|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 16, 2014 10:18:06 GMT -5
For a team with 1st place/post season aspirations, last night's debacle simply cannot happen.
It cannot.
Not to a team that's fielding a substandard, Fourple-A line up.
And to lose to them the way they did is flat out unacceptable.
Period.
And I blame Vogelsong.
Not for giving up the HR. No way. That was just a mistake in location, and that happens.
(Man, I called that one. When that moron what Pollack, and Trumbo stepped in, out loud I said; "4-0."
No.
I'm ticked because he walked Pollack.
That is inexcusable! And both he, the team, and the fans paid for it.
There is NO EXCUSE for a major league pitcher to walk Pollack there when basically their ONLY power threat is in the on deck circle.
If I'm Bochy and Righetti, I'm furious at Vogey for the way he's pitched in these last bunch of games.
Continually falling behind, throwing too many pitches, and ball four at the wrong time.
Now Roger is going to show us count frequency and numbers of walks, and other stuff, all of which I'm going to say is moot.
Because it is.
I'm flat out stating that I watched the game.
I saw what he did in EVERY situation, and what he failed to do.
Overall, he pitched fairly well. But that doesn't change the fact that, in the most important inning of the game... he struggled with location by NOT paying heed to who was on deck.
His INability to get INTO the strike zone when he absolutely must... killed an other wise solid effort.
This makes 3 straight games I've bitched at his nibbling and falling behind.
But the fact is, this is the way he's been for most of the year.
He wasn't like this in 011, and 012.
He was a dart thrower who could really hit his spots
Now... I don't know what he is, but he's not someone that Bochy, Righetti, or Giant fans can count on.
For me, and if I'm a manager/GM I have a LONG, LONG memory, this one I file away and I don't forget.
Same with Gutierrez. Allowing those runs was UNFORGIVEABLE!
He moves at the speed of petrified fudge, and puts EVERYONE behind him to sleep.
I'm the GM, both are gone when the season ends.
Gone.
My memory is long, and I want guys who are aggressive; who challenge. Those two didn't.
I don't sign Pablo for the ridiculous money he wants because we need front line starters.
That's where I put my money.
We can't and won't win with the current Lincecum.
Petit, at best, is a swing guy, and Hudson may very well be done.
That leaves Bumgarner and maybe... maybe Cain.
From what I see of our minor league system, there is no help coming next year.
We need starting pitching help, and paying Pablo Pence-money will just hurt us, not help us
That's all I have to say, as I watch our guys go cold with the bats just when they are needed most
boly.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Sept 16, 2014 20:41:00 GMT -5
I didn't want Vogelsong back THIS year, so you know what I think about having him back next year! He's actually had a better year than I expected him to have, but he's still not a pitcher that you want out there for a big game any more. In his defense though, I thought Pollack swung at the 2-2 pitch and Trumbo never should have batted. As for their terrible lineup, when you have Juan Perez leading off and Joaquin Arias batting sixth at first base, your lineup isn't very good either!
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 17, 2014 10:02:34 GMT -5
I agree on all points, Mark.
Pollack WAS out.
But my point is, really, that the count NEVER should have gotten to 3-2 with Trumbo on deck.
I was sort of, but not really, okay with Arias at 1B because he's been so hot.
but it is NOT what I would have done.
For ME, Susac would have been behind the plate, and Posey at 1B.
Susac has proven to me, at least, that he is not overwhelmed by the size of the stage or the situation.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2014 13:18:24 GMT -5
Man, Boly do we disagree a bit here.
First of all, I agree with you that Vogelsong fell behind too often. I don't have to look this one up, as I did in his September 3rd outing.
But I am baffled when you make it seem as if a walk or not throwing a strike is a cardinal sin (unless, of course, he walks the pitcher). You must be seeing how often even the best pitchers miss their target with frequency.
If they miss by 8 inches, the pitch is right down the middle. If they miss by 18 inches, it's a ball. If they miss by 17 inches, it's a great pitch to the other side of the plate.
Baseball isn't fair to the pitcher. The more he misses by, the worse the situation should be. But in the above, missing by the least distance is usually the worst for the pitcher. Missing by 18 inches is the next worst. But if he misses by just one inch less, it's a great pitch.
Pitchers miss their spots. Frequently. Sometimes by a lot. Of course issuing walks in non-strategic situations is a bad thing. But it happens to the best of pitchers -- even in clutch situations, even with the opposing pitcher batting.
Incidentally, some think a walk isn't as good as a single -- and they're right close to 40% of the time. Clearly the walk to Pollack didn't turn out to be in the 40%.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2014 13:31:29 GMT -5
Boly -- I was sort of, but not really, okay with Arias at 1B because he's been so hot.
Rog -- We're complaining about Arias playing, but all the guy has done is go 13 for 23. And the more we complain, the hotter he gets. He's 7 for 11 right now. Let's keep complaining, lest he cool down.
Boly --but it is NOT what I would have done.
For ME, Susac would have been behind the plate, and Posey at 1B.
Rog -- Something dawned on me just last night. With Tim Lincecum out of the rotation, the Giants are using Susac pretty much exclusively to catch Yusmeiro Petit. It may be that the other four starters WANT Buster to catch them instead of Susac.
