April 23, 200818 yr Fredi needs to stop giving people days off so often and just let the better players play. Get the regular line up out there. Hermida is a big boy and needs to figure out how to hit left handers if he's ever gonna become the hitter the Marlins need him to be.
April 23, 200818 yr I am SOOOO glad I wasnt able to watch this game. Thanks Eric (Everlong204) for texting me the bad news . Can someone please tell me what happened? I dont need a vent, just what happened :lol.
April 23, 200818 yr If I can get away from all this bickering over the game management, I thought I'd say that dive & throw made by Uggla was nice to see as well. #2 Web Gem on BBTN. And we all like good defense. And again, lets all be happy that Ricky looked better tonight. Kinda funny though that he gets a loss after this game after picking up a win when he gave up 6 R in Houston. That's how it goes though.
April 23, 200818 yr As for the bunt....if Hermida scores it was a good move, since he didn't we criticize the decision. If you go into the game thread, you'll see that a few of us criticized it as soon as we saw that Amezaga was bunting. Many of us just feel it is a bad move in that situation. many of you feel that bunting in any situation is a bad move.......................................... :banghead I'm not one of them. I've defended bunting before on here. I was against everyone asking for Uggla bunting though, and he proved me right the next day with his inability to bunt. What I don't believe in is throwing away outs in the 9th inning on the road. fair enough...but i believe this is the right call and i would have done it a million times even if the end result was less than favorable each of those times...sometimes...you have to tie it before you can win it...i mean if pasta hits into a dp and hanley doesnt even get an AB, then everyone screams for tosca's head because he didnt bunt there when its an obvious situation to do so...you cant win em all, or in the case of all the micro managers on this board, you cant win any of them
April 23, 200818 yr As for the bunt....if Hermida scores it was a good move, since he didn't we criticize the decision. If you go into the game thread, you'll see that a few of us criticized it as soon as we saw that Amezaga was bunting. Many of us just feel it is a bad move in that situation. many of you feel that bunting in any situation is a bad move.......................................... :banghead I'm not one of them. I've defended bunting before on here. I was against everyone asking for Uggla bunting though, and he proved me right the next day with his inability to bunt. What I don't believe in is throwing away outs in the 9th inning on the road. fair enough...but i believe this is the right call and i would have done it a million times even if the end result was less than favorable each of those times...sometimes...you have to tie it before you can win it...i mean if pasta hits into a dp and hanley doesnt even get an AB, then everyone screams for tosca's head because he didnt bunt there when its an obvious situation to do so...you cant win em all, or in the case of all the micro managers on this board, you cant win any of them and I know we're on the road, but with Gregg, Miller, Tank, Lindstrom, Kensing, etc., etc. still available as opposed to Pittsburgh who had ? still available. It was probably in favor of us, even if we only tied the game. And it was Amezaga (best bunter on the team). I agreed with it, as well. You gotta trust your best player. Our best player is Hanley. He just couldn't get it done tonight. I'll still take my chances with Hanley though...100 % of the time.
April 23, 200818 yr Couple things....I figured Fredi would've pulled Nolasco sooner in the 6th....maybe after two or three men got on base. I don't think he's built up his stamina yet this season. As for the 9th....I had the idea of Hermida PH'ing for Treanor before the inning started, so it was nice to see it happen....I'm not totally against Alfredo bunting there either. But having Rabelo PH in the 9th spot? Ick. I understand why, because if they tied the game, he could just stay in the game to catch instead of wasting another bench player (I would've preferred Helms there), leaving one left if it were to go into extras. Still, you gotta GET there before you can start planning for it.
April 23, 200818 yr The fact that you wanted 2-12 slumping Helms to pinch hit instead of Rabelo shows that you don't know much about baseball either. Helms did win the game Saturday night with a hit... Ever heard the one about the blind squirrel finding a nut?
