PDA

View Full Version : Hernandez Tieing run on 2nd yesterday>?



bgwilly31
05-10-2010, 11:50 AM
It ended up working out yesterday when Votto Our hero came through with a big bomb.

But why didnt BAKER pinch run for the terribly slow hernandez on 2nd>?

Given the situation;
7th inning late in the game.
Tieing run.
Hanigan on the bench with a hot bat anyways.

I see no reason why you wouldnt automatically pinch run.

Once again if somebody could possibly fill me in on the reasoning behind bakermetrics. I would be oblidged.

bounty37h
05-10-2010, 12:02 PM
or the terible baserunning that was worse then the slow part. Our boys dont seem to have fundamentals down very well, esp baserunning. I also wonder if they care or have any respect for 3'rd base coach, looked like a couple were getting chippy with him (dont recall who/when, but thought it looked like at least one made a snarl at him at least once)yesterday, or simply ignoring him...

roby
05-10-2010, 12:45 PM
I have to agree with Wily, that was one of the oddest set of moves I have seen in quite awhile. First you bunt with a tortoise-like runner at second base who promptly gets thrown out at third; then you leave the pitcher (who bunted) in to run until he gets to second base, then you pinch run for him??? It always makes me nervous when they have a good pitcher run and then take him out. I remember Jose Rijo's injury all to well. I don't know what Dusty was thinking...or if he was!

Jack Burton
05-10-2010, 01:04 PM
Another mark against Dusty, how many is that now?

redsfan_12
05-10-2010, 01:36 PM
I didn't understand that either. Would have brought in Heisey there with no questions asked. Looking back at it though, RH looked safe there. No way you get that call however. A bad bunt and the ball beat him there. Ramirez tagged his knee well after he touched the base

PedroBourbon
05-10-2010, 01:53 PM
I was even more perplexed that Duhsty didn't PH for Leake who was coming out of the game anyway. Why not PH Hanigan or Nix at that time? He leaves Leake in to bunt into a fielder's choice but then doesn't pinch run until Leake gets to second. I thought both decisions were very questionable.

bgwilly31
05-10-2010, 02:04 PM
Well Just good thing our boy votto was there to bail out Baker.

Or else this topic would be on fire right now after a loss.

redsfan_12
05-10-2010, 02:11 PM
Well Just good thing our boy votto was there to bail out Baker.

Or else this topic would be on fire right now after a loss.

Ditto

defender
05-10-2010, 03:17 PM
Well Just good thing our boy votto was there to bail out Baker.

Or else this topic would be on fire right now after a loss.

It was only the 7th inning, so even if Votto did not hit the HR, the Reds would have had 2 more chances. In the 9th inning, you clealy pinch run, and I am sure Baker would have.

bgwilly31
05-10-2010, 03:39 PM
It was only the 7th inning, so even if Votto did not hit the HR, the Reds would have had 2 more chances. In the 9th inning, you clealy pinch run, and I am sure Baker would have.

I think the 7th inning is late enough to start worrying about getting the tieing run home with no outs and the run on 2nd base.

You cant count on getting another oppertunity like that, especially the reds.

PedroBourbon
05-10-2010, 04:02 PM
You cant count on getting another oppertunity like that, especially the reds.



Exactly. It was late, Leake was coming out anyway, time to make the moves if you get the opportunity.

Kingspoint
05-10-2010, 05:51 PM
But, he's a "veteran".

Dusty needs his great "presence" and "maturity", and "knowledge of the game" out there instead of a guy who's OPS-ing 1.150 on the season (Hanigan).

Griffey012
05-10-2010, 06:59 PM
I was even more perplexed that Duhsty didn't PH for Leake who was coming out of the game anyway. Why not PH Hanigan or Nix at that time? He leaves Leake in to bunt into a fielder's choice but then doesn't pinch run until Leake gets to second. I thought both decisions were very questionable.

Leake is probably a better bunter than Nix, and he probably wanted to save Hanigan for a non-bunting situation. I suppose Dusty thinks the "need for speed" is much higher with the runner on 2nd than first.

