I can't believe he didn't even try a squeeze in the 10th. I'll try to take solace in the fact that we've lost our last five by one run. That, or I'll focus my attention on something else. I don't understand why some of you even watch any more. Except that I suspect that many of you are secretly happy this is happening.
Yep I agree. They had opportunities to squeeze early in game to advance the runner over, but instead they swing away into an out. I believe it was Everett who should have bunted. By the way wasn't that one of the reasons why Jimy Williams was fired b/c he didn't play small ball enough??
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4449199.stm Happy moments 'protect the heart' Happiness was more commonly linked to leisure, rather than work Every moment of happiness counts when it comes to protecting your heart, researchers have said. A team from University College London said happiness leads to lower levels of stress-inducing chemicals. They found that even when happier people experienced stress, they had low levels of a chemical which increases the risk of heart disease. The research is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. This shows that people who are happy and unstressed are likely to have less potentially dangerous stress chemicals in their bodies Professor Peter Weissberg, British Heart Foundation It showed that those who were happy less often had higher levels of a bloodstream chemical called plasma fibrinogen, which shows if there is inflammation present. It is an indicator of how great a risk a person has of developing heart disease in the future. Daily happiness Researchers tested 116 men and 100 women who were taking part in a major study of thousands of London-based civil servants recruited between 1985 and 1988 when 35-55 years old to investigate the risk factors for coronary heart disease. They carried out tests on people at work, during leisure periods and in the laboratory. People were also asked whether or not they were happy at 33 moments during the day. The researchers then evaluated how often people were happy in the course of the day. Leisure was, unsurprisingly, linked with more happy moments than work. It was found that some people reported they never felt happy, while others reported feeling occasional happiness and those who felt happy most of the time. The results were adjusted for gender, age, employment status, weight, smoking habits and psychological distress. Levels of cortisol - a stress hormone - were 32% lower in people who reported more happy moments. Cortisol has been related to abdominal obesity, Type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure and autoimmune disorders. The researchers also discovered happy people have had lower levels of fibrinogen when they were stressed. Emotional state Professor Jane Wardle, who worked on the study, said: "All the research to date has been on unhappiness, rather than happiness. "This research suggests we should aim to maximise the happiness of the population." Professor Andrew Steptoe, who led the study, said: "It has been suspected for the last few years that happier people may be healthier both mentally and physically than less happy people. "What this study shows is that there are plausible biological pathways linking happiness with health." He added: "What we find particularly interesting is that the associations between happiness and biological responses were independent of psychological distress. "We already know that depression and anxiety are related to increased physical health risk. This study raises the intriguing possibility that the effect of happiness may be somewhat separate." Professor Peter Weissberg, Medical Director at the British Heart Foundation said: "The results of this study build upon this team's work, which we are delighted to have supported. "Evidence that emotional state is important for good heart health is growing and this shows that people who are happy and unstressed are likely to have less potentially dangerous stress chemicals in their bodies."
Reading this, I can say it is way more enjoyable when they lose. These are the Stros folks, it's all they know, lovable losers; and I had no idea Jeff Bagwell was the highest paid first sacker in the league, figured he was close, but not the man
Managerial moves aside (since hindsight IS 20/20)...we lost because we didn't hit...the same reason we have lost most of our games this year. I knew we would have trouble scoring runs this year..i just didnt think it would be THIS much trouble. It scares me that our offense is actually worse than I thought it would be..and as you know, my expectations were pretty low.
I watch because I just moved to Little Rock from Missouri, and now I get nearly ALL the Stros games for free on FSN-H-Town - - what this losing skid shows is the incredibly fine line between winning and losing - - 5 1-run losses and the 8-4 loss to the Mets was a 4-3 lead in the bottom of the 8th - - it's been the bullpen two times, the offense three times, and starting pitching once (duckworth on sunday) - - it's a very fine line -- but a 4-1 start is proof the Astros can get back over that line more times than not - - they're a veteran team and I believe they'll straighten it out - - by that, i mean get to .500 or a little above by the time Lance's bat gets into the lineup - - it's a long road, it's just the start is real bumpy - - ask the $210 million dollar Yanks - - d - -
that was a tough game to watch. Bases loaded, no outs and we cannot score a run OR Lead off double, sac bunt sends the runner to third and we still cannot score. We have got to be able to score in these situations. I feel sorry for the Rocket if this continues.
Welcome and stick around! What part of Missouri? Well, hindsight is 20/20, but if you read the thread, we talked about the squeeze when the bases were loaded and no outs in the 10th. Nothing to do with hindsight. .
Eh...that did not surprise me. Walt Weis and these same Braves did something similar to us some years back in the NLDS. What I do not like is the obstinate approach to the games by manager Garner. It was painful to watch but I am glad I to watch my taped episode 24 before going to bed.
I stand corrected...as usual. I'd start with moving Everett to two and see how he does. Taveras hasn't been doing anything either. Still trying to figure out why he didn't bunt with one out in the 10th last night...
Garner makes the bunt calls, I'm assuming. Can't blame Tavares. But yea, he's fallen off. Still has solid #s for the season.
he is seeing less and less pitches in the 8 hole....especially since not only the pitcher is behind him...but so is everett. i think batting second would help him tremendously
Oh, I'm definitely blaming Garner for that one. I think any kind of shakeup would be good right now. Ensberg is so frustrating because when he actually does swing, he's making contact. I definitely wouldn't be upset with Taveras at the top part of the order.
