Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Manager's Decision


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
730 replies to this topic

#201 Toe Nash

  • 3,117 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 05:54 PM

I don't see the logic in leaving Cook in to pitch for so long with a grisly leg when you're carrying 13 pitchers. He said they wrapped it up and he lost feeling and was pitching with "all arm."

I can understand having him give it a go given the long game the night before, but once it became apparent that he wasn't the same (after the Jones HR at the latest) I see no reason to leave him in. He's not a guy who is so good that he's going to get guys out when he's not 100%.

#202 glennhoffmania


  • likes the tomahawk chop


  • 8,384,321 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:02 PM

I wasn't able to watch the game today, but at one point I checked in on the score and saw that Punto was leading off and I stopped checking in. On what planet is putting a guy hitting .174/.333/.217 (before today's game) in the leadoff spot defensible? It's getting really tough for Bobby supporters to keep coming up with excuses and explanations.

#203 Plympton91


  • loco parentis


  • 6,552 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:18 PM

I wasn't able to watch the game today, but at one point I checked in on the score and saw that Punto was leading off and I stopped checking in. On what planet is putting a guy hitting .174/.333/.217 (before today's game) in the leadoff spot defensible? It's getting really tough for Bobby supporters to keep coming up with excuses and explanations.


I'm seeing a .333 on-base percentage. What other alternative was there? Saltalamacchia? Gonzalez?

I mean, when "I think I'll hit Mike Aviles 5th today" is even something that seems like a good idea to anyone, doesn't that tell you all you need to know? This team is uninsured and has cancer. Valentine is looking for a winning lottery number while many on this board think the key to success is buying enough term life insurance to cover funeral expenses instead.

#204 absintheofmalaise


  • too many flowers


  • 11,087 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:23 PM

I'm seeing a .333 on-base percentage. What other alternative was there? Saltalamacchia? Gonzalez?

I mean, when "I think I'll hit Mike Aviles 5th today" is even something that seems like a good idea to anyone, doesn't that tell you all you need to know? This team is uninsured and has cancer. Valentine is looking for a winning lottery number while many on this board think the key to success is buying enough term life insurance to cover funeral expenses instead.


Ryan Sweeney, who was the original LO hitter until WMB was a late scratch.

#205 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:23 PM

I'm seeing a .333 on-base percentage. What other alternative was there? Saltalamacchia? Gonzalez?

I mean, when "I think I'll hit Mike Aviles 5th today" is even something that seems like a good idea to anyone, doesn't that tell you all you need to know?


As an alternative -- maybe Sweeney? You know...Option A to begin the day?

And sadly, the only persons thinking "I'll hit Mike Aviles 5th today" seems like a good idea are Aviles' mom and the guy filling out the lineup card.

Which, I suppose, does tell me everything I need to know. At least about BobbyV.

#206 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,383 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:32 PM


Buzz, when a lineup features Punto, Salty, Byrd, etc, who would bat 5th? There's Gonzalez, Pedroia, Ortiz and six 8-9 hitters. What's your ideal lineup?

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 05 May 2012 - 07:56 PM.


#207 Plympton91


  • loco parentis


  • 6,552 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:33 PM

As an alternative -- maybe Sweeney? You know...Option A to begin the day?

And sadly, the only persons thinking "I'll hit Mike Aviles 5th today" seems like a good idea are Aviles' mom and the guy filling out the lineup card.

Which, I suppose, does tell me everything I need to know. At least about BobbyV.


O.k., so Sweeney leads off, that seems good. Now, who hits sixth--Punto? And, if Sweeney's leading off, why isn't Aviles then the best option to hit 5th? And, the reason Sweeney wasn't hitting 5th, I assume, is because then you'd have three straight lefthanded hitters in a row--because they signed lefthanders in the middle of the order instead of getting Matt Holliday to replace Jason Bay.

I could optimize the lineup based on some weighting of platoon splits, left-right balance, current performance, and past performance. No matter how Valentine did that, the Orioles would have had a better lineup, a better pitching staff, and a better bench today -- by a mile.

