JOE BLOWS ANOTHER ONE
Slow Joe wasted a great effort by Ian Kennedy tonight by refusing to play small ball with the game on the line. Top of 9, 1-1, and Abreu singles. AROD up and he hasn't really done anything all game. Now noone expects AROD to bunt in this kind of a situation, but the truth is he's probably the second best bunter on the team after Jeter. If he lays one down, he may get a hit; he'll certainly get Abreu over for Matsui to drive in. Matsui's infield hit would have put him on third with one out and Cano's little grounder would have scored him. Cue Mo! You have to play to the dimensions of the game and particularly on the road. Now the pressure is off Boston altogether; even a sweep would leave them pretty comfortably ahead, with nothing but cripples left to play.
I love the decision of the league to allow the champs of the AL determine whether they will play in the 8 day series, in which you would get to start your # 1 & 2 twice apiece and your # 3 only once, or whether you would play the 7 day series, in which only your #1 would get a second start and you would have to use your # 4. I love it because a) it brings such interesting strategic calculations to bear and b) it allows the best record to dictate terms to the wild card, diminishing the chance that the wild card will win it all, which it has done entirely too many times.
Now trhe first three times I heard about this it was from pundits asserting that the Sox or the Angels would use this as an opportunity to "stick it to the Yankees" (they all used that phrase) by putting them in the more compressed series in order to limit their use of the Hut. Leaving aside the fact that recent performances by Hughes and all of Kennedy's outings have served to make the Yanks' rotation look deeper than most, the idea that any team would use this opportunity to lower another team's chances rather than enhancing their own is a pretty ridiculous example of rivalry-think.
If the Red Sox choose the long series, they will increase rest for Papelbon going through it, but since they have an Ace and then 4 number 4 starters, they can't really exploit the rotation advantage. If they were playing Cleveland, choosing the drawn out series would involve them in 2 games apiece against Sabathia and Carmona. With the Sox shaky starting pitching, I'm not sure they could survive that. What if Beckett loses a close one to Sabathia? They have to beat Carmona at least once with either the incandescent MR. K or Fat Man/Fat Pitch. They'd be better off going short one would think of forcing Cleveland to pitch Westbrook. That way a Beckett/Sabathia split (the most likely scenario) and a win by Schilling or Wakefield over Byrd ( a possibility) sends them to the next round.
If the Angels choose a short series, as the pundits envision, they have to pitch both Saunders and probably Colon, against Clemens and Kennedy for the Yanks. Wouldn't they be better off going long so that they can pitch both Lackey and Escobar twice, with one of them getting both his games in LA? Under that scenario, the Yankees would need a split against that pair on the road and a victory against Saunders in NY just to earn the right to face Escobar or Lackey again in a road game 5.
If Cleveland manages best record, they positively have to go long. It's really their only hope of beating the Yankees, who will, I guarantee you, beat both Byrd and Westbrook.
My point is the difference in the compressed and extended series is too great for anyone making that choice to worry how it affects anything but your immediate relation to your own opponent as determined by your own rotation.
I love the decision of the league to allow the champs of the AL determine whether they will play in the 8 day series, in which you would get to start your # 1 & 2 twice apiece and your # 3 only once, or whether you would play the 7 day series, in which only your #1 would get a second start and you would have to use your # 4. I love it because a) it brings such interesting strategic calculations to bear and b) it allows the best record to dictate terms to the wild card, diminishing the chance that the wild card will win it all, which it has done entirely too many times.
Now trhe first three times I heard about this it was from pundits asserting that the Sox or the Angels would use this as an opportunity to "stick it to the Yankees" (they all used that phrase) by putting them in the more compressed series in order to limit their use of the Hut. Leaving aside the fact that recent performances by Hughes and all of Kennedy's outings have served to make the Yanks' rotation look deeper than most, the idea that any team would use this opportunity to lower another team's chances rather than enhancing their own is a pretty ridiculous example of rivalry-think.