April 23, 200818 yr The fact that you wanted 2-12 slumping Helms to pinch hit instead of Rabelo shows that you don't know much about baseball either. Helms did win the game Saturday night with a hit... Ever heard the one about the blind squirrel finding a nut? Seriously, you say it like he's frickin Eric Reed out there getting a walk off hit. Helms is a pro who's been around long enough. In 06 he was "finding nuts" all year for us, to the tune of an avg over 320. I'm not saying it would've made any difference but I don't think there's any need to demean a guy who made plenty of clutch hits for us in 06.
April 23, 200818 yr Bunting eliminated the possibility of a double play. Not bunting there to set up your best hitter (Hanley) is foolish. Bunting is hardly throwing outs away. Think about it. In order of probability (least probable to most probable), given that we don't bunt: Homerun (Fish up 4-3, no outs, bases empty for the next batter - we probably win); Triple (Fish tie, no outs, man on third - probably drive in the next run); Double (Fish tie, no outs, man on second, less likely to drive in the winning run); Single (Fish still down, no outs, man on first and second, double play still possible which then leads us to a runner in scoring position with 2 outs just like we were today if a double play is turned, if not we POSSIBLY drive in the tying run and then the winning run); Grounder into a double play (Fish down, 2 outs, no one on, chances are we lose); Pop fly (Fish down, one out, man on first, this puts us in a worse position than we were earlier tonight) Given there are no errors, these are 6 different scenarios that could happen, and they have been listed in order of probability Now, by bunting, you eliminate the second most probable scenario. You now have eliminated a less favorable scenario and have kept the other scenarios alive. Not to mention, now the single scenario becomes more valuable because you automatically tie the game up with that, as opposed to not bunting, just getting a single and keeping the double play alive without making a difference on the scoreboard. So any argument that we should not have bunted is foolish
April 23, 200818 yr The fact that you wanted 2-12 slumping Helms to pinch hit instead of Rabelo shows that you don't know much about baseball either. Helms did win the game Saturday night with a hit... Ever heard the one about the blind squirrel finding a nut? Seriously, you say it like he's frickin Eric Reed out there getting a walk off hit. Helms is a pro who's been around long enough. In 06 he was "finding nuts" all year for us, to the tune of an avg over 320. I'm not saying it would've made any difference but I don't think there's any need to demean a guy who made plenty of clutch hits for us in 06. So because he was halfway decent in '06, I have no right to point out how egregious his numbers are thus far in '08? Over Rabelo, I agree I would have gone with Helms, especially after what he did two days ago. But the guy is far from receiving a free pass just because he's somewhat of a clutch hitter.
April 23, 200818 yr the real reason we lost was because we didnt hit when we had too..... Lets be honest how many runners did we leave on bases tonight? Just got to learn from it, I hope that they really get pissed about the game, knowing they should have won, and go on a little run the rest of the road trip. The BS call doesnt matter because that throw out on the steal was bs and cost them at least one run, so i say we are even on the umpires tonight. Yah they blew but it didnt really favor one team or the other. Hermida pinch hit basically for the pitcher and rabelo basically hit for treanor in that situation. I think way you look at it is they wanted to put hermida up first in the inning to set the table with amezaga to follow. Get one of them on base and drive them home with Rabelo/Hanley combo. From a baseball sense its a pretty solid way of using your order. Also it ends with our best player getting to hit with the tying run on second. I dont think you can ask for more in that situation. The problem is that Hermida should have pinch hit in the 8th for Cody Ross when we had 2 on base with 2 outs. Would it have changed anything? Who knows, but that fact that we didn't and we left the gigantic slumping Cody out there is dumb. why would he pinch hit for cody in the 8th. cody is a better hitter and its not guarenteed that jeremy gets a hit and hes a bad fielder. he wanted to save jeremy for the 9th with the bottom of the order coming up Cody is not even close to the hitter than Hermida is. You do realize Cody is hitting .176, right? Before his lucky hit yesterday, which was cause by bad fielding, he hadn't gotten a hit since the series against Houston. .167 vs lefties this year, too.