#208 glennhoffmania


  • likes the tomahawk chop


  • 8,384,321 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:36 PM

I don't care who else he puts in the leadoff spot. Nick Fucking Punto should be nowhere near the top of any lineup. He's a bench player that all of the sudden becomes a top OBP guy when Bobby puts him in every week or two? How many other bench/utility guys spot start and hit leadoff?

#209 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:37 PM

O.k., so Sweeney leads off, that seems good. Now, who hits sixth--Punto? And, if Sweeney's leading off, why isn't Aviles then the best option to hit 5th? And, the reason Sweeney wasn't hitting 5th, I assume, is because then you'd have three straight lefthanded hitters in a row--because they signed lefthanders in the middle of the order instead of getting Matt Holliday to replace Jason Bay.

I could optimize the lineup based on some weighting of platoon splits, left-right balance, current performance, and past performance. No matter how Valentine did that, the Orioles would have had a better lineup, a better pitching staff, and a better bench today -- by a mile.


LF - Sweeney (L)
2B - Pedroia ®
DH - Ortiz (L)
1B - Gonzalez (L)
LF - Ross ®
C - Salty (B)
SS - Aviles ®
3B - Punto (B)
CF - Byrd ®

Is that so hard?

#210 MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

  • 4,173 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 07:59 PM

LF - Sweeney (L)
2B - Pedroia ®
DH - Ortiz (L)
1B - Gonzalez (L)
LF - Ross ®
C - Salty (B)
SS - Aviles ®
3B - Punto (B)
CF - Byrd ®

Is that so hard?


No. It's really not. Punto leadoff just seems like the purest form of wishcasting.

#211 Plympton91


  • loco parentis


  • 6,552 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 08:38 PM

LF - Sweeney (L)
2B - Pedroia ®
DH - Ortiz (L)
1B - Gonzalez (L)
LF - Ross ®
C - Salty (B)
SS - Aviles ®
3B - Punto (B)
CF - Byrd ®

Is that so hard?


Is it better? Why? Punto has a higher OBP vs. righthanders over the past two seasons than all of Ross, Salty, Aviles, and Byrd. Aviles had been leading off, so, while demoting him to 7th might be what you'd do while playing EA Sports Baseball 2012, when you're dealing with an actual human being, such a demotion might be considered a slap in the face to one of the few guys not underperforming this season.

And, the main point is that if someone told me that was going to be the Red Sox lineup for the rest of the 2012 season, I'd revise my projection from 92 wins to 72 wins. That lineup blows chunks. It's like being back in pre-Duquette days.

#212 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 08:47 PM

Is it better? Why? Punto has a higher OBP vs. righthanders over the past two seasons than all of Ross, Salty, Aviles, and Byrd. Aviles had been leading off, so, while demoting him to 7th might be what you'd do while playing EA Sports Baseball 2012, when you're dealing with an actual human being, such a demotion might be considered a slap in the face to one of the few guys not underperforming this season.


But Punto does not have a higher OBP vs. righthanders over the past two seasons than any of Sweeney, Pedroia, Ortiz, or Gonzalez. A trend which has, if fact, continued through this very May.

Honestly. There's just no arguing with these people any more.

#213 Plympton91


  • loco parentis


  • 6,552 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 09:05 PM

But Punto does not have a higher OBP vs. righthanders over the past two seasons than any of Sweeney, Pedroia, Ortiz, or Gonzalez. A trend which has, if fact, continued through this very May.

Honestly. There's just no arguing with these people any more.


But, so what? Your lineup had Punto 8th! Why do want Salty and his sub-300 OBP getting more at bats than Punto and his 330 OBP? Why put the bigger outmaker 2 spots higher in the order? Are you a moron!

Moreover, Sweeney vs. a righty is a production guy for your May 2012 Red Sox. As I said, I think I would have been temped to have him hit 5th, in order to protect Gonzalez a little bit. But, the problem is that you needed Sweeney to hit first, fifth, and sixth in that lineup today, because you didn't have any good options. And, hitting him 5h means you've got 3 straight lefties beginning for a lefty specialist in the middle innings, and then McDonald against Johnson in the 9th.

