Game 67: Brewers 7, Indians 5
by afh4 on Jun 16, 2009 10:59 PM EDT
in Game Recaps
Email
PrintAfter a brief sojourn in normalcy, the Cleveland Indians have returned to bullpen hell. For the second night in a row, the Indians offense probably did enough to win yet the team lost. Tonight, Jensen Lewis was the culprit, surrendering 4 ERs in 2.2 IP. There were significant offensive bright spots, with Luis Valbuena hitting two doubles, Shin-Soo Choo going 3-4 and Travis Hafner smacking a two run homerun. The bullpen can't be totally blamed, as Sowers only mustered a mediocre performance in five innings and with the bullpen already taxed last night, that's not a good situation.
It's becoming increasingly clear that the Indians are a very good offensive team, as they are now fourth in the league in runs scored and have a number of truly outstanding offensive performers. The problem is that the Indians bullpen appears to be regressing to it's early season form and, frankly, it can't be called unexpected. Journeymen relievers managed to put together a number of good weeks in a row; that was nice but obviously couldn't be expected to continue. However, it could be expected that the Indians supposedly "good" relievers would right themselves and be able to stabilize the bullpen when these journeymen relievers faltered. This has not happened, at all, as Lewis, Perez and Betancourt are all mired in various forms of not performing. Only Wood has bailed the water out of his ship and he's not ever going to be used at this rate. 
182 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Jokes on us. Fielder scores from first.
by odradek on Jun 16, 2009 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I liked it better before I’d convinced myself they could climb back into this thing.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jun 16, 2009 11:26 PM EDT reply actions
I’m still trying to figure out why Wedge left Lewis in to pitch the eighth, or at least have someone warming. Rafael Perez was warming, but only to come into the game should the Brewers break it open.
I’ve seen more than my fair share of questionable bullpen utilizations from Wedge over the past few years. How hard would it be for Shapiro to, at a minimum, hire a manager that used his best relievers in high leverage situations? I understand it would contradict convention but Shapiro’s the guy who had the stones to trade Sabathia and Colon. Certainly he has the fortitude to hire someone who will correctly use the bullpen.
by NickFantana on Jun 16, 2009 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I was thinking that about last night’s game. If Wedge had brought Wood in to face Fielder with the bases loaded—the highest leverage of the game—what would have happened? Would any manager have done that? I used to think it wasn’t done to cover the manager’s ass. But If Wood comes in and gives up a grand slam to Fielder, the press would be all over him, but it’s perfectly defensible for Wedge to say, “The game was right there, on the line. It was the moment of reckoning.”
Would any manager bring in Wood in that situation?
If, as a manager, you feel that bringing in Wood is the right move, then you have no problem defending it.
You do see closers being brought it in eighth inning jams. Not all the time, but it does happen. I don’t know if there’s a hard rule in place that Wood can’t pitch more than an inning because of his injury history, but that would have been the perfect situation to use him if he was available.
I wasn’t thinking of having him get five outs. I mean just to pitch out of the eighth with the lead. Let another pitcher (Perez?) start the ninth with the bases empty. I agree that a manager can justify what is obviously a justifiable move, but what happens if he comes in the eighth and has to throw 26 pitches to finish the inning with a lead?
They obviously decided when they signed him that he would only be a 9th inning guy, considering his injury history. Now if they would actually be in contention later in the year, I could see them bending that rule a time or two. But if you use him in the 8th on Monday night, then you start rationalizing using him in the 8th inning sometime next week…and so on.
And I also posted this in a Fanshot tonight, but I’ve never seen the closer come in only for the 8th inning and not pitch the 9th, with the exception of the closer’s team scoring big in their next turn at bat.
Maybe a manager feels it’s disrespectful to use a closer in a high-leverage eighth inning situation and then not allow the closer to get the money shot: the save. After all, that’s what gets them the big contracts. That’s the Elias system.
