Master Index of Archived Threads
IGT Marlins @ Mets, 04/28/09
| bmfc1 Apr 28 2009 01:53 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 28 2009 04:02 PM |
|
I invite Edgy to remake the batting orders in that cool format thing he does.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 01:57 PM |
|
Don't have time and I can't find the Fish lineup.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 01:58 PM |
|
Is that 4 in a row for Santos? Yeow.
|
| Vic Sage Apr 28 2009 01:59 PM Re: IGT Marlins @ Mets, 04/28/09 |
|
Preferred order (not that it matters much):
|
| LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 28 2009 02:14 PM |
|
Heading out there right... about... NOW. (1-0 so far this year-- believe in the streak!)
|
| metirish Apr 28 2009 02:35 PM |
|
Hanley out with that bruised wrist
|
| Centerfield Apr 28 2009 02:51 PM Re: IGT Marlins @ Mets, 04/28/09 |
|
|
I don't like how suddenly Jerry Manuel is turning into Willie Randolph. Apparently Miguel Cairo was unavailable to bat 2nd tonight.
|
| G-Fafif Apr 28 2009 03:16 PM |
|
Why isn't Santos batting cleanup?
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 03:32 PM |
|
I'm willing to lay off Cora till he has more than 15 at-bats.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 28 2009 04:58 PM |
|
What's the over/under on a Met getting drilled tonight as payback for Ramirez?
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 05:29 PM |
|
You know its a big park when Sheffield & Delgado leg out triples
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 05:35 PM |
|
Bad Ollie, Good Livan?
|
| Swan Swan H Apr 28 2009 05:49 PM |
|
Another hit for Santos. I don't suppose he'll play the day game tomorrow, so I'll get to see a disgruntled Castro.
|
| metsguyinmichigan Apr 28 2009 06:23 PM |
|
Let's hope our offense can tack on a couple more and to give Livan some more room and let our pen take over.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Apr 28 2009 06:24 PM |
|
|
I suspect Castro would be more disgruntled if he had to actually play every day.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 06:36 PM |
|
Can we just call it TripleField?
|
| Swan Swan H Apr 28 2009 06:40 PM |
|
|
Well, he's done his best to ensure that it doesn't happen.
|
| metsguyinmichigan Apr 28 2009 06:58 PM |
|
If we can get Livan through this inning, call it "good enough" and get him out of there.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 07:06 PM |
|
Omir Santos, not exhibiting good plate-blocking skills. That throw had the runner beat.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 07:08 PM |
|
Quality slide, he took the only opening there was.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 07:14 PM |
|
Bobby Parnell for ROTY
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 07:17 PM |
|
"Y'know" score:
|
| metsguyinmichigan Apr 28 2009 07:38 PM |
|
Darn it.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 07:38 PM |
|
Now we tied.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 07:38 PM |
|
Damn you, Sean Green, if that is your real name.
|
| themetfairy Apr 28 2009 07:39 PM |
|
Fuckshit....
|
| PiggiesTomatoes Apr 28 2009 07:40 PM |
|
Was that Aaron Heilman out there????
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 07:40 PM |
|
Well, you know, he was real important to our win last night.
|
| OlerudOwned Apr 28 2009 07:43 PM |
|
Well, the Rangers are done. How's baseball going?
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 07:46 PM |
|
|
It's got scandolously little coverage in New York, but Aaron Heilman has pitched in 11 games for the Cubs to the tune of 2-0 and a 0.82 ERA. And I couldn't be happier for him.
|
| Swan Swan H Apr 28 2009 07:46 PM |
|
The Mets have three innings against this bullpen, a bunch of miscreants, retreads, and bedwetters like I have never seen in my thirty-five years in the game. Let's put up five in the seventh and three in the eighth, and shake hands with Takahashi-san after he puts them away the ninth.
|
| metirish Apr 28 2009 07:46 PM |
||
|
I didn't know that , good for him
|
| PiggiesTomatoes Apr 28 2009 07:48 PM |
||
|
And only one blown save.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 07:50 PM |
|
Give me a break.
|
| Swan Swan H Apr 28 2009 07:52 PM |
|
OK, two innings.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 07:59 PM |
|
How much Mojo does this team have tonight? Can they pick up their teammate this once?
