10/19 - ALCS Game 4

deconstruction

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
3,547
Hanover NH
Not disagreeing with you, but in all fairness he clearly missed a third strike call on Devers in the first that would have ended the inning. Bogaerts followed the walk with a bomb.
This is incorrect. (A) That was on a 3-1 count and (B) it wasn't a close to being a strike as the one to Castro.
 

Sandman5756

lurker
Jul 31, 2021
95
This is incorrect. (A) That was on a 3-1 count and (B) it wasn't a close to being a strike as the one to Castro.
Absolutely right. The pitch to Castro was IN THE ZONE, and Diaz had been giving that strike in previous at bats. The overhead view showed it clearly within the confines of the plate, and the frontal view showed that it was belly button height. Bad pitching after that call made matters much much worse, but the inning should have been over. Eovaldi had set him up to expect the split, and he threw a perfect pitch high in the zone and did not get the call. All comments about our inability to score are well taken, but the Sox should have been out of that inning.
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,306
Chicago, IL
They had no high leverage arms left for a lefty. lol
Should have brought in Sale and started Houck tomorrow since we already held Houck back under the assumption Sale will be terrible again.
RIght. COra said he might do this if there was a "lane" and there it was ... indeed, if he held it there, and Sox tied it in the 9th, Sale could have pitched a few innings in an extra innings (if effective that is, which I know is an iffy proposition).

Scottyno sent me that good article detailing the falloff third time through, and it was illuminating for me. But I will add: you still need to make in-game decisions contextually, not automatically. In my mind, with this particular Red Sox Bullpen in a close game, I'd like to get them to only having to get 9 or less outs in the game. The pen is just not that good. I guess Pivetta's BAA goes from something like .210 to .270 third time through. NEVERTHELESS, especially with Sale going tomorrow, you gotta see if you can steal some more outs from Pivetta, given that he's on his "A" game ....The only good lefty reliever in the bullpen came on for the lefty "lane" in the sixth, when you knew those guys would be coming up again in a couple innings. SO .... either, stretch Pivetta there in the sixth, or, in the least, bring in Sale in the 9th.

I think pitching Whitlock 2 and Eovaldi 1 was fine ....they have been your two best pitchers all year, and Eovaldi was robbed by that incompetent ump ...it's just what's behind Eovaldi if it doesn't work, and the dubious move to rely on the bullpen to pitch four innings of scoreless ball ...

EDIT: Right now Erod, Eovaldi, and Pivetta all seem capable of pitching deep into games. All are pitching well. I'd hope Cora would lean on THEM, more than leaning on his bullpen.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
2,721
Sox are 23-58 when they score 4 runs or less. They aren’t built to win games when they don’t score. Going to the pen early and playing matchups makes sense- you hold the line and give the offense time to score more runs. But when the offense doesn’t score more runs, it’s not going to work out.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
54,688
San Andreas Fault
Now Colin Cowherd is saying if you know an umpire is off, adjust to it. What if he's unpredictably off all over the place? Just swing at everything I guess. Cowherd hasn't changed. Same fool.
 

Sandman5756

lurker
Jul 31, 2021
95
I love Colin Cowherd sometimes, but at other times he should be called Cow Turd. That particular response is ridiculous. Laz Diaz was giving pitchers up to five extra inches on the first base side of home plate, mostly victimizing RH hitters. But he did not do it for every pitch, so batters were confused as to what they should swing at. He was about equally bad with both teams, but his timing was worse with the Sox. The JD Martinez pitch determined whether it was two men on with one out, or man on 1st with two away. That is a significant difference. The Eovaldi pitch determined whether the top of the inning was over or whether the batter got more pitches with a slightly more favorable count than before. And I don’t want to hear comparisons with the Devers pitch. The difference was that the Devers ball was a ball. It was outside of the K zone. On the Eovaldi pitch, the ball was mostly inside the zone. We all know what happened afterwards.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
74,290
Oregon
Exactly right.
Disagree. He got up and into throwing position immediately. If he thought/knew it to be Ball 4, he wouldn't have acted so instinctively. There was such confusion at the plate because of the strike call, though, that he just stopped in the moment.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
8,982
I think pitching Whitlock 2 and Eovaldi 1 was fine ....they have been your two best pitchers all year, and Eovaldi was robbed by that incompetent ump ...it's just what's behind Eovaldi if it doesn't work, and the dubious move to rely on the bullpen to pitch four innings of scoreless ball ...
I assume it would have been Houck for an inning or 2 if Eovaldi had got out of the 9th tied and they didn't walk it off, but they still had a few good options vs righties at least, the problem was having not much to face lefties.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
74,290
Oregon
I assume it would have been Houck for an inning or 2 if Eovaldi had got out of the 9th tied and they didn't walk it off, but they still had a few good options vs righties at least, the problem was having not much to face lefties.
We're all playing the what-if game at this point ... but would going Brasier-Eovaldi-Whitlock for 7-8-9 last night had been a better strategy? Brasier gets the 6-7-8 batters, Eovaldi deals with the top of the order and Whitlock, if all goes to plan, gets the Bregman-Alvarez-Correa portion
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
8,982
We're all playing the what-if game at this point ... but would going Brasier-Eovaldi-Whitlock for 7-8-9 last night had been a better strategy? Brasier gets the 6-7-8 batters, Eovaldi deals with the top of the order and Whitlock, if all goes to plan, gets the Bregman-Alvarez-Correa portion
Maybe, the problem there is that there's a good chance Brasier ends up facing 2 lefties with Tucker leading off and then Castro coming in for Maldonado. Maybe Whitlock comes in in the 7th if Brasier gets in trouble before he has to face a 2nd lefty, but it could be too late by then.

In an ideal world Houck for the 7th is probably the best option, but they probably wanted to stay away from him if at all possible to save him for today.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,871
I’ve been a member here for a couple decades, and I don’t often feel compelled to post… but this game felt like Diaz had it decided. The missed Eovaldi call was as obvious as it gets, and it directly decided the game. That’s one that shouldn’t be soon forgotten.
I personally think he decided the game much earlier. He struck out JD twice on pitches that weren't close. Both times basically killed rallies or at least dramatically changed both of those innings.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,871
Disagree. He got up and into throwing position immediately. If he thought/knew it to be Ball 4, he wouldn't have acted so instinctively. There was such confusion at the plate because of the strike call, though, that he just stopped in the moment.
So why didn't he throw?.. Or even get anywhere close to throwing... Catchers get ready to throw before the call is made because they have to be ready to throw the runner out if it's called a strike. I don't think he threw because he thought for sure it was a ball.