Baker's Bullpen Mismanagement Costs the Reds Dearly
by Slyde on Apr 8, 2010 8:36 AM EDT
in Events
Email
PrintI apologize up front for writing a second-guessing post like this one. I try to avoid, as much as possible, falling into the talk-radio traps on this site. However, I read this post from John Fay and my feelings of irritation from last night all came rushing back.
Fay says the big mistake was walking Brendan Ryan, which I completely agree with from a performance perspective. You have to throw strikes to the hitter before Albert Pujols with the game on the line. That is question number one on the MLB entrance exam, and Logan Ondrusek failed that test miserably.
The real issue that I have with Fay's article though is his justification for using Ondrusek in that situation:
Baker is getting ripped for using Ondrusek. But, if you want the right-on-right match-up the choices were Mike Lincoln, Nick Masset and Micah Owings. You could have heard the boos in West Chester if Baker brought in Lincoln. Baker was trying to save Masset for the eighth. It was a tie game, so Owings was needed if it went extra innings and they need three innings from someone. And there’s this: Pujols is 3-for-5 off Owings and Masset.
I'm fine with looking for the right-on-right matchup. I fine with his justification for not using Mike Lincoln, though shouldn't that be an obvious indication that maybe Lincoln doesn't deserve a spot on the roster? I'm even okay with saving Micah Owings for a potential extra inning game. What irritates me to no end is "Baker was trying to save Masset for the eighth."
Look who was batting in the 7th - by the way, we are talking about the 7th inning here, not the 4th or the 2nd, the 7th! It was the top of the Cardinals order. Pujols was due up third in the inning and Matt Holliday was due up fourth. Is this a logical place to bring in a rookie with one inning of big league experience? Why would you save your best relievers for an inning where the bottom half of the order is likely to be batting? Managing your bullpen to the inning is beyond stupid.You have to put your best pitchers into the most important situations in the game.
This shouldn't be a difficult concept to grasp, but managers make these sort of decisions all of the time. I understand wanting to give pitchers clearly defined roles, but those roles do not need to be defined strictly by the inning. Surely Masset can be ready to pitch in the seventh OR eighth inning, right? He's not an eighth inning cyborg, is he?
Side note: Can we please stop using 5 at-bats as justification for batter-pitcher match-ups? Five at-bats has zero predictive power, as we can see by the fact that Masset later struck out Pujols on four pitches in the eighth inning.
Did Dusty Baker single-handedly lose this game? No, of course not. The offense barely managed to put up a threat all night long. But this is two games already where Baker has made glaring bullpen mistakes.Both he and the Reds' offense need to get their butts into gear. This ain't spring training anymore.
It's a long season, so I'm not panicking yet - no where near it. I'd just like to be able to go one game without having to pull my hair out over poor decision making and even worse justifications for it.
There, now I feel better.
156 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I really wonder about Dusty sometimes...
Seriously, how can you put in a rookie to face the best hitter the game has seen in who knows how long- with the game on the line. Baker needs to start making better decisions, or we’re going to see a lot more series like this. And I’d love to have an offense too…
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
Wait, really?
Ondrusek pitched well in ST, he pitched well on opening night and it’s the second game of the season. This wasn’t a Game 7 NLCS game.
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
Is that really the determining factor?
So….don’t reward the guy for pitching well. Seems to me we’ve been bitching about that before with a CF
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
Listen
If you want to put out your rookie pitcher with ONE INNING of major league experience to face the BEST HITTER in baseball, be my guest. It just sounds like a stupid idea to me, but hey, maybe I’m just stupid, who knows?
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
It's the 2nd freakin' game
Does it really matter in the grand scheme of the season or does it matter because it fits into a nice narrative that Dusty is a horrible manager?
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
Every game counts, you know
Are you honestly arguing that putting Ondrusek in was the smart move? You don’t concede that it makes more sense to use Masset in that situation?
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
Honestly
I would’ve been fine had he used either Masset or Ondrusek in that situation. The outcome may have been different had he used Masset, no one knows. It’s easy to second guess. But hey – 160 more games to play
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
Right, I understand that, and as I posted below
the case could possibly be made for either. It’s Dusty’s explanation that is bullshit.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
Who knows what he actually thinks.