THERE'S NOT ENOUGH TALENT FOR THE MANAGER TO MAKE "GOOD" (which you define as the decision a computer program would make) DECISIONS.

Were you criticizing Francona for not having Johnny Damon hit 8th and Bill Mueller lead off in 2003? After all, Mueller had a much higher OBP than Damon. Just to highlight the difference we're talking about here:

Damon.......Sweeney
Bellhorn.....Pedroia
Nomar.......Ortiz
Ramirez.....Gonzalez
Ortiz...........Ross
Millar..........Salty
Varitek........Aviles
Mueller.......Punto
Nixon.........Byrd

The 2012 Red Sox lineup currently SUCKS, no matter how you stack it up.

Edited by Plympton91, 05 May 2012 - 09:13 PM.


#214 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,383 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 09:11 PM

Sadly, Tito didn't manage the Sox in 2003, although your conclusion is one I agree with. I mean, Ellsbury has never been a great OBP guy and he's always led off, although Tito did get criticized for that prior to last year.

#215 reggiecleveland


  • sublime


  • 13,818 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 09:53 PM

And in 2003 Bellhorn played for Colorado.

#216 Gene Conleys Plane Ticket

  • 3,189 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 10:49 PM

Does anyone seriously believe that any batting order at all with this combination of players would make any God damn difference at all. Why can't we face the fact that this is a bad team right now.

A. Bad. Team.

How hard is that to understand?

Maybe Valentine really does suck. At this point, so what? I would defy any manager to get significantly better results out of this group of players.

#217 glennhoffmania


  • likes the tomahawk chop


  • 8,384,321 posts

Posted 05 May 2012 - 11:04 PM

Does anyone seriously believe that any batting order at all with this combination of players would make any God damn difference at all. Why can't we face the fact that this is a bad team right now.

A. Bad. Team.

How hard is that to understand?

Maybe Valentine really does suck. At this point, so what? I would defy any manager to get significantly better results out of this group of players.


The team is bad. That doesn't excuse Bobby when he makes idiotic decisions. If he used the proper lineups they may not have done any better, but we can still criticize him for making ridiculous decisions. His job is to put the players in the best position to succeed. He has failed to do that on numerous occasions.

#218 Gene Conleys Plane Ticket

  • 3,189 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 12:35 AM

The team is bad. That doesn't excuse Bobby when he makes idiotic decisions. If he used the proper lineups they may not have done any better, but we can still criticize him for making ridiculous decisions. His job is to put the players in the best position to succeed. He has failed to do that on numerous occasions.


By all means, of course, criticize away! The manager is always totally fair game. And it's abundantly clear that at the least, Valentine was a highly tone-deaf selection by Lucchino.

Just realize that right now, complaining about the manager is little more than an execise in intellectual masturbation. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But this team and this baseball organization have problems that run, far, far deeper than the manager. It's like complaining that a terminal cancer patient has bad breath.

#219 mr guido

  • 3,112 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 02:09 AM

"Basically I could see the whole inside of his leg," said Saltalamacchia. "Tendons, ligaments. It was pretty nasty."


I said, 'Cookie, it's on you. If you can pitch, throw. If not, let us know.'"


http://espn.go.com/b...ebut-buries-sox

Edited by mr guido, 06 May 2012 - 02:09 AM.


#220 The Long Tater

  • 1,830 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 06:44 AM

Did he really expect "Cookie" to pull himself out after that? Apparently he manages like Bill Parcells coached.

#221 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:03 AM

Did he really expect "Cookie" to pull himself out after that? Apparently he manages like Bill Parcells coached.


That's truly despicable. And so surprising that "Cookie" got shelled the inning after.

#222 Plympton91


  • loco parentis


  • 6,552 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 09:11 AM

The team is bad. That doesn't excuse Bobby when he makes idiotic decisions. If he used the proper lineups they may not have done any better, but we can still criticize him for making ridiculous decisions. His job is to put the players in the best position to succeed. He has failed to do that on numerous occasions.


