Mets v Cards - NLCS Game 2 -- IGT

[Zvon]

We cant be giving games away tho.

Id rather be blown out.
DAMN YOU WAGNER!!! *until next time you come in and do great)

[TransMonk]

#13 blows it on Friday the 13th.

My triskaidekaphobia has returned.

[Zvon]

Hillbilly wrote: This game was so winable. The Cards got it done but the Mets couldn't. We need to get a solid start from Stevie Wonder and get back on the winning track cause this game sucked.

this was actually a great game.
But, yea, the ending sucked.

[Zvon]

Two bombs by Delgado--TWO.

And we lose.......not good.

[Guest Edgy DC]

The Mets got outplayed in small ways.

For the record, I'd not rather be blown out.

[Guest holychicken]

All I can say is that I REALLY hate baseball.

[Zvon]

I had left the room for a minute at that point,..just saw the Tagushi homer now for the 1st time.

How can Wagner give it up to him?
How?
Thats insane!

Well, its driven me crazy.

We got to Carpenter and had the lead, and I really thought that was gonna be the hardest part tonight.
We all know, watchin alot a games, that no pen can be perfect.
Not for a whole season.
For a whole series?
It would have been nice.
And for it to be Wagner to Tagushi in the ninth......thats wack.

[Guest askus3]

Just my opinion. Anyone else agree? The Mets had a 6-4 lead and they brought Feliciano in to get the last out in the top of the 6th. They needed to lead off with a pinch-hitter in the bottom of the 6th, so the logical move I was saying to my daughter while we were watching the game was to do a double switch. Bring in Anderson Hernandez to bat 9th and play 2B for Valentin and lead off and bat Feliciano 7th. (Chavez made the last out in the 5th). Ironically A. Hernandez was brought in to pinch-hit. If Randolph did this he would have got more mileage out of a rested Feliciano and a better glove in the line-up for defense and no worse a hitter (than Valentin of late- both suck). And if you want to pinch hit with men on base you could even bring Woodward in later on. Thus they wasted an extra inning or two they would have got out of Feliciano. Mota would not have given up the tying triple to Spezio and who knows what might have happened. In the chess match Randolph blew it in my opinion.

[Zvon]

askus3 wrote: Just my opinion. Anyone else agree? The Mets had a 6-4 lead and they brought Feliciano in to get the last out in the top of the 6th. They needed to lead off with a pinch-hitter in the bottom of the 6th, so the logical move I was saying to my daughter while we were watching the game was to do a double switch. Bring in Anderson Hernandez to bat 9th and play 2B for Valentin and lead off and bat Feliciano 7th. (Chavez made the last out in the 5th). Ironically A. Hernandez was brought in to pinch-hit. If Randolph did this he would have got more mileage out of a rested Feliciano and a better glove in the line-up for defense and no worse a hitter (than Valentin of late- both suck). And if you want to pinch hit with men on base you could even bring Woodward in later on. Thus they wasted an extra inning or two they would have got out of Feliciano. Mota would not have given up the tying triple to Spezio and who knows what might have happened. In the chess match Randolph blew it in my opinion.

I was very surprised that Feliciano was used in that way.
One batter-two pitches.
But many times thats just what you need from your pen.

Its a bit easier, in retrospect, being an armchair manager.
Especially in this game.
But I hear ya.

Personally I even questioned the use of Mota (to myself--said "mmmm" on board) at all tonight, or at that point anyway, considering the rested pen and the other arms out there. But at first Mota looked mahhhhhvelous.

I dunno-baseball is funny like that.
Best laid plans and all....

Bottomline-Wagner was given the job to get us thru the ninth----- and we all had to be happy to be in that position. Ahead or tied,it looked good and was a good place to be.
Wagner failed.

I wonder how he writes this up in his column...........

[Gwreck]

I was less worried about the performance -- sometimes it gets away, there's only one Mariano Rivera, etc. -- than I was about bullpen management. Using Feliciano for John Rodriguez? Seems kinda unnecessary, especially when Bradford was going great.

Willie played like it was a 9 inning game, which is great, but I don't think he had much saved for extras, and it's only Game 2 of 5 games in a row.

It was nice meeting many of you prior to the game.

PS. Happy Birthday Duaner.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I think (1) the Mets didn't want to send their lefty out against the top of the order --- Eckstein ® - Duncan(L) - Pujols®.

(2) I'm mad enough as it is that Hernandez got one at-bat. I don't think two would have been a solution.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

Misery.

Big goofs:

1) Delgado's error.
--We can't do anything to shorten the outings of guys like Maine.

2) Should yanked Mota after the Edmonds walk.
--Pujols worked him hard.

I was right field and couldn't see the Green play: Don't even wanna see the highlights.

I'd like it if Wright could provide an XBH here and there.

5 runs off Carpenter should been a win. Cards did a nice job fouling off pitches.