I was thinking the same thing. If his bonuses, option years, etc. kick in for saves, or “games finished” (I can’t remember what the contract says), then using him in the 8th causes all kinds of problems with his agent, the union, etc.
by JulioBernazard on Jun 17, 2009 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions
I think Tribe Jay’s right. It’s about conserving Wood’s arm. If this were the last day of the season with the pennant on the line, you might see them break their own rule. But, I don’t think you can go through a season using your bullpen as if it’s the playoffs. You’ll wind up using your three best guys all the time and injuries are bound to result.
The basic point everyone is making is correct — the bullpen lacks talent. Their starting pitching isn’t good enough to hide the bullpen’s limitations. They also miss Betancourt, who was starting to pitch better when he got hurt.
i wonder how often the highest-leverage situation in a given game actually occurs in the 9th inning. it appears as though the conventional wisdom (or at least the wedge-ventional wisdom) is that no matter how high leverage a 7th or 8th inning situation is…there’s always the potential for a high(er) leverage situation in the 9th for which a closer must be saved.
which is a little bit like not buying the ice cream b/c you want to be able to pay for extra fudge.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jun 17, 2009 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t doubt what you are saying at all. But is it possible that one reason the Bill James closer-for-the-most-important-outs concept hasn’t caught on is that it’s impossible to guarantee a guy his stats in that scenario?
by JulioBernazard on Jun 17, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Wedge’s bullpen use has always been terrible. In 07, you can’t say he did well, because everyone in that pen was good.
FE WEE
That is patently untrue. We had about 2.5 fantastic relievers that year and nobody else who was even good.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
JoeBo being the half?
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 2:08 AM EDT up reply actions
Lewis.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 8:03 AM EDT up reply actions
Right. Actually, between Perez and Lewis spent about 70% and 40% of the season in the majors, respectively. so it’s really more like 2.1 pitchers.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Not Mastny?! (I kid).
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Newsflash for you…if you were following another team, you probably wouldn’t like how that manager uses his bullpen either. Especially when there are multiple moves to be made.
Monday night I would’ve liked to seen Herges start the 8th. Vizcaino just can’t be trusted to throw strikes. But otherwise I didn’t have any issues. Tonight, I didn’t like Lewis coming out for his third inning, but then I spent two minutes trying to think of who should actually be out there and never came up with a good answer. So it’s tough to be too critical there.
I think Wedge is reluctant to use pitchers two days in a row because then he can’t use them the next day. Perez, no doubt, was probably figured in need of getting back on the horse,
This doesn’t really make sense though. If you are afraid to pitch someone two days in a row, then you are losing the pitcher for the 2nd day instead of the 3rd day. You have to play for the current game when the opportunity presents itself because there are no guarantees for tomorrow
Absolutely true. Because you don’t know what will happen tomorrow: it could rain, be a blowout, etc. I think Wedge prefers certainty and the comfort of knowing to the risk of having to improvise. He probably keeps extra cans of kidney beans in his pantry and double checks his checkbook entries, too.
Yeah, that probably would’ve been my best alternative. But there have been a few games where I thought Herges might get used and he wasn’t. I wonder if he’s battling minor arm issues or something. You know, that’s something that usually isn’t considered by fans. It’s not always a simulation game where most everyone is available every night. Sometimes there are things that happen that we’re not privy to.
Sometimes there are things that happen that we’re not privy to.
I love this. How can you argue with it?
by NickFantana on Jun 17, 2009 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Newsflash for you…if you were following another team, you probably wouldn’t like how that manager uses his bullpen either. Especially when there are multiple moves to be made.
Maybe I wasn’t clear enough. I’m aware that this is how all current managers handle their bullpen. I’m also aware that many (Trey Hillman, I’m looking at you) do it worse.
My question is, if Shapiro’s at the front lines of analysis and innovation in baseball, shouldn’t he be gutsy enough in the next manager interview to state, unequivocally, that a requirement of the position is using relievers according to leverage as opposed to pre-determined inning slots?
by NickFantana on Jun 17, 2009 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Are you in the future?
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Nick, I was just saying that if a manager needs to make multiple bullpen moves over the course of a game, it’s likely most of us would disagree with one of the moves, regardless of who the manager is.