One player in a lineup -- even Arias, as hot as he's been -- doesn't usually win or lose the game. Just like batting one player in a different spot in the order usually doesn't make a difference.
Sometimes our ideas work out (such as batting Joe Panik second). Sometimes they don't (such as getting rid of Blanco and Arias).
Speaking of Panik, he's yet another example of the young guys' getting to play if they product -- but sitting on the bench or going back to Fresno if they don't. Panik was being platooned and looked like he might even lose his job to fellow rookie Matt Duffy -- but he began hitting and suddenly was playing every day.
In addition, Bruce isn't operating in a vacuum. Even we here saw that Panik and Susac had a much better chance of making a difference than guys like Adam Duvall and Ehire Adrianza.
Knowing that, would we give a longer rope to Panik and Susac or to Duvall and Adrianza?
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Sept 17, 2014 14:13:15 GMT -5
lol when I saw the title of this thread I knew immediately who created it. Come on Boly you know full well the Dodgers, the Cards and the Nats have all lost games like Monday's and to teams just as bad as the snakes. The NL simply doesn't have a dominant team in it this year. All 5 teams that qualify for postseason will have warts and all 5 will have a decent chance to win the pennant.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 17, 2014 15:33:05 GMT -5
Randy, no question you are correct about all teams losing games they should win...
But... and it's a big butttt...
We're in the final (at the time) 13.
Your intensity HAS to be 100%.
Your focus HAS to be 100%
Your brain HAS TO BE 100% on the down and distance, so to speak.
i.e. Who's hitting? What are his hot zones? Who's on deck? How aggressively do I go after this guy?
Vogey FAILED on every point on the at bat to Pollack and THAT is what cannot happen.
Crimmenee. Vogey was screwing around with most of those mediocre hitters, finally going 3-2 to a guy he should have been going after.
Period.
That was my point, and I made that very clear when I said that I didn't blame him for the HR, I BLAMED him for the walk to Pollack.
He was screwing around all game long nibbling and falling behind.
That was ridiculous, and made even more so with the Pollack at bat.
No walk, no GS.
No GS, we have a solid chance to win.
Bottom line: we CAN'T, no team CAN afford to lose games to 2nd rate teams because of mental mistakes, and THAT is what I contend Vogey did in how he managed the Pollack at bat.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2014 16:19:27 GMT -5
Are we saying that walking Pollack was a mental mistake, while giving up the home run to Trumbo wasn't? How the heck do we know when a mistake is mental and when it is physical?
Sometimes it is clear. I don't see that as being the case here. Using your argument, are we saying that missing over the plate isn't a mental mistake, whereas missing off it IS? WHERE the pitcher misses determines whether it is a physical or mental mistake?
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 17, 2014 16:29:07 GMT -5
Boly -- But... and it's a big butttt..
Rog -- NOW you've got my attention!
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Sept 17, 2014 22:40:38 GMT -5
Boly, you keep mentioning that he walked Pollock and then had to pitch to Trumbo like he walked Juan Perez to get to in his prime Barry Bonds. Are you not aware that Pollock is the best hitter on the Diamondbacks at .313 and Trumbo is hitting .235? Did you see Trumbo put up that golden sombrero today? Walking Pollock and facing Trumbo is perfectly acceptable and probably a very smart strategy.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Sept 17, 2014 23:07:10 GMT -5
DBacks pitchers wisely pitched to Perez rather than walking him to face the pitcher
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 18, 2014 11:00:07 GMT -5
Mark -- Boly, you keep mentioning that he walked Pollock and then had to pitch to Trumbo like he walked Juan Perez to get to in his prime Barry Bonds. Are you not aware that Pollock is the best hitter on the Diamondbacks at .313 and Trumbo is hitting .235? Did you see Trumbo put up that golden sombrero today? Walking Pollock and facing Trumbo is perfectly acceptable and probably a very smart strategy. Rog -- You make an excellent point here, Mark. The best strategy probably WAS to pitch carefully to Pollock, with the idea of making it hard for Pollock to hit, and then facing the low-hitting, right-hand hitting Trumbo. Boly said he didn't blame Vogelsong for the homer to Trumbo, so Ryan essentially did nothing wrong! Aside from the four runs, of course. This is another example of why it is usually somewhat pointless to question strategy. There is usually more than one way to look at things. In this case, I understand Boly's point, but agree with Mark that while it backfired, Vogelsong likely used the better strategy. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2455/unacceptable#ixzz3DgQFeE13
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 18, 2014 18:48:45 GMT -5
Mark--Boly, you keep mentioning that he walked Pollock and then had to pitch to Trumbo like he walked Juan Perez to get to in his prime Barry Bonds. Are you not aware that Pollock is the best hitter on the Diamondbacks at .313 and Trumbo is hitting .235? Did you see Trumbo put up that golden sombrero today? Walking Pollock and facing Trumbo is perfectly acceptable and probably a very smart strategy.
---boly says---
I am aware that Pollock is out hitting Trumbo by a considerable number.
But my point is multi-fold, and though you may not agree, it's still my point.