Define "succeed." Does that mean, maximize the chance to win a particular game on a particular day? O.k., yes Valentine hasn't always done that. Does that mean, maximize the probability of having the best possible team on October 1st? I think a lot of the times he hasn't maximized the chance of winning a particular game can be chalked up to trying to figure out the rest of the season. Of course, for the people who think a computer program should manage a baseball game and that baseball players should react to changes in their usage with all the passion of an avatar in MLB 2012, that argument falls on deaf ears.

#223 tonyarmasjr

  • 565 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 09:52 AM

Define "succeed." Does that mean, maximize the chance to win a particular game on a particular day? O.k., yes Valentine hasn't always done that. Does that mean, maximize the probability of having the best possible team on October 1st? I think a lot of the times he hasn't maximized the chance of winning a particular game can be chalked up to trying to figure out the rest of the season. Of course, for the people who think a computer program should manage a baseball game and that baseball players should react to changes in their usage with all the passion of an avatar in MLB 2012, that argument falls on deaf ears.

I think you're right. The problem, obviously, is if in the process of trying to find the best team for the end of the year, they leave themselves too far back for it to matter. We're a month into the season now, and already 7 GB. The team's not playing well, and if trying to figure out what he has in certain players in certain situations costs even 2 or 3 games, that could make a difference. It's certainly something he should do throughout the season, but it's a lot easier to do that (and justify doing it) if they're winning. He doesn't have that luxury. It makes it even harder that there are (and will be) so many moving parts (i.e. adding Hill or Cook, moving Bard or Doubront to the pen at some point, adding Byrd, Crawford/Ellsbury coming back at some point). If it were Tito, he'd be familiar with most of the guys and it wouldn't be quite as big of a deal. For Bobby V, when Matsuzaka comes back, it'll be the first time he's ever played for him, for example. Right now, I'd rather see the focus be on winning every game they can, until they can get the ship righted. If that happens, then, by all means, tinker away through the dog days.

#224 reggiecleveland


  • sublime


  • 13,818 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 10:27 AM

Did he really expect "Cookie" to pull himself out after that? Apparently he manages like Bill Parcells coached.


It seems Bobby is in a short term mind trap. He is thinking about the shitty start Buchholz is likely to give, and the extra inning game the night before. So he makes these game by game decisions trying to get one win since there is little confidence in the next game. There is a lot of hoping going on.

#225 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 10:46 AM

Define "succeed." Does that mean, maximize the chance to win a particular game on a particular day? O.k., yes Valentine hasn't always done that. Does that mean, maximize the probability of having the best possible team on October 1st? I think a lot of the times he hasn't maximized the chance of winning a particular game can be chalked up to trying to figure out the rest of the season. Of course, for the people who think a computer program should manage a baseball game and that baseball players should react to changes in their usage with all the passion of an avatar in MLB 2012, that argument falls on deaf ears.


Wait, why do you think it matters whether BobbyV is maximizing the probability of having the best possible team on October 1st with all the injuries to projected key players? Jim Mora has some words for you.

BobbyV should be making the right moves now to win each particular game, precisely because Ellsbury, Crawford, Youkilis, Matsuzaka, and Bailey are all currently out. Those five make 20% of "the best possible team on October 1st" as far as I can tell. And because those key players are out, there's no way to judge that team until they start returning or are scrapped for the season.

That means BobbyV should be planning ahead, setting rational lineups, using relievers in sensible roles, and paying close attention to his starters' pitch counts and mound presence for signs of fatigue. How the current cast of understudies performs under "win today" conditions will have much more relevance to sorting out roles for October, regardless which if any key players can't make it back on the field.

I have not seen him do well in these matters. I have seen him manage "by his gut" like Williams, Kerrigan, and Little. Which suggests to me that BobbyV doesn't have an overdrive gear on the shift for playoff driving.