His quotes always sound like auto-pilot bullshit.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
No, this is absolutely the old-school rigidity we've come to expect from him
It’s absolutely what he thinks.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
I see what you (and Slyde and others) are saying...agreed
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
Sure, it's only the second game of the season.
But if we are contending later in the season they might be two very, very important games. What if we miss October baseball by 2 games?
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
it makes more sense to give Ondrusek a chance
to bring him in to face Pujols when the game is not on the line… a tie ball game in the 7th is not when you bring in a rookie to face possibly the greatest hitter ever
This is my point right here
This is the mistake that was made.
I’m all for giving Ondrusek a chance. And I don’t think he needs to be handled with kid gloves. But if Albert Pujols is coming up in a tie ballgame with in the 7th inning or later. I use an experienced pitcher in that situation every time.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
I think it's also kind of notable that Ondrusek is not exactly a hotshot prospect with crazy stuff
He had a great year last year, but doesn’t have a spectacular record outside of that. He definitely deserves a chance this year, but you have to be a little bit reasonable about your expectations this season.
IAN! I'm on traain!
Right, because games against your opponents in the same division don't matter.
You notice how we’re now 2 games down in the standings? Yeah, that’s bad.
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
Ondusek came in with almost no experience and a history of control problems
to handle the toughest part of the game.
That’s dumb, dumb, dumb.
It doesn't matter what you think, or what I think. It's what Dusty thinks that matters, and he's a knucklehead.
Oh my GOD you've figured it out!
Masset is an eighth inning cyborg!
(or did I just completely misread this post?)
by thevole on Apr 8, 2010 8:51 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
"You have to put your best pitchers into the most important situations in the game."
Y’know, we can go back and forth about on-base percentages, stolen bases, veteran presence, lineup construction and every other thing in baseball that has an associated ‘new school’ vs ‘old school’ debate but I feel like Slyde’s statement above represents the last and least likely of the game’s philosophical metamorphoses.
The best bullpen pitcher will always pitch the ninth. And the second best bullpen pitcher will always pitch the eighth. This lowly caterpillar will never transfigure into a flying wonder. It’s not even going to harden into a chrysalis. It’s just gonna keep on eating leaves and getting fatter and slower.
"You know it's gonna be a good one when you see Fred Quimby's name at the beginning."
Which brings up another important point:
How the hell do you get fat off of leaves? Seriously?? They’re leaves.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
That one got fat because it got parasitized.
Looks like Pachysphinx modesta.
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
Just kidding
Parasitism won’t make it fat! The little wasps will cause the caterpillar to LOSE weight as they eat it from the inside out! :D
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
Thing is, I don't think it was always like this
Top relievers used to be more of the “fireman” type, brought in to face the toughest part of the lineup. It wasn’t until the late ‘80s or so when the industry agreed that closers should be used in the 9th exclusively. Defined, narrow roles for set-up men followed that. I don’t see this as necessarily old school vs. new school – more like orthodoxy versus using your brain. And that’s what drives me nuts about this. Conservatism and sticking to the industry norm gives managers an easy out in these types of situations. If the pitcher fails, it’s not the manager’s fault because he was doing what you’re supposed to do.
by ken on Apr 8, 2010 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions
and Fay proved that by backing him up
When you manage mindlessly (by the book), as long as you stick to the book, no pros will criticize you.
In 1990
Rob Dibble entered the game in the SIXTH inning 6 times.
Just sayin’.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
by Slyde on Apr 8, 2010 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah and notice one of the 12 million men hasn't even pitched
and by that I mean Cordero. Fay doesn’t even mention him in his “analysis.” He should be in the analysis for pitching in that situation, since he is — ostensibly — the best RH in the bullpen. Or, is he just on this team for the glory stat?
For me, i also have a problem with the mentality that Owings can’t be used. So waht it’s a tie game. If you want to win it, use your best pitchers to do so (no offense Logan)
To me, this sort is absurdity is exactly the mis-reading of what LaRussa changed int he 80’s. His observation regarding bullpens wasn’t that Dennis Eckersly should be used only in the ninth inning; it was that bullpen pitcher pitch better when they start an inning, rather than enter and try to keep inherited runners from scoring.
I'm bery surprised Dusty is getting ripped for this, of all things.
