May 14, 201115 yr HEY EURRRRK I don't care what logical response you can formulate. Badenhop in the 9th. Leo when we really need him Uh, how is a tie game a lower leverage situation than a game with a one run lead? a home run wins the game in a tie game while it only ties a game when you have a one-run lead. I'm not really arguing anything here nor do I know what people are arguing about, but that may be a way to see it. nvm, misread that.
May 14, 201115 yr HEY EURRRRK I don't care what logical response you can formulate. Badenhop in the 9th. Leo when we really need him Uh, how is a tie game a lower leverage situation than a game with a one run lead? First, read the bold. Second, what? They were both tie games. My point initially was to exhaust your BP options (within reason) in sequential order in order to have a guy like Leo available deeper into the game. EDIT: I don't think you were aware of what I'm talking about. Erick and I were discussing it last game. He thought Leo should've been used and was used, I thought Badenhop should've been put on the mound and saved Leo for the 10th or 11th, depending on how Badenhop handled the 10th and whether or no we won the game, of course. So this time we won in extras. We used Badenhop first, Leo to close it, obviously.
May 14, 201115 yr HEY EURRRRK I don't care what logical response you can formulate. Badenhop in the 9th. Leo when we really need him Uh, how is a tie game a lower leverage situation than a game with a one run lead? First, read the bold. Second, what? They were both tie games. My point initially was to exhaust your BP options (within reason) in sequential order in order to have a guy like Leo available deeper into the game. EDIT: I don't think you were aware of what I'm talking about. Erick and I were discussing it last game. He thought Leo should've been used and was used, I thought Badenhop should've been put on the mound and saved Leo for the 10th or 11th, depending on how Badenhop handled the 10th and whether or no we won the game, of course. So this time we won in extras. We used Badenhop first, Leo to close it, obviously. I think the problem with using the BP in sequence is that you may never get to Leo Nunez in a extra inning game at home. In the case of extra innings that can end at any moment, you work from the best to the worst. You want to give yourself the best opportunity you have to conserve the lead in extra innings because you have, at most, 3 outs to match any run deficit. If you're on the road, you'd obviously keep the closer until you have a lead. That's the way I see it.
May 14, 201115 yr HEY EURRRRK I don't care what logical response you can formulate. Badenhop in the 9th. Leo when we really need him Uh, how is a tie game a lower leverage situation than a game with a one run lead? First, read the bold. Second, what? They were both tie games. My point initially was to exhaust your BP options (within reason) in sequential order in order to have a guy like Leo available deeper into the game. And how does that make any sense in a home game? I assume you're of the opinion of saving Leo for the save situation, as Edwin did tonight? As the home team, once you're tied in the 9th inning, there is no more save situation for your closer. The "save" would be to hold the opponent scoreless, so your team could win it as soon as possible in the bottom half of the inning. ALL MANAGERS DO THIS. As a matter of fact, Jim Riggleman did the same thing tonight! Washington was the home team, the game was tied, and Riggleman went to his closer (Storen) in the 9th inning.
May 14, 201115 yr HEY EURRRRK I don't care what logical response you can formulate. Badenhop in the 9th. Leo when we really need him Uh, how is a tie game a lower leverage situation than a game with a one run lead? EDIT: I don't think you were aware of what I'm talking about. Erick and I were discussing it last game. He thought Leo should've been used and was used, I thought Badenhop should've been put on the mound and saved Leo for the 10th or 11th, depending on how Badenhop handled the 10th and whether or no we won the game, of course. So this time we won in extras. We used Badenhop first, Leo to close it, obviously. It's impossible for Leo to get a save in extra innings at home. You realize this, right? So what, exactly, are you saving him for? Also, Leo's not the type of guy who goes more than one inning per apperance; that would be Badenhop, if anything. So, again, even if you're using that line of thinking, it still makes no sense.
May 14, 201115 yr In the bottom 9th of a tie game, I don't see why you'd put your 7th pitcher ahead of your closer.
