Phillies Sweep Braves on Ruf’s 8th Inning Homer – Phillies Nation

Phillies Sweep Braves on Ruf’s 8th Inning Homer

Cole Hamels actually got lucky. It’s about time.

Hamels went eight innings, giving up two runs on two hits while striking out nine in the Phillies 3-2  Another solid performance that dropped his ERA to 3.45. It’s almost going unnoticed how great he has been. His only blemishes came off the bat of Evan Gattis.

The mule-strong Gattis hit the longest home run in Citizens Bank Park history at 486 feet on Ashburn Alley. He’d also add another bomb to torture Hamels.

However, Hamels was bailed out by Darin Ruf with his 13th home run in the eighth inning. Ruf has done that damage in just 188 at-bats. With 15 career home runs in 252 plate appearances, that extrapolates to 37 home runs over a 162 game season. The Phillies are sorely lacking that power.

Jonathan Papelbon was given the day off, so BJ Rosenberg came in for a nine-pitch save.



  1. Paul

    September 8, 2013 at 9:06 pm

    Hey Pat, for us math dummies out there, how’d you get to 37 homers?


    September 8, 2013 at 10:50 pm

    Just wondering, if Cholly were calling the shots would we have seen Papelbomb today?
    I thought this game was for sure going to be in the loss column, great win.

  3. hk

    September 9, 2013 at 7:19 am

    Ruf has hit 1 HR per every 16.8 PA’s, so if he were to keep up that pace during a full season of ~620 PA’s, he would hit 37 HR’s in that season. Look at his 162 game average on the link below:

    • Paul

      September 9, 2013 at 10:01 am

      Thanks hk

  4. Manny

    September 9, 2013 at 7:35 am

    It’s a real shame that Lee and Hamels won’t be in the postseason again. Two of the very best in baseball… even with a crappy offense, that duo could potentially carry any team all the way through the postseason.

    • schmenkman

      September 9, 2013 at 8:36 am

      Manny, I assume you mean both at the same time, and for the Phillies. I don’t think it’s out of the question for the Phillies to get into the postseason in either 2014 or 2015 (Lee’s last year; Hamels is here through 2018).

      • Manny

        September 9, 2013 at 12:31 pm

        Yea. I should’ve said ” this year” instead of “again.” If the Phillies can get another top of the rotation starter and a legit outfielder this offseason, I think they’d have a good chance at the playoffs in 2014 (also thanks in part to the solid performances from the younger guys).

  5. George

    September 9, 2013 at 8:48 am

    Once again, Hamels got little run support. It’s only his ability that allows him to win at all. I’d say that Ruf bailed out the offense more than he bailed out Hamels. It was a pathetic showing by the hitters until that home run, and even then, 3 runs per game doesn’t usually make for winning.

    • Lefty

      September 9, 2013 at 12:58 pm

      Your criticism would make sense 3 months ago. But sheesh, “pathetic showing” seems a little rough on a lineup with Rollins, Utley, and 5-6 AAA players. IMO- A pathetic showing is what the Braves, the team that leads the NL in wins and winning percentage- getting only 2 hits, put on. In fact I’d call it a damn pathetic weekend for the Braves, a very flawed team, who in my estimation have no shot of going far in the post season.

      • Hogey's Role

        September 9, 2013 at 1:57 pm

        I agree with lefty it’s more pathetic the big bad braves just got swept by our AAA team basically lol… however every team goes through some rough stretches, the Phillies have been riding there’s for close to 2 years now lol…

      • Ken Bland

        September 9, 2013 at 2:52 pm

        VERY flawed? I suppose it depemds on use of the word very. They certainly have SOME flaws, and those you could easiy say are VERY flawful, Carrying the bats of Uggla (unfortunately, it’s fair to say as usual) and BJ, who has never been a well rounded hitter, exceed very, but for the most part, particularly since pitching’s so important, that’s a good ballclub.

        As for the playoffs, I’d consider them a team that perhaps more than a lot of clubs need some things to go right. Home field through the LCS (good as it can get) would help. Heyward making a quick and effective return is only going to do so much to help against lefties, but it’d be a big plus.

