2009 Baseball Season/Off-Season Discussion

[pilferk]

Forecast for tomorrow night is looking worse and worse as today goes on.

There was a HUGE window from 7 to 11:45 PM, earlier today.

Now, they're listing chance of rain at 50%.

We'll see....

[sandman]

i'd go Blanton-Lee in games 3 and 4.

Would Blanton have been a viable choice for Game 2?

How would that have flown in Philly?

i think people would have been fine with it. after the game 5 clincher vs LA, i heard alot people say they better not use Hamels in games 1 or 2.

a buddy of mine who is the biggest and smartest baseball fan i've ever met, said Blanton is not the right guy for game 2 though. he's better at home and just hasn't had that big of a responsibility placed on his shoulders. ALSO, he has a decent bat (for a pitcher) which could have an impact in philly. he hit a HR in last year's WS.

Poll on philly.com asks "is starting pedro in game 2 the right move?" 90% of about 3,000 votes voted "YES." although that may have been pilferk voting 2500 times.  

[pilferk]

Poll on philly.com asks "is starting pedro in game 2 the right move?" 90% of about 3,000 votes voted "YES." although that may have been pilferk voting 2500 times.  

Shhh, dont' tell!!

I gotta tell ya, I can't WAIT to see the "spectacle" that ensues when he takes the mound in the bottom of the first.  I'll be AT that game, in the bleachers....it's gonna be a carnival!

[faldor]

It's NOT the same.  Girardi took Burnett out after 2 batters when they still had the lead.  Little left Pedro out there until the lead was gone.  At least the Yankee bullpen had the chance to hold the lead.  The same cannot be said for the Red Sox bullpen.

The initial decision is the same. Little may have compounded his decision by making further bad ones (leaving Pedro out there after the visit).  But the initial "moment of decision" is the exact  same thing, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.  Both managers sent pitchers out there to start an inning, with a lead, in a clinching game, when they KNEW, by every number they had available to them, that those pitchers were out of gas.  If you're going on "feel", one batter is all you needed, in both cases, to know it was time to use the hook.  2 is excessive and stupid.  More than 2 would be lunacy (visit to the mound or not).  So Girardi was stupid, and Grady a lunatic?  I'd be OK with THAT distinction.  They're just varying degrees of "bad" decisions that had an impact on the outcome...and to be sure, both decisions were bad.

One was a bit more dramatic (being a Game 7, win or go home, situation), and one effected YOU, but they're functionally the same things at the moment of decision. Eliminate the hindsight factors for a minute.  The  executions are different, sure.  The ultimate outcome for the Yanks was actually worse...AJ's failure to execute directly led to the loss (he was charged with the earned runs) while Pedro's just pushed the game into extra frames (where your "favorite" all time player, Aaron FUCKING Boone, played hero).  But in the moment of the actual initial decision: Late innings, with a lead, with a pitcher you know is tired, who's been shaky the past innings, in a clinching game...I don't see the differences.

Yes, the Yanks pen had a chance to execute while the Sox didn't.  But they had a much more reduced chance of success than they would have had they just started the inning with the pen.  Both Joba and Hughes have proven they pitch better if brought in at the start of an inning.  Robertson had pitched amazingly well for the post.  Girardi had a fully rested pen AND had a day off the next day...so rest wasn't going to be an issue.  There simply wasn't any good, compelling reason to stay with AJ.  And plenty of good reasons to go with the pen (who, likewise, might not have executed...and we still could have lost..but at least then Girardi would absolutely NOT have been considered a factor in the outcome).  Because he would have done what they'd done all season, and what they said they planned on doing during the post (with Joba in the pen).

And while the Sox pen did not get the chance to execute, your line of reasoning could be that the Sox line up could have executed and scored more runs in the top of the 9th and won the game.  Right?  Or they could have scored in the top of the 10th or top of the 11th.  See,. that's where your logic falters.  Because you can't honestly sit there and say managerial decisions have zero effect on the game outcome and that it's 100% player execution and STILL maintain that Grady Little effected the outcome of that game.  You just can't have it both ways.  Which is why I used an example I knew would be near and dear to your heart.

Managers decisions don't outright win or lose games.  But they do effect who wins and loses.  They are a part of the equation, and when you make an obvious bad one (Little did, Girardi did) that can then be traced back to the events that occurred, you rightly deserve criticism for it.   I'm not ready to lynch Girardi just yet.  I thought he did a great job in the regular season.  But I think he's overmanaged, in a few situations (some of them wins) this post-season.  And 2 of his mistakes have had effects on the outcome of the games.