Initially, I thought that no team would ever do what you suggest…but maybe there will be a team that does it. Probably a small-market team, maybe the Pirates. Also, it would help if the team did not have an alpha-closer, but maybe two or three guys that were clearly better than the others.
I think it would have to be announced prior to the season, that this is the way it’s going to be done. I think getting the players to buy into the idea would be critical. One thing you often hear from bullpens that are successful is that everyone knows what their role is. When that phone rings, most everyone knows who is getting up to throw. In this case, there might be a lot of uncertainty.
One other thing that might be tough…sometimes high-leverage situations occur very quickly. It’s easy to tell when they happen, but sometimes it’s not easy to see that they are just two hitters away. Do you warm up your “high-leverage” guys, and then sit them down if the situation doesn’t occur? And then do you do it again the next inning? This wouldn’t be an issue all the time, but it would certainly occur some of the time.
This is great feedback, thank you for taking the time.
I think you’d have to have a few ground rules. I’ll propose a few that I came up with.
1) After the 6th inning, your closer(s) (used here to denote best pitcher or pitchers) will pitch the inning with the best hitters in it, unless;
2) With a close lead in the last three innings, if the opposing team gets two runners on with no one out, bring a/the closer in, regardless of the quality of hitters coming to bat.
I agree with you that there are limitations (especially in warm-up time) and that you’d be better off with two or three high quality bullpen arms. Of course, once you have two or three high quality bullpen arms, you could just take the typical 7-8-9 approach. Ultimately, this is probably what makes it impractical, that it would take so much talent to work correctly that a team with sufficient talent is unlikely to need to deploy a bullpen in such an unconventional way.
While we’re on the subject, I’ve often wondered if it would be possible to have a team of entirely relievers, where each game, three pitchers would each pitch three scoreless innings, assuming no struggles. You’d need, at most, 10 or 11 pitchers, the two extra being for relief of the scheduled “3-inning” guys. You could use the additional roster flexibility to maximize platoon splits, or have seven pinch runners. Just another half-baked idea.
Chuck Tanner tried the three inning idea, or at least proposed it, but it obviously never caught on.
I think one talent of a good manager is to have a feel for the game. I was noticing the difference between Raffy’s appearance last night and the night before. The Monday appearance was so high-leverage there were electrical sparks. We almost all knew it wasn’t going to end well. Last night, it was as if a storm had passed, and there was little pressure.
Someone like Gene Mauch knew what was happening, and, seemingly, what would happen. The problem with what you propose is that it puts the manager on the line. Rather than going by the book, which says Use Your Dominant Arm in the ninth, a manager would have to make a judgment call and open himself to harsh criticism if it backfired.
didn’t tony larussa use a similar strategy with (at least) the a’s in the mid- to late-90’s?
your point about the manager is fair…it would take significant buy-off from the front office for a manager to have the air cover to go away from “dominant arm in ninth”
by DontCallMeJoey on Jun 17, 2009 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, I thought his bizarre bullpen stuff tonight was stranger than last night’s. It’s almost as if he had decided to lose tonight rather than stress the pen. Does the Tribe make a roster move to provide another long man? It’s odd how Lewis has to be used as a long man, regardless of the situation. He comes in and has to pitch the third inning.
Wedge must be thinking “If I’m gonna use my long man, I’d better at least get enough innings out of him to save the rest of the pen for more than one inning”. Which is idiocy, of course.
FE WEE
yea, I felt it was pretty obvious early on in Lewis’s third inning of work that he was tiring. The game is still within reach and yet we were playing like the game was over. Lewis did a nice job of bridging the gap the next couple innings, but we needed to play the last 2 like we had a lead to protect
I’m sorry everyone. I take responsibility for this loss. I was at the Cardinals game and this clearly upset them somehow. However I do have funny story from the Cards game. We were walking tot he team shop on my quest for a Rasmus shirt (which failed because 1) Girls are only allowed to like Albert, Yadi, Wainwright, and Ankiel 2) Apparently kids are allowed to like the same poeple their mothers do and 3) They had only XXL Shirts in the men’s section. The Indians have a MUCH better team shop.) and we were passed by an emergency cart carrying an upset and ashamed looking Tigers fan in the front seat and a Cardinals fan holding an ice-pack to their eye. Clearly the Tigers fan punched the Cards fan in the face. Stay classy, Detroit.