        They lost to 2 excellent lefties over the weekend. What else is new? And they were quite competitive in both games. They play LA, and have the lesser home game, Greinke (quality righty) between CK and Ryu, that’s difficult. Match up against the Cardinals, which may or may not be in a consistent pitching mode with the odd game at the Ted, it could easily be a competitive series. “Luck” of such a draw gets them to the LCS, which no matter what, seems deep to me. Cincy’s got strength in Chapman at the back end, but that rotation’s pretty righthanded (but admittedly good), and you match Heyward, Freeman and McCann against righties, it’s no reason to be pessimistic. So the Braves might not look great, and have flaws, but they also might be about the right matchup at the right time.

        I can easily see a series unfold where they don’t hit, and the quotes are all “We just didn’t hit”
        almost against anyone. But that’s most likely against LA where the Dodgers get the odd game.

        Their not chopped liver. The Phils beat a good club that wasn’t able to exert it’s strength because they didn’t get to the late innings ahead. And I think they got beat by a decent ball club that played well. Not some collection of minor leaguers. They rate higher than being thought of as an automatic quick exit even if it is certainly a possibity beyond the normal it could happen to anyone..

      • Lefty

        September 9, 2013 at 3:13 pm

        Fair enough KB, I’ll make a slight retraction- they’re not chopped liver. They are however, the team that started 12-2, and then waffled just below the .500 mark for the next three months, followed by another hot streak that seems to be going cold again.

        So, which team will they be when the playoffs come in three weeks? My forecast remains- October chilly.

      • George

        September 9, 2013 at 3:59 pm

        Lefty, to me three runs is pathetic no matter who’s in the lineup. These AAA players are now in the majors, and some of them have been up before (Hernandez, Galvis, Ruf) and should at least know something by now. If they expect to win, they’ll need more than three runs most of the time. You expect a team to be shut down by good pitching, but not by the ordinary guys or people who were lately AAA players themselves.

        I also can’t compare their performance to the Braves’. Maybe their offense was pathetic, too. But they were facing an excellent pitcher who also happened to be having one of his better games.

        Part of my disgust with yesterday’s offensive game is that run support always seems non-exsistent when Hamels is pitching. A paltry three runs aggravates me more than it would normally.

      • Ryne Duren

        September 10, 2013 at 9:53 am

        In an answer to George’s comment. The way it seems to me George is that you think the AAA players you mentioned are the reason for the lack of offense by the Phillies. But in case your memory is short. The 3 guys you mentioned all had a part in the wins against the Brave. Two of them had game winning HR’s ( Ruf and Galvis) and Hernandez got on base in the eight inn. in the first game and score on another AAA guy hitting a HR Asche. In my mind all those guys are proving that they are major league players.
        If you want to blame a lack of offense on anybody there are a number of so ML veterans on this team who come up short on a consistent basis. Not the afore 3 you mentioned.

    • George

      September 10, 2013 at 10:52 am

      I didn’t mean it to sound as if I was blaming the “AAA” players, as Lefty calls them. My main concern is the overall offense. Ruf, who is certainly one of the newer guys, saved the offense from being worse than pathetic last night, and yes, some of the others had a role in other wins, but I wasn’t refering to those games, but only the Hamels game. I also don’t see how these players can be called AAA guys. Galvis played quite a few major league games last season. He wouldn’t even qualify as a rookie. Hernandez has been up earlier in the year, and Ruf finished the 2012 seaon on the active roster.

      The team has been garbage offensively for the entire season, especially when Hamels pitches. It hasn’t much mattered who’s been in the lineup. They’ve been winning some lately, but the offense has only been marginally better, and without the good pitching of Hamels, Lee, Diekman, and others lately, they’d still be losing more than winning.

      • Lefty

        September 10, 2013 at 11:23 am

        George, we completely agree that proper run support has not been given to Cole Hamels this year or Cliff Lee last year, or Cole Hamels the year before that. It’s very frustrating that an offense with this kind of payroll, and veteran presence for the last few seasons doesn’t play well for it’s outstanding pitchers. I just thought you were a little tough on the “young guys”, the “AAA guys”, the “substitutes”, “Call Ups”, -whatever label you wish to use, that are playing now, that’s all. I really like these guys, I’ve been enjoying watching them the last few weeks. Yes, some have had limited ML experience before, and some have a realistic chance to be every day major leaguers, others don’t.

        I guess what I really meant to say was this-
        My expectations for the guys playing now is so much less than the team they put together at the beginning of the year, so that when they fail, I don’t mind as much. – Not nearly as much as when a lineup of M Young, Rollins, Revere, Utley, Howard, Brown, D Young, and whoever they had catching at the time were in place.

