Raise It!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bucco's win it.
- Thread starter CappyToCJF
- Start date
MARK M admitted after the game he wasn't QUITE ready as Locke got to the 9th so quickly.
As it was it took 2 pretty good plays at first base to nail this one.
The Bucs are going all the way....all the way this year
You have to try to get the second run across the plate. No problem pulling Locke there.
I do think getting a closer a save just to get him a stat is dumb, but I'm all for pinch hitting for Locke there.
Last edited:
Think hurdle gets his jollies on having a closer with good stats. Hilarious when we are up 4 runs and he will put some clown like bastardo in but if it is 3 runs, its melancon. My man Clint loves him some statistical leaders. Great outing for Locke though, feel good about winning series with our future cy young pitcher going tomorrow
And I thought I was the only one who was constantly infuriated by Hurdle's victimization at the hands of Holtzman's Folly (i.e. when a manager will have his decisions influenced by getting his closer the save rather than putting his team in the best position to win). I didn't mind yesterday, but I'd say that 9 times out of 10 if you think Hurdle is being a dolt then he's probably being a dolt.
There's nothing special about the 9th inning -- and I say that having been a "closer". If you have the opponent's 3-4-5 guys coming up in the 8th, put your best guy out there. That's a much tougher task than facing their 6-7-8 in the 9th.
I don't think he's nearly as deserving now as he used to be of his #bowlofjello hashtag on Twitter (which began when some national guys wondered how much better the Pirates would be if they had a bowl of Jell-o managing them instead of Hurdle), but at this point I think it's safe to say he is going to make maddening bullpen decisions and over manage in close games and that won't ever change.
He's frustrating, but compared to the other dinosaur managers he's pretty good. Managers are so inconsequential anyway that it doesn't REALLY matter how overmatched he might be compared to some -- it's not like having a GM who has seen the game pass him by. That will cripple you.
I agree with you completely on "closers" not being a fundamental position and agree with using your best reliever against the 3-4-5 in the 8th as opposed to getting him a save. But I absolutely think pulling Locke was the right call. I've never looked at it statistically, but I think without a doubt you have to try to get the second run across there. Plus, I'm not comfortable with Jeff Locke pitching that deep regardless of how well he is pitching that day. Any of the top 4 bullpen options are a better option in the 9th of a 1 or 2 run game than Locke IMO.
And, I think everyone should lay off as Hurdle as I agree that managers aren't consequential and he has done a good job over his tenure here. So yeah, he does make some dumb decisions, but he's done a good job so I can forgive them.
I have no problem either, pulling Locke, but in todays game in the 9th inning every Indians batter was left handed. Tony Watson should have closed it out.
The way the game is played today it is obvious that it is more important for a manager to be a good manager of men rather than a good manager of the game. Hurdle excels at managing men. That's why he can make so many strategic moves that are less than optimal and yet still be a successful manager.
He also has a very, very good team given to him, and has for a few years now.
It's most definitely a GM's game. A good manager won't make a bad team good and a bad manager won't make a good team bad.
A manager will hurt you within a game but won't largely impact a 162 game season. That's why he makes me nervous in the playoffs, where the whole thing is a fluky small sample anyway, rather than the regular season. There's still minimal damage a guy can do, but it's still a concern. Most of my consternation is related to not breaking bad habits, rather than actually costing the team much in the long haul. He doesn't strike me as a Mike Sciosca who is a horrible manager that also runs off competent front office people in the process.
Went to the game last night.......really good one, tight with 2 great pitching performances, solid defense and a nice win in the 9th. It seems obvious to me that Hurdle was making EVERY effort to get a W for AJ. He seems less enamored of forcing lefty/lefty or righty/righty matchups that have been favored since the '80s....1880's. I'd agree that he's more of a player's mgr. than stats mgr. This team is still a lot of fun to watch, though....but the farm system seems short of MLB position players. Lombardozzi?? Lambo??? Gorkys Hernandez?? They bring in Ishikawa?? I know there's talent in the lower levels, but we seem to already be seeing the results of worse draft positions as the record improves. I'd love to see a last-minute deal for an outfielder with a bat. Polanco looks dreadful at this stage.
It's always tough with AAA guys and finding a balance between developing guys and doing what is best for the MLB team in the short term.
I think they have decent talent (Alen Hanson, Elias Diaz, Jaff Decker, Willy Garcia) but it's talent that probably is best served playing every day rather than coming up and playing sporadically off the bench. Hanson is 22, Diaz is 24, Decker is 25, Garcia is 22. Not really finished products who won't be impacted by being shuttled up and down.
For better or worse, they seem to be relatively set on Polanco in RF. They rushed him, pretty badly, and seem like they're content to live with the consequences while he figures things out. He's never had to adjust to capable pitching, and now he's learning to do it at the highest level possible. He could struggle through next season and it would be considered a normal developmental curve given how he was handled. Fortunately he provides some defensive and baserunning value and boasts some solid K and BB rates -- that mitigates things somewhat and gives hope that it's just a matter of squaring up tough pitches rather than recognition or approach. If he were a bat-only player like some corner OF prospects it would be a disaster.
