2009 Baseball Season/Off-Season Discussion

[pilferk]

suck it up

Oh, I will...but I won't like it (well, until the clincher, if there is one).  And I'll loudly bitch to anyone who will listen.

[Falcon]

Not sure what Manuel is thinking having Pedro go in Game 2 at Yankee Stadium, that just seems like he's asking for trouble.

Has he lost all faith in Hamels??

It would seem so..

[faldor]

I agree pitching Pedro in game 2 seems a bit strange.  Like pilferk said, the Yanks have had Pedro's number over the years back when he was actually a great pitcher.  That performance against the Dodgers was admirable, but the Yanks lineup makes the Dodgers look like the Toledo Mud Hens.  So good luck with that Pedro.  I agree with those who say he won't be intimidated, I just don't think he's good enough to pitch in game 2 of the World Series at this stage of his career.  Regardless of how Hamels has pitched, he deserves the ball before Pedro.

As for the managers.  Baseball managers receive way too much blame for losses and no props for wins.  If the team wins, it's a player or a team effort, the manager had nothing to do with it.  But if a team loses, someone will pick out some move the manager did or didn't make and blame him for the loss.  Girardi is the reason the LCS went 6 games?  Come on, that's crazy talk.  Let's put some of the blame with the players.  Girardi isn't out there hitting, pitching, or playing defense.

[tim_m]

I agree pitching Pedro in game 2 seems a bit strange.  Like pilferk said, the Yanks have had Pedro's number over the years back when he was actually a great pitcher.  That performance against the Dodgers was admirable, but the Yanks lineup makes the Dodgers look like the Toledo Mud Hens.  So good luck with that Pedro.  I agree with those who say he won't be intimidated, I just don't think he's good enough to pitch in game 2 of the World Series at this stage of his career.  Regardless of how Hamels has pitched, he deserves the ball before Pedro.

As for the managers.  Baseball managers receive way too much blame for losses and no props for wins.  If the team wins, it's a player or a team effort, the manager had nothing to do with it.  But if a team loses, someone will pick out some move the manager did or didn't make and blame him for the loss.  Girardi is the reason the LCS went 6 games?  Come on, that's crazy talk.  Let's put some of the blame with the players.  Girardi isn't out there hitting, pitching, or playing defense.

True but not true. You gotta question Girardi's move to leave Pettitte in there one batter too long when he was clearly tired. If he pulls Pettitte maybe we hang on in game 3 and sweep the Angels.

[faldor]

I agree pitching Pedro in game 2 seems a bit strange.  Like pilferk said, the Yanks have had Pedro's number over the years back when he was actually a great pitcher.  That performance against the Dodgers was admirable, but the Yanks lineup makes the Dodgers look like the Toledo Mud Hens.  So good luck with that Pedro.  I agree with those who say he won't be intimidated, I just don't think he's good enough to pitch in game 2 of the World Series at this stage of his career.  Regardless of how Hamels has pitched, he deserves the ball before Pedro.

As for the managers.  Baseball managers receive way too much blame for losses and no props for wins.  If the team wins, it's a player or a team effort, the manager had nothing to do with it.  But if a team loses, someone will pick out some move the manager did or didn't make and blame him for the loss.  Girardi is the reason the LCS went 6 games?  Come on, that's crazy talk.  Let's put some of the blame with the players.  Girardi isn't out there hitting, pitching, or playing defense.

True but not true. You gotta question Girardi's move to leave Pettitte in there one batter too long when he was clearly tired. If he pulls Pettitte maybe we hang on in game 3 and sweep the Angels.

Sure you question it.  You also question Scioscia pulling Lackey with the bases loaded for Oliver when he just needed to get one more out.  That move didn't work out too well either.  Yet the Angels were able to overcome that and still win the game. 

Again, Girardi didn't let those first 2 batters reach base.  Burnett did.  And he didn't give up the runs, the bullpen did.  He didn't pop up with the bases loaded in the 9th, that was Swisher.  Any and every move or non move can be questioned.  I just don't buy that HE lost the two games in the ALCS.  The Yankees are mortal.  They CAN lose games to other teams without Girardi handing them the win.

[tim_m]

I agree pitching Pedro in game 2 seems a bit strange.  Like pilferk said, the Yanks have had Pedro's number over the years back when he was actually a great pitcher.  That performance against the Dodgers was admirable, but the Yanks lineup makes the Dodgers look like the Toledo Mud Hens.  So good luck with that Pedro.  I agree with those who say he won't be intimidated, I just don't think he's good enough to pitch in game 2 of the World Series at this stage of his career.  Regardless of how Hamels has pitched, he deserves the ball before Pedro.