Masset has got to get his shit together. In tht situation last night, I would have gone with Ondrusek ten out of ten times. We can’t rip Dusty for making decisions based on veteranness and then also rip him for having confidence in a talented rookie. Logan was the best arm in that situation. He just fucked up. On the flip side, getting Ryan and Pujols and Holliday would have been quite a career boost for Ondrusek. He’ll learn, but he’s got to be in those situations.
by Brian B on Apr 8, 2010 8:56 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
This is a good point,
However, I think it works differently for pitchers than it does for, say, Stubbs in center field or Janish at SS. Dusty put Logan out there to face some of the best hitters in the world one-on-one. I’m glad that he seems to have confidence in him, but that’s a lot of on-the-spot growing up for a man to do.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Just to be clear
That was a minor point, and I don’t want it to take away from the fact that Ondrusek is a very good pitcher and should be able to rise to that situation. I will give credit to Dusty for recognizing the talent and not brushing it off because of lack of experience.
by Brian B on Apr 8, 2010 9:23 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Sure,
But as I said below, he was only put into that situation because Lincoln sucks ass and took Burton’s spot on the roster. Burton should have been in there in that situation.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
Well, sure
I was just taking into account that Dusty would never, ever do that. His rigidity needed Burton on the roster there is all I was saying.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
Masset - maybe, Cordero - no
He’s the saves guy…how often was he used in the 7th last year? Maybe a few times he was used in the 8th.
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
It's not like Ondrusek is a bad pitcher
It’s splitting hairs between Ondrusek and Masset – it may not have made a difference. If you believe Masset was the right call, well then I can accept that. Maybe I’m wrong. If only we had an alternate reality to be able to see what would’ve happened
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
Masset struck out Pujols on 4 pitches later in the game.
Ondrusek got shelled. Sounds like Masset probably would have been a better guy to go with in the 7th.
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
this isn't justification
anymore than 3 for 5 is justification for not using him. We don’t know what Masset would have done in the 7th. But I do know that it would have been the smarter move to use him there, even if it failed.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
Yes.
I would have been disappointed in Masset, not furious at Dusty. I can accept a player failing, but not the manager for creating a situation for a higher chance of failure.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
by Pops Daniels on Apr 8, 2010 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions
For some reason, it's much easier to tolerate, "What wrong with Masset?"
than “What’s wrong with Dusty?” I probably wouldn’t be as upset if the former question was the one we were asking today.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
Well, Masset can work through it.
Dusty cannot. It’s not like Bryan Price can take Baker’s brain aside and have it throw a couple of ’pens and find the mechanical flaw.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
by Pops Daniels on Apr 8, 2010 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions
In addition,
There’s the fact that Masset is an established bullpen guy who would not be intimidated by Poopjoles.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
I'm not upset about not using Cordero there
I’m being reasonable about roles to a point (though in a perfect world, I would be right there with you). The situation could have used Cordero, but I understand that the way roles are defined for closers these days, they’re not even thinking about getting into the game int he 7th. That’s not Dusty’s fault. That’s just the way baseball has stupidly developed.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
Not necessarily true
In X-Box games, when I’m winning by 20 runs, I ALWAYS bring my closer in to start the 7th inning.
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
Logan was the best arm in that situation
If you completely ignore 2009 performance.
by ken on Apr 8, 2010 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions
Masset was one of the best relievers in baseball last year
by ken on Apr 8, 2010 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Just to be clear, I am not on your side in this.
by Brian B on Apr 8, 2010 10:45 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I know, I was teasing
Besides, it IS the same point you made before: the new season does not mean the past is forgotten.
Lastly, giving up an opposite field HR to Molina is something to be ashamed of. Yadier can hit, but, seriously, an opposite field HR? Just pathetic
Definitely agree
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
"Masset has got to get his shit together."
I wasn’t aware that Masset didn’t have his shit together.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
Grape Nuts'd
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Exactly
Masset should have been in the first one out of the pen on Monday and the first one, at least in front of Ondrusek, last night
"Masset has got to get his shit together." ???
One bad game means Masset doesn’t have his shit together?
Volquez, Bailey, Cueto, Chapman, and Leake. The future is so bright I have to wear sunglasses.
by justin007000 on Apr 8, 2010 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
My take is this:
None of us would be upset about this if the Reds had won. We wouldn’t have really given it a thought. Dusty can manage in whatever ass-backwards way he wants to, he just needs to win some damn ballgames.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
We can't win when he manages back-asswards..