I think they have decent talent (Alen Hanson, Elias Diaz, Jaff Decker, Willy Garcia) but it's talent that probably is best served playing every day rather than coming up and playing sporadically off the bench. Hanson is 22, Diaz is 24, Decker is 25, Garcia is 22. Not really finished products who won't be impacted by being shuttled up and down.
For better or worse, they seem to be relatively set on Polanco in RF. They rushed him, pretty badly, and seem like they're content to live with the consequences while he figures things out. He's never had to adjust to capable pitching, and now he's learning to do it at the highest level possible. He could struggle through next season and it would be considered a normal developmental curve given how he was handled. Fortunately he provides some defensive and baserunning value and boasts some solid K and BB rates -- that mitigates things somewhat and gives hope that it's just a matter of squaring up tough pitches rather than recognition or approach. If he were a bat-only player like some corner OF prospects it would be a disaster.
Huh?? He seems like a defensive liability to me, despite the size & speed. On the bases, he's a disaster....yeah, he'll steal a few bases, but seems clueless in inderstanding situations. Not looking at Sofield until AFTER he commits to go to third base, e.g. I love his potential, but wish he'd start producing. With 2 of our best hitters on the shelf, the pitching will be under immense pressure, since STL is so damn good. I'd hate to see them as a playoff opponent with home field. PNC is magic, Bush is tragic.
I'm thinking the speed/arm are what has him pretty high up in DRS (Defensive Runs Saved) per Mark Simon. Something like catching a ball and not having a runner test you, for instance, would increase your DRS rating but be a relatively subtle part of the game that isn't ordinarily picked up on or remembered by the eye test. A good example is a guy like Derek Jeter, who never made errors but was ultimately a horrible defensive player because he just didn't get to balls that the average SS did ("Past a Diving Jeter" made light of this, particularly his total lack of range to his left). It's tough to quantify, and UZR is relatively imperfect for OF just due to the different OF sizes in MLB. But, it's probably better than just going off errors.
Oftentimes it's the balls that go for hits that should have been converted into outs that kill you, not necessarily the errors. For instance, if there are 100 balls hit in a guy's vicinity and he converts 85 of them into outs with 15 errors, he does me far more good than a guy who converts 65 of those balls into outs with 5 errors.
Baserunning is tough, too, as the baserunning component will reward guys from going 1st to 3rd or 2nd to home or 1st to home. I can't recall the specific game, but Polanco going from 2nd to home on a bunt attempt would be an example of increasing the baserunning value while possibly being overlooked by the naked eye. It attempts to quantify it beyond SB/CS numbers and TOOTBLANs. It's a hard thing to eye test in general, plus there's the cognitive bias where it's far easier to recall the times he got thrown out rather than a time he took an extra base or two that most guys wouldn't have been able to.
Oftentimes it's the balls that go for hits that should have been converted into outs that kill you, not necessarily the errors. For instance, if there are 100 balls hit in a guy's vicinity and he converts 85 of them into outs with 15 errors, he does me far more good than a guy who converts 65 of those balls into outs with 5 errors.
Baserunning is tough, too, as the baserunning component will reward guys from going 1st to 3rd or 2nd to home or 1st to home. I can't recall the specific game, but Polanco going from 2nd to home on a bunt attempt would be an example of increasing the baserunning value while possibly being overlooked by the naked eye. It attempts to quantify it beyond SB/CS numbers and TOOTBLANs. It's a hard thing to eye test in general, plus there's the cognitive bias where it's far easier to recall the times he got thrown out rather than a time he took an extra base or two that most guys wouldn't have been able to.
I trust what I see.....and he's lacking instinct, both in the field and on the bases. His swing is too long, needs to make contact more. Seems like a decent kid....hope he gets things fixed. We sure will need some offense at the leadoff spot.
I don't necessarily disagree -- Huntington more or less mentioned as much when he was covering for those cheap Nuttings and purposely deceiving the fanbase when he said Polanco was raw and needed extra refinement
I wouldn't, however, underestimate how much his physical abilities are able to compensate for poor outfield reads and/or questionable baserunning decisions. To me, he's similar to a younger Starling Marte. Does some really dumb things that stick out, but also tends to do difficult things really easily that go unnoticed because he's a physical freak.
Marte's ability to play LF at PNC, for instance, is something he makes look incredibly easy. And I think that was something that was taken for granted for several years until we saw Marlon Byrd, Matt Holliday, and Travis Snider try to play it effectively at various points in time.
I sort of view it as the reverse Nate McLouth phenomenon. McLouth made a bunch of diving catches that people loved, but then the trackers would point out that he had to dive to make a play that an average CF would have made without breaking a sweat. McLouth would get credit for making an easy play look difficult, while a good defender would get none for making a difficult play look easy.
Similar threads
