IGT Business Person's Special 4-29-09

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

This team needs to see Dr. Brinkley for some goat-gland surgery.

[nymr83]

FUCK FUCK FUCK, WHAT THE HELL IS SUDDENLY WRONG WITH RELIEVERS WHEN THEY COME TO THE METS???

[Centerfield]

Edgy DC wrote: Fuckin' A, people. How can we support this strategy? At all!?

The Santana comment was meant to address your "keep the bullpen fresh for September" aspect you brought up yesterday.

I will support putting in Putz in the 8th inning of a one-run game when Santana has tossed 109 pitches. Even after today. It sucks that we're losing, but it's not because of bad strategy.

[Guest Edgy DC]

It's not the relievers, it's the strategy.

I'M BEGGING YOU ALL TO SEE!

[Fman99]

Oh no, it's the "one pitch, one out" strategy.

Don't lie down, you overpaid fuckers! Hit! This gives me pain in my goat-scrote.

[metirish]

Edgy DC wrote: It's not the relievers, it's the strategy. I'M BEGGING YOU ALL TO SEE!

I'm with you , why not let Santana go out there , what's another 15 or 20 pitches to him?

[Fman99]

Reed with the two out triple. Another triple!

OK, say it with me.

HIT.

THE.

BALL.

NOW.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Centerfield wrote: ="Edgy DC"]Fuckin' A, people. How can we support this strategy? At all!? The Santana comment was meant to address your "keep the bullpen fresh for September" aspect you brought up yesterday. I will support putting in Putz in the 8th inning of a one-run game when Santana has tossed 109 pitches. Even after today. It sucks that we're losing, but it's not because of bad strategy.

And I'll dispute it even before today. It is because of bad strategy. We pulled the better pitcher for the lesser pitcher and we pulled the pitcher who had established he was on his game for the one who hadn't.

109 pitches? Big fucking whoop. What does that number even mean?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Reyes walks. Up to Cora.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Two-out triples produce mixed feelings in me.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Is there any Delgadavailability?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Edgy DC wrote: It's not the relievers, it's the strategy. I'M BEGGING YOU ALL TO SEE!

Well, it's both. But I'm in your camp on this one. Solidly.

[Guest Edgy DC]

OK, then, it's not something cursed that happens to relievers when they come to the Mets.

[Fman99]

Sheff on deck as the likely PH (double switch took Murphy out of the #3 slot earlier).

[Guest Edgy DC]

Is this guy a sidearmer?

[TransMonk]

Edgy DC wrote: And I'll dispute it even before today. It is because of bad strategy. We pulled the better pitcher for the lesser pitcher and we pulled the pitcher who had established he was on his game for the one who hadn't. 109 pitches? Big fucking whoop. What does that number even mean?

This reads to me like Santana should go nine innings every start if he's winning.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

fuck

[Fman99]

MOTHERFUCKER.

[Guest Edgy DC]

TransMonk wrote: ="Edgy DC"] And I'll dispute it even before today. It is because of bad strategy. We pulled the better pitcher for the lesser pitcher and we pulled the pitcher who had established he was on his game for the one who hadn't. 109 pitches? Big fucking whoop. What does that number even mean? This reads to me like Santana should go nine innings every start if he's winning.

Surely you realize that's an over-broad interpretation.

[TransMonk]

7 runners left in scoring position with 2 out through 8.

Cheese and rice.

[bmfc1]

Classic over-managing. If he didn't run Reyes, Cora's ball goes into CF, but the manager felt that he had to do something so he ran Reyes and it cost the Mets the tying run. Sometimes, a manager should just stand there.

[Fman99]

Someone watching -- if Reyes isn't running, and Bonifacio isn't moving over to cover, does Cora's ball make it through to center?

[metirish]

Matt Lindstrom is our last hope.

[Fman99]

bmfc1 wrote: Classic over-managing. If he didn't run Reyes, Cora's ball goes into CF, but the manager felt that he had to do something so he ran Reyes and it cost the Mets the tying run. Sometimes, a manager should just stand there.

OK that answers that. Thanks bmfc.

[Centerfield]

But that's exactly what you wrote. You seem to disregard any possibility that:

1. Starting pitchers can tire. Even suddenly, and that a manager has to make a call on pulling that starter before they give up the lead in a tight game.

2. Overtaxing your starters can (as you point out with relievers) have negative effects later in the year.

No general rule can apply to pulling a starter and going to the pen. It's a balancing act, and in most cases, there is no clear cut answer that is the better way.

[Frayed Knot]

So if Cora's hit goes to a different angle then it's good managing?

That's bad luck, IMO, not bad managing.

[TransMonk]

Edgy DC wrote: ="TransMonk"] Edgy DC wrote: And I'll dispute it even before today. It is because of bad strategy. We pulled the better pitcher for the lesser pitcher and we pulled the pitcher who had established he was on his game for the one who hadn't. 109 pitches? Big fucking whoop. What does that number even mean? This reads to me like Santana should go nine innings every start if he's winning. Surely you realize that's an over-broad interpretation.

Would it be over-broad to amend my statement to: This reads to me like Santana should go nine innings every start if he's winning by one run.

[metirish]

Howie on the radio saying that it's by design that Santana is done after 100+ pitches , and Manuel told Howie that early in the season no circumstance would cause him to deviate from that...

[bmfc1]

FK: that's one way to look at it, but I, in my pissed-off mind, see it as over-managing.

[Fman99]

Pinch hitter, Beltran, Wright due up in the 9th. I say let Delgado take a whack as the PH if he can handle it.

Just takes one swing to tie this up.