Wags = blech.

Nice meeting you guys but just a miserable game.

[Guest cooby]

]I was right field and couldn't see the Green play: Don't even wanna see the highlights.

Go ahead and watch it; he didn't make a bad play. He just couldn't quite get it.
Thank heavens they called it right, not that it mattered in the end, except to save us all a lot of bitterness.

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

He actually broght the ball back in - it would have been a homer otherwise.

[MFS62]

Yep, nice meeting you folks.

I have cautioned about Tagichi before. IIRC he once had a something like 11-12 streak (pre-season games carried over to the regular season) against the Mets. Since then, he has shown time and time again that they still haven't figured out how to pitch to the guy.
When he came into the game, I yelled "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO" because I had the feeling he would do something to hurt the Mets.

I wish I had been wrong.
The fukker.

I later heard the replay. Howie Rose called the homer "unexpected".
Maybe by Howie.
Not by me.
I wonder if he really has watched the games he has called over the years.

Later

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

That blast against Howie was pretty unfair, 62.

http://leaptoad.com/mets/opponent.php?PlayerCode=6439

Prior to last night, Taguchi had never homered against the Mets in 44 at bats.

In 2006 he had a .091 batting average against the Mets, and in 2005 he hit .227.

He did put up some terrific numbers against them in 2004, though. In 11 at bats he had five singles and three doubles and drove in 5 runs.

[Frayed Knot]

"I have cautioned about Tagichi before. IIRC he once had a something like 11-12 streak (pre-season games carried over to the regular season) against the Mets."

PRE-SEASON?!?! We're counting pre-season memories now as long as it fits into the theory?
Taguchi was 8 for 11 against the Mets in 2004 meaning that, yeah, you're right, he ONCE had a streak.



"Since then, he has shown time and time again that they still haven't figured out how to pitch to the guy."

Well, considering that he followed his '04 'mastery' with a 5-for-22 in '05 and then a 1-for-11 in '06 (that's .182 over 2 years) it sounds to me that they "figured it out" quite nicely.
Y'see, you're not only seeing short-term variances and treating them as if rock-solid and predictable trends but then you're ignoring further evidence if/when it contradicts that conclusion.



"When he came into the game, I yelled "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO" because I had the feeling he would do something to hurt the Mets."

Was it just a feeling or a real hunch?
Taguchi, btw, was 0-for-5 in his career against Wagner. So even if he did hold some kind of "hex" over Met pitchers in the past, how exactly would this affect Wagner who had never pitched for the Mets before this season? Do batters hit against pitchers or are their successes and failures determined by the laundry being worn?




"I later heard the replay. Howie Rose called the homer "unexpected".
Maybe by Howie. Not by me.
I wonder if he really has watched the games he has called over the years."

Judging by the stuff above, more closely than you.

Look, Taguchi has 16 HRs in nearly 1,000 MLB ABs and, as mentioned above, had never even had a hit against Wagner. Can we PLEASE stop treating the outcomes of games and plays within games as if they're pre-determined by some unexplainable force, and, while we're at it, this notion that teams are some sort of unchanging blob that acts, thinks, and plays the same way no matter how much you change the braintrust & personnel over time?

Yeah, it was surprising.

[Guest cooby]

The thing is too, the guys on TV were saying how Wagner had done so well against the Cardinals dating back to 1998 , so that meltdown was unexpected in that sense too.
(Though I was thinking to myself, whole new set of Cardinals here, boys)

Well, it's over with, he can start a new good streak.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

There was another dumb TV graphic on Fox near the end of the game. It was titled "OVERWORKED BULLPEN?" And listed how many pitches the Mets pen had thrown this postseason.

What it didn't mention is that the Mets had a four-day break between the NLDS and the NLCS. So prior to last night's game, the bullpen had only pitched two innings in the last five days.

The pen is probably going to be overworked in the next few days. But going into last night's game, it certainly wasn't.

[MFS62]

="Frayed Knot"] "When he came into the game, I yelled "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO" because I had the feeling he would do something to hurt the Mets." Was it just a feeling or a real hunch? Yeah, it was surprising.

What's the difference?

Yes, all , my opinion of Taguchi was based on a streak he had a few years ago. I hadn't followed his numbers very closely since then.

But I had a feeling in my gut (OK so it was a feeling, but I'd still like to know how you differentiate between those terms)that So would do something damaging. Maybe not a homer (as your stats show), but something.

Unfortunately, I was right.

Sitting in the stadium, I didn't have the advantage of access to the stats that you did to challenge my post. I had to rely on memory.
And I am a firm believer that if a player gives you problems, you use every game, including spring training, to work on way to solve him (pitcher or hitter). The fact that he once went something like 8 for 8 against the mets in spring training and he later went the 8 for 11 you noted was stuck in my mind.
Did anyone else have an uneasy feeling when he entered the game?
Honestly?