Pollack doesn't have Trumbo's power. Not even close.
2 men on, 2 out.
Small, hot ball park.
Last thing I want is bases loaded and a power guy coming up.
Who would I rather go after? A guy more likely to hit a single or double? Or a guy who can almost check his swing and clear the bases.
That's my logic.
****Rog---This is another example of why it is usually somewhat pointless to question strategy. There is usually more than one way to look at things. In this case, I understand Boly's point, but agree with Mark that while it backfired, Vogelsong likely used the better strategy.
--boly says--- I'm going to disagree on this. Get the singles hitter, DON'T put yourself in a position to get taken deep by the power guy.
I disagree also, that THAT was Vogey's strategy. He pitched too carefully, and got careless.
boly
boly
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Sept 19, 2014 8:26:58 GMT -5
Boly, a base hit there brings in two runs and a double clears the bases, which isn't much worse than a grand slam. And in a "small hot ballpark" a lesser power hitter like Pollack can certainly go deep too. He hit a triple the following day. Ever watch the Phillies play? Who pitches to Utley in a clutch situation when they see Ryan Howard on deck? Yet Howard is the power hitter in a small hot ballpark. The slow footed low batting average power hitter can be gotten out easily in so many different ways, while the fast running high average non power hitter is much tougher to pitch to. I'd rather face Trumbo every time, and I expect my pitcher to not put it in his wheelhouse like Vogelsong did.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 19, 2014 14:03:44 GMT -5
I'm enjoying this one.
To me, Pollock is the guy I don't want to beat me, as Mark. Yet, I certainly don't want a grand slam, which was Boly's point.
I like the strategy of pitching to Pollock, but pitching carefully, since there was a base open, is the best strategy. In a low-scoring game such as that was, some managers might even have walked Pollock intentionally. Personally I think that would have been a mistake. We saw what Trumbo did, and while he's not a particularly good hitter, he's not an automatic out, either. While he's not nearly as likely as Pollock to get a single and drive in two runs, he's more likely to drive in three or more.
Was the game at that point one in which we would risk the small potential of four runs being scored in order to cut down on the chances of two coming in? I think the answer is yes, which is why I would have pitched carefully to Pollock.
Really, how likely was Trumbo to do what he did? He homers many once every 25 at bats, 20 at the least? Pollock gets a hit three times out of every 10.
We may not like the execution, but I think the strategy was sound.
Not wanting to pick on you, Boly, since you know those days are long gone and regretted considerably, but I found what you said to be ironic. You said Vogelsong pitched too CAREfully, then he got CAREless. So he was overly careful for a while and then suddenly wasn't careful enough?
I realize that's not what you meant. I just found it humorous how the words fit together. That's almost as unfortunate as some of the things I write. You've got a L-O-N-G way to go to catch me in that category, but I appreciate that you're trying!
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 19, 2014 18:22:58 GMT -5
I understand all of your arguments for pitching to Trumbo, and they are good ones.
But me? I'd have gone AFTER Pollack, being aggressive, not nibbling at the strike zone.
I don't want the bases loaded where any fluke play, passed ball, whatever, ignites a big rally.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 19, 2014 19:32:32 GMT -5
--boly says--- I'm going to disagree on this. Get the singles hitter, DON'T put yourself in a position to get taken deep by the power guy.
I disagree also, that THAT was Vogey's strategy. He pitched too carefully, and got careless.
Rog -- I think one can view the strategy either way. I thought pitching carefully to Pollock was better than walking him intentionally or pitching straight out to him instead of Trumbo. In a more wide-open game I might have felt differently.
As for Ryan's strategy, I think we'd have to ask him and Buster. Since guys don't always throw the ball where they want to, I really couldn't tell.
I thought it might be useful to look up how Pollock is doing compared to Trumbo, and now I think the WORST strategy would have been to go right after Pollock. Trumbo has had excellent power numbers in the past, but this season he's homered once every 34 at bats. Pollock has actually been a tiny bit more powerful, with 31 at bats per homer. Pollock has an extra base hit every 7 at bats compared to Trumbo's one every 12. Every 100 at bats, Pollock gets 8 more hits than Trumbo.
IMO pitching straight up to Pollock would have been the worst possible strategy aside from intentionally walking him, and one could even make an argument for that.
The numbers say that this season Pollock has been FAR more dangerous than Trumbo. How much more dangerous? Pollock has essentially been Buster Posey. Trumbo has essentially been Brandon Crawford. That's a bit of an exaggeration, but not much. Perhaps it would be closer to say that Trumbo has been between the two Brandon's -- and perhaps closer to Crawford. Maybe Pollock has been between Posey and Panik -- and quite a bit closer to Posey.
I just can't see much of an argument for pitching straight up to Pollock instead of pitching carefully to him with a base open to get to Trumbo. I see your point, Boly, and perhaps a season ago when Trumbo was still powerful I would have agreed with it (although I'm not sure even then, since a single would have driven in half as many runs as a grand slam and was far more likely from Pollock), but the closer I look at this one, the more I have to agree with Mark.
I have a hard time disagreeing with EITHER of you, but I guess I can't sit on the fence either!
|
|