|
| metirish Apr 28 2009 08:01 PM |
|
|
Go for it.... I need a pick me up too
|
| Kong76 Apr 28 2009 08:01 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 28 2009 08:02 PM |
|
JCL: Would a rally song be futile here? <<<
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 08:02 PM |
|
I wanna Be Sedated
|
| metirish Apr 28 2009 08:02 PM |
|
|
A queue quickly forms
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 08:02 PM |
|
|
| Kong76 Apr 28 2009 08:03 PM |
|
Ash: I wanna Be Sedated <<<
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 08:17 PM |
|
Its Pedro!..oops, not the one I was hoping for
|
| Kong76 Apr 28 2009 08:20 PM |
|
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 08:21 PM |
|
Win or lose..tomorrow being a day game..Castro, Tatis at 2B Cora at 3RD Jeremy Reed gets a start...
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 08:21 PM |
|
I like Reed leading off here. I am predicting a comeback of extraordinary magnitude.
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 08:22 PM |
|
Jose can you hit
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 08:24 PM |
|
OK Reyes needs to get laid also
|
| Kong76 Apr 28 2009 08:25 PM |
|
Eek, I'm leaving and I ain't checking to see if I left anything under my seat
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 08:26 PM |
|
Maybe we can reincarnate Andy Kaufman to manage and Tony Clifton to be the bench coach?
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 08:27 PM |
|
|
Have a good one..Tomorrow is Johan day..
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 28 2009 08:27 PM |
|
Smelly.
|
| metirish Apr 28 2009 08:28 PM |
|
Gary says this is the fourth time this season that the Mets have lost after leading a game by 3 runs .
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 08:30 PM |
|
Here's my book. My book says we hired Hernandez because he's durable. Why lift him after 91 pitches?
|
| Ashie62 Apr 28 2009 08:30 PM |
|
Apparently not the good book
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 08:37 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 28 2009 09:09 PM |
|
The rally that knocked out Hernandez.
|
| mario25 Apr 28 2009 08:54 PM |
|
How about Parnell and Stokes being the 2 guys leading up to Putz and Krod...Green seems very hittable.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 28 2009 09:10 PM |
|
My position is that the starting pitcher should be the one guy leading up to that point. The idea that we now need four guys to close out a win seems absurd.
|
| Gwreck Apr 29 2009 04:18 AM |
|
That was my thought too. I think there's been too much bullpen used so far this year.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 04:34 AM |
|
Sean Green's ERA is now 8.49.
|
| bmfc1 Apr 29 2009 05:21 AM |
|
|
Salient point by Edgy. One of the positives for Livan is that he's durable (200+ IP every year) but Jerry (and I'm not saying he's wrong) thinks that Livan is vulnerable the third time through the lineup. If so, then the Mets aren't getting one of the reasons they signed him which means they might have made a mistake.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 05:32 AM |
|||
|
Or, in this case, the first sign of a sign.
|
| Gwreck Apr 29 2009 05:39 AM |
|
All 3 of those other leads were given back by the starters:
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 06:07 AM |
|
Ah, it seems I'm misinterpreting my third-hand information.
|
| Fman99 Apr 29 2009 06:21 AM |
|
Another gutless late inning display by the Mets O.
|
| Fman99 Apr 29 2009 06:29 AM |
|
|
According to da Gangsta, they feel that Hernandez is more susceptible to getting smoked as the opposing lineup gets more face time with him, so they're trying to give him the hook pre-smoke.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 29 2009 07:19 AM |
|
|
Yup. You could just tell we were headed for disaster after Reyes failed to get Muffy in from 2nd.
|
| metirish Apr 29 2009 07:25 AM |
|
|
Thanks Greck , that it was the starters that gave up those leads wasn't mentioned in the booth.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 07:38 AM |
||
|
And it's emotional gobbledygook on my part, but I say that, by turning the game over to the pen so early, it's an implicit message that the O needn't keep battling, because they've done their part, and it's on the bullpen to win it now. In the sixth! I mean, why don't they just trot out some defensive replacements? I tell you now, if the idea with Livan is to look at 5 1/3 innings of two-run ball as a victory, I don't want him. You know, giving up four runs in seven innings with just your starter is inherently better than giving up four in seven by your starter and two relievers, because in the latter case you still have all your bullets. And yeah, it costs you an extra at-bat by your pitcher to get there, but still.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 07:40 AM |
|
I agree with that.
