Bochy

[donk33]

Some one please explain why Bochy pulled Romo after one inning in the first game and put Casilia in  to close....this the same day that he said both were closers...then his 2 "closers" had to sit around for close to 4 hours for one of them to pitch the close of the second game...this is a HOF manager???  Don't you think Romo could go 2 in one game better than 2 innings spread over 4 hours???

Terrible attempt to block the 3rd strike by our catcher and the game started to  sip away...thank goodness it wasn't Sanchez, he would been deported...at least....

Rockies announcers had a mini discussion on Posey's hot streak with the bat but were in agreement that he is an average catcher, known for his game calling and pitch targeting...in my opinion, 2 of his weakest points...and , in my opinion, verified by the pitchers body language in the constant shaking off of signs and locations...and the manager saying he has to get him on the same page with the pitchers...
They also agreed that he would move to 1st.... I don't understand how the board would prefer Posey to play third...if Belt comes back, there is no reason he can't play the outfield...he has the legs and arm to make the switch with a little practice gauging the flight of the balls...

[Rog]

I wouldn't have minded seeing Bochy leave in Romo to close the first game, but I don't believe he has used either pitcher for two full innings this year. There was no way to know if he would need a closer and/or set up man in the second game.

Your point is a good one. IMO it is a situation that could be looked at in more ways than one (as is often the case).

Thanks for the comments you heard about Posey. Just don't forget to put in a positive comment about him once in a while so we know you're being objective!

I saw a clip of Belt in left field yesterday, and I agree with you that he could be a better outfielder than we may have given him credit for. At the very least, his potential versatility gives the Giants more than one way to go to handle left field next season.

If Posey can play third, that also increases the Giants' possibilities. Possibly if the Giants are unable to re-sign Pablo they would look at playing Buster at the hot corner. Otherwise, they and he seem committed to his continuing to catch.

At least the Giants are developing options. Belt is part of that, and Posey might be.

[klaiggeb]

My guess? all the lefties that were coming up.

But I have different issues with Bochy, whom, right now, I'm calling "Bonehead Bochy."

In the real game, he managed... no make that, over managed himself into a corner with some of the moves he made.

In particular, he sent Susac up to PH to LEAD OFF an inning, knowing that it was highly likely Weiss would counter his move with a righty.

Which he did.

Putting Susac up to LEAD OFF an inning was downright stupid.

IF he gets on...he can't run, and needs a Pr.


but the biggest boneheaded play was starting Arias at 1B and NOT Posey, with Susac, who, right now, is hot, hot, hot with the bat, behind that plate.

That, to me, was idiotic.

If Arias needed some at bats, play him at SS, but DON'T take Susac's bat out of the line up.

Bonehead better have Andrew behind the plate tonight, too, because that guy has flat gotten hot!

boly

[Rog]

The lefty aspect of leaving Romo in seems a very good analysis.

As for the other points, let's look at them one by one.

Although Susac wasn't sent up to lead off an inning, he was sent up with one out and no one on, with the Giants having just five outs in which to score at least two runs. He doesn't seem like a natural to get on base, but as you say, he's hot. And he does have good plate control, which has helped him reach base in the minors.

Perhaps more importantly though, it may be that Bochy liked the matchup of Ishikawa against Ottavino better than any other available matchup. As you pointed out, he was very likely to get that matchup, and indeed he did. Ishikawa did indeed hit the ball hard, but lined out to first base.

The one thing Bruce did was "waste" Susac as a pinch hitter. But he had only five outs left, so if in wasting Andrew, he was able to get the matchup he wanted, it was probably worth it. I was surprised at "wasting" Susac, but I can't necessarily say it was a bad move. If Ishikawa's line drive had found a hole and everything else stayed the same, the Giants would have taken the lead that inning.

As for starting Arias at first base instead of Susac behind the plate, there could have been a variety of reasons:

. Tim Hudson may enjoy pitching to Buster. Buster has caught him all but one game, and Tim gave up two home runs in the game in which Andrew caught him. Andrew caught Yusmeiro Petit last night

. Except than giving Buster the occasional day off, they seem to almost always prefer to catch Buster.