      • Ken Bland

        September 10, 2013 at 11:28 am

        You know what I find funny about your ripping the offense Sunday? Funny strange, niot funny hilarious. This is just one person (moi) ‘s view, but I watched that game Sunday. And the way that one person’s mindset was, I was watching Hamels pitch well. I was watching the defense play well (I can’t remember, maybe there were 1 or 2 typical 2013 Phillie blunders, but nothing stood out, I dunno). They just played well on the whole, and they maybe get another 1-2 runs if Hernandez has a better day on the bases.

        But the point is, they looked like a pretty decent team on the whole, so unlike some of the garbage we saw earlier in the year, I was pretty easily distracted from the fact that they didn’t hit. It’s not an unfair poinbt, it just didn’t stand out to one person like it has at times when multiple stuff rolled downhill at once.

        And no question you can make a deal, or maybe even a big deal out of it, but they never have an easy time against lefties (or seldom),nd I think Maholm’s a pretty decent pitcher.

        So anyway, I just found myself easily distracted from it. Besides, they had a bunch of good at bats Saturday night, and you don’t necessarily cream the ball even 2 days in a row as pitching continues to regain it’s role as Director of Operations in the 2013 baseball world.

      • Ken Bland

        September 10, 2013 at 11:54 am

        Two thoughts on this run support philibuster, or referendum, in case I spelled filibuster wrong.
        That’s a better percentage than Dave Montgomery likes on trades, so that’s a good start.

        One. If you gave Messers Lee and Hamels some truth syrum, locked ’em in a room, threatened them with being traded to Houston if they didn’t speak the whole truth and nothing but the truth, what would they say bugged ’em nore….the lack of run support, or lack of freaking defensive support, how close would they be to the next flight to Houston. You’re supposed to hit 3 of 10. You’re supposed to field 9 of 10.

        And secondly, you gotta do what you can to catch trends in the game. I’m hardly rushing to the defense of the Phillies offense, or the guy that put the roster together. No question, you wanna see more than some of the games we’ve seen them demonstrate that they think scoring is felonious. But it’s a fact that there’s some real, real good young pitching around the game, which has contributed to The League’s destination of what as of a week ago was the lowest OBP and OPS, or slg, or some multiple categories since either ’89, or ’92, or some time a way back in the day. Neither Lee last year, or Hamels this year are alone in their plights. They both rank(ed) low in run support, and the complaint isn’t in vain, but you can’t get overly caught up in that.

        And there’s additional reason you can’t get overly caught up in it. Pitchers wins are a well dissected misrepresentation of value. More so than losses. This is gonna sound harsh, but it still carries a lot of truth. The relative lack of run support on the part of both pitchers not forgotten, there’s a world of difference quite often in pitching from behind, or pitching ahead. You give up the first run, maybe 2, you put some degree of pressure on your offense. Maybe it’s just some, not to be confused with a lot, but it’s some. Nobody’s saying you always have to have your team score first, but you certainly strive for that. And in the case of both Lee and Hamels, there were enough times where they didn’t do that to where you can’t just blame the lack of run support. Both guys, on the whole, have pitched real well in their corresponding losing record seasons. But both threw enough bad pitches where a lack of run support shouldn’t gain unanimous support like they were perfect and it was somebody else’s fault, although a lot of blame on the teammates is far from totally absolved.

        End of phillybuster.

      • George

        September 10, 2013 at 3:42 pm

        Actually, my expectations are probably higher now than they were a few months back. I expected very little from Kratz, nearly nothing from D. Young, and I didn’t expect Utley to go as long as he has. I expected Frandsen and Mayberry to be a bench bats only, and Nix to be what he was. I had no expectations whatever about Howard. Even replacements can play better than some of the early Phils, who going into the season actually had below replacement level numbers. I always hoped for better, but that was pretty empty emotion.

        I expect more from the new guys because they aren’t decrepit like the Youngs, and aren’t yet obvious bench players like Mayberry, and aren’t completely washed up like Nix.

  6. schmenkman

    September 9, 2013 at 8:57 am

    Phillies in the second half:

    under Manuel: 3.54 runs scored per game, 5.67 runs allowed
    under Sandberg: 3.61 runs scored per game, 4.52 runs allowed

    Same offense, better pitching.

    • Chuck A.