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
True.
I mostly just meant that we wouldn’t really care about his managerial style if we were winning.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
We'd have to have some pretty ridiculous talent for that to happen...
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
Hasn't anyone here ever heard of Joe Torre
You CAN win when your manager is a strategic dolt. You just need talent
With some of the bullpens Torre has had, he's be mighty jealous of this one
In his last season in NYC he had a bullpen of Mariano Rivera and six dwarves.
I must disagree
I would have complained about the decision there either way. If Logan had succeeded, I would have taken a deep breath and said Dusty got fucking lucky there. The main point here is, Dusty has not really managed in order to win the last two games. There should be no more constructive failures to teach these young men a lesson. Dusty was a direct cause for the losses.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
After nine years of looking like a pack of rubber assholes out on the field every day...
I don’t care if Satan himself has to manage this team. Just win please.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Hey, at least that guy is scrappy.
He went a lot farther than people expected him to with som every suspect Cards teams.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
I'm somewhere in the middle.
If Logan had succeeded, Dusty might then again use him in a similar situation. And if Logan succeeded again (and then maybe again), well.. then we might be onto something.
"You know it's gonna be a good one when you see Fred Quimby's name at the beginning."
by Fat Vegas Alan on Apr 8, 2010 9:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Are you willing to give heavier odds for a loss to find out?
I guess that’s the question (aside from the fact that Lincoln should get the DFA and Burton should have been in to pitch in that spot).
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
I was pretty upset when it happened
though to be honest, I wasn’t paying enough attention to the situation when they brought in Ondrusek. However, when he was facing Pujols with 2 on, I believe I said, “They should bring in another pitcher here.” though obviously I have no documentation on that.
FWIW, I agree that I wouldn’t have written this post if the Reds had won. However, that still doesn’t justify the mistake.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
Not true.
I bitched when he brought in Logan. I thought it was dumb to bring in a rookie to face Pujols with a man on – especially a rookie with control problems who isn’t as good as Masset.
It doesn't matter what you think, or what I think. It's what Dusty thinks that matters, and he's a knucklehead.
Why don't you cry about it Glen!
I’m just teasing, of course.
Its just fun to see even cool-headed Slyde have to post a rant. That’s how infuriating things have gotten here.
The season doesn't start until the Cincinnati Reds take the field! Reclaim The Opener!!
Volquez, Bailey, Cueto, Chapman, and Leake. The future is so bright I have to wear sunglasses.
by justin007000 on Apr 8, 2010 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
just finished listening to this crapfest
and realize i’ve never been this upset this early in the season. it’s like the off season never happened, it’s just more of the same garbage as the last ten years.
Would a little Ryan Hanigan make you feel better?
Sheldon’s got the ’nup:
Stubbs 8
Cabrera 6
Votto 3
Phillips 4
Rolen 5
Bruce 9
Gomes 7
Hanigan 2
Arroyo 1
More to come…
Follow me on Twitter at
http://twitter.com/m_sheldon
"You know it's gonna be a good one when you see Fred Quimby's name at the beginning."
by Fat Vegas Alan on Apr 8, 2010 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
by Pops Daniels on Apr 8, 2010 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions
interesting
Righthander on the mound, still no Dickerson.
All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?
I was just noticing that
I don’t get it.
Gomes’ OPS is 130 pts lower against righties and he doesn’t get on base effectively against them. He’s 29 – that’s not changing. And he got the golden sombrero last night against Wainwright (a righty).
Yeah, those guys and the Cincinnati Reds. They're a terrible football team. / Because they're a baseball team? / Exactly. You know who's the worst football team? The Philadelphia Flyers. - Best Show
by RijoSaboCaseyWKRP on Apr 8, 2010 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
The 'golden sombrero' is four strikeouts, no?
Gomes only struck out thrice, right?
"You know it's gonna be a good one when you see Fred Quimby's name at the beginning."
by Fat Vegas Alan on Apr 8, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Or how bout we give Francisco a chance
before we have to ditch him for Leake.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
And that would be fine with me too,
but why do we even have him on the roster, then? Evidentally Cairo is the better pinch hitter anyway(lol!).