. Arias has been hot too. It's hard to argue against a guy who goes 1 for 3 with two walks and scores two runs. He's now 9 for 19, which is hot, hot, hot. Bruce may have wanted to keep the at bats coming for Joaquin. Yes, Bruce could have played Joaquin at shortstop, but as you mentioned, Brandon Crawford has also been heating it up a bit, and in fact went 3 for 4 with three RBI's.

If this was the most idiotic move Bruce will make, I'm OK with it.

[donk33]

all those alibis for Bochy gets lost in the translation...if he was afraid of the LH'ers in the lineup, then come in with Casilia in the first game for the 8th and 9th innings and save Romo for the second game. I just don't think you use a reliever in both games unless you are short of arms...and there are too many available to worry about that...

[klaiggeb]

I still think Bochy screwed up Susac's at bat, Rog, and if Susac is NOT in today's lineup, I'll contend he screwed that up, too.

Susac all of sudden seems comfortable at the plate. And it happened one heck of a lot quicker than I expected.

He's comfortable, and relaxed.

And have you noticed how he is with off speed stuff? Pretty darned solid!

IF... and I say IF.... he keeps this up, that presents Bochy with an interesting dilemma for next year.

Me?

IF... Susac works out, I move Belt to LF, and do as Don has been suggesting; Put Posey at 1B.

We won't need to go out and get a LF.

Late innings, a defensive replacement in LF, and Belt to 1B.
If....

All I know is, IF this continues, or anything even close to this, I sure DON'T stick Andrew on the bench to back up Buster and be a pinch hitter.

No how, no way.

With Sanchez, who was subject to all sorts of brain cramps back there, it was easy. I would have said a no brainer.

Not so with Susac.

This kid handles himself well.

And as to the "technical" aspects of playing the position, Susac is not just a little better behind the plate than Posey, he's a LOT better!

And I mean a LOT!

In fact, defensively, they aren't even in the same conversation.

Susac blocks balls smoother and so much better than Posey, and also shifts his weight and gives better set of signs as well as a quieter target.

Heck, I've watched Posey give signs for years, and I ALWAYS think, "What the heck is he calling for?"

His finger action is sloppy, and if I was his pitcher, I wouldn't be happy with the adjustment I'D need to make to pitch to HIM.

Posey's fundamentals are mediocre at best, and I would NOT enjoy Pitching to him.

boly

[Rog]

When the Giants are scoring double digit runs (although clearly not in today's game), it's hard to get too tough on the lineups Bruce is putting out there.

I'm sure this is coincidence, and I don't want to get Don foaming at the mouth, but the Giants have scored pretty well this season when Buster hasn't started. I don't exactly think that means Bruce should sit him, and just because the Giants are hitting doesn't mean Bruce is putting the best possible lineup out there.

But it appears to me that he's trying to get some rest for his starters while giving the bench players a chance to keep their bats from rusting. The Giants have been scoring lots of runs, so whether he's going about it the best way or not, it seems to be working.

I wouldn't always make the same moves as Bruce, and I'd like to think my ideas are even better than his, but that's somewhat pretentious on my part, especially since he has information I may not be privy to.

Let's look at something you and Bruce DO agree on. You both like Joe Panik hitting #2, even though modern lineup construction philosophy suggests a more powerful hitter batting second would be an improvement. My personal thought -- which I'm pretty sure you and likely Bruce would agree with -- is that lineup construction depends on how all nine pieces fit together, even down to how the bench complements the lineup.

In the case of the Giants' present lineup, I like Joe's batting 2nd. When Brandon Belt returns, the answer doesn't seem as clear, although frankly, if Joe continues to hit as he has for the past month, he can hit just about anywhere in the lineup he wants.

As long as he's getting on base consistently, Joe seems like a good #2 hitter to me. He'd likely make a good lead off hitter, and batting Angel Pagan lower in the order to take advantage of his greater power might work too. I like Brandon Belt as a #2 hitter, given that he gets on base and seldom hits into double plays.

If Pence gets on base enough, he could make a good #3 hitter. Posey isn't a perfect cleanup hitter, but he's a very good hitter, and likely the best in the cleanup spot that the Giants have. Pablo seems like a good fit at #5, and if Panik leads off, I would probably prefer Pagan and Morse in the #6 and #7 spots.