Kingspoint
05-10-2010, 07:24 PM
Leake is probably a better bunter than Nix, and he probably wanted to save Hanigan for a non-bunting situation. I suppose Dusty thinks the "need for speed" is much higher with the runner on 2nd than first.

Combine, Leake's at-bats have been great this year (for a pitcher, or for a rookie, whichever way you look at it). He's actually doing more with his at-bats than Cabrera, Owings, Stubbs, Dickerson, Nix and Cairo (my cat could do better than Cairo http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:6swjm6vkOC1bnM:http://farm1.static.flickr.com/230/481894516_fb5e2cf178.jpg ).

nemesis
05-10-2010, 07:34 PM
Dusty has said on many occasions that the 2nd catcher is the last person he will use on his bench. Because what happens if he puts the second catcher on the game and he gets hurt? Then he has no one to go in and catch.

It has always seemed to me he manages for the what if vs the right now. Kinda like he had the bases loaded down by 2 in the 6th a couple years ago and sent up some light hitting pinch hitter. When asked why him vs I think Dunn at the time he said he needed to save his big guns for late in the game. Or sending in Mike Lincoln to face Pujols in the 7th down by a run already with the bases loaded vs Cordero who he might need in the 9th if they get the lead back. As the ball sails outta the park. I have a hard time believing the players don't see this stuff to at a much larger level. It has to frustrate them a lot worse than us.

Kingspoint
05-10-2010, 07:38 PM
Right now, I'd pinch-hit Mike Leake over Cairo.

kfm
05-10-2010, 08:29 PM
It ended up working out yesterday when Votto Our hero came through with a big bomb.

But why didnt BAKER pinch run for the terribly slow hernandez on 2nd>?

Given the situation;
7th inning late in the game.
Tieing run.
Hanigan on the bench with a hot bat anyways.

I see no reason why you wouldnt automatically pinch run.

Once again if somebody could possibly fill me in on the reasoning behind bakermetrics. I would be oblidged.

You know what would have been nice on that play, if the batter had actually bunted the ball to the third basemen like he was supposed to. If Leake had bunted the ball where he was supposed to, then even Benji Molina could have made it to third, but whey bother with a discussion about execution.

Griffey012
05-10-2010, 09:09 PM
You know what would have been nice on that play, if the batter had actually bunted the ball to the third basemen like he was supposed to. If Leake had bunted the ball where he was supposed to, then even Benji Molina could have made it to third, but whey bother with a discussion about execution.

:thumbup: This is another example of a player not executing and it getting pinned on Dusty. I don't care if Leake is a rookie, I don't care if it's Chapman at the plate and he never hit before this year. You have plenty of time out of the day you can make these guys work on bunting, bunting, and bunting until they can get a bunt down. But I bet they maybe take a few bunts the day before they start.

We are paying them millions, so make them work a bit.

bgwilly31
05-10-2010, 10:27 PM
Dusty has said on many occasions that the 2nd catcher is the last person he will use on his bench. Because what happens if he puts the second catcher on the game and he gets hurt? Then he has no one to go in and catch.



Ive heard dustys position on the 2nd catcher thing before. i think in that situation late in the game. you dont need to worry about that what so ever.


You know what would have been nice on that play, if the batter had actually bunted the ball to the third basemen like he was supposed to. If Leake had bunted the ball where he was supposed to, then even Benji Molina could have made it to third, but whey bother with a discussion about execution.

Yes probably. But then again anybody on the bench aside from Fatty hernandez makes it in there safely even with the bunt that leake put down.

So you can keep trying to justify dustys poor decisions all you want.

When you have the tying run on 2nd and its the 7th inning or later in the game. You want to avoid having your slowest runner on the team out there representing it.

kfm
05-10-2010, 11:16 PM
Ive heard dustys position on the 2nd catcher thing before. i think in that situation late in the game. you dont need to worry about that what so ever.



