Hey calm down now… people don’t issue retractions when they speculate as to what happened and they’re wrong. They issue retractions when they report something that happened that didn’t. Reddick was caught between 3rd and home, which cost his team, and the author speculated that thought the ball got by the catcher. The fact that Scutaro missed a sign doesn’t significantly change any facts that were reported here, so relax! :)
…and then Scutaro got thrown out at 2nd trying to stretch a single into a double. If anyone is to blame, it’s Scutaro. And the rest of the Red Sox for not being able to solve Kyle Davies. Reddick clearly had the best game of any Boston hitters.
The issue I have with that is not the authors read of the play, but that it was definitely a boneheaded play by Scutaro that could very well have cost the game, but f/bWAR can’t yet account for it. It’s just one play, but there are ballplayers who make these boneheaded plays a lot (my objection to the fawning over McCutchen). What good is WAR if it can’t filter out those you don’t play the game properly? Isn’t that a very, very important part of being a pro baller?
Comment by Sultan of Schwwingg — July 26, 2011 @ 12:58 pm
ecp: A much larger amount of WPA was generated in getting the runner to third base. At this point, scoring the run is almost assumed. Removing the runner from third kills your win probability.