I realize Pagan isn't likely to leave the lead off spot, but I suspect he might help the Giants more by batting lower in the order, since he should be a better RBI guy than a player like Panik. His hits should score more runners than Joe's do.

I realize the traditional lead off man has more speed and base stealing than Pagan, but how much has Angel's speed helped the Giants score runs this season? Baseball Prospectus rates Angel's base running at 1.7 extra runs this season, just a bit above Joe's 1.4 runs added. Given that Angel has played about twice as much as Joe, Joe's base running this season has arguably been better than Angel's.

And it's not as if Angel is having a down year in base running. Last season he ranked #54 in the majors with + 2.6 runs. In 2012, he added 1.4 runs, ranking 105th.

In short, Angel is a good base runner, but not a true difference maker. Joe isn't as fast, but he may have better judgment.

If Angel were hitting 6th or 7th, he would still be high enough in the order to drive in runs, but as a base runner, he would be lower in the order where it is more important to manufacture runs.

The argument for having a base stealer leading off is that he gets the hitters behind him better pitches to hit. I haven't seen studies on that, so I can't say for sure how true that is. The saying is that base stealers rattle pitchers, catchers and other fielders. Can't say how much that applies, either.

But might it not be at least as important for hitters down in the order to get better pitches to hit than for the better hitters higher up in the lineup? If a base stealer rattles pitchers, isn't he likely to do so more when he hits down in the order where the pitcher may not need to focus as much on the hitter and where the manufacturing of runs is more important?

As I say, I haven't seen studies on these things, but I do think that we should keep our minds open to the points made here -- unless we can disprove them or at least shed serious doubt on them.

My point here often isn't that people (us, other fans, players, managers, coaches and press) aren't necessarily wrong. It's that they may not be looking at all the variables and evaluating those variables correctly.

Who would have guess, for instance, that Joe Panik may be a more valuable base runner than Angel Pagan? Maybe he is, and maybe he isn't. We might have a better idea four or five years from now. But isn't it surprising that the early returns indicate so far he has been? There is certainly a degree of error in these measurements, but if the same guys fare well season after season, they are probably fairly indicative.

And most seasons, the guys we think would be the best at base running tend to show up pretty high on the lists. And the guys we would expect to be at the bottom, are near the bottom.

Anyway, there are so many things to consider when evaluating the various aspects of baseball. More and more ways of evaluating are being added all the time. The depth of measurement continues to increase. Baseball wisdom has been growing over the years -- and not just recently. The pace at which it has grown has almost certainly been increasing, just as the information for evaluation has grown in just about every aspect of life.

I guess my advice would be, challenge ourselves. Take a look at the things about baseball we have long believed, and turn them inside out. Most things we will change our mind on little if any. But if one keeps his mind open, he can continue to learn. Just because things have seemed a certain way for a long time doesn't mean they still are -- or perhaps ever were.

[Rog]

By the way, any ideas on how recent performance should affect lineup construction? How much should the "hot hand" concept be applied, as opposed to the stability of a set lineup?

With regard to set lineups, more and more we are seeing platooning, which is the antithesis of a set lineup. And the platoon advantage -- especially lefties against lefties -- has shown to be significant.

[Rog]

Hunter Pence this season is an intriguing argument for hitting a more powerful hitter higher in the order. Batting mostly second and lead off this season, Hunter leads the NL in runs scored. This even though he isn't a prototypical #2 or lead off hitter and doesn't play on a team which scores a lot of runs.

[Rog]

How good a hitter is Miguel Cabrera? This season he has driven in 23.5% of the runners on base for him. As a bench mark, when Willie Mays drove in a career high 141 runs in 1962, he drove in just 19.2% of the runners he was presented. This year isn't a fluke for Miguel. Last season he drove home 20.8% of runners on base. The year before that he was at 21.4%.

The past three seasons, Miguel has been clearly ahead of the percentage Willie drove home in Willie's biggest RBI season.

[Rog]

Baseball Prospectus shows that Buster Posey is by far the best pitch framer of the Giants three catchers. Perhaps surprisingly, Hector Sanchez is ahead of Andrew Susac. As for avoiding wild pitches and passed balls, Posey is first, with Susac second and, not surprisingly, Sanchez third.

BP isn't grading form. They're grading measuring results.