Yes probably. But then again anybody on the bench aside from Fatty hernandez makes it in there safely even with the bunt that leake put down.

So you can keep trying to justify dustys poor decisions all you want.

When you have the tying run on 2nd and its the 7th inning or later in the game. You want to avoid having your slowest runner on the team out there representing it.

First of all that is your opinion that anyone else would have been safe, your opinion nothing more and I happen to disagree with you. Second, I am not trying to justify his decision, I am once again trying to figure out why guys like you have zero problem with players failure to execute and why do you insist on constantly blaming the boogey man for players failures. Even the guys on TV talked about what a horrible bunt that was by Leake. It was a bad bunt plain and simple but hey why blame a player when you can just pull another page out of your predetermined script.

bounty37h
05-11-2010, 10:36 AM
[QUOTE=Griffey012;2078026]Leake is probably a better bunter than Nix, and he probably wanted to save Hanigan for a non-bunting situation. I suppose Dusty thinks the "need for speed" is much higher with the runner on 2nd than first.[/QUOTE

He needs someone to teach him how to hold his bat when bunting, he is going to end up with a broken hand holding his lead hand like that!

swaisuc
05-11-2010, 10:51 AM
First of all that is your opinion that anyone else would have been safe, your opinion nothing more and I happen to disagree with you. Second, I am not trying to justify his decision, I am once again trying to figure out why guys like you have zero problem with players failure to execute and why do you insist on constantly blaming the boogey man for players failures. Even the guys on TV talked about what a horrible bunt that was by Leake. It was a bad bunt plain and simple but hey why blame a player when you can just pull another page out of your predetermined script.

If we are going with results based analysis here, the slowest player on the team was barely out at 3rd so I presume that many if not all of the other players would have been safe with that bunt.

I don't even care if he was safe though. Tying run (late) on 2nd with no outs and your pitcher up means the speed of the runner matters. We happen to have 2 good catchers. Pinch run is the right move there whether Leake bunts into an out at 3rd or bunts for a double. The fact that Hernandez got thrown out just means that this bad decision happens to get a thread about it.

bgwilly31
05-11-2010, 11:50 AM
If we are going with results based analysis here, the slowest player on the team was barely out at 3rd so I presume that many if not all of the other players would have been safe with that bunt.

I don't even care if he was safe though. Tying run (late) on 2nd with no outs and your pitcher up means the speed of the runner matters. We happen to have 2 good catchers. Pinch run is the right move there whether Leake bunts into an out at 3rd or bunts for a double. The fact that Hernandez got thrown out just means that this bad decision happens to get a thread about it.


exactly.

defender
05-11-2010, 02:37 PM
It has always seemed to me he manages for the what if vs the right now. Kinda like he had the bases loaded down by 2 in the 6th a couple years ago and sent up some light hitting pinch hitter. When asked why him vs I think Dunn at the time he said he needed to save his big guns for late in the game. Or sending in Mike Lincoln to face Pujols in the 7th down by a run already with the bases loaded vs Cordero who he might need in the 9th if they get the lead back. As the ball sails outta the park. I have a hard time believing the players don't see this stuff to at a much larger level. It has to frustrate them a lot worse than us.

Baseball players, like anyone, want a manager that is consistent. Baker is a players manager, in that he puts the players in their rolls, and lets them win or lose the games.

kfm
05-11-2010, 11:00 PM
If we are going with results based analysis here, the slowest player on the team was barely out at 3rd so I presume that many if not all of the other players would have been safe with that bunt.

I don't even care if he was safe though. Tying run (late) on 2nd with no outs and your pitcher up means the speed of the runner matters. We happen to have 2 good catchers. Pinch run is the right move there whether Leake bunts into an out at 3rd or bunts for a double. The fact that Hernandez got thrown out just means that this bad decision happens to get a thread about it.

