 4-6 years.

The bad part is, I’m not getting anything done at night because I’m watching every game!! Thankfully, Mrs. Jack Daddy has become a huge Rangers fan (though she was very disappointed to find out Kinsler was married!).

@EG: nice article and glad you asked Wash his reasoning, i was checking other articles today and couldn’t find a quote on it any where else. keep up the good work, and thanks for providing a site where this type of debate can happen.