April 23, 200818 yr The fact that you wanted 2-12 slumping Helms to pinch hit instead of Rabelo shows that you don't know much about baseball either. Helms did win the game Saturday night with a hit... Ever heard the one about the blind squirrel finding a nut? Seriously, you say it like he's frickin Eric Reed out there getting a walk off hit. Helms is a pro who's been around long enough. In 06 he was "finding nuts" all year for us, to the tune of an avg over 320. I'm not saying it would've made any difference but I don't think there's any need to demean a guy who made plenty of clutch hits for us in 06. So because he was halfway decent in '06, I have no right to point out how egregious his numbers are thus far in '08? Over Rabelo, I agree I would have gone with Helms, especially after what he did two days ago. But the guy is far from receiving a free pass just because he's somewhat of a clutch hitter. To be fair, he does have just 12 at-bats and didn't really have a chance to get into a rhythm before coming here, since he got no AB's with the Phils.
April 23, 200818 yr The fact that you wanted 2-12 slumping Helms to pinch hit instead of Rabelo shows that you don't know much about baseball either. Helms did win the game Saturday night with a hit... Ever heard the one about the blind squirrel finding a nut? Seriously, you say it like he's frickin Eric Reed out there getting a walk off hit. Helms is a pro who's been around long enough. In 06 he was "finding nuts" all year for us, to the tune of an avg over 320. I'm not saying it would've made any difference but I don't think there's any need to demean a guy who made plenty of clutch hits for us in 06. So because he was halfway decent in '06, I have no right to point out how egregious his numbers are thus far in '08? Over Rabelo, I agree I would have gone with Helms, especially after what he did two days ago. But the guy is far from receiving a free pass just because he's somewhat of a clutch hitter. To be fair, he does have just 12 at-bats and didn't really have a chance to get into a rhythm before coming here, since he got no AB's with the Phils. I agree on that. I don't think he is ready yet, despite getting one hit 4 days ago, because of the 2-3 weeks that he didn't get an AB. Under normal circumstances, I would also take Helms over Rabelo. But let me add that it's not fair to measure Helms solely based on his 2006, but not on his very bad 2007 and his very slow start this year.
April 23, 200818 yr So because he was halfway decent in '06, I have no right to point out how egregious his numbers are thus far in '08? Over Rabelo, I agree I would have gone with Helms, especially after what he did two days ago. But the guy is far from receiving a free pass just because he's somewhat of a clutch hitter. If you're gonna complain about a sub 200 avg in less than 15 ABs and just cast aside that the guy hit over 320 over a whole season for us, much of it in exactly this role (late inning PH), well, I guess you do have a right to say whatever you like. But I have the right to dismiss it and say how ridiculous you sound. HEY, Andino's SLGing 625, we should PH him for Hermida next time he comes u0p with men on base!! See how silly that sounds when you get worked up over a small sample size? But let me add that it's not fair to measure Helms solely based on his 2006, but not on his very bad 2007 and his very slow start this year. That's fair enough, but consider the difference in the role he played here in 06 vs in Philly in 07. If you figure every decent player has a niche where they perform best, I think Helms's place is here coming off the bench late in the game. Just my opinion. But even if you take into account his 07 #s, he still isn't somekind of sub 200 hitter.