But I watched the updates on the board at Busch and I am sure the people around me were confused when I seemed sad at times when I should seem happy. Or at around the time Cabrera hit his home run I looked up and said, “Oh look Hafner hit a home run!” with a smile on my face. I’ll be there tomorrow night though so maybe it will be better.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
A bad record doesn’t automatically mean a pitcher has pitched badly. Cliff Lee at one point this season had a 1-4 record.
I’m not sure I agree. Since rejoining the rotation, Sowers has given up 1, 2, 2 and 3 runs. He’s not pitching deep into the game, but could easily be 4-0 in that stretch instead of 0-2. Not that record matters, of course, but he’s doing exactly what a back of the rotation guy usually does – pitch 5 or 6 innings and give the team a chance to win (see Byrd, Paul circa 2007).
He was pitching great the first time through the lineup, but it feels like any time he lets a guy or two reach, he loses his confidence and starts trying to make guys chase by pitching outside the strike zone. It was really frustrating to watch
I don’t disagree at all. He’s like some sort of lone wizard keeping the hordes of Plate Nibblers at bay. Once his spell starts to falter through the distraction of a baserunner, he gets overrun. I just think we’re quick to say that Sowers Sucks, when in fact his performance of late has been decidedly not-sucky. Certainly not great, but not a bucket of crap, either. Sometimes consistently average is OK.
I tend to disagree with this … I think Sowers had only thrown 90 pitches through 5… if Wedge leave him in him most likely gives he gives up alot of additional runs… I do agree he is our best option as a 5 currently but not next year when people are healthy
99, actually. And it is possible, though far from certain, that he would have given up runs. His 2 runs in the 5th came on two singles (neither hit particularly hard), a walk and 2 outs. Given that there were seven more batters before Braun came up again, assuming Sowers would give up “alot” of runs isn’t necessarily fair.
I don’t know anyone who is penciling Sowers into the 2010 rotation who isn’t currently enjoying illicit pharmaceuticals.
Gee, why not just use his playing time.
This is getting to be a really bad habit of yours. We don’t need to use Idiots Stats here to “indicate” things. We have, you know, indicators that are actually good indicators.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
by Jay on Jun 17, 2009 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
A bad habit of mine? Please. I have said there is valid information in RBIs. It is an idiot stat but not totally worthless. Same as batting average. Even wins, though susceptible to many variables beyond the control of the pitcher, have some small value. But I don’t habitually cite idiot stats to indicate things.
You could use playing time to indicare quite a bit about him. You might determine from that bit of information (say IPs per start, or pitches per start) that he is a tentative pitcher. What I was referring to in Sowers W-L was his number of losses despite pitching relatively well. I haven’t looked it up, but I presume Sowers has to rely on the bullpen for four or five innings, which hasn’t proven to be a good thing.
It was an offhanded comment, but certainly not a bad habit, I hope.
A bad habit of mine?
I didn’t say it was a bad habit. I said it was a really bad habit.
There’s just no reason to use inferior data with inferior correlations to draw inferior inferences. Why not just stick to our better data with better correlations and draw better inferences?
Offhand comments are fine, but they’re hard to discern within a style isn’t exactly breezy or non-argumentative.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
No need, I like your style just fine. It just makes off-the-cuff comments problematic sometimes.
I used to have a similar problem with sarcasm — people couldn’t tell when I wasn’t being sarcastic. Now I’m never sarcastic.
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
people couldn’t tell when I wasn’t being sarcastic.
Now I’m never sarcastic.
How many years of self-censorship did that take?
swing and a miss.
There’s an easy rule I’ve seen expressed elsewhere on LGT (fleerdon? brick?): The default assumption is sarcasm. Get with it, people!
