The Swamp

Nonlinear FC wrote:

Joe K wrote:Man, I hate the strategy of bringing starters out of the pen on short rest. For the few times it's succeeded (Randy Johnson, Bumgarner), there seem to be multiple debacles.

Yep. The crowd cheered. I bit my nails. Seems like a great idea on paper...

The other thing about the Johnson, Bumgarner examples is they were in Game 7 of the World Series when there were no more games left (Lester last year is also an example). Even if the Scherzer move worked last night, you've sort of fucked your rotation for the Dodgers series. Instead of fully rested Scherzer, then Roark in Games 1-2, you're starting Roark and then??? I know you've gotta win the NLDS first to even get to the NLCS, but if the goal is to win a championship and not just a first round series, that makes the Scherzer decision even weaker IMO.

mister d wrote:I'm fine with using multiple starters. Every option isn't ideal, given you've got 15 outs to go, so I'll take my chance on short-rest Scherzer over either using your 5th-6th reliever in leverage work or trying for a one inning bridge then getting 12 outs between Madson and Doolittle.

I agree. I was fine with the decision to use Lester Wednesday, and I was screaming at my Twitter feed for Maddon to put Quintana in for the fifth inning last night. I thought putting him in during the seventh was okay given the situation they were facing at that moment, but really, the time to use a starter in relief is early in the game and with a clean inning.

It didn't work out for Scherzer, but it's hard to fault Scherzer too much. He retired the first two guys then gave up an infield hit and a blooper. He deserved to be out of the inning before the shenanigans began.

I assume Wilson won't be on the roster for the NLCS, since Maddon wasn't willing to use him last night. (And I assume he'll be calling his agent looking for a trade, as will Rondon, who was left off the roster in favor of Wilson.)

You could build better pens for 1/2 the teams in baseball out of the relievers this year's playoff teams don't trust.

Nonlinear FC wrote:

A_B wrote:

Joe K wrote:

duff wrote:They should have brought in a relief catcher.

The Wieters play happened after Scherzer already gave up 3 straight hits and the lead.

I agree mostly but he should have eaten that ball.

He absolutely should've eaten that. My daughter continues to play pretty high level travel softball and I can't tell you how many times I'm swallowing my tongue when an infielder throws the ball when the runner is already hitting the bag. "Eat it!!!"

I'm not making any kind of "Nats were robbed" claim, but that play should've been dead. And the broadcast crew and obviously the umps simply blew it. If a batter hits the catcher with his bat, the ball is dead. Period. Not even a complicated call. I don't understand how that wasn't called last night. Maybe the strikeout complicates it? But that makes no sense to me. Dudes bat clearly hit Weiters in the head. Dead ball. Inning over.

did they know the rules? Darling on the broadcast said he'd never heard of it. Dusty kind of argued, or had a civil discussion. Weiters was the only one maybe but couldn't convince the ump.

Wieters was clearly arguing it, even as the announcers thought he was claiming foul tip.

mister d wrote:Wieters was clearly arguing it, even as the announcers thought he was claiming foul tip.

Then put it down to another one where Dutsy doesn't raise a fuss to stick up for his players. The pickoff review too, he should have been out there kicking dirt. If nothing else, it gets the crowd into it.

I don't get Baker at all. If he's not an analytics guy and he's not a players guy and he's not a rules guy, what the hell is he?

mister d wrote:I don't get Baker at all. If he's not an analytics guy and he's not a players guy and he's not a rules guy, what the hell is he?

He used to be a players guy, no?

Maybe a hitters' guy?

would anything happened today if the game was played under protest in the 5th inning. Does anything ever happen?

I just like the ump making a BIG P.

Rarely, and there's a 99% chance it wouldn't be applicable looking back and assuming the ump was saying "I didn't see him hit the mask" versus simply not knowing the rule. If he acknowledged the mask but didn't enforce the rule, that's actually pretty much the only time a protest could win.

mister d wrote:Rarely, and there's a 99% chance it wouldn't be applicable looking back and assuming the ump was saying "I didn't see him hit the mask" versus simply not knowing the rule. If he acknowledged the mask but didn't enforce the rule, that's actually pretty much the only time a protest could win.

This is why Baker needed to start in on the home plate umpire, pointing out the rule demanding that 'dead ball' be declared and a strike assessed. He should've demanded the umpires convene to discuss that very rule. And if Baker doesn't know the rule, you'd sure like to think at least one of his bench coaches would.

Girardi went and effed up the Yankees' chances to win their series v the Indians a week ago tonight.

Baker: "Hold my beer."

It's impossible to quantify, but Max Scherzer has to be an all-time major league leader in brutal postseason losses.

brian wrote:It's impossible to quantify, but Max Scherzer has to be an all-time major league leader in brutal postseason losses.

Doug Drabek would be close. lost a bunch of close games in 3 consecutive NLCS'

There's a fangraphs article that says the HP ump did know the rule and did know there was contact, but cited a different rule (where the bat must interfere with the catch). If that's the case, you still protest and see where it goes, no?

mister d wrote:There's a fangraphs article that says the HP ump did know the rule and did know there was contact, but cited a different rule (where the bat must interfere with the catch). If that's the case, you still protest and see where it goes, no?

I just read the article. It's a bad article and the writer should feel self conscious about it. (o;

The umpire was digging into the wrong rule. The batter hit the catcher in the head with the bat. Unintentionally. Strike. Out. Inning over.

What I want to know is why there wasn't/isn't some governance call coming in from the NY office to stop this kind of crap in its tracks. They got fucked over here, and yes, Baker should've protested the game. At which point, around right now the MLB offices would release a comment saying "The play stands, and yes, the umpire sucks ass. We'll give him a demerit and a frowny-face on his next review."

brian wrote:It's impossible to quantify, but Max Scherzer has to be an all-time major league leader in brutal postseason losses.