April 23, 200818 yr Bunting eliminated the possibility of a double play. Not bunting there to set up your best hitter (Hanley) is foolish. Bunting is hardly throwing outs away. Think about it. In order of probability (least probable to most probable), given that we don't bunt: Homerun (Fish up 4-3, no outs, bases empty for the next batter - we probably win); Triple (Fish tie, no outs, man on third - probably drive in the next run); Double (Fish tie, no outs, man on second, less likely to drive in the winning run); Single (Fish still down, no outs, man on first and second, double play still possible which then leads us to a runner in scoring position with 2 outs just like we were today if a double play is turned, if not we POSSIBLY drive in the tying run and then the winning run); Grounder into a double play (Fish down, 2 outs, no one on, chances are we lose); Pop fly (Fish down, one out, man on first, this puts us in a worse position than we were earlier tonight) Given there are no errors, these are 6 different scenarios that could happen, and they have been listed in order of probability Now, by bunting, you eliminate the second most probable scenario. You now have eliminated a less favorable scenario and have kept the other scenarios alive. Not to mention, now the single scenario becomes more valuable because you automatically tie the game up with that, as opposed to not bunting, just getting a single and keeping the double play alive without making a difference on the scoreboard. So any argument that we should not have bunted is foolish Yes, yes it is wasting outs. Outs are the thing you can least afford to give up under ANY circumstances. Pitchers are the only ones I find it acceptable to bunt with. Here is a Run Expectancy Chart... we'll see what's higher... RE 0 outs 1 out 2 outs Empty 0.555 0.297 0.117 1st 0.953 0.573 0.251 2nd 1.189 0.725 0.344 3rd 1.482 0.983 0.387 1st/2nd 1.573 0.971 0.466 1st/3rd 1.904 1.243 0.538 2nd/3rd 2.052 1.467 0.634 Loaded 2.417 1.65 0.815 Using this nifty chart, you'll see that you have almost twice the probability of scoring a run with a runner on first NO OUTS than you do with a runner on second and ONE OUT. That's how bad a decision bunting was. It cut our chances of scoring in half. source of chart: http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html
April 24, 200818 yr Just some food for thought. -Same situation as last night in the 9th today in the 9th. -1 on, no outs. -This time, Amezaga doesn't bunt, like I was asking for, and he gets a hit. Runner moves to 2nd. -Helms up to bat like I was against, and he strikes out. -Then Hanley dies out and Uggla gets the good hit and bring in 2 runs. Thank you Fredi for proving to myself that I was right.
April 24, 200818 yr Just some food for thought. -Same situation as last night in the 9th today in the 9th. -1 on, no outs. -This time, Amezaga doesn't bunt, like I was asking for, and he gets a hit. Runner moves to 2nd. -Helms up to bat like I was against, and he strikes out. -Then Hanley dies out and Uggla gets the good hit and bring in 2 runs. Thank you Fredi for proving to myself that I was right. you werent right dumbass. last night he was facing a closer and tonight he was facing a sh*tty pitcher up by 3.
April 24, 200818 yr Just some food for thought. -Same situation as last night in the 9th today in the 9th. -1 on, no outs. -This time, Amezaga doesn't bunt, like I was asking for, and he gets a hit. Runner moves to 2nd. -Helms up to bat like I was against, and he strikes out. -Then Hanley dies out and Uggla gets the good hit and bring in 2 runs. Thank you Fredi for proving to myself that I was right. you werent right dumbass. last night he was facing a closer and tonight he was facing a sh*tty pitcher up by 3. Hm, your right. Outs are obviously less important against good pitchers than bad pitcher... Right. And please, we try to refrain from personal attacks here, it cheapens you.