Later

[metsmarathon]

well, i just have this feeling that the guy most likely to beat a flame-throwing closer is the biggest scrubbeenie in the opposing clubhouse.

fire fastballs at the weaklings, cos they're not expected to get the bat on the ball. only when they do connect with a fireball, it'll usually go very very far.

[Frayed Knot]

]What's the difference? [between a feeling and a hunch]

Nothing of course. I'm just tweaking the notion that either is worth much.

]Sitting in the stadium, I didn't have the advantage of access to the stats that you did to challenge my post. I had to rely on memory. And I am a firm believer that if a player gives you problems, you use every game, including spring training, to work on way to solve him (pitcher or hitter). The fact that he once went something like 8 for 8 against the mets in spring training and he later went the 8 for 11 you noted was stuck in my mind.

Well I didn't have them at the time either, I only looked them up after reading your post because usually when I hear things like 'Player X always kills us':
a) it's often not true, but rather is a generalization based on some small sample from years back (as in this case)
and/or
even if it were accurate, is this really something you want to base future strategy on?

It's just so illogical to me to act as if some player is going to suddenly become some super-ized version of himself merely by seeing a hurler wearing our teams' pajamas (even one he HASN'T hit in the past) that I don't even think it's worth discussing.

]Did anyone else have an uneasy feeling when he entered the game? Honestly?

- Uneasy because it was the 9th inning of a tied playoff game? ... Sure.
- EVEN MORE Uneasy because some so-so hitting (see what I did there?) defensive replacement who once had a handful of singles & doubles 3 seasons back off some NYM pitchers who are almost certainly no longer on this team was the man leading off the inning? ... Not even a little bit

[Willets Point]

Does anyone have stats on Wagner's performance in tie games or where the Mets have a big lead (AKA - non-save situations). My anectdotal evidence is that he seems to turn up the suck big time in those situations but stats often put such feelings to the test.

[Guest Rotblatt]

I fifth the "nice to meet you all" thing and millionth the "this game blew."

Ugh. Just painful as hell. I know most of you have said this all, but what the hell:

1. Delgado's error. HUGE. Almost negates his first home run. Almost.
2. Why not use Darren Oliver in the fifth? He's a good long man, and while Bradford was great, he is, IMO, best saved until we need a ground ball--so generally when there are runners on base. And wasting Feliciano on a pinch hitter is just crazy to me. If we'd used Oliver for two, we could've spun Bradford & Feliciano out there in the seventh as a bridge to Heilman in the eighth.
3. Valentin has looked lost at the plate this entire post-season. Chavez should be batting ahead of him until he starts to get hot.
4. Anderson Hernandez? Seriously? Why not try Cliff in that situation? Sure, it would be leading off the inning, but if Cliff gets anything other than a dinger, you put Hernandez in to pinch run for him. If you ARE going to use Andy, for the love of Christ, tell him to bunt, not swing. It's the only thing he's remotely good at at the plate. And yeah, I know they're expecting it, but you've got to try, and it's not like Spiezio is GOOD at third.
5. Why Mota? Why not Heilman for two innings? Or at least after walking Edmonds?

Willie went for the jungular again, and I think that was the right attitude, but I question the above chances. I'll grant that he's made similar moves and they worked out, and it's a lot easier to Monday morning quarterback than Sunday afternoon quarterback, but I thought all of the above at the time they happened . . .

It's an interesting contrast to La Russa, too. He probably made the wrong choice in starting Carpenter, but everything else worked out beautifully. Flores got Beltran & Delgado with LoDuca on 2nd in the 6th. His double switch to get Taguchi in there. His putting of Rolen in there as a defensive replacement, who robbed Wright in the ninth.

Willie outmanaged La Russa in Game 1, but La Russa clearly got the better of Willie in Game 2.

Anyway, I now feel ridiculously pessimistic about our chances. Maine looked awful, our bullpen got exposed, and we've got Trachsel, Perez & Glavine on short rest coming up.

Ugh.

And even if we manage to win a game in St. Louis, we've looking at Maine & Trachsel in 6 & 7, and at this point, that's not an inspiring thought.

I'm clearly in for the long haul, but man oh man do we have our work cut out for us.

It's time to sac up and make it work, Trachs!

[Zvon]

="Yancy Street Gang"]There was another dumb TV graphic on Fox near the end of the game. It was titled "OVERWORKED BULLPEN?" And listed how many pitches the Mets pen had thrown this postseason. What it didn't mention is that the Mets had a four-day break between the NLDS and the NLCS. So prior to last night's game, the bullpen had only pitched two innings in the last five days. The pen is probably going to be overworked in the next few days. But going into last night's game, it certainly wasn't.

FOX and ESPN started playing up this angle the second the game was over....maybe even before.
I STRONGLY agree with you Yancy, that to be saying this, under the circumstances, is a great big pile of bull dooty.