This is how I translate Andrew.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jun 18, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
The one thing DeRo hasn’t done in a ML game is pitch. Could he be that much worse than Perez that Wedge wouldn’t give it a try?
Isn’t Wedge the ultimate tinkerer?
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
I don’t believe he’s donned the tools of ignorance, either, according to ESPN’s chart the other night.
by JulioBernazard on Jun 17, 2009 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions
i’m not sure if you’re kidding…but using non-pitchers to pitch in all but the absolute most extreme of circumstances isn’t tinkering, it’s just dumb.
by DontCallMeJoey on Jun 17, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Indians are 1 of only 3 AL teams to lose tonight, with White Sox-Cubs postponed and A’s-Dodgers pending.
Indians 3-5 in IL play, Minn 6-1, KC 5-2, Chi 4-2, Det 2-5.
we need to hurry up and give up on the season so we can get hot.
by world dictator on Jun 17, 2009 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Just got back from the game (car trouble on the way home).
I was upset that Wedge left Jensen in as long as he did, but then again, I don’t know who I would have put in instead after last night, but then again, I thought that almost anyone would be better than tired Jensen.
Is it just me, or does Bucknor’s strike zone expand like crazy by the end of the game? I don’t know if he called a ball in the 8th or 9th that wasn’t in the dirt or at the batter’s head. However, that’s no excuse for some of the godawful ugly swings from Jim Chrisenez, BenFran, and Barf throughout the game.
I'm not really into Song of Hiawatha.
The mere idea of that assclown on the mound in downtown Cleveland doing his Riverdance jig after a save makes me want to punch out my monitor.
--
Force quit and move to trash.
punch out my monitor.
for some reason i read this as “punch out my mother”…and i didn’t think that was completely crazy, which was made even funnier by Allen imploring you to do so
by DontCallMeJoey on Jun 17, 2009 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Legit LOL. For like 30 seconds.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jun 17, 2009 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry if this has been said already because I haven’t been able to be on many game threads lately, but at what point does Willis start to bear some responsibility for the continual bullpen implosion? There’s something fundamentally wrong with our relief staff up and down that isn’t all explainable by poor management and overuse.
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 2:11 AM EDT reply actions
So it’s Shap’s problem, then, not Willis’s?
"Lotta heart in Cleveland." - Ian Hunter
by Denver Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I would argue that Shapiro has struggled to build a strong bullpen. Whether or not this can be attributed to randomness or a bad process is open for debate
The randomness stuff seems to have worn thin. If bullpens are so volatile, why does Milwaukee have a good bullpen? Why does Cleveland’s bullpen suck three years out of four?
It is funny, because for so long Doug Melvin has struggled with how to properly assemble a bullpen. Maybe Eric Gagne and David Riske failing spectacularly while a waiver claim like Todd Coffey and an indy league refugee like Mark DiFelice succeed has taught him something. I hope.
It was a great selection of awesome.
I would argue that a year after having a very bad bullpen, the next will almost always be a crap shoot. The year after having a good bullpen, however, should only be limited by the amount of injuries you might incur. This year would fall under crap shoot combined with injuries combined with Rafael Perez’s arm still residing in the Dominican.
The only thin that should have been taken care of, from my point of view, before the season was Masa leaving town.
Shin-Soo Choo, future U.S. Citizen.
I think there’s something to this: Good bullpens stay good, unless there are injuries, whereas bad bullpens might be good if they get lucky and there are no serious injuries. It’s kind of like what Tolstoy said: Good bullpens are all alike, but every bad bullpen is bad in its own way.
That’s said, I think—in hindsight—that Joe Smith and Kerry Wood and various NRIs were not enough. I would have gone for Juan Cruz or another arm.
You have a point with Juan Cruz. I think if you combine that with my point that we should never have counted on Masa and couple that with getting another legitmate relief arm, there literally wouldn’t be any way you could not think you were prepared.
Shin-Soo Choo, future U.S. Citizen.
Sorry if that got confusing. My point was… the only thing I wish I had seen the FO do in the offseason was not count on Masa being in the pen and go after another mid-profile, setup arm type, whatever you want to call it. A Joe Smith with more experience.