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Honestly, Tim, with as much as you defend Dusty, I'm surprised you're concerned about this
The minor league season doesn’t even start until today, and END will be back in AAA by Sunday. They explicity said he’s an extra LH pinch hitter for this week. Not a big deal.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
Could telling I defend Dusty just because I don't think the world ends when he opens his mouth
Dude is not ready and should be in extended spring with the rest of the Louisville team.
Although, imagining Dusty as the roster maker (when i imagined it was Walt with Dusty’s input), could be #5 on our list of how dusty ruins, like, everything!
The Reds are averaging 6 runs a game this season when Dickerson starts
just sayin’.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
by Slyde on Apr 8, 2010 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
This must all be a part of the non-platoon.
Gee I’m really glad we’re not doing a platoon. How cliche would that be?
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Dusty likes to think outside of this:
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
by Pops Daniels on Apr 8, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Awesome. We can use it when the baby no longer fears the laundry basket.
"You know it's gonna be a good one when you see Fred Quimby's name at the beginning."
by Fat Vegas Alan on Apr 8, 2010 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
15 Euros for that shit?
Box?
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Euros, eh?
So those fancypants Europeans are too good to shit in the woods now?
by the finest muffins on Apr 8, 2010 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Pounds, I think.
I guess I get it – if you’re out on the moors, it’s hard to find a tree to use for balance.
IAN! I'm on traain!
Is that the Pound symbol?
I’m not too up on those…
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Yeah it is, that's pounds
Stupid British and their shitbox mentality
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
yup - pounds
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
That's why I like Canada.
I know what their symbol is!
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Also, beavers =B
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Could be a blessing
Repeated game mismanagement like this, not to mention his lineup construction, could help spell an earlier end to the Dusty Baker era.
It’s probably too much to hope he gets canned real soon (and the two-game sample is a wee small), but I would be surprised if a decision on him one way or the other isn’t made before the season is over.
Not that a different manager will have a huge impact in the W-L column, but like Slyde said, it sure would be nice to agonize just about the play on the field and not all the dumb decisions being made in the dugout.
I wondered this, as well.
1. When does the “Walt fires Dusty” pool begin?
2. Who do you see as the interim — Hatcher, Berry, Speier?
We Are ... Marshall!
by Thundering Turtle on Apr 8, 2010 11:44 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yesterday (when the Reds were 0-1) I threw out perhaps the earliest hypothetical situation...
Let’s say they’re 3-7 (or even 2-8) when they go to Pittsburgh.
Does Dusty have to win that series?
"You know it's gonna be a good one when you see Fred Quimby's name at the beginning."
by Fat Vegas Alan on Apr 8, 2010 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Interesting.
Bob C. has a quick trigger finger, as Wayne Krivsky would tell you. Could happen, I suppose. I’m betting, though, if a move is made it will be July/August.
We Are ... Marshall!
by Thundering Turtle on Apr 8, 2010 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you're right.
But I hate the idea that a move would be made when the season is beyond redemption. Guess that would be Bob’s main reason to fire him, but still.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
Jared Burton vs. Albert Pujols
1-6, 1IBB. 0 HR….Just sayin’
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
Aaaand it's based on more than 5 PA
7>5. 7 is totally a big sample size, right?
Just kidding, but yeah- Burton or someone needs to be here, Lincoln needs to be gone.
"People don't kill people. Burning oreo packages kill people."
Of course,
just using Dusty against himself.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
After reading these comments, I think the real issue isn't that he used Ondrusek
The case can be made that he was the right guy. Maybe Dusty wanted to give a trial by fire, maybe he thought Logan was more likely to get a groundball out of Pujols, maybe Monday caused him to lose all confidence in Masset.
No, for me it’s not that he used Ondrusek (although I was kinda following on GD and saw Logan in for the 7th and thought, FTH?)
It’s his justification for using Logan instead of Masset. If he’s the better guy there, fine, but don’t pull this garbage about needing to save Masset for the 8th. (Never mind you had Rhodes for the 8th anyway)
So, yeah, this is basically exactly what Slyde said in his post.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
i'm ok with him experimenting with ondrusek if it wasn't a division game...
if we had been playing the phillies and ondrusek would have to face the meat of their lineup (i know he probably wouldn’t since utley and howard bat L, but i’m just sayin’) then fine… it’s the fact that these games matter a little bit more than they would had we been playing the mets, dodgers, etc…
i still don’t mind that he went with his rookie there, but it’s just more of the same rule-based “reasoning” that drives me nuts.