As for the managers.  Baseball managers receive way too much blame for losses and no props for wins.  If the team wins, it's a player or a team effort, the manager had nothing to do with it.  But if a team loses, someone will pick out some move the manager did or didn't make and blame him for the loss.  Girardi is the reason the LCS went 6 games?  Come on, that's crazy talk.  Let's put some of the blame with the players.  Girardi isn't out there hitting, pitching, or playing defense.

True but not true. You gotta question Girardi's move to leave Pettitte in there one batter too long when he was clearly tired. If he pulls Pettitte maybe we hang on in game 3 and sweep the Angels.

Sure you question it.  You also question Scioscia pulling Lackey with the bases loaded for Oliver when he just needed to get one more out.  That move didn't work out too well either.  Yet the Angels were able to overcome that and still win the game. 

Again, Girardi didn't let those first 2 batters reach base.  Burnett did.  And he didn't give up the runs, the bullpen did.  He didn't pop up with the bases loaded in the 9th, that was Swisher.  Any and every move or non move can be questioned.  I just don't buy that HE lost the two games in the ALCS.  The Yankees are mortal.  They CAN lose games to other teams without Girardi handing them the win.

Yeah that move by Sciioscia really puzzled me. I have no idea what he was thinking there.

[Layne Staley's Sunglasses]

Not sure what Manuel is thinking having Pedro go in Game 2 at Yankee Stadium, that just seems like he's asking for trouble.

Has he lost all faith in Hamels??

It would seem so..

I said this on another baseball forum, I am SOOOO looking forward to the "Who's Your Daddy?" chant.  One of my favorite Renovated Yankee Stadium moments, along with REG-GIE REG-GIE.  (Came at the expense of my bums, but a great moment anyway.)

That's a nice tradition to take across the street.

Pitching is going out the window for the World Series.

Both teams play in bandboxes and have Murderer's Row type lineups.

This is going to be fun.

Beyond CC and Lee, you maybe onto something.

The only other guys that seem to be "trustable" so to speak (for me) maybe Pettitte and Mo.

It'll be interesting to see if anyone else can/will step up.

The weather will play a factor in this thing too. 

I hate how MLB has stretched out this postseason.  Harsh winter weather may stifle the offenses or aid in the renaming of these stadiums into Cape Canaveral.  We just won't know until the forecasts are in.

TV Money TV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV MoneyTV Money

I think it may have something to do w TV money

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Ya think?

[pilferk]

As for the managers.  Baseball managers receive way too much blame for losses and no props for wins.  If the team wins, it's a player or a team effort, the manager had nothing to do with it.  But if a team loses, someone will pick out some move the manager did or didn't make and blame him for the loss.  Girardi is the reason the LCS went 6 games?  Come on, that's crazy talk.  Let's put some of the blame with the players.  Girardi isn't out there hitting, pitching, or playing defense.

Except...no.

A manager is SUPPOSED to be invisible.  That's pretty much the ultimate symbol of being a successful manager.  What I mean by that is you might make decisions that effect the outcome of the game, but they're generally transparent and seem to make good sense, whether the players ultimately suceed or not. His job is to put his team in the BEST possible position to win, in other words, and set the players up for success. 

He did a crappy job of that in a couple of  LCS games.  Just like Swisher did a crappy job of hitting.

Lifting Robertson (who was pitching lights out) for Aceves (who was not) in game 3 was monumentally dumb and nobody with a lick of baseball knowledge seems to see the logic in it. And it cost the Yanks the game, no if's and or buts about it.  Yes, Aceves threw the pitches.

NOT pulling Burnett in game 5, once the Yanks took the lead in the top of the 7th, ultimately cost them the game.  The guy had been shaky all night and looked gassed coming out in the 6th.  When his team just picked him up, and the bullpen is fresh (they'd just come off an off day), and your "post season plan" was to go Joba/Hughes/Mo in the 7th-9th...you get to a situation tailor made to execute our plan, and you don't?  That's non-sensical, at best. The Angels were practically salivating when they saw AJ come out for the 7th.  He puts a guy on and you STILL don't pull him?  As I said, it certainly cost the Yanks the game, ultimately, because those 2 earned runs they scored to take the lead were charged to AJ.