He was not barely out. So you like most of the Dusty Bashers do not hold players responsible for their lack of execution. That is really my only question here. I was just making the point, why no comment about the lack of execution. It seems to be a constant here, never holding playes responsible especially if there are some mental gymnastics that will allow people to blame Dusty. When Dusty is gone, and some Reds fans get to see another manager not do the things that they believe "ALL" managers would do it will be quite the awakening for some.

bgwilly31
05-12-2010, 12:19 AM
He was not barely out. .

I stopped reading after this.

You couldnt have seen the play and thought that.

bounty37h
05-12-2010, 11:38 AM
I stopped reading after this.

You couldnt have seen the play and thought that.

To be fair, the play itself wasnt close, out by mile, but the tag was closer then it looked. On the other angle, it almost appeared he made it around the tag somehow.

bgwilly31
05-12-2010, 12:13 PM
To be fair, the play itself wasnt close, out by mile, but the tag was closer then it looked. On the other angle, it almost appeared he made it around the tag somehow.

bending facts to make them fit somebodies argument better.

if its stubbs at second base in that situation hes probably standing up.

texasdave
05-12-2010, 12:31 PM
Dusty has said on many occasions that the 2nd catcher is the last person he will use on his bench. Because what happens if he puts the second catcher on the game and he gets hurt? Then he has no one to go in and catch.

Dusty is not the only manager that believes this. And to be quite frank, this is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard. If Hanigan (or Hernandez) is the bench player that will give the Reds the best chance of winning a particular game then he should be used. If it is late in the game and there are only a couple of innings to play the chances that the other catcher gets hurt to the point that they have to be removed from the game are microscopic. If, over the course of a season, the Hanigan/Hernandez take forty or so pinch-hitting opportunities away from the likes of Miguel Cairo or Paul Janisch, then that absolutely has to outweigh the next-to-nothing risk of injury. And the game would not automatically be lost if that freak injury did occur. Are we to believe that there is nobody else that could go in and catch an inning or two? I simply don't believe it. If the worst-case scenario played out then you could forfeit the game if necessary. Maybe they would be pinch-hitting in a game in which the team already trailed and would have lost anyway. In which case you would be forfeiting a game that you would have likely lost anyway. It is dumb, simply dumb, to hold back your number two catcher (if he indeed is your best bench bat at the time) for fear of an injury that has a snowball's chance in hell of occurring.

Vottomatic
05-12-2010, 01:25 PM
I really don't like Dusty, but when you've won 11 of 15, there's not really anything to nitpick about.

Funny how good a manager looks when the players do their jobs.

Just win baby!

bgwilly31
05-12-2010, 04:14 PM
Theres no doubt players have to perform in order to win games.

However dustys decisions like the one talked about in this thread can cost a good team a team that played well enough to win a game.

And that is what is most frustrating.

bgwilly31
05-12-2010, 04:15 PM
Dusty is not the only manager that believes this. And to be quite frank, this is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard. If Hanigan (or Hernandez) is the bench player that will give the Reds the best chance of winning a particular game then he should be used. If it is late in the game and there are only a couple of innings to play the chances that the other catcher gets hurt to the point that they have to be removed from the game are microscopic. If, over the course of a season, the Hanigan/Hernandez take forty or so pinch-hitting opportunities away from the likes of Miguel Cairo or Paul Janisch, then that absolutely has to outweigh the next-to-nothing risk of injury. And the game would not automatically be lost if that freak injury did occur. Are we to believe that there is nobody else that could go in and catch an inning or two? I simply don't believe it. If the worst-case scenario played out then you could forfeit the game if necessary. Maybe they would be pinch-hitting in a game in which the team already trailed and would have lost anyway. In which case you would be forfeiting a game that you would have likely lost anyway. It is dumb, simply dumb, to hold back your number two catcher (if he indeed is your best bench bat at the time) for fear of an injury that has a snowball's chance in hell of occurring.

exactly. You basically explained what i was too lazy to post a book about. Good post.