[donk33]

Sept 3, 2014 20:04:28 GMT -5 Rog said:

Baseball Prospectus shows that Buster Posey is by far the best pitch framer of the Giants three catchers. Perhaps surprisingly, Hector Sanchez is ahead of Andrew Susac. As for avoiding wild pitches and passed balls, Posey is first, with Susac second and, not surprisingly, Sanchez third.

BP isn't grading form. They're grading measuring results.

dfk...once more, you prove that stats don't lie, but people who use stats twist the truth.....the limited catching that Sanchez and Susac have done  includes the catching of Lincecum, the hardest pitcher to catch...Susac and Sanchez call for more low and/or inside  pitches than Posey who sits on the outside   corner and likes to go for  high pitches...no, I don't have the stats to  prove it, only my observation....;I do notice that Posey doesn't go into the fetal position when he tries to duck the low sliders to LH'ers  as he did the first part of his career....and you continue to duck the fact that they continued to not use Posey as a catcher when Tim pitched, even though Tim needed all the help he could get....

[klaiggeb]

Roger-Baseball Prospectus shows that Buster Posey is by far the best pitch framer of the Giants three catchers. Perhaps surprisingly, Hector Sanchez is ahead of Andrew Susac. As for avoiding wild pitches and passed balls, Posey is first, with Susac second and, not surprisingly, Sanchez third.

BP isn't grading form. They're grading measuring results

---boly says--

rog, this just proves to me, beyond a doubt, that either BP is nuts, or the stat is nuts.

I've watched Posey since he got in the league, and each night, I watch a different catcher. Posey is "okay" framing pitches, and that's it.

He isn't even close to the best.

McKhenry, or however you spell his name, of Colorado, is much better, as was their back up, Jackson Williams.

And do you really believe Buster is better than Molina, of St. Louis?

I'm sorry, but as that old saying goes, "that dog just won't hunt.

boly

[Rog]

dfk...once more, you prove that stats don't lie, but people who use stats twist the truth.....the limited catching that Sanchez and Susac have done includes the catching of Lincecum, the hardest pitcher to catch...Susac and Sanchez call for more low and/or inside pitches than Posey who sits on the outside corner and likes to go for high pitches

Rog -- Sorry I wasn't more specific, Don. The expectations for passed balls and wild pitches are estimated based on the pitches themselves. I started to make a notation that both Susac and Sanchez faced tougher pitches than Buster, but that was indeed factored into the expectations for each catcher. Buster exceeded expectations at a higher rate. In fact, Hector was below expectations. I think Susac was close to neutral.

Wouldn't it be more thoughtful to ask how the measurements were done instead of implying that I was twisting the truth? I try to be as objective as I can. As I mentioned, I started to make the very notation you indicated I should have made -- until my looking closer showed that the expectations had been adjusted for the pitches caught or missed.

Sanchez looks like he doesn't have much of a clue. Susac looks the best. Perhaps it's Posey's athleticism, but despite not having form as good as Susac, he gets the best results. I should mention that Andrew's sample is still very small. Perhaps as it grows, he'll equal or exceed Buster.

But the analysis I gave is based on what has happened SO FAR.

By the way, it dawned on me that you probably owe me an apology for indicating I was twisting the truth here. I wasn't, and perhaps you should have been more thoughtful, cautious and courteous.

Why not ask if the stats have been adjusted for difficulty rather than assume they hadn't been? By the way, I don't think Buster has been as good behind the plate this season, so I suspect his ranking will drop a bit in the Bill James Annual. That should come out in about two months, so it should be fun to see how things change. Maybe a little drop for Brandon Crawford too and perhaps for the injured Brandon Belt. I suspect Hunter Pence might move up a couple of notches among the right fielders. Pablo should show a notable increase.

[Rog]

---boly says--

rog, this just proves to me, beyond a doubt, that either BP is nuts, or the stat is nuts.

I've watched Posey since he got in the league, and each night, I watch a different catcher. Posey is "okay" framing pitches, and that's it.

He isn't even close to the best.

Rog -- When I read something that seems to make no sense, I try to re-read it to make sure I understood correctly. I don't always do so correctly, but I try.

BP's ratings didn't show Buster to be the best, but rather, the best of the three GIANTS. It does show him to be among the best overall, but not the very best. The stats are based on looking at the PITCH/Fx data on every pitch thrown and evaluating how many more strikes a catcher gains than is average for the pitches he caught. Buster's results have been pretty good.