Glavine's gotta be up there.

On a per loss basis, its Mariano.

EnochRoot wrote:

mister d wrote:There's a fangraphs article that says the HP ump did know the rule and did know there was contact, but cited a different rule (where the bat must interfere with the catch). If that's the case, you still protest and see where it goes, no?

I just read the article. It's a bad article and the writer should feel self conscious about it. (o;

The umpire was digging into the wrong rule. The batter hit the catcher in the head with the bat. Unintentionally. Strike. Out. Inning over.

What I want to know is why there wasn't/isn't some governance call coming in from the NY office to stop this kind of crap in its tracks. They got fucked over here, and yes, Baker should've protested the game. At which point, around right now the MLB offices would release a comment saying "The play stands, and yes, the umpire sucks ass. We'll give him a demerit and a frowny-face on his next review."

Well, more importantly, that guy wouldn't be eligible for any more post-season work this year and he'd have an uphill climb next year.

Nonlinear FC wrote:

EnochRoot wrote:

mister d wrote:There's a fangraphs article that says the HP ump did know the rule and did know there was contact, but cited a different rule (where the bat must interfere with the catch). If that's the case, you still protest and see where it goes, no?

I just read the article. It's a bad article and the writer should feel self conscious about it. (o;

The umpire was digging into the wrong rule. The batter hit the catcher in the head with the bat. Unintentionally. Strike. Out. Inning over.

What I want to know is why there wasn't/isn't some governance call coming in from the NY office to stop this kind of crap in its tracks. They got fucked over here, and yes, Baker should've protested the game. At which point, around right now the MLB offices would release a comment saying "The play stands, and yes, the umpire sucks ass. We'll give him a demerit and a frowny-face on his next review."

Well, more importantly, that guy wouldn't be eligible for any more post-season work this year and he'd have an uphill climb next year.

I take it you haven't seen Angel Hernandez in the post season.

I keep seeing (and saw last night) lots of references to how it was a horrible decision for Maddon to let Hendricks bat in the fourth.

Maybe I'm missing something, but since when is a manager *expected* to pinch-hit for his starter after three innings in a basically-no-leverage batting situation? Even with your starter laboring - and Hendricks had a decent third inning - you still need 18 outs and you don't have many pitchers who can get you more than three of those, if that.

It seems to me that the run expectancy letting Hendricks bat there was around 0.15. But the run expectancy with a pinch-hitter was only 0.26 or so. So is it worth taking out a starter for an extra 1/9 of an expected run in the fourth inning?

I certainly would not have burned a pinch hitter that soon

Not sure why the Houston fans are cheering, making him throw 107 pitches in 7 innings is a big win.

Chad Unfairchild.

Rex wrote:Not sure why the Houston fans are cheering, making him throw 107 pitches in 7 innings is a big win.

You're so subtle I can't tell when you're messing with us. But I think getting 7 from a starter is pretty legit regardless of pitch count.

I think the Yankees’ only realistic goal tonight (and I’m being about 60% serious here) was to make Keuchel work a little bit for his 4-hit shutout and to not wear out their own pen. It looks like they’ll use only Green (who needed the work) and hopefully the series will look a little different the next time Keuchel pitches.

Hmmm. I don't think that pitch count is high enough to count as "making him work". I see where youre coming from but I guess I just don't agree.

Nice shutout, Giff. NOT!

Tonight was a game the Yanks didn’t need, as much as you can ever say that in a playoff series. It was good that they didn’t get Madduxed or blown out since their philosophy is to wear down pitchers. Tomorrow I will resume trolling and reverse jinxing. The Yanks probably need to win 3 of the next 4.

Giles threw a lot of pitches. A split here would be perfectly good.

i dont care. hopedully our offense picks up and we can hold serve at home tomorrow. spin it however you want, keuchel was brilliant and up 1-0 feels fucking amazing.

Severino appears to be letting the umps get under his skin. And he isn't wrong.

That was a fun half inning.

I love watching verlander pitch.

“Never make the 1st or 3rd out ...” is mostly right, if a bit overplayed. Gardner picked the absolute dumbest time possible. There isn’t a batter + runner combination in baseball that would see less value gained getting from 2nd to 3rd there.

mister d wrote:“Never make the 1st or 3rd out ...” is mostly right, if a bit overplayed. Gardner picked the absolute dumbest time possible. There isn’t a batter + runner combination in baseball that would see less value gained getting from 2nd to 3rd there.

I agree. Gardner even seemed to be slowing down. But the base coach was adamant.

A_B wrote:I love watching verlander pitch.

That was an awesome, balls out performance by Verlander. I think his last two seasons have already earned him a HOF spot, but 2-3 more good games this postseason and an Astros title and he's a lock.

I sincerely and unironically love Puig's bat flips on non-HRs.

I think the umps got that review right. He steeped in baseline too soon.

yeah...honestly what the fuck, Ron Darling? this macho bullshit about it "being that way for 100 years and now it's a bad play" - how is it baseball to literally block a guy from getting to the base? it's not friggin football. he beat the throw (barely). jesus it's not hard, i'm not sure what he wants the alternative to be. cleats to Contreras' face? because that's the only other path i can come up with.

sending altuve from first was insanity. he was beat by a wide margin....gary sanchez shouldve gotten him easily...but verlander deserved that win. brilliant performance...about as good as it gets. worth the trade for this game alone. 2-0...so pumped. Some dick announcer said after the game, while we literally are just celebrating that "Houston has accomplished nothing significant besides holding serve, and its a bit premature for fans to get excited yet." Whygoout of the way to suck the joy out of the room? Let us be happy once...fuck. Also altuve should be the mvp and if they give it to judge its a fucking travesty.