      September 10, 2013 at 7:27 am

      So the Phillies are 13-10 under Sandberg. I’ve heard people make a big deal about that. But who’s to say that they couldn’t been the same 13-10 under Charlie?

      • Ryne Duren

        September 10, 2013 at 10:06 am

        Chuck I agree, but I might ad that Sandbergs handling of the pen has been a big difference in my mind. Plus the fact that the Youngs are gone. Which means the defense is better so those two factors combined seem to make a difference.
        I mean it’s a short time span to judge but I think it’s noticeable. Otherwise same old same old.
        Their wins in one run games to me means that the manager is pulling the right strings when it’s needed where Charlie, God love him wasn’t doing that and really never did in his tenure here. So to get the same old same old changed we could use a good high ave. bat in the line up.
        I’m getting the feeling that we’re not that far away from becoming relevant again. A pitcher here and a hitter there could be the answer. Revere and Howard both healthy next year could be the spark this team needs along with Brown so I’m optimistic about next year . I’m feeling a lot better about this team the last month than I have been in 2 years.

      • George

        September 10, 2013 at 11:04 am

        I disagree. Manuel suffered from the fact that none of his bullpen arms were performing. It never seemed to matter whether he played percentages or not because some bullpen bum would give up walks and hits. Many of those guys, like Valdez and Aumont, are no longer part of the equation, and some of the others, like Diekman and Rosenberg, are finally starting to show some ability.

        I will agree with the better defense, but that, I think, might also play a role the relief pitchers’ performance of late.

        Some one run wins aren’t due to the bullpen, anyway. They sometimes involve clutch hits or great starting pitching, or pure dumb luck. The Hamels game certainly wasn’t won because of the handling of the bullpen. That game was won because of an eighth inning homerun in support of a great pitching effort

      • Ken Bland

        September 10, 2013 at 11:17 am

        It’s an utterly stupid question.

        And I bet Charlie Manuel would agree with that. He may or may not be close to turning the corner emotionally and looking forward, but a guy with what he’s accomplished, for my money is past comparing what he’d have done, or would do with the lineup, with the pitching changes, ad infanitum. MAYBE, he did it for like 2 games into the change. He’s probably having a fun time in Florida by now, hanging out with the little lady, and doing what he usually did….avoiding the bulk of fandom, but missing those he enjoyed talking baseball with. And he’ll be back to that, you can book it..

        I don’t know how anybody could get suckered into discussing that, but whatever flips one’s switch accounts for the many beats to which mankind moves. I assure you The Chuckster wouldn’t give it an ounce of thought.

        The preceding editorial is the opinion of the individual. It is not necessarily the view of the staff or management of the company the individual may or may not work for. But it’s a god damn fact.

    • George

      September 10, 2013 at 3:27 pm

      It’s not an utterly stupid question because it asks if Sandberg’s management might not be the entire reason why the team is playing as they have been lately. There’s no possible way of knowing how they’d have continued under Manuel, of course, but that 13-10 record is a pretty small sample. Look back in the season, and you’d find a great number of managers who have guided their teams to a slightly better than .500 percentage for 23 whole games.

      Sandberg so far seems to be doing a good job, but it’s a little early to tell just how he’ll be over the long term, especially when he’s his bullpen has improved and his lineups have players in them who are virtual unknowns to the opposing teams.

      • Ken Bland

        September 10, 2013 at 5:03 pm

        It’s not an utterly stupid question because it asks if Sandberg’s management might not be the entire reason why the team is playing as they have been lately.

        How could anyone, including not just those in their right mind believe that to be the case. Ya know, we’re talking 13-10 here, which shouldn’t be confused with 19-4. It doesn’t matter if Ryne’s a better, or different style manager than Dallas Green. Don’t matter a hill of beans how he compares to Frank Lucchesi, Jim Fregosi or even Buck Bleeping Shaw. He was better than Joe Kuharich and Roy Rubin when he went out to check out the ground rules and present the lineup his first game, but so what?.

        But what difference does it nake if the Phils win almost however many games in such a short time frame. Charlie raised questions, won. Rybo might win, might raise fewer questions. But what’s the big deal. Guy puts up a legacy, it’s cool. He doesn’t need to be compared to anyone else. Calling Charlie the best manager in Phils history is absurd. Calling him the winningest is bullseye accurate.

        So I’ll rephrase.

        The Atlanta Braves are not chopped liver against possible matchups.