Running out to frontyard laughing! -Fat Vegas Alan
You "trial by fire" him if there's a 4 run lead and there's runners on
You don’t do that with a pitcher in his second game in a tie ballgame
"aaron harnann is so aweseom" - justin
by BK on Apr 8, 2010 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm not saying it would've been the right decision, I'm just saying the explanation would've been more palatable
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
How many pickles do you have to put on a shitburger
before it no longer tastes like shit?
It doesn't matter what you think, or what I think. It's what Dusty thinks that matters, and he's a knucklehead.
Is there a possibility that we can establish a shorthand for "It's all Dusty's fault."
Certainly i don’t mind Slyde’s specific complaint with the bullpen in this case. It is a specific laser-focused criticism and it would apply to 85% of MLB managers.
But, can we just call “the Reds lose and it’s all Dusty’s a fault” comments a number 1?
And, a number 2 can be, “it rained on my wedding day and it’s Dusty’s fault”
Number 3: The Reds would win and Paul Janish would slug .800 if Dusty wasn’t his manager."
Number 4: “That one guy [insert name here] is only playing because he’s dating Dusty’s daughter.”
Obviously, we can add to them as Dusty’s level of suckiness expands at the same rate the Universe does and we’ll need to. We have successfully banished all the other scapegoats of suck (Griff, Dunn, EdE, etc), so we will need new categories. Still, i think we should open with these comments, so I can read all the comments quicker and avoid work in other ways.
Count me in as a firm believer in #2
I get that you are being absurdist,
but I made no such complaints when Pete Mackanin was here. It’s not always just finding stuff to bitch about, it’s that Dusty was the wrong choice from the beginning and continues to reinforce that.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
by Pops Daniels on Apr 8, 2010 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Pops, you think I directed that at you?
I did not. It’s a blog and it’s about complaining and celebrating. I’m just wondering if the people who write things like “the reds would win if dusty would go away Eleventy” would just write in shorthand so I could nod (or shake my contrarian head in annoyance) without having to read all the reasons Dusty allegedly sucks, then my life would be better.
PS Which exempts, as I mentioned, this particular post from Slyde. That sort of insular thinking is common amongst managers and may be worth 2-3 wins a season for the team who figures it is bs
No, I didn't take it personally, just chiming in.
But I do think, around here, (unlike other blogs) we’d bitch a lot less vehemently if Dusty were not in the equation.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
by Pops Daniels on Apr 8, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Well Boone, certainly.
Worst. Manager. Ever. Makes Dusty look like Connie Mack.
A Pete Rose by any other name would still smell of cheap hookers and pinetar.
The pitcher isn't what matters
The four straight balls to Brendan Ryan are what kill me. We did the same thing last year with Arthur Rhodes to load the bases, and Pujols hit a grand slam.
It was David Weathers, but yeah, the walk was the real failure of the inning
If it was me, I would have started the inning with Arthur Rhodes. Let him face Skippy and Ryan. If he gets those two out, let him carefully face Pujols. If not, bring in Masset to face Pujols. If Rhodes gets through the inning, then bring in Masset or Ondrusek in the 8th, when the best hitter in the game isn’t coming up to the plate.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
Hey, let's talk about Cueto.
Yeah, he only pitched well enough to get the no-decision:
“I was chilling when Cabrera hit the home run,” Cueto said.
But he did help keep Pujols’ average below .800 with his second inning strikeout. Got ’em looking!
"You know it's gonna be a good one when you see Fred Quimby's name at the beginning."
Right, but didn't Rhodes walk the hitter...
Only to be taken out for Weathers, who gave up the homer? Either way, I agree with your original post – walking the guy ahead of Pujols is an epic failure.
i agree with Slyde on this one
watching Logan walk their #2 batter on four pitches was brutal. major red flag.
"the only place they lost was the scoreboard"
Where's the Eyewitness Report?
"aaron harnann is so aweseom" - justin
by BK on Apr 8, 2010 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm just coming into this thread
but I noticed that only one person mentioned Micah Owings. That’s the crappiest reason ever for not using him. Really, you’re that afraid of extra innings? Then bring him in for two innings and still have multiple guys sitting in the bullpen who can easily go an inning or two.