Was Girardi SOLELY responsible for it going 6 games?  No.  But in close games, any blunder (managerial or otherwise) is going to cost you.  The Angels committed their errors on the field, the Yanks largely committed them OFF the field (so they don't show up in the box score).  Girardi blundered.  And those blunders definitely had SOME effect on the outcome.  So did our bottom half of the order disappearing at the plate.  There's no assurance we would have won one of those games we lost, had Girardi NOT blundered.  But those blunders pretty much drastically reduced any chance we had to win, and they turned out to be one of the reasons we lost.

When Grady Little left Pedro in just a LITTLE too long....you can't sit there and argue that had no effect on the outcome.  Was it the managers sole responsibility?  No, Pedro threw the pitches....but it hurt the teams chances to succeed.

[sandman]

did Charlie make an official announcement on the rotation? i haven't heard anything.

the assumption is that he will go with Pedro, and i agree with that move. Hamels is just way off his game. it's tough to have any confidence in him at all. and Pedro pitched nearly perfect on the road vs. the Dodgers, and has plenty of playoff experience.

i would probably go blanton, pedro, hamels, but am ok with Pedro before Blanton. also, Blanton and Hamels are more effective at home. I would NOT pitch Lee on 3 days rest. i am not a fan of that move, and i HATE when managers announce it ahead of time.

i don't always agree with Charlie, but tough to argue with a guy that has won 3 straight division titles and last year's World Series.

looks like rain will play a factor in the series as well. Game 1 could be postponed (and there's rain in the philly forecast for the weekend). that would prevent CC (and lee) from pitching in game 4.
 

[pilferk]

did Charlie make an official announcement on the rotation? i haven't heard anything.

the assumption is that he will go with Pedro, and i agree with that move. Hamels is just way off his game. it's tough to have any confidence in him at all. and Pedro pitched nearly perfect on the road vs. the Dodgers, and has plenty of playoff experience.

i would probably go blanton, pedro, hamels, but am ok with Pedro before Blanton. also, Blanton and Hamels are more effective at home. I would NOT pitch Lee on 3 days rest. i am not a fan of that move, and i HATE when managers announce it ahead of time.

i don't always agree with Charlie, but tough to argue with a guy that has won 3 straight division titles and last year's World Series.

looks like rain will play a factor in the series as well. Game 1 could be postponed (and there's rain in the philly forecast for the weekend). that would prevent CC (and lee) from pitching in game 4.
 

They were talking about it yesterday on Francessa, around 5 PM, that they Philly had announced their starters for the first 3 games....don't know if it's "official" or not.

I just question going with Pedro in game 2 (and not 3).  He might have pitched well in LA, but he's going to pitch against a group of fans who just HATE this guy.  If you want to minimize the Yanks home field advantage, you do NOT pitch Pedro in game 2.  I definitely think you pitch him...but not in game 2.  Game 3.  Blanton or Hamels shoudl go in 2.

And they say they ARE going with Lee on 3 days vs CC.  I'm not crazy about the move either.   I also don't think the Yanks will go with a true 3 man rotation, given the abscense of that extra "silly" off day between games 4 and 5.  We'll probably get Gaudan in game 5, AJ in game 6, and CC in game 7.  Though a lot of people are just assuming a blanket 3 man rotation for the yanks.  I'd be surprised at that.  I can't see Andy going on 3 days rest....we'll see.

Yeah, I was only half serious about the disparaging comments on Charlie.  It just seemed like a REALLY odd move to go with Pedro in game 2, all things considered.

On the rain, we're still showing light rain/showers late in the afternoon on Saturday.  I don't think they'll stop play....maybe a delay.  But that rain has trended heavier and later as the forcast has progressed, so we'll see.

[faldor]

As for the managers.  Baseball managers receive way too much blame for losses and no props for wins.  If the team wins, it's a player or a team effort, the manager had nothing to do with it.  But if a team loses, someone will pick out some move the manager did or didn't make and blame him for the loss.  Girardi is the reason the LCS went 6 games?  Come on, that's crazy talk.  Let's put some of the blame with the players.  Girardi isn't out there hitting, pitching, or playing defense.

Except...no.

A manager is SUPPOSED to be invisible.  That's pretty much the ultimate symbol of being a successful manager.  What I mean by that is you might make decisions that effect the outcome of the game, but they're generally transparent and seem to make good sense, whether the players ultimately suceed or not. His job is to put his team in the BEST possible position to win, in other words, and set the players up for success. 

He did a crappy job of that in a couple of  LCS games.  Just like Swisher did a crappy job of hitting.