Put another way -- who cares whether BobbyV keeps the confidence of Punto or Aviles as leadoff hitter? It's highly improbable that the Sox will still be playing into October should either one keep getting penciled in there against RHP.

Unless of course, the pitching turns around. But BobbyV seems just as befuddled managing that side of the game.

#226 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,383 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 11:10 AM

He's befuddled because he has a roster filled with garbage players. Remember when he was a "dunce" for not using Melancon in a high leverage situation spot early? Or for wasting Padilla in a low leverage spot? Or for making Aceves closer? It's May, and does anyone have a clue who the teams top set up men are, and any confidence that we won't be demanding those players release in two weeks? I mean, the team can survive if the starters throw strikes and pitch as they can, but the big three have been well below expectations.

Bobby has sucked, but crappy players have a way of making the manager look bad. I'd love to see them fire him, and go on to win 95 games under Bogar but thinking changing the manager is going to significantly change this teams direction is as wishful thinking now as it was in November.

#227 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 11:26 AM

From lurker "williams_482" --

I was curious to see how angry I should be about Punto hitting leadoff, so I ran some computer sims of yesterdays lineup and some other suggestions to see the effect. The simulator assumes that all players are average baserunners (base stealing is player dependent) and that the opposing pitcher for the entire game is a league average righty, so the results are not going to be perfect, but should be good enough for something like this. For the player stats, I took ZiPS ROS projections and gave each player a league average split vs RHP (so none for Punto or Salty, which is correct and somewhat off respectively). The results of those lineups:
Lineup #1 (the real one):
1: Punto
2: Pedroia
3: Ortiz
4: Gonzalez
5: Aviles
6: Sweeney
7: Ross
8: Salty
9: Byrd
Runs per game: 4.953

Lineup #2 (your suggestion):
1: Sweeney
2: Pedroia
3: Ortiz
4: Gonzalez
5: Ross
6: Salty
7: Aviles
8: Punto
9: Byrd
Runs per game: 4.961

Lineup #3 (your suggestion minus "demoting" Aviles):
1: Sweeney
2: Pedroia
3: Ortiz
4: Gonzalez
5: Aviles
6: Salty
7: Ross
8: Punto
9: Byrd
Runs per game: 4.958

So based off of those results,Punto leading off costs them about 0.005 runs per game if Aviles stays put at #5. If they did this for an entire 162 game season, they would loose just 0.81 runs. So while the decision appears to be suboptimal, the difference is tiny, and would be completely wiped out if one of Punto or Sweeney felt more comfortable in the slot they were placed.


As this is a matter of infinitesimal advantage, I guess this means that P91 and BobbyV are the guys managing like a computer.

However, as a serious response I'd suggest that it's by compounding infinitesimal advantages that "the other 2%" is generated. Also that williams_482's initial assumptions of league-average splits and ROS ZIPS projections are not particularly useful on a game-by-game basis. The players are humans, after all!

#228 glennhoffmania


  • likes the tomahawk chop


  • 8,384,321 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 11:49 AM

By all means, of course, criticize away! The manager is always totally fair game. And it's abundantly clear that at the least, Valentine was a highly tone-deaf selection by Lucchino.

Just realize that right now, complaining about the manager is little more than an execise in intellectual masturbation. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But this team and this baseball organization have problems that run, far, far deeper than the manager. It's like complaining that a terminal cancer patient has bad breath.


I agree with you. Yeah, complaining about Bobby on a message board won't solve any problems, just as praising any given player won't affect the situation either. Bobby has made himself a lighting rod both throughout his career and so far this season with his comments and behavior. It can't be surprising to anyone that when the team is losing (for any reason) and Bobby seems pretty unprepared in multiple situations that he's going to get a disproportionate share of the attention. If players start saying publicly that teammates aren't emotionally into the game, that they didn't know which hand the opposing pitcher threw with, etc., then I'm sure we'll have a busy thread about them as well.

#229 kieckeredinthehead

  • 3,932 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 11:53 AM

Of course, for the people who think a computer program should manage a baseball game and that baseball players should react to changes in their usage with all the passion of an avatar in MLB 2012, that argument falls on deaf ears.