If the Red Sox choose the long series, they will increase rest for Papelbon going through it, but since they have an Ace and then 4 number 4 starters, they can't really exploit the rotation advantage. If they were playing Cleveland, choosing the drawn out series would involve them in 2 games apiece against Sabathia and Carmona. With the Sox shaky starting pitching, I'm not sure they could survive that. What if Beckett loses a close one to Sabathia? They have to beat Carmona at least once with either the incandescent MR. K or Fat Man/Fat Pitch. They'd be better off going short one would think of forcing Cleveland to pitch Westbrook. That way a Beckett/Sabathia split (the most likely scenario) and a win by Schilling or Wakefield over Byrd ( a possibility) sends them to the next round.
If the Angels choose a short series, as the pundits envision, they have to pitch both Saunders and probably Colon, against Clemens and Kennedy for the Yanks. Wouldn't they be better off going long so that they can pitch both Lackey and Escobar twice, with one of them getting both his games in LA? Under that scenario, the Yankees would need a split against that pair on the road and a victory against Saunders in NY just to earn the right to face Escobar or Lackey again in a road game 5.
If Cleveland manages best record, they positively have to go long. It's really their only hope of beating the Yankees, who will, I guarantee you, beat both Byrd and Westbrook.
My point is the difference in the compressed and extended series is too great for anyone making that choice to worry how it affects anything but your immediate relation to your own opponent as determined by your own rotation.
posted by joe valente | 10:20 PM
4 Comments:
Last night was the first opportunity I had to watch Kennedy. It was really impressive to see how much his breaking pitches moved. If the Hut really goes into the rotation next year (nstead of doing a year as the closer's apprentice) it'll be a good combination--an opposing team could get blown away by Joba on day and baffled by Kennedy the next.
as for the game: Blue Jays manager John Gibbons has been on record that, to upheld the integrity of pennant races, he feels compelled to play his best team, rather than auditioning call ups, etc., against the Yankees. Torre apparently has no such respect for the integrity of the game, or for his own team's need to stay ahead of the now relentless Tigers. Chris fucking Britton? what the hell was that? Remember last year when Jim Leyland scolded his team for how they played the last game of a series on a travel day, because apparently all they wanted to do was get on the plane and get going? I'd like to see someone on the Yankees call out slow joe for the same thing. I'm just confused about one thing: if he was so eager to get the game over with and on the team on the plane to Boston, why didn't he start the inning with Henn? Isn't he ussually the go to guy when Torre wants to get a quick walk off road loss? With Britton, you had to wait through 2 batters and a stolen base. Henn might have ended it on one pitch.
wasn't Britton the guy they got for Jared Wright? That guy is still tormenting us....
I imagine Joda wouldn't use Joba or the big F... because of the night before and wanted to have Rivera for all 3 in Fenway. That said, I don't get Britton at all unless oyu really want to lose rather than extend the game. I personally would like to have seen Ohlendorff in that situation. Let's see what he's got. And you're right: Kennedy looks like the bomb. Next year, Pettite, Wang, Hughes, Kennedy, Chamberlain. I'm drooling over here.
I can't say enough about the young pitchers. Absolutely outstanding and a great harbinger for the future.
Joe V., I like your argument for bunting A-Rod and I'll extend it farther. How great a message does that send to the entire team? We play to win, even to the point of having the MVP lay one down to move up the runner. It's not about stats - it's about the WIN. That has to be the focus. I believe the team is thinking like that, A-Rod included. It would have put an exclamation point on the playoff push if only Torre had done it. Missed opportunity.
I will pick one bone with you, though. I drives me crazy when the TV talking heads say that what followed a particular play would have occurred even if the play in question had developed differently. And now you've gone and made the same argument! To say Hideki's single and Cano's groundout WOULD have occurred is balderdash. It might have, but then again, maybe not. They would have been pitched to in a different manner, at the least, with a runner in scoring position. A different pitcher might have been used. And on and on.
Enough of that. Go Yankees.
--MUNSON
I take your point about the hypothetical or what Milan Kundera called the incredible lightness of being. There is no way of knowing how a circumstance changed by a different decision would have played out. Enough to say that with noone out in the ninth, the polay is to get the man in scoring position, thereby increasing your odds of success.
Post a Comment
<< Home