ervinsm84 (04-07-2013)
Dusty doesn't usually announce pitcher unavailability 24 hours in advance. I am pretty confident it was an assumption on the part of the announcer.
If the game is real close tomorrow, I'd expect Chapman to work. Brox not so much, he seems to need more rest.
I posted surprise on the game thread that Brox pitched today, I thought Lecure would pitch the 8th. Dusty decided to use his top guys, I don't mind it.
The Nats manhandled the Reds last year, I'm sure Dusty really wanted this series and wasn't playing around at the end of this game. There's an off day Thursday, he'll get the bullpen straightened out.
If Chapman and Broxton are out, I'm okay with LeCure-Marshall being our 8th-9th guys tomorrow. You could do a lot worse than that with some rosters.
Award Winning Baseball Player
Redszone popular theme of 2013: it's supposedly dumb to use your top relievers three runs ahead. It came up in the Chapman debate about 100 times.
The answer, as usual, is that it depends.
Today's game was against a top notch opponent which is perfectly capable of scoring three runs late. Reds had trouble last year with the Nats.
If Dusty wanted to use Marshall, Brox, and Chapman to protect a three run lead to win the series against this opponent, it's fine with me.
If he did this to pin down a win against the Astros in a meaningless game in late September, I'd have a different view.
Caveman Techie (04-08-2013),edabbs44 (04-07-2013),membengal (04-08-2013),PuffyPig (04-07-2013),Tommyjohn25 (04-08-2013)
Winning is not a bad thing, and giving yourself a better chance to beat a tough opponent is equally good.
Let's say that Baker uses Lecure to save the game, and the Nats get 2 guys on base in the 9th. Everyone would be screaming for Chapman, which means he would have had to be warming up anyway if there was some chance he had to use him.
Managers are risk adverse. And I understand it.
If Dusty lets LeCure or Brox go 2 innings and they cough up the league, the fallout on Dusty is much worse than if he goes by the book and the lead is lost.
If you are going to be unconventional, most managers need to be darn sure (in their heads) it will work. I wish it wasn't that way, and I wish somehow Brox or Chapman were saved today, but I totally get why it went down.
Who said winning was bad? Also the issue isn't if bringing in brox and Chapman increases WP. The issue is comparing imo, the minute WP edge gained by using both in comparison to other alternatives because the given WP state of that game was already very HighWinning isn't a bad thing, and giving yourself a better chance to beat a tough opponent is equally good.
Let's say that Baker uses Lecure to save the game, and the Nats get 2 guys on base in the 9th. Everyone would be screaming for Chapman, which means he would have had to be warming up anyway if there was some chance he had to use him.
Correct Process > Short Term Results OrientedI
More importantly just because some people would incorrectly rip Dusty for a correct decision that didn't work in that one specific example doesn't have any bearing on the validity of the decision.
Doug is obv right on this. Lucky for us Reds fans it doesnt matter much in the grand scheme of things, and it's also not like other teams are close to managing optimally froma strategy standpoint so at least we are not being exploited
Newsflash!
Joey Votto does not care about RBI.
NEITHER SHOULD ANY OF US
Dusty trying to get Chapman his saves. Bugs the crap out of me that a reliever here or there can't go more than 1 lousy inning, especially when they took'em done 3 in a row.
Broxton should have gone 2 innings and finished the darn thing, to save Chapman for the Cards.
As they used to say, you don't get fired for buying IBM.
You don't get fired for making a safe decision. It may not be bold, it may be short-sighted, but it is safe.
She used to wake me up with coffee ever morning
"Likely"?
You don't know that. That statement assumes alot. And you know what happens when you assume.
Bring a guy in the 8th and see if he can go 2 innings and finish it up. If he gets in trouble THEN bring in Chapman. Absolutely no reason Dusty can't do that.
Also, I was hoping that having both Chapman and Broxton might save us from the dreaded "shoulder fatigue" Chapman seems to experience every season. There is no reason Chapman can't get the bulk of the save opportunities and Broxton can't get a few. Great opportunity to not overuse these guys and Dusty already is not taking advantage of it.
That's definitely the rationale. Doesn't make it correct decision making though. Baseball is definitely poor in these spots but at least they make on average better decisions than what we see in the NFLAs they used to say, you don't get fired for buying IBM.
You don't get fired for making a safe decision. It may not be bold, it may be short-sighted, but it is safe.
Newsflash!
Joey Votto does not care about RBI.
NEITHER SHOULD ANY OF US
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
traderumor (04-08-2013)
Control what you can control... Obviously managers in MLB need to "plan ahead" more so than coaches in other sports due to the 162 game season, but in general, I like the idea of controlling the moment the best you can and then seeing what the next moment has to offer.
It's why I hate constructing a lineup with the idea of alternating sides of the plate so that teams can't bring in guys situationally late in games.
You don't know what is going to happen in the 7th and 8th inning; you DO know what is going to happen to start the game. Just put your best lineup out there and don't over think future possibilities.
Don't sit Chapman when he can help you win today just so that MAYBE he can help you tomorrow.
Baker and Price have more than earned my trust with how they handle the roster and pitching staff.
Baseball is like church. Many attend, few understand
cumberlandreds (04-08-2013),dubc47834 (04-08-2013),edabbs44 (04-08-2013),REDREAD (04-08-2013),Tommyjohn25 (04-08-2013)
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |