Where does starting Leake in Game 4 rank on the stupidity chart?

[reds44]

It used to be easier to use 3 man rotation's when there were more off days in the LDS.

[mdccclxix]

SF's bats were going to wake up at some point. The Reds have had Giants hitters heads in the toilet all series until today. Reds turn to regain the upper hand tomorrow.

[OldRightHander]

Score more than 1 run in game 3 and we're not even having this conversation. Possibly we're talking about whether or not Cueto would be able to make it back to pitch in the NLCS. Then today they left 10 runners on base. I know Leake was off, but you have to wonder how things might have turned out if a few of those stranded runners had made it home. Either way, if you had asked me during the first inning of game 1 if I would take my chances with a rested Latos at home for game 5, I think I would have taken that. I'm still cautiously optimistic about tomorrow and I think this team is just resilient enough to possibly turn some heads in the NLCS as well. Either way, it sure beats being a Cubs or Astros fan.

[Blitz Dorsey]

Originally Posted by OldRightHander

Score more than 1 run in game 3 and we're not even having this conversation. Possibly we're talking about whether or not Cueto would be able to make it back to pitch in the NLCS. Then today they left 10 runners on base. I know Leake was off, but you have to wonder how things might have turned out if a few of those stranded runners had made it home. Either way, if you had asked me during the first inning of game 1 if I would take my chances with a rested Latos at home for game 5, I think I would have taken that. I'm still cautiously optimistic about tomorrow and I think this team is just resilient enough to possibly turn some heads in the NLCS as well. Either way, it sure beats being a Cubs or Astros fan.

Re: Stranded runners. That's the No. 1 reason why our beloved WAR is a flawed stat. How many managers, fans, reporters, etc. always say "They just didn't hit with men in scoring position"? Quite a bit. To ignore the ability to hit well with runners on base is foolish. The pitcher is trying harder to make pitches, the batter is pressing because he knows it's a big situation ... yet WAR completely ignores this.

RBIs are important. And I consider myself more of a sabermatrician than I do "old-school" thinker. But to completely discredit RBIs is foolish.

[OldRightHander]

I'm somewhere in the middle. I don't frankly understand a lot of the new stats, but I understand that there is a level of understanding about the game that those metrics can provide. I'll just leave it up to those who understand them better and can expound on them to hash it out and I can come in here and read.

With that said, there are times I can watch a game and see that there is something wrong with the offense when you leave that many runners on. Even if you say that there's no difference over a large sample between hitting with runners in scoring position or not, a good offense is going to leave fewer of those guys on base over the long haul simply by virtue of being better hitters in all situations. But I also can't ignore the fact that there are some micro situations where the hits just don't seem to be there when they could do some damage, and that's pretty frustrating as a fan when a game or a series can hinge on a couple of those situations.

[edabbs44]

It doesn't rank very high, I don't think.

[Kc61]

Leake today was probably a necessary decision. Now Latos is rested, Arroyo is semi-rested, the good relievers are all rested. The pitching side is in good shape for this game.

It's up to the offense. I posted, as did others, in mid-April a concern about the offense. We all know the offense has been middling this year, good with power, not good with OBP and BA, and that ain't changing overnight.

So the Reds need to find a way to score four or five runs tomorrow. If they don't, then the problem is obvious and should be fixed for next year. If they do, we likely go to the NLCS.

Go Reds.

[Vottomatic]

At what point does Jacoby get replaced as hitting instructor?

[AtomicDumpling]

I don't think the Reds had much choice but to use Mike Leake in Game 4. The only (possibly) better option was to use a bullpen day. If they had put Cingrani on the roster instead of dead meat Cairo they could have had Cingrani make the start without having to remove Cueto from the roster and make him ineligible for the next series.

Where does using Miguel Cairo as your first pinch hitter in a critical RBI situation in a tight game rank on the stupidity scale?

[GAC]

5 Reasons Mat Latos Will Pitch a Gem in Must-Win Game 5

Watch this slide show.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...ust-win-game-5

He reminds me a lot of a guy named Rob Dibble. Many Reds fans know him as the hot-headed, flame-throwing member of "The Nasty Boys." He thrived on the pressure, and he mowed down opponents—especially those he didn't like.

Well folks, Latos really doesn't like the Giants. No, really. He doesn't. He once signed a baseball "I hate SF!"

To sum things up, all and all it would be a wise bet to put your money on Mat Latos to come up big once again. Expect a dominant, gem of a performance.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Totally and completely disagree with you Blitz. Sorry. Leake was the right call. Not the right outcome, but the right call. Looking at the box score and highlights I'm surprised he didn't get pulled a bit earlier, but that's the only problem I have with Leake. (using Arredondo however....)

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

The point is, the Reds should have gone all-out to win Game 4 IMO. It's like they wanted to hold something back "just in case." Not a good strategy in the playoffs.

If that's the way you feel then you must really think the Giants were stupid for not throwing Cain yesterday because it was definitely must win for them. Instead they threw a 5 inning pitcher

[CySeymour]

Starting Leake was the right move, and really the only move. The Reds mistake was letting him try to go through the order a 3rd time. Even if they sent him out there to try, LeCure should have been warming up to start the inning and Leake pulled a lot sooner. But, it wasn't like the offense was helping out much.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

* He was completely left off the NLDS roster -- it's evident how the team felt abot him.

* Latos only pitched four innings on Saturday. He EASILY could have pitched on 3 days rest. It's not like he had a 100+ pitch outing last time out. This would not have been the typical "3 days rest."

* Very often in playoffs, teams go with a 3-man rotation anyway.

* Playing to set yourself up well for Game 5 or setting yourself up for the NLCS is a great way to lose Game 4. You need to go for the kill when you can.

Latos was the obvious call. Ridiculous that Leake was given the start. Way to overthink this one!

1. He was left off the roster becuase it was felt we only needed 4 starters, and better to keep releivers who were used to relieving.

2. Pitching on 3 days rest is not just about how many pitches you threw the last game. It's about conditioning your arm and routine. Obviusly the Reds and Latos felt it made a difference.

3. When was the last time any team went with a 3 man rotation, pitching every starter on 3 days rest?

4. Unless the Reds felt comfortable pitching Arroyo on 3 days rest, what difference did it make? You would still be short for game 5. Better to have Latos on normal rest and go with Leake in game 4. The Reds looked at this as what was going to make them stronger for the 2 games combined. Unless they wanted Arroyo on 3 days rest, it would have been foolish to go with Latos in game 4.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

Re: Stranded runners. That's the No. 1 reason why our beloved WAR is a flawed stat. How many managers, fans, reporters, etc. always say "They just didn't hit with men in scoring position"? Quite a bit. To ignore the ability to hit well with runners on base is foolish. The pitcher is trying harder to make pitches, the batter is pressing because he knows it's a big situation ... yet WAR completely ignores this.

RBIs are important. And I consider myself more of a sabermatrician than I do "old-school" thinker. But to completely discredit RBIs is foolish.

I beleive it's somewhat discredited because in large sample sizes RBI's tend to correlate to RBI opportunities rather than "clutch hitting".

FWIW, the Giants did not get their first hit with runners in scoring position until the 5th inning last night, when the scored their 5th run of the game, and 9th of the series.