Shin-Soo Choo, future U.S. Citizen.
I wouldn’t go that far. If we polled people here I think a lot of us were very bullish on what the 2009 bullpen could do. Raffy B can’t be that bad. Perez is Perez. Jensen was great down the stretch in 2008. Kerry Wood kills bears. Tony Sipp and Adam Miller won’t be far. We had enough extra pieces that a few of them should stick to the wall. Etcetera. I wouldn’t blame a GM for sitting back in February and saying to himself, “I think I’ve done a pretty good job with this.”
Steel Nick
Remarkably, the Indians have the makings of not only a solid bullpen in 2009, but potentially a stellar one.
—Maple Street Press’ Indians 2009 Annual
Even the most brilliant and handsome men on earth, and Andrew, saw the wrong picture in the Magic Eye.
Steel Nick
Hindsight. Gun to my head, Shapiro made the right calls before the season. I can’t blame him or expect him to take heat for this bullpen, which goes back to RD’s original question: bad luck or bad process? I say bad luck. Now he has to try to fix it again.
Steel Nick
Yeah, maybe, but QED. Look at the 2009 pen. I thought in March it was plausible, but it hasn’t been. That was an error in judgment on my part (big deal) as well as on the part of the Men in Suits. It turned out to be bad process.
It’s bad process to assume Kerry Wood and Raffy Perez would have good years when all the evidence suggested they would?
Steel Nick
Kind of cherry-picking in that you named the one reliever who has been marginally effective all year (other than Betancourt)
It’s really like:
It’s bad process to assume Kerry Wood, Jensen Lewis, Joe Smith and Raffy Perez would have good years when all the evidence suggested they would? And that Masa Kobayashi and Vinne Chulk would be servicable, even though the evidence suggested they probably weren’t?
And also, it’s not really like ALL the evidence was lining up for any of those guys other than Wood. I remember a discussion of projected bullpen regression in the preseason.
Hope is not a business plan. I presume they run worst-case scenarios. Maybe they need to re-calibrate their rates for the possibility of the worst case. I think it is fair to say (reasonable, I mean) that Jensen Lewis was overvalued. I thought Raffy Perez was awesome, but maybe that presumption was wrong too. Maybe more credence should have been given to the idea that Betancourt was becoming vulnerable. I agree there was talk about regression, but in the wake of a disastrous 2008 that meant, “Surely our pen can’t suck as much as it did last year. All we need to do is ride it out and we’ll see improvement naturally, on its own.”
Eh, maybe. What I think is being overlooked is how many resources we had to actually account for sudden collapses or failure to resuscitate from former collapses. Remember we already used most of our ammo on DeRosa and a closer. We traded for infield depth and another reliever. After that there’s only so much we could have done. I don’t think someone like Juan Cruz was an option anymore.
Steel Nick
But the fact that there’s only so much we could have done is also Shapiro’s fault. Realistically, we had a glut of outfielders going into the offseason, we traded Gutz for a reliever, and then traded a reliever for DeRosa.
I mean, none of these moves is in a vacuum. We wouldn’t need DeRosa if Marte had been handled correctly, as an example. I feel like, on the whole, Shapiro has managed to accumulate a large quantity of below-average talent and, when that talent has overperformed, instead of leveraging it into a better player, we just use the overperformance as confirmation that we’ve built a better model than everyone else in baseball.
What do you think about what odradek (make a nickname for that!) said so eloquently just below here?
by NickFantana on Jun 19, 2009 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Well we can’t trade someone that another team doesn’t want, if you’re referring to Francisco/Gutierrez. As enamored with I was with Gutierrez I liked this trade. We needed Joe Smith badly. We needed a GOOD Joe Smith badly. And he went and got injured.
Joe Smith is/was viewed at a much higher level than what we traded for DeRosa. So I don’t think it’s fair to say it’s stupid to trade someone for a reliever and then trade a reliever for DeRosa.
Steel Nick
I was pointing more towards odradek’s second paragraph.