Unless that computer calls out one of its key, aging, players, in which case it's probably just doing so to motivate him, or isn't actually calling him out, or was doing it because the computer knew he was injured. Yes, thank god we don't have an emotionally tone-deaf computer managing this team.

#230 BosRedSox5


  • Stuart Smalley devotee


  • 1,258 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 04:17 PM

So here's the scene:

Ryan Sweeny up, and Mike Aviles on first. One out, tie game, bottom of the ninth. There's a former MVP (Pedroia) on deck and the sun is causing problems for hitters.

Bobby V elects to try a hit and run. The idea I'm assuming, is to prevent the double play. It backfires in spectacular fashion and ends in a strike em out throw em out double play. Am I just mad that this move failed, or was that a big mistake?

#231 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 04:19 PM

So here's the scene:

Ryan Sweeny up, and Mike Aviles on first. One out, tie game, bottom of the ninth. There's a former MVP (Pedroia) on deck and the sun is causing problems for hitters.

Bobby V elects to try a hit and run. The idea I'm assuming, is to prevent the double play. It backfires in spectacular fashion and ends in a strike em out throw em out double play. Am I just mad that this move failed, or was that a big mistake?


It likely wasn't a hit-and-run, or Sweeney missed the sign. Because he didn't swing.

BobbyV just sent the runner. Aviles. On Wieters.

I think you have your answer.

#232 Lupe Whalewatch

  • 1,290 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 04:21 PM

It wasn't a hit and run, it was a full count and he sent the runner

#233 sfip


  • directly related to Marilyn Monroe


  • 7,451 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 04:23 PM

...with Sweeney looking at half sun, half shade on the way to the plate.

#234 rembrat


  • SoSH Member


  • 23,547 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 04:26 PM

Sweeney has grounded into exactly 0 double plays this year. This baseball shit is not that hard.

#235 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,383 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 06:35 PM

Darnell McDonald? Really? Not only is he getting big at bats, now he's pitching in high leverage situations. Screw Bobby and this pathetic organization. What a joke.

#236 czar


  • fanboy


  • 3,583 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 06:39 PM

Not that this is totally in Valentine's control, but once the Orioles went to Davis, I would have liked them to get Doubront (on 5 days rest) up and run him out there for a few innings. You have to figure 95% win (although Davis' 90 mph fastball is shockingly impressive) and then you DL Buch/send Miller down and call up tomorrow's starter for the PawSox.

Figure you have high odds of forcing 1-1 split at least and giving yourself a chance at 2-0. Pitching D-Mac opens you up to 0-2 as well (in addition to other two outcomes).

#237 TheGoldenGreek33

  • 1,934 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 06:52 PM

You have to figure 95% win (although Davis' 90 mph fastball is shockingly impressive) and then you DL Buch/send Miller down and call up tomorrow's starter for the PawSox.

Wouldn't be a bad idea. Justin Germano has been pitching fairly well for the PawSox (0.87 WHIP in 33 IP).

#238 The Gray Eagle


  • SoSH Member


  • 9,455 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:00 PM

Just horrible managing to send McDonald to the mound after the Orioles had already given up. You either get one more inning out of Atchison or use a starter. We just used Bard in relief between starts when we didn't even need to.

We're at home in extra innings and the other team is using a position player to pitch. You find a way to get a professional pitcher out there, period.

The Orioles literally said "here, Boston, take this game, we don't want it this bad" but we politely refused.

#239 ichirob4ichiro

  • 1,631 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:01 PM

On the post game news conference, Bobby said something simlar to that he didn't think it was FAIR in that spot to get Doubront up. . .he thought it was fair to throw DMac out there? And to do it AFTER seeing the other team waive the white flag? It was a winnable game. A freebie.

#240 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:02 PM

On the post game news conference, Bobby said something simlar to that he didn't think it was FAIR in that spot to get Doubront up. . .he thought it was fair to throw DMac out there? And to do it AFTER seeing the other team waive the white flag? It was a winnable game. A freebie.