Maybe he has a good rapport with the umpires that leads to his getting more close pitches. I don't know that it's the way he catches the ball necessarily. But the fact is that an objective evaluation of ALL catchers shows that Buster is getting pretty good results. Maybe it has something to do with the pitchers too, although Buster's numbers are FAR better than the other two Giants' catchers IIRC.

Perhaps the best point here is that analytics is evaluating things as esoteric as pitch framing. We no longer have to base our judgment on whether it LOOKS like a catcher is a good framer. Instead, we get to see the actual results -- based on where PITCH/Fx shows the pitch to be.

By the way, PITCH/Fx must be pretty accurate. MLB uses it to evaluate its umpires. I've read how accurate it is considered to be, and the accuracy was to a very low tolerance.

[donk33]

Sept 4, 2014 17:39:28 GMT -5 Rog said:

dfk...once more, you prove that stats don't lie, but people who use stats twist the truth.....the limited catching that Sanchez and Susac have done includes the catching of Lincecum, the hardest pitcher to catch...Susac and Sanchez call for more low and/or inside pitches than Posey who sits on the outside corner and likes to go for high pitches

Rog -- Sorry I wasn't more specific, Don. The expectations for passed balls and wild pitches are estimated based on the pitches themselves. I started to make a notation that both Susac and Sanchez faced tougher pitches than Buster, but that was indeed factored into the expectations for each catcher. Buster exceeded expectations at a higher rate. In fact, Hector was below expectations. I think Susac was close to neutral.

Wouldn't it be more thoughtful to ask how the measurements were done instead of implying that I was twisting the truth? I try to be as objective as I can. As I mentioned, I started to make the very notation you indicated I should have made -- until my looking closer showed that the expectations had been adjusted for the pitches caught or missed.

Sanchez looks like he doesn't have much of a clue. Susac looks the best. Perhaps it's Posey's athleticism, but despite not having form as good as Susac, he gets the best results. I should mention that Andrew's sample is still very small. Perhaps as it grows, he'll equal or exceed Buster.

But the analysis I gave is based on what has happened SO FAR.

By the way, it dawned on me that you probably owe me an apology for indicating I was twisting the truth here. I wasn't, and perhaps you should have been more thoughtful, cautious and courteous.

Why not ask if the stats have been adjusted for difficulty rather than assume they hadn't been? By the way, I don't think Buster has been as good behind the plate this season, so I suspect his ranking will drop a bit in the Bill James Annual. That should come out in about two months, so it should be fun to see how things change. Maybe a little drop for Brandon Crawford too and perhaps for the injured Brandon Belt. I suspect Hunter Pence might move up a couple of notches among the right fielders. Pablo should show a notable increase.

dk...if you weren't twisting the facts, why was it necessary to return with a long explanation....how do you adjust??? All they do is make some kind of an allowance based on their opinion....my opinion varies from theirs and Tim's, too...I think ...I  didn't say you twisted it, the guys you quoted did that....

[klaiggeb]

Rog--BP's ratings didn't show Buster to be the best, but rather, the best of the three GIANTS.

---boly says---

Ahhh. That's different, and much more reasonable, Rog. Not that I agree that Posey frames better, because the sampling on Susac is too small, but it DOES influence me to not be so down on BP

Thanks for the clarification.

boly

[Rog]

You're welcome, Boly. There is a TON of information out there. Did you think that we would have outfielder information, for instance, of how long a ball was in the air, how much ground the outfielder covered, and a map of his route to the ball? While there is still work to be done, is it any WONDER we are able to evaluate fielding much better than we ever could?

And we've even got detailed base running evaluations. We can see how often a runner takes the extra base on hits. We can see how often he advances on ground outs and on air outs. We can, of course, see how he does stealing.

With all this information available, it becomes important to focus on the right factors. As an example, when we come down to the impact of offense in whether Buster should catch of not, here are some things to think about:

. Buster's career differences as a first baseman compared to as a catcher are similar to the differences when he faces a southpaw pitcher and when he faces a right-hander. Because the Giants' primary first baseman, Brandon Belt, bats left-handed, Buster has played a disproportionate amount at first base while facing left-handers rather than righties.