I don't know how Girardi manages, but sometimes managers go on feel rather than by the numbers.  Maybe that's why he went with Aceves over Robertson in game 3.  Maybe he just had a hunch.  I thought that was the right move at the time.  Again, I haven't watched the Yankees all season long but I was under the impression Aceves was better than Robertson.  Apparently that's not the case, but I remember that guy doing quite well for a stretch this season.

The problem is his "feel" defies any reasonable explanation.  2 outs, the guy has throw 15 pitches and has pitched stellar innings so far in the post season, nobody on base, in a close game that could go long into the night....if you have a hunch telling you to replace the pitcher with a guy who has been shaky in the 2nd half and had NOT pitched well in the post season so far, you need to tell it to shut the fuck up.  Because in that case, unless you're a certified clairvoyant, you're taking too big a risk.  And if you're a really good manager, you know that.

Robertson lead the LEAGUE in strike outs per 9 innings pitched.  Ace was a decent reliever for the 1st 1/2 to 3/4 of the season.  But declined quickly, late.  He got hit HARD in July and August.  Got better, slightly, in Sept...but faced the Twinkies and looked horrible.  And then had looked horrible in ALCS Game 2 (remember, he gave up the run that put the Halo's ahead, before A-rod's homer).

Ask any Yanks fan, baseball analyst, what have you:  It was a boneheaded move...made worse because you couldn't bail Ace out, in case he did pitch badly (and he did) because there was no body left in the pen to do it.

The initial decision may be the same, I never said it wasn't.  Both managers left their starters in too long.  But on a scale of 1-10, Grady scores a 97 for leaving Pedro in to wilt.  Girardi rates at about a 6 or 7 for leaving Burnett in for TWO batters.  It's a completely different scenario isn't comparable.

I just find it amusing that whenever a team loses a game, it's always the managers fault (unless some boneheaded play occurs).  I've never heard a fan say, "man we never would've won that if it wasn't for the manager".  All baseball fans (even me) thinks they know more than they actually do.  Even after the Red Sox won 2 World Series in 4 years, some Sox fans (not me) still complain about Francona and how he's not a good manager.   You can armchair manage all you want, there's a reason we're watching the games from our living rooms and they're in the dugouts.  They know what they're doing.  Not every decision they make is going to work out.  Some managerial mistakes are more glaring than others.  Girardi DID leave Burnett in too long, but it was nowhere near Grady Little territory.  I know you'd like to think the mighty Yankees couldn't possibly lose a game unless Girardi does something wrong.  But it happens.

[sandman]

weather.com is saying rain all day, but the % drops to 20% at 7pm and stays there thru the rest of the night. hopefully the rain ends and they get this in. i'm going to the pearl jam concert friday night and would miss most of it if they have to play game 2 that night.

you could argue that a postponement helps the phillies cause we have a much deeper pitching staff. but who really knows how that would effect things. i just want this thing to started tonight!

[pilferk]

The initial decision may be the same, I never said it wasn't.  Both managers left their starters in too long.  But on a scale of 1-10, Grady scores a 97 for leaving Pedro in to wilt.  Girardi rates at about a 6 or 7 for leaving Burnett in for TWO batters.  It's a completely different scenario isn't comparable.

Again, you see the "drastic difference" because one happened to YOUR beloved team, while the other happened to you hated rival. One WAS a bit more dramatic, but the outcomes? The disparity exists, but isn't nearly as drastic as you make it out to be.  I'd go with 75 to 100, myself.

How many earned runs did Pedro get charged with?  Did the gaffe actually directly correlate to them LOSING the game?

Answer: 3, and NO. They were tied 5-5 at the end of that inning.  He faced 5 batters (the first batter he faced, Nick Johnson, was an out).  So the arguement is he was left in 4 batters too long.

How many earned runs did AJ get charged with?  Did the gaffe actually directly correlate to them LOSING the game?

Answer: 2 and YES. They were behind 7-6 at the end of that inning.  He faced 2 batters, both got on base.  So he was, you'd argue, left in 2 batters too long.

I know...the Little thing KILLS the Red Sox fans.  They can't fathom that anything compares, because it stings so bad (just like 2004 stings the Yanks faithful). 