Sigh.

#241 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:05 PM

Not that this is totally in Valentine's control, but once the Orioles went to Davis, I would have liked them to get Doubront (on 5 days rest) up and run him out there for a few innings. You have to figure 95% win (although Davis' 90 mph fastball is shockingly impressive) and then you DL Buch/send Miller down and call up tomorrow's starter for the PawSox.

Figure you have high odds of forcing 1-1 split at least and giving yourself a chance at 2-0. Pitching D-Mac opens you up to 0-2 as well (in addition to other two outcomes).


Matsuzaka is pitching tomorrow, and if you're considering running Hill out there for a third distinct inning, you have to consider calling him up to go 80 pitches. Which frees up a ton of possibilities.

#242 judyb

  • 3,363 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:08 PM

Atchison pitched 3 innings yesterday, I don't understand why they didn't use the Cook DL to get Tazawa back and option Mortenson for Miller. Or just any two pitchers who didn't pitch yesterday, instead of just Miller.

#243 Harry Hooper


  • SoSH Member


  • 14,803 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:20 PM

Not calling Tazawa back up when given the opportunity is going to hurt unless Clay goes on the DL. Of course, Clay made sure to say he was healthy in his post-game comments at his locker.


Edit: Wasn't fair, BobbyV? It's quite common to see the next day's starter go down to the bullpen after 11 or 12 innings in a MLB game.

Edited by Harry Hooper, 06 May 2012 - 07:22 PM.


#244 YTF

  • 3,696 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:23 PM

Wonder if Buchholz gets sent down. Might be a good time for several reasons.

Edited by YTF, 06 May 2012 - 07:24 PM.


#245 Buzzkill Pauley


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,268 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:23 PM

Wonder if Buchholz gets sent down. Would be a good time for several reasons.


Second straight snit-fit getting pulled after an outright shellacking. There's no time like the present.

#246 Stitch01


  • SoSH Member


  • 9,066 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:42 PM

On the post game news conference, Bobby said something simlar to that he didn't think it was FAIR in that spot to get Doubront up. . .he thought it was fair to throw DMac out there? And to do it AFTER seeing the other team waive the white flag? It was a winnable game. A freebie.


Hope he meant not fair to Felix, not that we're returning to Grady Little vs the Marlins type managing

#247 Plympton91


  • loco parentis


  • 6,552 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:45 PM

We're debating the decision Valentine made in the top of the 17th inning. Once again, that means the manager is getting grilled for something that happened long after the point at which any group of professional hitters would have ended the game, against the Orioles first baseman, who was pitching the bottom of the 16th. Jerry Royster should be drawn and quartered for sending Byrd home. They should cut Saltalamacchia for whiffing. They should make Gonzalez play the rest of the week in a dress. Middlebrooks also deserves to be demoted, because he apparently can't be bothered to run hard on a ball down the line.

#248 Stitch01


  • SoSH Member


  • 9,066 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:51 PM

Its not like we dont have multiple threads focused on the primary culprit for today's loss on the main board.

#249 genivive

  • 821 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 07:55 PM

Buch?

#250 scotian1


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,259 posts

Posted 06 May 2012 - 08:08 PM

So here's the scene:

Ryan Sweeny up, and Mike Aviles on first. One out, tie game, bottom of the ninth. There's a former MVP (Pedroia) on deck and the sun is causing problems for hitters.

Bobby V elects to try a hit and run. The idea I'm assuming, is to prevent the double play. It backfires in spectacular fashion and ends in a strike em out throw em out double play. Am I just mad that this move failed, or was that a big mistake?


The unaccounted for factor was that Valentine didn't expect Sweeney to take a called strike three. Sweeney usually makes pretty good contact so I have to say I had no trouble with Valentine's call. Also if indeed it was a hit and run play, why wouldn't Sweeney be more ready to try and put the ball in play.

Edited by scotian1, 06 May 2012 - 08:26 PM.