I just wonder if Micah Owings will ever get to pitch at this rate. In general, there just aren’t that many extra inning games.
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
by Gray on Apr 8, 2010 11:02 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
long relief
pitchers in his role come into the game in 4th or the 10th, if you ask me. His job is to save the other starting pitchers, not kill rallies.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
Sure, but why be so rigid about that role, too?
He’s someone who can pitch a couple of innings when needed. And sure, I don’t think that he would have been the best choice last night, but I think that’s a crappy reason for never using him.
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
I guess I just think back to when Dusty used Fogg as a short reliever
and then Aaron Harang pitched 4 innings later that game. I’m not too upset about covering your ass in a close game. If we were 2 weeks into the season and Owings still hadn’t pitched, maybe I’d see it differently though.
Red Reporter or follow on Twitter: @redreporter
Baker's used the extra innings excuse before, right?
I seem to remember a couple games (maybe more) last year where he tried to rationalize not using a reliever because he wanted him in case the games went to extra innings.
Bart: "Dad, what's a Muppet?"
Homer: "Well, it's not quite a mop, not quite a puppet, but man... (laughs, then pauses) So, to answer you question, I don't know."
I feel like he started using it
right after a game went to extras after he blew through three pitchers in an inning.
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
Call me over-aggressive...
But I feel like we should be going all out FTW.
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
There's definitely a balance to be struck
between sending everyone out for one batter each to set up matchups (thereby blowing through all of your pitchers) and holding out pitchers for possible extra innings. Dusty seems to swing wildly between the two extremes.
Let me write out a formal proof for you.
It's like Dusty's brain is nothing but dipswitches
ON or OFF
It doesn't matter what you think, or what I think. It's what Dusty thinks that matters, and he's a knucklehead.
Sliver lining?
We’re still floating up above the Astros.
They’re 0-3. They’ve scored 6 runs and allowed 18.
"You know it's gonna be a good one when you see Fred Quimby's name at the beginning."
YAY!!
We suck less than Huston!
No amount of prosperity is sufficient to eliminate all misfortune, and sloth is impervious to opportunity.
Bullpen Mismanagement
There are a couple of issues in the whole situation for me.
1.) Dusty feels that he has to use Masset in the 8th. Why?? If he is your best option he should be facing the biggest and toughest tests from the 7th or 8th inning. If he would do his job in the 8th and then you can use Ondrusek against the bottom half in the 8th. It is ridiculous to have such a narrow-minded view on this. This narrow-minded view of his cost his teams many games.
2.) If they felt like Ondrusek wasn’t ready for this situation, he shouldn’t have made the team. So maybe they felt like he was ready for this kid of situation.
3.) Mike Lincoln is right for any situation. Why is he on the team. It baffles me because there is so much talent throughout the system and this guy is hurting the team every single time he comes into the game.
4.) Why in the world did Herrera come in to pitch to Shumaker at the beginning of the inning? Wouldn’t have been a better idea to start Masset or Rhodes against the top of the lineup and pitch to more than one batter? If you view Herrera as simply a LOOGY then he should have been saved to face a lefty in a tough situation. Say even if he had gotten Shumaker out, then Dusty brings in Ondrusek, he is still going to give up a bunch of runs.
The biggest thing to me is that Dusty has his mind set on what inning a guy is coming in. It is stupid. Your best pitchers should be facing the toughest tests in the late innings, period. There is no reason to not pitch Masset “so he can pitch the 8th”, when the game is obviously on the line in the 7th.
There is a time a place for everything, and it's called college.
Contrast tonight's bullpen management
Reds won the game despite Cordero giving up a homer and the bases loaded. What if this Chad got a homer instead of a ground out? Should Baker be credited with sticking with Cordero to get the final out? If Chad had a homer and the Reds lost the game, should Baker be labelled with bad bullpen management again.
Look at Pinella over at the Cubs. Did he over manage his bullpen as well? Why did he pull his starter Silva, after only 6 innings, a 71 pitch count and a 3-1 lead?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Red Reporter
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
- The Juice: Mesoraco’s grand slam helps Reds complete four-game sweep of Braves
- Please hold: Indians’ Joe Smith jumps the gun on relief appearance