May 14, 201115 yr I never implied that Leo would be getting a save at home in an extra innings game. What Entendu said is true, you might not even get to Leo. However, you also might give up the lead just equally when your offense gets stopped. Leo didn't NEED to be used. I'd rather have NOT used him unless we had to. You need to have faith in your entire pen to hold a tie game in extras.
May 14, 201115 yr I never implied that Leo would be getting a save at home in an extra innings game. What Entendu said is true, you might not even get to Leo. However, you also might give up the lead just equally when your offense gets stopped. Leo didn't NEED to be used. I'd rather have NOT used him unless we had to. You need to have faith in your entire pen to hold a tie game in extras. No, you need to win/lose with your best because every game matters - especially games against the Philadelphia Phillies. Leo was available to pitch, so he pitched. If Leo can't come into a tied game in the 9th against the Phillies then there is absolutely no point in him or his 3.65 million dollar salary. Leo's paid like the best reliever on the team; the best reliever on the team pitches in important/high-leverage situations. You don't use your 6th/7th best reliever over the closer because "you need to have faith in your entire pen to hold a tie game in extras." That makes no sense. Why not just sit Hanley for a week, and give Ozzie Martinez starts? Or perhaps we should play Wes Helms everyday. ...after all, 'ya gotta have faith in the roster. Am I right? :confused
May 14, 201115 yr You're acting absurd. It's not like Badenhop is a guaranteed run. Yeah? What about tonight then? Who cares if it's on the road? If Badenhop would've blown that game then the Marlins would've been EQUALLY guilty of your accused crime. Why didn't they just use Leo instead? After all, he's the best pitcher, right?
May 14, 201115 yr You're acting absurd. It's not like Badenhop is a guaranteed run. Yeah? What about tonight then? Who cares if it's on the road? If Badenhop would've blown that game then the Marlins would've been EQUALLY guilty of your accused crime. Why didn't they just use Leo instead? After all, he's the best pitcher, right? Because it wasn't a save situation. On the road, you know you're going to need to use your closer to "shut the door" if you want to win. On the road, you save your closer to get the save. As you know, at home, this is not the case because there will not be a save sit.
May 14, 201115 yr You're acting absurd. It's not like Badenhop is a guaranteed run. Yeah? What about tonight then? Who cares if it's on the road? If Badenhop would've blown that game then the Marlins would've been EQUALLY guilty of your accused crime. Why didn't they just use Leo instead? After all, he's the best pitcher, right? Who says I agree with what Edwin did tonight? I don't. Managers do that on the road, though; they do it because there's still a possible save opportunity later on in the game. At home, there's no point in doing that; you're simply trotting out your best because you're trying to win the game as soon as possible, considering you're the team with the last at-bat. Should the Yankees not use Mariano Rivera in a tied game in the 9th? Basically, you're saying you think it'd be cool to use Buddy Carlyle before using Mariano Rivera if you're managing a home game for the Yankees. After all, there would be no "need" to use Mariano Rivera in that particular game. Save him for later and have faith in the rest of the pen to pickup the slack, even if they aren't your best guys.
May 14, 201115 yr HEY EURRRRK I don't care what logical response you can formulate. Badenhop in the 9th. Leo when we really need him Uh, how is a tie game a lower leverage situation than a game with a one run lead? First, read the bold. Second, what? They were both tie games. My point initially was to exhaust your BP options (within reason) in sequential order in order to have a guy like Leo available deeper into the game. EDIT: I don't think you were aware of what I'm talking about. Erick and I were discussing it last game. He thought Leo should've been used and was used, I thought Badenhop should've been put on the mound and saved Leo for the 10th or 11th, depending on how Badenhop handled the 10th and whether or no we won the game, of course. So this time we won in extras. We used Badenhop first, Leo to close it, obviously. You said "use Leo when we really need him." that to me says that you would have him saved for a higher leverage situation. However, if you believe that Leo is the better pitcher, then using him in a tie game is getting much more value out of him than with a one run lead. A tie game is a higher leverage situation than one in which you have a one run lead. Thus, to get the proper value out of your best pitcher, you would use him in a tie game.