Mr Larkin
05-12-2010, 04:15 PM
The "team" is playing well. The "team" is winning. Dusty gets no credit for when the team wins, but you are ready to crucify him for not pinch running in a situation that worked out.
Many of you are just too silly - extreme tunnel vision which leads to goofy sounding links, like this one.
Good job - Reds and manager Dusty Baker - you are playing up to expectations.

bounty37h
05-12-2010, 04:34 PM
bending facts to make them fit somebodies argument better.

if its stubbs at second base in that situation hes probably standing up.

Huh? I was simply stating my thought on it, sorry it didn't fit for you, where did I bedn facts at all? When I watched it live, I knew he was nailed long before he got there-obvious. When I saw a replay from the other side, it actually looked closer, no, he didn't get in, but somehow the tag was actually really close.

kfm
05-13-2010, 08:27 PM
I stopped reading after this.

You couldnt have seen the play and thought that.

I saw it and like a poster pointed out the ball got there way before he did. I am assuming you kept reading, but I understand that this response was easier one for you to defend.

kfm
05-13-2010, 08:32 PM
The "team" is playing well. The "team" is winning. Dusty gets no credit for when the team wins, but you are ready to crucify him for not pinch running in a situation that worked out.
Many of you are just too silly - extreme tunnel vision which leads to goofy sounding links, like this one.
Good job - Reds and manager Dusty Baker - you are playing up to expectations.

Exactly. Beleive me some of these guys are torn on the Reds success. They want the team to win, but they know if they keep winning than Dusty will be back. It is almost like Sophies choice for them. Lance McCalister who has been a long time Dusty hater says that the haters are so ridiculous that they have turned him into a Dusty supporter. Dusty does some things that are foolish, but is he really to blame for every Reds loss and now in this thread atacked when they win, I guess they are not losing enough right now to satisfy the haters. Lance has a new slogan "in Dusty we Trusty." THat has got to drive the hater crazy. I wouldn't go that far, but I still think it is pretty funny.

Griffey012
05-13-2010, 10:46 PM
Exactly. Beleive me some of these guys are torn on the Reds success. They want the team to win, but they know if they keep winning than Dusty will be back. It is almost like Sophies choice for them. Lance McCalister who has been a long time Dusty hater says that the haters are so ridiculous that they have turned him into a Dusty supporter. Dusty does some things that are foolish, but is he really to blame for every Reds loss and now in this thread atacked when they win, I guess they are not losing enough right now to satisfy the haters. Lance has a new slogan "in Dusty we Trusty." THat has got to drive the hater crazy. I wouldn't go that far, but I still think it is pretty funny.

That's pretty much where I find myself. It is hard for me to criticize Dusty even when he should be criticized, because he can do no right whatsoever. I find myself defending him constantly when things arise in which he really has no control over, like the early bullpen struggles. Nobody calls him a genius for the recent bullpen success, but it was his fault when they sucked.

1990REDS
05-13-2010, 10:52 PM
Ill put up with dusty for a winning team any day of the week!

bgwilly31
05-14-2010, 12:20 PM
The "team" is playing well. The "team" is winning. Dusty gets no credit for when the team wins, but you are ready to crucify him for not pinch running in a situation that worked out.
Many of you are just too silly - extreme tunnel vision which leads to goofy sounding links, like this one.
Good job - Reds and manager Dusty Baker - you are playing up to expectations.

Your posting about a topic that was posted when we wont the first game of this current streak. Its not like this was posted yesterday.

However whether we won the game or not it doesnt change the opinions of many here that the decision wasnt the best by dusty for the situation.

bgwilly31
05-14-2010, 12:43 PM
I saw it and like a poster pointed out the ball got there way before he did. I am assuming you kept reading, but I understand that this response was easier one for you to defend.


You and another poster.

Not plural. Its not like your the majority here. 15 other people in this thread agree anybody but hernandez out there on 2nd makes it safely in there at 3rd.

Of course i will put up with dusty for a winning reds team.

But just because the reds win it doesnt change dustys dumb decisions to good decisions.

Im far and away not the biggest dusty hater around.

I dont care what coach is back there if he makes that kind of decision in that situation im not going to be happy about it.