. If Buster were to play first base every day, would he continue to put up the high numbers he has put up so far as a first baseman? A positive change can make a positive impact, but as the change becomes the norm, the differential may be less. As an example, Willie Mays used to play particularly well when Leo Durocher announced Giants games on TV. Better than when Leo managed Willie on an everyday basis.

. How certain does the sample size make us? (The sample size is getting bigger and bigger all the time, so it should be becoming more and more reliable.)

. Buster hasn't fared well as a designated hitter or a pinch hitter, making it a little less clear that his advantage hitting as a first baseman comes from not catching.

I don't have anywhere near all the answers here. I could do a study, but MAN would it take a lot of work. Now that the Giants have Susac available to catch, I'm going along more and more with Don and you that Buster and the Giants would benefit from his changing to first base. It makes more sense now than when Hector Sanchez was the alternative.

My primary reason for agreeing more is that the dangers of catching are becoming more and more apparent. That said, with the exception of his horrific ankle injury, Buster has been remarkably durable as a catcher.

[Rog]

dk...if you weren't twisting the facts, why was it necessary to return with a long explanation....

Rog -- While I'm certainly not known for my brevity and would indeed make my explanations far shorter if I were writing for publication, how would you have gotten the point across in a more concise manner?

Don -- how do you adjust??? All they do is make some kind of an allowance based on their opinion....

Rog -- They evaluate each and every pitch.

Don -- my opinion varies from theirs

Rog -- I don't find that surprising.

Don -- and Tim's, too...I think ...I didn't say you twisted it, the guys you quoted did that....

Rog -- But what would be their motivation for doing so? They evaluate every catcher on a pitch-by-pitch basis. Their goal is to do so objectively. Why would they twist the results so that the results would be less impartial?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2429/bochy?page=1&scrollTo=22109#ixzz3CQFUFCZe

[rxmeister]

The original point here was Bochy, and let me get back to that. The Giants were blown out, so I'm not going to sit here and tell you we would have won, but the guy shows no ability to adapt to any situation. You're playing in Coors Field and you're sitting power guys like Susac and Duvall and playing the likes of Joaquin Arias and Travis Ishikawa? Not only is he devoid of power, but he doesn't walk either, so he can't get on base for the few guys that do have power. And you're resting starters like it's an April game? Time is running out!! And did he really leave in Vogelsong (who was throwing batting practice) to pitch another inning because the eighth place hitter made the last out and he was due to lead off in the next inning? This is stupid when you have a 25 man roster, now you're doing it when you have 35 players at your disposal! And tonight we are in an AL city where they have the DH. The man is clueless when it comes to this. He'll rest a veteran and put an automatic out into the lineup, I guarantee it. They'll be playing eight against nine, when he has power hitters like Susac, Duvall and Dominguez on the bench.

[klaiggeb]

Mark, you summed everything up PERFECTLY!!!

Bochy's strong points very well may be relating to players and what not, but when it comes to situational games... he's frickin' terrible!

It was pointed out by the Brewer announcers in that first game when the only broadcast was the Brewer feed how Bochy uses the DH... and that it is NOT the way other teams, who have been successful with the DH, have used it.

All of what you said is what DISGUSTED me about Bochy's handling of that Rockie game.

And disgusted is the nicest word I can think of.

But I like yours, too; CLUELESS!


I also loved your point about how he managed a 35 man roster. Well said!

he didn't manage it... he ignored it.

boly

[rxmeister]

He did better last night, but Jake Peavy going six after a three hour rain delay? Huh? I expected Peavy to want that win, but it's the manager's job to convince him that's not the best scenario for a 33 year old arm with a lot of mileage. I expected the "get him five innings for the win" mentality though. And then he allows him to pitch the sixth after a rocky fourth and fifth inning! Oh, Bruce, what are you doing? If Peavy gets blasted in his next start we know where to look.

[klaiggeb]

Actually, Mark, coming back and pitching even one, or two innings would have had the same effect.

Zito did it, and from what I've read... suffered no adverse reactions.


This Peavy pick up, which I thought was decent but not dramatic...has turned out to be darned near a blockbuster! (to quote the article on Scutaro in 2012)


Did you see his numbers in his last 5 starts? 4-1, 1.06 ERA!