But, down to brass tacks....the situations are VERY similar.  Not exactly equivalent, but similar enough to make the comparison apt. 

I wonder what the rest of the group thinks?  Ignoring the hindsight and differences in dramtic effect....they look remarkably similar to me.

I just find it amusing that whenever a team loses a game, it's always the managers fault (unless some boneheaded play occurs).  I've never heard a fan say, "man we never would've won that if it wasn't for the manager".  All baseball fans (even me) thinks they know more than they actually do.  Even after the Red Sox won 2 World Series in 4 years, some Sox fans (not me) still complain about Francona and how he's not a good manager.   You can armchair manage all you want, there's a reason we're watching the games from our living rooms and they're in the dugouts.  They know what they're doing.  Not every decision they make is going to work out.  Some managerial mistakes are more glaring than others.  Girardi DID leave Burnett in too long, but it was nowhere near Grady Little territory.  I know you'd like to think the mighty Yankees couldn't possibly lose a game unless Girardi does something wrong.  But it happens.

See, that's not me.  It's not ALWAYS the managers fault.  Not even most of the time.  I'm not even sure THIS time it's his completely his "fault".  But his decision certainly impacted the outcome in a big way.  Just like we'll talk about the two Angels fielding blunders in game 6, and the baserunning blunders throughout the series.....they're all part of the team.

 And I don't think I'm way out in left field saying this.  You have baseball analysts, including former managers and players, saying much the same thing.  Chalk it up to "media sensationalism" if you want, I guess.  But when I see something, and before the outcome is decided say "that's a boneheaded move", then hear a WHOLE lot of people say the same thing....I take that as reinforcement that maybe, just maybe, I'm on the right track. Especially when they're people who know the game better than I, and who are more than just fans.

The Yanks lost PLENTY of games during the regular season that had ZERO impact from Girardi.  And they could have lost a couple of the squeakers in this ALCS that didn't have a whit to do with any Girardi moves.  But these two losses, specifically?  Girardi has to shoulder some of the blame.   They were BAD decisions, plain and simple (you even admitted as much, above...you're just talking gradients, now). 

Would they have won if he'd made different decisions?  I don't know.  Maybe, maybe not.  But the manager's job is to give his team the greatest chance to succeed.  It doesn't look like he did that.....just like Little didn't do it. 

[faldor]

I honestly think everyone would agree, regardless of what team they support, that Grady Little leaving in Pedro in 2003 was far more damning than Girardi leaving in Burnett the other night.  Regardless of the outcome that one ended the Red Sox season and the other, the Yanks prevailed and advanced to the World Series.  Take that all out of the equation and it's still not even close.  Pedro gave up double after double, was at the end of his rope.  All season long they had babied him and kept a close eye on his pitch count.  Even HE thought he was done after the 7th, yet they brought him back out and Little just sat there as he gave up hit after hit.  Girardi had enough sense to take Burnett out after 2 batters.  Was it 2 batters too late?  Absolutely!  But at least he didn't leave him out there to lose the lead on his own.  I'm sorry, but the bullpen did a horrible job in that spot.  I know it's not the easiest situation but the Yanks have a pretty good bullpen, it wasn't exactly asking for a miracle to get out of that situation holding the lead or at least not surrendering it altogether.

Let's just say, we agree to disagree on this one.  I'm not gonna give in, and neither are you, so there you go.  Let's just move on.  Big World Series begins tonight (weather permitting).  Good luck to both teams.  Felt like I had to say that, even though I'll be rooting heavily for the Phillies.

[sandman]

i'm so excited/nervous. i can't even concentrate on work.

another bad sign for the phillies....mets fans are on the philly bandwagon. the last thing i wanted to see was their negative karma!

and one more advantage i thought of for the Yanks....known steroid users - 2-0 in favor of the yanks.  (sorry, i had to.)

(i'd love to chime in on your manager discussion, but i'm not familiar enough with both situations, and like i said, i can barely concentrate.) 

[pilferk]

i'm so excited/nervous. i can't even concentrate on work.

another bad sign for the phillies....mets fans are on the philly bandwagon. the last thing i wanted to see was their negative karma!

and one more advantage i thought of for the Yanks....known steroid users - 2-0 in favor of the yanks.  (sorry, i had to.)

(i'd love to chime in on your manager discussion, but i'm not familiar enough with both situations, and like i said, i can barely concentrate.) 