        The timing of comparing Charlie Manuel to his successor is flagrantly moronic. I hope that comes across as more romantic than utterly stupid. Sure, I do. Even if he wins 6 divvys in a row, 2 titles, and 4 Met bets, all it proves is he did a bottom line net good job in his time. There’s STILL a thick line between that and the LaRussa/Martin/Weaver types of the world/ Or whoever you wanna consider a great manager, although those are good nominees. But you can discuss Manuel V Sandberg at some point, water coolerish though it might be. But now? Everyone knows Charlie’s game “flaws” without needing Ryno to test them. At 13-10, no less. Like he’s the second coming of Mr. Mack.

        That said, I like the BJ move, but so what. Charlie still did a helluva job.

      • Lefty

        September 10, 2013 at 5:28 pm

        KB, Sometimes there are parts of your comments that are as random as your pictures. What do the Braves and chopped liver have to do with it? That was from earlier.

        Speaking of pics.

        Number 6?? Late 70’s, Early 80’s retro uni? Familiar, but my memory is failing me.
        BA lists these guys-
        Ted Sizemore?
        Keith Moreland?
        Johnny Oates?
        Is it one of them?

      • Ken Bland

        September 10, 2013 at 5:48 pm


        Johnny Oates, recognizing the affiliation with OD, 2014 and his effective careers as Boonie’s backup/partner, and Ranger managerial career.

        The common denominator on the Braves, who platy in the NL, and Sandberg, who manages in the NL is simple. I chose to rephrase both theories I presented.. The Braves, as you overstated yesterday are not quick exit chopped liver, but are ONLY a possible second round player as I speculated if they fall into a favorable matchup. So they are chopped liver if the first round pits them with road field disadvantage against the Dodgers. And I changed tempos, the common denominator that justified the Braves inclusion on the uuterly stupid description to flagrantly moronicalrteration

        Maybe the best segue since Cerrone’s Love In C Minor was mixed with Souvenirs by Voyage, but that’s another story for another time.

        And if by chance you read this far, I have what I think is not an utterly stupid question.


        young pitcher

        brand new catcher

        who calls the pitches

        Other nominees are Dubee and Sandberg.

        I’m guessing Sandberg, although MAYBE they wanna see what kind of game Rupp calls.

        I really think that’s a terrific question, but what do I know. What do you think, and how sure are you?

      • Lefty

        September 10, 2013 at 6:20 pm

        I think they go in with a generic game plan that Sandberg can change at any point so Rupp will be looking over frequently.

        I just recently heard a great story told by Cal Ripken. He said that when Ben McDonald first came up, he took over calling the games from his position at shortstop! He said he would signal in to Tettleton or Melvin and then it was passed on to McDonald. He said that his signs were so subtle that neither Frank Robinson or – Johnny Oates- knew he was doing it for a long time. His perspective was that his perspective was better than either the pitcher or the catcher’s as to what the batter was doing, or how he was hitting. Apparently after a while Ben was only comfortable if Ripken was calling the game, as if he didn’t have enough to do. I thought it was fascinating stuff.

      • Ken Bland

        September 10, 2013 at 7:06 pm

        A guy could probably write some fascinating stories about calling pitches, and baseball signs.

        All that body motion and limb movement, and it might come down to a nose twitch.

        Tettleton, I recognized by last name, Melvin, I’m not so sure, but I believe it was Bob that caught there.

        Kind of ironic that a talented pitcher like Ben was once at a stage where they had to be concerned with making him comfortable. And he didn’t break in too young, either, having gone to LSU.

        So many great traditions to Orioles baseball. Anyway, we’ll see how Rupp does tonight. It’ should be fun watching him get that first big league game in. Gotta cherish those once in a lifetime experience, and even for that guys that don’t make it, it’s fun to experience that vicariously, let alone in uni on the field level.

      • George

        September 11, 2013 at 10:19 am

        Ken, there’s not a person alive who exists in a vacuum. Comparisons are inevitable, and one of the ways everybody is evaluated. You simply can’t rate Sandberg’s management without a frame of reference, be it Charlie Manuel or Buck Shaw or anybody else. If he’s won more than he’s lost, one has to ask why, and the way to answer that in many cases will boil down to speculating on how some other successful person in the same occupation might have done under the same circumstances.

        I resent your implications that people are crazy to be doing otherwise. I’d even go far as to say you yourself have made comparisons before you’ve made most of your decisions. YOU’D be out of your mind if you didn’t.