|
| Centerfield Apr 29 2009 07:42 AM |
|
Livan has tended to give up runs late in his starts this year...which might have prompted the quick hook. I had no problem with the substitution. My problem was with Sean Green sucking moose cock.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 07:51 AM |
|
|
You really should. If we've really gone from needing a guy to close out games for a starter, to needing two then three and now four, we've got to realize that (1) odds are increased that one of them won't have it that day, and (2) we're using all of these guys a lot more and in a lot more game game situations. It's Russian Roulette. It's one thing asking a guy to save a game and do it successfully every time. But now we're asking four guys to. FOUR! It's almost guaranteed that one of them will suck MC on a given day, and if you get him out of there in time (Jerry certainly didn't), well then you need a fifth motherfucker to get the precious save. It's insane, I tells ya.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 08:01 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 29 2009 08:06 AM |
|
And we're not helping when we vote for a guy as PotG for these five-and-fly appearances.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 29 2009 08:04 AM |
|
Yes, Cora had a strong game and, dare I say, is already beetter than Damian Easley was on his best day last year.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 08:17 AM |
|
|
This makes sense, but only in hindsight. If Jerry knew ahead of time that Green would give up four runs in one inning, then Green doesn't come in. And if Green pitched a scoreless inning in a 4-3 Mets win, nobody complains. The obvious point here is that Jerry took Livan out thinking that at that point in the game, Fla. would have a tougher time scoring against the Mets pen than against Livan himself. The real issue in yesterday's game is that Green had a very bad (and costly) inning, and for the season, that the starting pitching after Johan has been unreliable to a man -- 80% of the starting rotation isn't getting the job done. The Mets offense is second in the NL in runs scored, tied with Philly; the Mets have outscored first place Fla. so far this season. The Cubs are the only NL team to have outscored the Mets. Jerry, and the Mets, are for the most part, stuck with the trio of Maine, Pelfrey and Perez this season. I'm not ready to blame Jerry for their struggles just yet.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 08:31 AM |
|
|
The idea isn't to know ahead of time what's going to happen. The idea is to know what is most likely to happen when taking a given course. More pitching changes increases your vulnerability to blow-ups. I don't know ahead of time what's going to happen when I play Russian Roulette either. But surviving it doesn't mean that it's not still recklessly foolish to play.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 08:46 AM |
||
|
Yes. And obviously, Jerry didn't think that Green would get tagged for four runs in one inning. I'm not gonna blame Jerry for Green's bad inning, either. By the way, from June 17, 2008 (Manuel's first day as Met manager) through the end of last season, the Mets had the best record in the NL. The Mets would have clinched their division outright about a week before the regular season ended had Willie's Kids managed to win at Manuel's clip. I'm not convinced that, all things equal, increasing the number of pitchers used is detrimental.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 09:08 AM |
|
It's logic, man. The more guys you use, the lesser standard of guys you are going to use and the greater the likelihood that one will not have his best stuff, and the more gassed guys you will have the next day.
|
| Centerfield Apr 29 2009 09:22 AM |
||
|
I don't think what you're saying is true. The more guys you have to bring in, the more likely it is that one of them will give up runs. But the longer you leave any one pitcher in, the more likely it will be that that particular pitcher gives up runs. By your argument, you are more likely to give up runs by using Putz for the 8th and Rodriguez for the ninth, than you are by using Rodriguez for the 8th and 9th, since you're doubling your chances that one of them will be off. I disagree. Any increase (or at least some portion of it or more) is offset by the fact that Rodriguez will be asked to get twice the number of outs. Now, to the 6th inning, regardless of what you do over innings 7, 8 and 9, your objective there is to make it less likely for the opposition to score. If you look at Livan's starts this year, his OPS against increases drastically as his pitch count increases. The runs he gives up coincides with this trend. In the Milwaukee game, Manuel was criticized for leaving him in too long, allowing Milwaukee to take the lead on a 3 run HR. And so, I have no problem with Jerry thinking that going to his bullpen in that situation provided his best chance to win. Scenario 1 (Edgy's) 6: Tired Livan Hernandez 7: Parnell or Green 8: Putz 9: Rodriguez Scenario 2 (Manuel's intended) 6: Livan subbed by Parnell mid-inning 7: Green 8: Putz 9: Rodriguez I don't see that one is a clear winner over the other.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 09:29 AM |
|
I do. Livan falters and you can go to your pen.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 09:34 AM |
|
I'm with you. I've had the same perspective for years now. Every time you bring a new pitcher into the game, he's an unknown quantity. It's better to do this as infrequently as possible.
