Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
So its looking more and more like the Reds will be forced to throw Leake today...their #5 SP who, with the exception of one outing this year, has thrown mostly batting practice against the Giants.
Realizing that hindsight is 20/20...after Cueto's early departure in Game 1, should Dusty have gone ahead and just used LeCure/Simon/Hoover to get thru, no matter the results? That way they could have taken their chances with Arroyo in game 2 and Latos in game 3 as planned....leaving them with Bailey in game 4 and back to a rested Arroyo in game 5 if necessary.
Perception was that the Reds would be set up well if they could take at least 1 in SF...by burning Latos early sure they ended up taking 1 and 2, but now are left with question marks and guys on short rest to capture that elusive third win.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
No. It was handled perfectly if you ask me.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
No.
They were handed a 1-hitter last night by Homer Bailey on a silver platter and they didn't take advantage. This series should be over.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
Dusty did fine. Taking that first game on the road was crucial. Note that Latos didn't enter the game until they were up in the score.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
Nope. Took some bad luck and a complete lack of offense in innings 2-10 to lose last night. Any offense whatsover and dominant Homer would be the toast of the town this morning.
Not walking Arias is the one that smarts. Would have taken out Romo, used up the last Giants position playr, setup a force at any base and forced the Giants to use Lincecum last night (making him unavailable for Game 4).
Baker played Saturday night perfectly.
Ironic that a team that made 161 starts is left scrambling for a 5th starter in the 4th game of a series. That's why baseball is so maddening but incredible to watch the ebbs and flows of a playoff series.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
In hindsight, knowing we took Game 2, I think the instinct is to say yes. However, most of us were assuming a loss in Game 2 at the time.
In the playoffs, you don't punt. Wins are simply too valuable. Too much can happen in the future. We're still going to get a regular start out of Latos, if needed. The net impact of the decision was trading a 2nd Arroyo start for a Leake start, which isn't that big of a step down.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
No way you don't ever give away trying to win a game.
They lost a game they could have won last night. It just bad luck what happened with Cueto but you deal with it.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
Why in God's Holy Name would you ever punt a Playoff game?????
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
No you never punt a playoff game. Never. Ever.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
If you punt game 1 and end up losing game 2 then you look like a chump. We still got 2 chances, if the Reds hit like they are capable then we should at least win one of those, if not we lose. This series is going to be decided by the bats not the arms.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LawFive
So its looking more and more like the Reds will be forced to throw Leake today...their #5 SP who, with the exception of one outing this year, has thrown mostly batting practice against the Giants.
Realizing that hindsight is 20/20...after Cueto's early departure in Game 1, should Dusty have gone ahead and just used LeCure/Simon/Hoover to get thru, no matter the results? That way they could have taken their chances with Arroyo in game 2 and Latos in game 3 as planned....leaving them with Bailey in game 4 and back to a rested Arroyo in game 5 if necessary.
Perception was that the Reds would be set up well if they could take at least 1 in SF...by burning Latos early sure they ended up taking 1 and 2, but now are left with question marks and guys on short rest to capture that elusive third win.
Yeah. Punt one of the games we won. :confused:
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cumberlandreds
No you never punt a playoff game. Never. Ever.
This.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
Like I said, the question only arises in hindsight. Time yields clarity of vision. And at the time, I was on board with the move as well...but now it appears the Reds may have used their best sprinters at the beginning of the relay, and have only a JV player left to finish. True there is a game 5 and Latos will be throwing, but now an entire summer of fun and excellence is likely going to come down to a one game coin flip.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LawFive
So its looking more and more like the Reds will be forced to throw Leake today...their #5 SP who, with the exception of one outing this year, has thrown mostly batting practice against the Giants.
Realizing that hindsight is 20/20...after Cueto's early departure in Game 1, should Dusty have gone ahead and just used LeCure/Simon/Hoover to get thru, no matter the results? That way they could have taken their chances with Arroyo in game 2 and Latos in game 3 as planned....leaving them with Bailey in game 4 and back to a rested Arroyo in game 5 if necessary.
Perception was that the Reds would be set up well if they could take at least 1 in SF...by burning Latos early sure they ended up taking 1 and 2, but now are left with question marks and guys on short rest to capture that elusive third win.
I would never punt a game. LeCure, Simon and Hoover are all good pitchers though, so using them in game 1 could very well have resulted in a win. I wouldn't call that a punting strategy.
Re: Should Dusty have punted Game 1?
Second-guessing at its best.