  7. Hogey's Role

    September 9, 2013 at 11:36 am

    Why hasn’t Rupp started yet,I don’t see why we’re not trying to see what some of our younger guys can do for us??

    • George

      September 10, 2013 at 11:08 am

      I would guess Rupp will catch when Cloyd pitches. They’re familiar with each other, and that should help both of them.

  8. Ken Bland

    September 10, 2013 at 2:12 pm

    Upcoming Phillies baseball

    Monday, March 31, 2014

    3:05 PM ET
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 R H E
    Philadelphia C. Hamels (0-0)
    Texas Y. Darvish (0-0)

  9. Ryne Duren

    September 11, 2013 at 8:52 am

    I’m not going to argue with you guys on the question. And it was a great question. We all have our theories. At least I do. But that’s just me! Who the heck am I. You guys all have good and valid points.
    I just think that when Charlie was here the #2 and 3 spots in the order didn’t produce much with the exception of Utley. And a lot of times it was the #1, 2,4, blah blah. and it went on and on around the lineup. And the pen was horrible period. The defense? I don’t have to tell you.
    Now with Sandberg? most of the time the 1 and 2 holes are unproductive. And that tends to rove around the line up. As far as the pen goes with Sandberg? I do think there’s a difference in the handling but also that some of these guys are actually performing much better so who’s to say it wouldn’t have happened under Charlie.
    I think the difference in my eyes between Charlie and Sandberg is that Charlie never exuded confidence (if that’s the right word) to his young pitchers add that to the fact that these guys at AAA pitched well for Sandberg. So maybe it was sort of a comfort thing. They didn’t have to prove it to Ryno, they just eased up a bit on trying to impress and just pitched to their capabilities. Can’t wait for next year it’ll be fun again.

  10. Ken Bland

    September 11, 2013 at 11:42 am

    “I think the difference in my eyes between Charlie and Sandberg is that Charlie never exuded confidence to his young pitchers ”

    That seems like an implication of current staff consideration. So from the top, if we’re limited to that populous, number one, it sure seemed like during the Manuel administration, he showed more confidence in Jake once he showed better control. Ryno seems to have inherited a quality guy there. And Bastardo’s still around, so it’s fair to consider him. Seems like Charlie showed confidence in him quite a bit, and what was it, 2 years ago, or some distant time, Antonio was pitching poorly for a while, so is the headline out of that that Manuel lost confidence in him, or that Antonio was in a slump. Is BJ pitching all that better since Ryno took over? He was doing fine this year under Charlie, and Charlie, in the past, seemed to be giving him more options than his pitching seemed to deserve, although pitching and potential are 2 different things, when he was stinking up the joint in prior recalls. . Do you think Sandberg showed confidence in Aumont by asking Ruben to bring him up this month? I doubt it, but that’s speculation. Exactly which young pitchers are we talking about that Sandberg has shown more confidence in that didn’t by the way start showing they were ready to pitch quality baseball.

    And if we’re NOT limited to present staff, what are the details on this alleged non confidence Charlie had toward Vance Worley, or JA Happ? Additionally, is Ryno more patient with Kendrick, who Charlie had plenty of both patience and impatience with over 24 games times a lot more Charlie gave Mike Stutes ample opportunity to pitch when he was healthy. That sure seemed to portray confidence. I bet David Herndon would testify under oath that Charlie gave him a display of frequent confidence for a good length of time.

    So it’s a great question if you have a vivid imagination and think that multiple players are feeding off this miracle confidence that Ryno has brought to the table. If you ask any of the players, you can bet YOUR house, AND your neighbors that if there’s a difference in the club, it’s got more to do with discipline, attention, that sort of stuff, than confidence. And if this isn’t the 10,000th time in a row that that’s happened in baseball history, it hasn’t happened 10,000 times.

    Like I said yesterday. Ryno might win, might raise fewer questions about strategy and the like than Chuck. If you think now’s the time to measure it, then either get your information straight, or by all means, correct what player performances I have spoken erroneously about in suggesting that Sandberg instilling confidence in is mostly a product of fan’s imagination.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Phillies Nation has been bringing Phillies fans together since 2004 with non-stop news, analysis, trade rumors, trips, t-shirts, and other fun stuff!

Browse the Archives

Browse by Category

Copyright Phillies Nation, LLC 2004-2016
Not Affiliated with Major League Baseball or the Philadelphia Phillies

To Top