And, for what it’s worth, I’d rather have Smith and DeRosa than Gutz and Stevens, excluding the contract considerations. Ultimately, the money DeRosa is taking up could have been used by another reliever and our infield flexibility wouldn’t really be hampered that much.
by NickFantana on Jun 19, 2009 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh, ok. I don’t disagree that what Beane and Williams have done have worked for them, but I don’t know if I agree that Shapiro is too conservative. Conservative in a sense that he isn’t going to just blow it up while still in contention like Beane does, sure.
I guess I’m not sure.
Steel Nick
Beane hasn’t been that much more successful than Shapiro. Over 11+ seasons, his teams have won 54% of their games, 4 division titles and one playoff series. In Shapiro’s 8+ seasons, his teams have won 51% of their games, 2 division titles and one playoff series.
I think this is what happened. I know Seattle didn’t want Francisco, and I know Valbuena and Joe Smith are a nice haul, but damn we traded the wrong outfielder.
Billy Beane (and even Kenny Williams) takes chances. He doesn’t stick rigidly, conservatively, to a plan. Shapiro’s timidity has been a failing. He’s been too cautious, I think.
If it makes you feel any better, aside from superior defense, Gutz isn’t offering much more offensively in Seattle than Francisco is here.
Shin-Soo Choo, future U.S. Citizen.
It doesn’t. Nice try though.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jun 18, 2009 11:33 PM EDT up reply actions
I never really was as enamored with Gutz as others, his bat was always viciously afraid of the curveball.
Shin-Soo Choo, future U.S. Citizen.
Oh I didn’t really like him. It just didn’t make me feel any better that the other option would have also sucked.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jun 18, 2009 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Haha fair enough. But honestly, what would make us feel better at this point besides some wins?
Shin-Soo Choo, future U.S. Citizen.
I’m sorry. I didn’t mind him, just didn’t particularly like him either.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Jun 19, 2009 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.
by Les Fleurs Du Mal on Jun 17, 2009 9:13 AM EDT reply actions
By my count, he’s bequeathed at least one inherited runner in 8 of 11 such situations.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions
“My shoulder is a little sore, but it’s doing pretty good,” said Hafner. “It’s progressing better than it was two weeks ago.”
He will be on the DL or in a slump in no time
I like the idea of sending Crowe down for LaPorta…but God Bless America, only if LaPorta is going to get at bats every freaking day at either First Base or Left Field. Benny, well he’s in a slump…that happens.
Oh, and for all that is Holy! Please, Marky Shap. fire our bullpen coach!!! Why the heck did you hire a guy who destroyed Detroits bullpen last year?! That’s great strategy. NOT!!! You S.O.B., P.O.S, J.A.!!!!!!!!!!
by MooneysRebellion on Jun 17, 2009 12:11 PM EDT reply actions
Benny, well he’s in a slump…that happens.
especially when your entire career is a slump with two small hot streaks mixed in.
by Brick. on Jun 17, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This sums it up well.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Whoa. Calm down. It’s going to be okay. I promise.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
Lineups for tonight’s game are up, and old man Carroll is back on top. Frisco sits for Crowe. To be honest, if I’m Wedge, I probably would not start Barfield or Giminez once over the next month. Well, maybe once.
INDIANS (29-38): 2B Jamey Carroll, RF Mark DeRosa, 1B Victor Martinez, DH Shin-Soo Choo, LF Ryan Garko, 3B Jhonny Peralta, SS Luis Valbuena, C Kelly Shoppach, CF Trevor Crowe. LHP David Huff (2-2, 7.39).
BREWERS (36-29): C Jason Kendall, 2B Craig Counsell, LF Ryan Braun, 1B Prince Fielder, RF Corey Hart, CF Mike Cameron, SS J.J. Hardy, DH Mat Gamel, 3B Bill Hall. RHP Jeff Suppan (5-4, 4.48).
i had hoped hafner would play since he has to sit out thursday (no game), friday, saturday, and sunday anyway.
That is sort of strange. Is he available to pinch-hit in these days off?
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jun 17, 2009 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
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
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