Wow!

But as you say, we'll see.

boly

[Rog]

Mark -- You're playing in Coors Field and you're sitting power guys like Susac and Duvall and playing the likes of Joaquin Arias and Travis Ishikawa?

Rog -- You make a good point here. There are at least a couple of points on the other side of the equation:

. Arias and Ishikawa have been hot.

. Both Susac and Duvall are right-handed hitters, and Ishikawa bats lefty.

. According to the announcers, the ball was carrying best to right-center field (the "hot" part of the park).

. Susac had said he was tired after catching four hours the previous night.

My point is this: There were reasons for Bruce to do as you suggested. There were also plenty of reasons for him to do as he did. Why are we criticizing a guy when there is as much chance that he was right as that he was wrong?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2429/bochy#ixzz3CZrzKezw

[Rog]

Mark -- They'll be playing eight against nine, when he has power hitters like Susac, Duvall and Dominguez on the bench.

Rog -- If the Giants have to rely on Susac, Duvall and Dominguez to win, I don't like their chances.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2429/bochy?page=1&scrollTo=22128#ixzz3CZtICh26

[Rog]

Like Mark, I too am concerned about the effect on Jake's arm. I especially wonder about bringing him out for the 6th inning after Jake's win was guaranteed as long as the Giants didn't lose the game.

On the other hand, Jake didn't throw an inordinate amount of pitches. Bruce handled the situation differently than I would have, but I certainly can't say he was wrong. I'm with you though, Mark. I would have kept a close leash on Jake and certainly wouldn't have brought him back for the sixth inning.

I thought he did find a very nice time to use Tim though. And I thought Tim looked better. Even threw a little harder.

[klaiggeb]

I guess I'm the only one who's not worried, then, Rog.

Why should his arm have taken an more toll than normal?

He threw 85ish pitches.

Whether he had a 3 hour break in between is moot.

boly

[Rog]

Boly -- I guess I'm the only one who's not worried, then, Rog.

Why should his arm have taken an more toll than normal?

He threw 85ish pitches.

Whether he had a 3 hour break in between is moot.

Rog -- No doubt the Giants' thinking concurred with yours, Boly. I'm sure they were also talking to Jake and to the trainers. Still, it is unusual for a pitcher to come back after that long a delay, and one would presume there is a reason it is unusual.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2429/bochy#ixzz3Cdu5kL18

[klaiggeb]

No question is is unusual.

But that being said, there is no reason for it to cause undue wear and tear.

boly

[Rog]

Mark -- He'll rest a veteran and put an automatic out into the lineup, I guarantee it.

Rog -- You're usually right on the money, Mark, but the primary guy who was added to the lineup was Joaquin Arias, who is now 15 for 31.

And of course, there is the much-maligned Gregor Blanco, 8 for 19 with two doubles and two triples. Or if we want even more power, we could extend the streak back to 21 for 51 with four doubles, two triples and three homers. Oh, and we said Blanco doesn't walk enough? He has also added 10 walks in with those 51 at bats.

The great news is that even with tonight's disappointment, the Giants don't have much of anyone who is an automatic out right now.

Incidentally, Bruce DID play Susac and Duvall some. Andrew went 1 for 4 with a double, a walk and two RBI's. That's a move I have no problem in making. Duvall went 1 for 7. That's a move I DON'T like. Bruce was smart enough not to use Dominguez. Chris is said to be an extremely likable guy -- but he isn't going to hit.

So the "automatic outs" you said NOT to play fared much better than the guys you suggested.

Mark, you know that Panik and Susac can hit, and Duvall and Dominguez can't. And deep in your heart, you know that Bruce Bochy does a decent job with his lineups. It's been a lot of patchwork this season -- but overall, the Giants' hitters have gotten the job done.

Duvall and Dominguez, Mark? What were you THINKING!

As for those who have recently criticized Bruce's lineups, don't we realize how well Arias and Blanco have been hitting? Both those guys have raised their averages 100 points since we started criticizing them. And that's hard to do.

To the Giants' credit, Pablo, Pence, Arias, Blanco, Panik and now Posey have done wonders for their averages with scorching streaks.

Is it safe to say that Adam Duvall has not!

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2429/bochy#ixzz3Ci5dzVVT