2?  Only A-rod used steroids.

Andy used HGH. 



I'm OK concentrating on work, but tonight...post workout....it'll be time to start hyping myself up.

TOMORROW is gonna be nuts.  Only problem?  Yesterday afternoon started a case of the sniffles that is rapidly becoming a full blown head cold.  Don't feel all that bad..but couldn't breath through my nose to save my life.

[Falcon]

I wonder what the rest of the group thinks? 

From the outside looking in with no personal ties to either team, the situations are indeed comparable with the Little gaffe taking on more of a historical significance nationally.  I'm not sure if anyone outside of Yankee fan will remember the Girardi/Burnett situation mainly due to the Bombers winning the series and moving on.  

On the other hand, watching Pedro left there hung out to dry still resonates..

As for tonight...

Watched a ton of WS previews last night, CC and Lee are not only aces on the mound they seem to be likewise off.  Both came off very well in the interviews I saw - said all the right things and sounded sincere in doing so.

[pilferk]

Can you imagine what would have happened if they'd both stayed in Cleveland.  Not likely, I know..given the financials.

But still....the Indians would be unreal.

[cotis]

Can you imagine what would have happened if they'd both stayed in Cleveland.  Not likely, I know..given the financials.

But still....the Indians would be unreal.

With V-Mart and Sizemore and everyone else, they'd be a great team right now.

[pilferk]

i'm so excited/nervous. i can't even concentrate on work.

another bad sign for the phillies....mets fans are on the philly bandwagon. the last thing i wanted to see was their negative karma!

and one more advantage i thought of for the Yanks....known steroid users - 2-0 in favor of the yanks.  (sorry, i had to.)

(i'd love to chime in on your manager discussion, but i'm not familiar enough with both situations, and like i said, i can barely concentrate.) 

OK, NOW I'm getting worked up!

[pilferk]

I think you guys will like this article...it parallels a lot of the discussions we've had here:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=4599154

[sandman]

I think you guys will like this article...it parallels a lot of the discussions we've had here:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs/2009/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=4599154

i love jason stark.

21 of 23 experts predict the yankees to win the series.

i'm heading to a bar to start calming the nerves a little, and to watch the game with friends.

Enjoy it! i think tonight's winner takes it all (as is usually the case). 

[tim_m]

I'm starting to get nervous and game time is still 2 1/2 hrs away. I hope my nerves can take it. I couldn't even bare to watch when the Angels were up in game 6.

[Falcon]

OK - What the hell's up with the (loud) Star Wars music in the background during intros???

I digress..

Nervous fellas???

Good luck to fans of both sides 

Here we go.

[freedom78]

Yeah!  World fuckin' Series!

GO [REDACTED]!!!

[faldor]

Didn't get to see much of the game tonight (late day at work), but I certainly love the result.  Cliff Lee was spectacular!

It's only one game, but a BIG one for the Phils.  I don't LOVE the next 2 pitching matchups for them.  Should be some runs scored tomorrow, though both pitchers have the potential to hold the offense in check.  I don't see it happening though.  Then Pettitte is Mr. Post-season vs. a struggling Hamels.  We'll see.  Big win for the Phillies though.  Let's keep it going.  Make the NY Post and other NY papers look like fools.  All their pre-series hype, not giving the Phils any respect.  Shame on them!

[pilferk]

Yeah, I gotta admit:  The NY media wasn't too kind to the Phillies, which I thought was nuts.  They are a GREAT team...I don't know why some people are underestimating them.

It was a great game for 7 innings.  CC pitched well, Lee was unreal.  Then...the Yanks bullpen stunk the place up to hand the Phillies the easy win.

I did find it interesting that with a 6-0 lead, they threw Lee back out there.  I think that might be a sign they don't plan to use him 3 times in the series.

It also seemed (and Fox's pitch trax seemed to agree...I don't know how accurate it is) that the stike zone for the Yanks pitchers was, at times, a bit smaller than the one for Lee.  But I don't think it had one iota of effect on the outcome.

I thought Giradi made all the right calls, no exceedingly bad calls (ALMOST, but they got it right in the end even if it did go against the Yanks)....

Leaving today around 2:30-ish for the Stadium.  Already prepayed for my parking (OUCH)!  It'll either be a much better outcome tonight....or Yanks fans are going to be VERY sad tomorrow morning.