April 24, 200818 yr Just some food for thought. -Same situation as last night in the 9th today in the 9th. -1 on, no outs. -This time, Amezaga doesn't bunt, like I was asking for, and he gets a hit. Runner moves to 2nd. -Helms up to bat like I was against, and he strikes out. -Then Hanley dies out and Uggla gets the good hit and bring in 2 runs. Thank you Fredi for proving to myself that I was right. you werent right dumbass. last night he was facing a closer and tonight he was facing a sh*tty pitcher up by 3. Hm, your right. Outs are obviously less important against good pitchers than bad pitcher... Right. And please, we try to refrain from personal attacks here, it cheapens you. so you are aying your would rather have amezaga maybe not get on and have hanley up with 2 outs and a guy on 1st. than have 2 outs and a guy on 2nd. dude your a joke. there is a reason why every manager does it my way and nobody agrees with you
April 24, 200818 yr Just some food for thought. -Same situation as last night in the 9th today in the 9th. -1 on, no outs. -This time, Amezaga doesn't bunt, like I was asking for, and he gets a hit. Runner moves to 2nd. -Helms up to bat like I was against, and he strikes out. -Then Hanley dies out and Uggla gets the good hit and bring in 2 runs. Thank you Fredi for proving to myself that I was right. you werent right dumbass. last night he was facing a closer and tonight he was facing a sh*tty pitcher up by 3. Hm, your right. Outs are obviously less important against good pitchers than bad pitcher... Right. And please, we try to refrain from personal attacks here, it cheapens you. so you are aying your would rather have amezaga maybe not get on and have hanley up with 2 outs and a guy on 1st. than have 2 outs and a guy on 2nd. dude your a joke. there is a reason why every manager does it my way and nobody agrees with you Every manager does it that way? Our manager doesn't even do it that way.
April 24, 200818 yr Just some food for thought. -Same situation as last night in the 9th today in the 9th. -1 on, no outs. -This time, Amezaga doesn't bunt, like I was asking for, and he gets a hit. Runner moves to 2nd. -Helms up to bat like I was against, and he strikes out. -Then Hanley dies out and Uggla gets the good hit and bring in 2 runs. Thank you Fredi for proving to myself that I was right. you werent right dumbass. last night he was facing a closer and tonight he was facing a sh*tty pitcher up by 3. Hm, your right. Outs are obviously less important against good pitchers than bad pitcher... Right. And please, we try to refrain from personal attacks here, it cheapens you. so you are aying your would rather have amezaga maybe not get on and have hanley up with 2 outs and a guy on 1st. than have 2 outs and a guy on 2nd. dude your a joke. there is a reason why every manager does it my way and nobody agrees with you Every manager does it that way? Our manager doesn't even do it that way. yes he does. and once you respond with what i know you are going to say i will tell you why you are such a dumbass when it comes to baseball logic
April 24, 200818 yr You know, I give up on you kid. If you want to learn something, just go to here. That will be my argument.
April 24, 200818 yr Just some food for thought. -Same situation as last night in the 9th today in the 9th. -1 on, no outs. -This time, Amezaga doesn't bunt, like I was asking for, and he gets a hit. Runner moves to 2nd. -Helms up to bat like I was against, and he strikes out. -Then Hanley dies out and Uggla gets the good hit and bring in 2 runs. Thank you Fredi for proving to myself that I was right. the situation with Amezaga was a lot different. We weren't DESPERATE for a run in the 9th inning tonight. Leading by 3, is a big difference as opposed to trailing by 1 (especially when you're facing a tougher pitcher...the opposing team's closer last night).
April 24, 200818 yr Just some food for thought. -Same situation as last night in the 9th today in the 9th. -1 on, no outs. -This time, Amezaga doesn't bunt, like I was asking for, and he gets a hit. Runner moves to 2nd. -Helms up to bat like I was against, and he strikes out. -Then Hanley dies out and Uggla gets the good hit and bring in 2 runs. Thank you Fredi for proving to myself that I was right. the situation with Amezaga was a lot different. We weren't DESPERATE for a run in the 9th inning tonight. Leading by 3, is a big difference as opposed to trailing by 1 (especially when you're facing a tougher pitcher...the opposing team's closer last night). Disparate or not, it's not like you get more opportunities against a hard pitcher. Since it is so much harder to get a hit, wouldn't that mean that we should try even harder to get one? Try even harder not to get an out? Remember, statistically (read factually), you are more likely to get a run with a man on 1st and no outs than a man on 2nd with 1 out (or 2 outs for those who felt that Rabelo was an instant out). I will agree that Hanley Ramirez batting changes those stats a bit though .
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.