Lifting Robertson (who was pitching lights out) for Aceves (who was not) in game 3 was monumentally dumb and nobody with a lick of baseball knowledge seems to see the logic in it. And it cost the Yanks the game, no if's and or buts about it.  Yes, Aceves threw the pitches.

NOT pulling Burnett in game 5, once the Yanks took the lead in the top of the 7th, ultimately cost them the game.  The guy had been shaky all night and looked gassed coming out in the 6th.  When his team just picked him up, and the bullpen is fresh (they'd just come off an off day), and your "post season plan" was to go Joba/Hughes/Mo in the 7th-9th...you get to a situation tailor made to execute our plan, and you don't?  That's non-sensical, at best. The Angels were practically salivating when they saw AJ come out for the 7th.  He puts a guy on and you STILL don't pull him?  As I said, it certainly cost the Yanks the game, ultimately, because those 2 earned runs they scored to take the lead were charged to AJ.

Was Girardi SOLELY responsible for it going 6 games?  No.  But in close games, any blunder (managerial or otherwise) is going to cost you.  The Angels committed their errors on the field, the Yanks largely committed them OFF the field (so they don't show up in the box score).  Girardi blundered.  And those blunders definitely had SOME effect on the outcome.  So did our bottom half of the order disappearing at the plate.  There's no assurance we would have won one of those games we lost, had Girardi NOT blundered.  But those blunders pretty much drastically reduced any chance we had to win, and they turned out to be one of the reasons we lost.

When Grady Little left Pedro in just a LITTLE too long....you can't sit there and argue that had no effect on the outcome.  Was it the managers sole responsibility?  No, Pedro threw the pitches....but it hurt the teams chances to succeed.

Pilferk, again.  Scioscia made the wrong move by pulling Lackey, yet the Angels still won that game.  I'm not arguing Girardi should've left Burnett out there, I agree he should have gone to the pen.  But there was still plenty of opportunities to overcome that, so he didn't LOSE that game for them.  Players have to perform at whatever situations they're thrown into.  Coming into a game up 2 runs with 2 runners on may not be the most ideal situation but its certainly not an impossible task to ask your bullpen to hold that lead.

The Grady Little/Pedro situation was WAY different (I knew you'd bring this up,  .)  Absolutely no comparison.  Pedro was done and Little left him out there until the Yankees came all the way back.  I could almost have agreed with Little leaving Pedro out there for the first batter, if he got on, take him out (which is basically what Girardi did).  But Grady left Pedro out there for double after double, run after run.  Completely different scenario.  No manager has made as glaring a mistake as that since then.

[pilferk]

[Pilferk, again.  Scioscia made the wrong move by pulling Lackey, yet the Angels still won that game.  I'm not arguing Girardi should've left Burnett out there, I agree he should have gone to the pen.  But there was still plenty of opportunities to overcome that, so he didn't LOSE that game for them.  Players have to perform at whatever situations they're thrown into.  Coming into a game up 2 runs with 2 runners on may not be the most ideal situation but its certainly not an impossible task to ask your bullpen to hold that lead.

But Scioscia still made a mistake, and didn't set his team up for success.  Since I'm not an Angels fan, I'm not going to point out their managerial flaws.  Maybe they've done that all year, maybe it's something common place for them..I don't watch enough of them to know and justify or not justify his moves.

I do watch and follow enough Yanks baseball, and listen to enough analysis, to know it wasn't "normal" for Girardi to make those types of moves.  And I know the numbers don't support them.  There was just no logical justification for them....and that's not just my opinion, FYI.  You've seen pretty much every sports analyst say pretty much the same thing.

He didn't LOSE the game for them.  The decision he made led the Yanks to lose.  It's a fine distinction, but one to note.  Had he done things differently, they still might not have won.  But they would have likely been in a better POSITION to win and they would not have lost in the manner they did.

It's not an impossible task (2 on, no out) but it's certainly setting up your pen to fail, rather than putting them in a position to succeed.

The Grady Little/Pedro situation was WAY different.  Absolutely no comparison.  Pedro was done and Little left him out there until the Yankees came all the way back.  I could almost have agreed with Little leaving Pedro out there for the first batter, if he got on, take him out (which is basically what Girardi did).  But Grady left Pedro out there for double after double, run after run.  Completely different scenario.  No manager has made as glaring a mistake as that since then.