|
| Frayed Knot Apr 29 2009 09:41 AM |
|
The problem with the pre-emptive pitching change is that it takes out the known quantity (in this case - Livan pitching reasonably well) and subs in the unknown (who in the pen will have it today?) to the point where - absent various ominous signs** - it often does make the 'change now in case it's too late later' strategy the more risky one.
|
| Fman99 Apr 29 2009 09:45 AM |
|
|
No one does this anymore. You can thank Tony LaRussa and Dennis Eckersley for the "one and done" method of bullpen management.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 09:46 AM |
|
I know. And it's frustrating.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 09:53 AM |
|
|
I agree. I think that the way to fix this is by increasing the starting pitchers' workload, rather than by having your 6th or 7th inning reliever go longer. (We're talking about workloads here, I assume, and not about the Save stat dictating pitcher use ... right? )
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 29 2009 09:53 AM |
|
Bobby managed the pen very well though.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 09:54 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 29 2009 09:55 AM |
|
|
Somebody must be out there who is willing to stick with a pitcher who is doing well. Not everybody lifts Livan Hernandez in the fifth. Certtainly there's a broad continuum between looking for four straight guys to perform a save and Billy Martin pumping complete games out of everybody in Oakland.
There you go.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Apr 29 2009 09:54 AM |
|
I'm talking about both, actually.
|
| Centerfield Apr 29 2009 10:37 AM |
|
Without getting into a broad discussion on whether it is a good idea to leave a pitcher in or pull a pitcher in general, let's focus on Livan Hernandez's outings this year:
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 10:46 AM |
|
(1) It's hard to draw any conclusion from that sample size. I think it's ideal to have a pitcher have his worst inning before being lifted.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 10:51 AM |
|
|
But what if a pitcher's worst inning is the one where he gives up six runs? A pitcher might lose effectiveness during his start gradually, or all at once. How do you know that Livan wouldn't have imploded had he been left in?
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 10:55 AM |
|
I don't know that or claim to know that.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 29 2009 10:59 AM |
|
To me the bullpen mgt isn't necessarily about pulling Livan or anyone else when they did, but having (perhaps) compromised the guys he turned to by having used them the night before with a 6-run lead.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 11:02 AM |
||
|
I agree with you on that. But no manager should be waiting for the implosion to happen before relieving the starter. The trick is to anticipate the meltdown before it ever happens. Things didn't work out for the Mets yesterday. That's all it is.
Isn't this hindisght? Green was "on track"? Are you saying that everyone but Manuel knew that Green was going to have a terrible inning before it ever happened?
|
| Edgy DC Apr 29 2009 11:11 AM |
||||
|
No, there's something between a meltdown and the innocuous events of Livan Hernandez's sixth inning. It's called tiriing, flagging, struggling. It includes a walk or two, a hit or two, a hit batsman, dropping velocity, actually yielding something more than a bunt single and an infield out that doesn't even advance the runner.
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying what I'm saying, repeatedly and clearly. That each successive pitcher you need to get through the day (1) increases your chance that one of them will not have it, (2) decreases the options you have available to you as a plan B if/when one of them doesn't have it, and (3) limits their availablity for another day, so it behooves one to use as few pitchers as necessary.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 29 2009 07:13 PM |
|
|
This post was in my head all day long ever since I wrote it because, having watched almost every Met inning of this season, I couldn't reconcile the team I was watching with their outstanding run production. So I checked the team totals again, and I realized that I had made a mistake: I was looking at last season's NL run totals. The 799 runs scored by the Mets should have tipped me off. This year's Mets rank 7th out of 16 NL teams
|