May 14, 201115 yr Vol-Suck and Dunn were terrible.... Boner went 0 for 6... Some long ball action tonight from the O and a clutch slide by Omar... If we weren't eyeing a shot at post-season, I'd say we would be stuck with Volstad all year. 2 of our 5 starting pitchers are a liability. Volstad made a couple of bad pitches and had 7 K's getting better. The young 24 yr old is not a liability. Actually pitched pretty well according to Tommy and Rich. His age means nothing to me, I just don't think Volstad is ever gonna be better than what we saw tonight. As long as he keeps us in games and the team keeps putting up Ws when he starts, as they almost always do since he got called back up last season, then the haters can keep on hating.
May 14, 201115 yr And a superb job by Wes Helms. Keeping the bench warm. We're now 12-3 when he doesn't make an appearance. that is an amazing stat. No. It's a haters "stat". What are we in gamnes that Dobbs dosen't make an appearance? And Hayes? And Ozzie? Or any bench player or relief guy?
May 14, 201115 yr Did they ever produce a stat saying what speed Stanton's HR ball was travelling at?
May 14, 201115 yr Did they ever produce a stat saying what speed Stanton's HR ball was travelling at? /117 MPH
May 14, 201115 yr And a superb job by Wes Helms. Keeping the bench warm. We're now 12-3 when he doesn't make an appearance. that is an amazing stat. No. It's a haters "stat". What are we in gamnes that Dobbs dosen't make an appearance? And Hayes? And Ozzie? Or any bench player or relief guy? 4-3 without Dobbs. 19-11 without Hayes. 9-3 without Ozzie. 3-7 without Cousins. 12-3 without Helms.
May 14, 201115 yr You said "use Leo when we really need him." that to me says that you would have him saved for a higher leverage situation. However, if you believe that Leo is the better pitcher, then using him in a tie game is getting much more value out of him than with a one run lead. A tie game is a higher leverage situation than one in which you have a one run lead. Thus, to get the proper value out of your best pitcher, you would use him in a tie game. First and foremost, you use the pitcher according to their role. Leo's a closer. I never said 'Leo is the best pitcher', but I acknowledge Leo's role just like I acknowledge Badenhop's role. In regards to the Phillies game, they would've both been a tie game situation, if both pitchers made an appearance, no matter what. You coming in here and talking about higher leverage situations is completely irrelevant and has nothing whatsoever to do with the argument at hand.
May 14, 201115 yr You said "use Leo when we really need him." that to me says that you would have him saved for a higher leverage situation. However, if you believe that Leo is the better pitcher, then using him in a tie game is getting much more value out of him than with a one run lead. A tie game is a higher leverage situation than one in which you have a one run lead. Thus, to get the proper value out of your best pitcher, you would use him in a tie game. First and foremost, you use the pitcher according to their role. Leo's a closer. I never said 'Leo is the best pitcher', but I acknowledge Leo's role just like I acknowledge Badenhop's role. In regards to the Phillies game, they would've both been a tie game situation, if both pitchers made an appearance, no matter what. You coming in here and talking about higher leverage situations is completely irrelevant and has nothing whatsoever to do with the argument at hand. All closers come into a tie game in the ninth at home; it's part of the "role."
May 14, 201115 yr Having a prescribed role is stupid. You use your best relievers in the most important situations. A tie game is a more important situation than a 1 run game. Period.
May 15, 201115 yr And a superb job by Wes Helms. Keeping the bench warm. We're now 12-3 when he doesn't make an appearance. that is an amazing stat. No. It's a haters "stat". What are we in gamnes that Dobbs dosen't make an appearance? And Hayes? And Ozzie? Or any bench player or relief guy? 4-3 without Dobbs. 19-11 without Hayes. 9-3 without Ozzie. 3-7 without Cousins. 12-3 without Helms. Going by those "stats" we should be starting Cousins every game. Can't seem to win without him in there. Sticking by it' a haters "stat". Emphasis on the "'s.
May 15, 201115 yr And yet another thread taking on the image of sports talk radio. GM wanna-be's chiming in and showing why they aren't GMs.
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.