The only real difference is that one happend to YOUR team, in a decisive game, so it stings you more.  But the scenario's are actually quite similar, in terms of what the manager knew, what had happened up to the point of the decision, etc.  Burnett was done,had been shaky for awhile, and Girardi left him out there longer than he should.  Pedro was done, had been shaky for awhile, and Little left him out there.  One batter was probably too many, but 2 was just stupid.   Girardi did NOT take him out after just one batter.  Neither did Little.

Grady might have STUCK with the decision longer, but that goes back to your point about execution.  You can't, in one breath, say it's all about the players executing, and then paint one decision as different than the other based on the after effects of the execution.  Same basic point in the game, same basic situation.  Both made the WRONG move.  Both the opposing teams capitalized on those blunders, executed, and won.

[faldor]

[Pilferk, again.  Scioscia made the wrong move by pulling Lackey, yet the Angels still won that game.  I'm not arguing Girardi should've left Burnett out there, I agree he should have gone to the pen.  But there was still plenty of opportunities to overcome that, so he didn't LOSE that game for them.  Players have to perform at whatever situations they're thrown into.  Coming into a game up 2 runs with 2 runners on may not be the most ideal situation but its certainly not an impossible task to ask your bullpen to hold that lead.

But Scioscia still made a mistake, and didn't set his team up for success.  Since I'm not an Angels fan, I'm not going to point out their managerial flaws.  Maybe they've done that all year, maybe it's something common place for them..I don't watch enough of them to know and justify or not justify his moves.

I do watch and follow enough Yanks baseball, and listen to enough analysis, to know it wasn't "normal" for Girardi to make those types of moves.  And I know the numbers don't support them.  There was just no logical justification for them....and that's not just my opinion, FYI.  You've seen pretty much every sports analyst say pretty much the same thing.

He didn't LOSE the game for them.  The decision he made led the Yanks to lose.  It's a fine distinction, but one to note.  Had he done things differently, they still might not have won.  But they would have likely been in a better POSITION to win and they would not have lost in the manner they did.

It's not an impossible task (2 on, no out) but it's certainly setting up your pen to fail, rather than putting them in a position to succeed.

The Grady Little/Pedro situation was WAY different.  Absolutely no comparison.  Pedro was done and Little left him out there until the Yankees came all the way back.  I could almost have agreed with Little leaving Pedro out there for the first batter, if he got on, take him out (which is basically what Girardi did).  But Grady left Pedro out there for double after double, run after run.  Completely different scenario.  No manager has made as glaring a mistake as that since then.

The only real difference is that one happend to YOUR team, in a decisive game, so it stings you more.  But the scenario's are actually quite similar, in terms of what the manager knew, what had happened up to the point of the decision, etc.  Burnett was done,had been shaky for awhile, and Girardi left him out there longer than he should.  Pedro was done, had been shaky for awhile, and Little left him out there.  One batter was probably too many, but 2 was just stupid.   Girardi did NOT take him out after just one batter.  Neither did Little.

Grady might have STUCK with the decision longer, but that goes back to your point about execution.  You can't, in one breath, say it's all about the players executing, and then paint one decision as different than the other based on the after effects of the execution.  Same basic point in the game, same basic situation.  Both made the WRONG move.  Both the opposing teams capitalized on those blunders, executed, and won.

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.

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.

[sandman]

Manuel announced it a few minutes ago. Pedro in game 2. still no word on Lee pitching game 4 on short rest.


Apparently, the Phillies rotation is set. In a marked departure from the norm, the team will push former playoff ace lefthander Cole Hamels back to Game 3 of the World Series so Pedro Martinez can face the Yankees in Game2 at Yankee Stadium on Thursday.

Phillies manager Charlie Manuel announced the news on his weekly radio appearance with Michael Smerconish on WPHT (1210-AM).

After Game 3 on Sunday at Citizens Bank Park, Hamels will not be available to pitch again until Game 7.

Hamels won World Series and NLCS MVP awards last season but has allowed 11 runs, 20 hits and six home runs in just 14 2/3 postseason innings this year. Last year, Hamels pitched at least six innings in all five of his postseason starts, finishing at least seven in four of them. This year, he hasn't completed six innings in any of his three starts, and has pitched into the sixth just once.

Martinez tossed seven scoreless innings at Dodger Stadium in a loss to Los Angeles in Game 2 of the National League Championship Series, his lone start of the postseason. He threw 50 pitches in two innings of a simulated game the Phillies held during their workout Sunday and an additional 15 pitches before each inning. He is 2-0 with a 1.88 ERA in five starts at Citizens Bank Park, compared with 3-1 and a 5.66 ERA in four starts on the road.

