ShareThis Page
Pirates farm report |

Pirates farm report

| Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:00 a.m

A look at how the Pirates’ farm teams fared in games played July 27:

NASHVILLE (48-54) lost 2-1 at home against Salt Lake (Angels). John Van Benschoten (3-9) started and lost, allowing two runs and five hits in seven innings. He struck out six and walked one. 3B Luis Figueroa was 1 for 3 with an RBI.

ALTOONA (60-41) lost 8-3 at home against Akron (Indians). Bryan Bullington (7-6) started and lost, allowing four runs and seven hits in six innings. He struck out five and walked one. 2B Jeff Keppinger was 2 for 4 with two RBI. 1B Josh Bonifay was 1 for 4 with an RBI.

LYNCHBURG (43-56/8-21) lost 4-0 at Winston-Salem (White Sox). Tom Gorzelanny (0-3) started and lost, allowing four runs and four hits in five innings. He struck out seven and walked four. DH Matt Meath and 3B Ryan Newman had Lynchburg’s only two hits.

HICKORY (60-42/21-11) won its fifth consecutive game, a 3-1 decision at home against Delmarva (Orioles). Leo Nunez (7-3) pitched a rain-shortened complete game, allowing one run and four hits in 6.2 innings. He struck out six and walked one. 1B Jon Benick was 3 for 3 with a double, two home runs (Nos. 22-23) and three RBI. 3B Justin Harris singled and scored a run.

WILLIAMSPORT (15-21) was rained out at New Jersey (Cardinals).

BRADENTON (18-12) had it doubleheader against the Gulf Coast League Red Sox suspended because of rain.

is a former freelancer.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.