Martinez will be pitching in his second career World Series, the other was in 2004 with Boston.

One of the reasons that Manuel might have chosen Martinez is that it allows the Phillies to split up lefthanders Cliff Lee and Hamels.

As detailed in Monday's Daily News, New York faced lefthanded starters in back-to-back games 13 times this season, and in three straight games four times. In those instances, when facing a lefty starter for the first time, the Yankees scored 72 runs while hitting .278 and drawing 49 walks. The second day, they scored 74 runs while hitting .303 and drawing 59 walks. And in the four times they played a third straight game against a lefty starter, they scored 26 runs while hitting .327 and drawing 23 walks.

Starting Lee and Hamels in Games 1 and 2 would not only give their opponent back-to-back games against lefty starters, it would open the possibility of throwing lefty starters in Games 4, 5 and 6, should Manuel elect to give rookie J.A. Happ the start in Game 4.

[pilferk]

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.

[pilferk]

Manuel announced it a few minutes ago. Pedro in game 2. still no word on Lee pitching game 4 on short rest.


Apparently, the Phillies rotation is set. In a marked departure from the norm, the team will push former playoff ace lefthander Cole Hamels back to Game 3 of the World Series so Pedro Martinez can face the Yankees in Game2 at Yankee Stadium on Thursday.

Phillies manager Charlie Manuel announced the news on his weekly radio appearance with Michael Smerconish on WPHT (1210-AM).

After Game 3 on Sunday at Citizens Bank Park, Hamels will not be available to pitch again until Game 7.

The more I think about it, the less (well, actually MORE as a Yanks fan) I like this move.

If you're up 2-0, do you want Hamels to pitch game 3 and potentially give the Yanks new life?

If you're tied 1-1, do you want Hamels to pitch game 3 and potentially give the Yanks a 2-1 lead?

If you're down 0-2, do you REALLY want Hamel pitching game 3 to keep you from the cusp of elmination?

If I were a Phillies fan, I'd want hames in game 2, because no matter what happens, having Pedro in game 3 makes me feel better.

If I'm up 2-0, I'd rather have Pedro pitching the "cusp of Yanks elimination" game.

If I 'm tied 1-1, I think my chances are better vs Pettite to get a 2-1 lead.

If I'm down 0-2, I'd prefer Pedro pitching to save us from a "cusp of elimination" game.

With Hamels pitching game 2, the worst you have is the Yanks holding home field, with a proven pitcher waiting in game 3 to stop the bleeding.

Am I way off base in my thinking, sandman?  Maybe I'm overthinking it....

As far as the data on the Yanks facing lefty starters....it's interesting, but I'd want more data.  The QUALITY of those lefty starters might be more a factor than the fact they were lefties.  The phillies lefties are (by and large) better than the garden variety the Yanks may have faced "in a row".

[Mal Brossard]

Pedro isn't what he used to be at this point in his career.  Counting on him to save you down 2-0, where momentum is in NY's favor, is like asking the rain not to fall.  It might work, but ain't bloody likely.  If I were a Phillies fan, I'd rather see him in the 2 spot where, if you win Game 1, there's less pressure on him, and even if you lose Game 1, there's not as much pressure as if you were to lose 1 and 2 and then have to go to him.

[pilferk]

Pedro isn't what he used to be at this point in his career.  Counting on him to save you down 2-0, where momentum is in NY's favor, is like asking the rain not to fall.  It might work, but ain't bloody likely.  If I were a Phillies fan, I'd rather see him in the 2 spot where, if you win Game 1, there's less pressure on him, and even if you lose Game 1, there's not as much pressure as if you were to lose 1 and 2 and then have to go to him.

I guess....but when your other option at #3 is Hammels, who has NOT been the same guy he was last year, and who has NOT been good in the post, so far....

You still feeling the same way? 

For me, that's what it would come down to.

[sandman]

everyone i've heard from (friends, media, baseball experts) like the move. it's actually the ballzy move. playing it safe would be sticking with Cole.

I like it because:
A) Pedro is the better pitcher right now. (nothing else matters much to me.)
B) Hamels has been getting rattled on the mound. WS on the road isn't the place to figure out your problems.
C) it breaks up the lefties.

regardless of who wins game 1 or 2, i want the pitcher that gives me the best chance of winning each game. if we're down 1-0 the last person i want to see on the mound is Hamels. in fact, if we're down 2-0, i'd go Blanton-Lee in games 3 and 4.

[Falcon]

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?