User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.6434 seconds
62 querie(s) executed
|
| |||||||||
|
You are here > Home > Gonfalon Cubs > Discussion
| |||||||||
Gonfalon Cubs — Cubs Baseball for Thinking Fans Wednesday, September 03, 2008Assigning BlameThere was a lot of talk in yesterday’s game chatter about how bad of a game Lou had. I disagree with that; sure I can quibble with a move here or there, but overall I think he put the team in the best position to win that game. I don’t want to come across as a Lou apologist, but ever since the Dusty experience I’ve found myself questioning my second guessing of managerial decisions. Some of the specific moves are questionable. For instance, I believe-and I’m guessing almost everyone here agrees with me-Bob Howry shouldn’t be pitching unless the game is completely decided. For whatever reason, Howry’s been given about 10 million chances to work out his problems, but guys like Wuertz were shipped out at the first sign of trouble. I understand the tendency of managers to give more leeway to veteran guys who have “been there before.” I hope that last night was the last straw for Howry; there’s no excuse for him to face another significant batter in a Cubs uniform. But last night, Lou had to make a quick decision when Zambrano was pulled and Howry just happened to be that guy. On some level, I understand the thinking; it was only the 6th inning and there was lots of time for both teams to score. And as bad as Howry has been this season, he’d only given up 1 run in his previous 6 appearances (7 innings). I know that’s cherry picking, but that’s probably what Lou was thinking. Last night was still Howry’s worst appearance of the season, and the Cubs were still able to come back and tie the game. Pinch hitting Casey McGehee in the bottom of the 9th is pretty ridiculous, I’ll admit. I think Hoffpauir is a better PH option than him, even against a LHP. Having DeRosa sacrifice bunt backfired, but it’s a completely defensible decision in that situation. I wonder if McGehee is the PH if the sac bunt worked. Hoffpauir was also probably a better PH option that Blanco in the 10th, actually Fontenot should have just hit for himself against Wright. I don’t think Cedeno is a PH option at all at this point (and honestly, Blanco probably shouldn’t either); whatever gains he appeared to have made earlier in the season are gone (outside of April, he’s hitting .234/.285/.281). Anyway, the real reason the Cubs lost last night, and the previous 3 nights, was because of their failure to hit with runners on. In the previous 4 games, which they’ve lost by a total of 10 runs, they’ve left 34 runners on base. In every game, the Cubs had either the tying or winning runs on base as late as the 8th inning. Last night was particularly painful, since the game could have been won in any of the 8th, 9th, or 10th innings. Lee and Soriano both failed with the go-ahead run in scoring position and less than 2 outs. There’s nothing Lou could have done differently that would have gotten those runs home. The team was in position to win last night multiple times and the big money players failed to deliver. It happens. There’s still no reason to worry; the Cubs have better than a 99% chance of making the playoffs and a bump in the road like this doesn’t take away from the great year they’ve had. The Cubs are still the team to beat in the NL and will still end up with home field advantage in the playoffs. Sometimes the big picture stuff just needs repeating so that it’s not lost in small picture venting. Oh, and there’s nothing Lou could have done about Geoff F’in Blum. Moses Taylor: armed with a will, the past, a brick
Posted: September 03, 2008 at 10:11 AM | 49 comment(s)
Related News: |
My BookmarksYou must be logged in to view your Bookmarks. Hot Topics |
||||||||
|
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2008 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
| Page rendered in 0.6434 seconds | |||||||
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Then I thought, what if rather than W, W, L, L, L, L, the last six games had gone W, L, L, W, L, L, or L, W, W, L, L, L, how would I feel? Probably a lot better. And just now I looked at the standings and see the Cubs are still the best team in the Majors, and still have a 4 1/2 game lead on the Brew Crew. So they split a series with a good Phillies team, and lost a road series to the surging Astros. Yeah, it looks ugly with the losses all coming in a row like that, but they were bound to scuffle a bit this month. I think they'll get back on the horse and turn it around pretty soon.
Of course, I thought Wood was going to dominate Game 7, so what do I know...
Agreed. 20 for the division and 15 for the WC with 24 left to play. My guess is that they run off 5 of 7 starting tonight and make this little hiccup a distant memory.
You can all blame me, actually--for last night and for the entire 4-game skid. I forgot to turn the Cubs calendar in my office ahead to September before I left work Friday.
You ###### ###### - I #### ######### and ##### if ########### ###### the ##### ######## when they ##### and ######. The ####### ##### ############# if I ###### #### the Cubs. You should be ########## ###### ###### ######### or at least apologize. ####.
So anyway, last night sucked. Lou annoyed me more than I can ever remember him annoying me in one game and I was pretty pissed when the game ended. But in the long run, it's much ado about nothing. I love this team, but it's time for them to resume putting the P ttmf' M!
(Side note: It's interesting to watch the game while being away from the Chatter and know exactly what everyone is thinking/saying during the game...and when the game is over, take a look at it, and be exactly right. Howry, Lee, the bunts, the pinch hitters, as it all unfolded I knew precisely what the Cubs Chatterers would be saying about it...)
Aren't there run expectancy tables out there? I seem to recall that you're more likely to score 1 run with a runner on 2nd and 1 out than with a runner on 1st with no outs. I can't seem to find any right now. I do think it's a case of aesthetic preference, but when all they need is 1 run to win I'm fine with it. I'd have been more pissed if DeRosa grounded into a DP while swinging away.
We knew Howry coming into the game was a bad move (as it has been most of the year), but with Z leaving quickly with an injury, Lou had to think fast. BPJ or Marshall would have been the obvious choices, but they weren't available. Guzman wasn't getting the call into a tie game in his first appearance this year, he doesn't like Wuertz, and Lieber v. Howry's probably a toss-up.
Lee failing in two big spots was the biggest disappointment of the night, I think.
It sucked, but I'm not that discouraged. Tonight'll be better.
It better be, I'm going tonight.
for the astros that is
but honestly, who would YOU have put in if all yall were lou? and he pulled him pretty fast, too.
why doesn't lou like wuertz?
- but actually all yall can blame DLee a lot more. because GIDP with bases loaded 1 out against brocail who couldn't find the effing plate is a LOT worse than anything lou did/didn't do
and who knows about tonight? the psychobilly cadilly-ack from houston is running great on all 9 cylinders
Hope so; surely you have better luck than I do. I'm 1-3 this season (with the 1 win being a nail biter in LA where Wood tried to cough it up).
Sorry, man. Didn't occur to me till I got to the office this morning and I saw the calendar stuck on August.
Uh, anybody other than Howry? Apart from Howry, the Cubs have a really good bullpen, plus Lou had the benefit of the expanded roster. (And by "benefit of the expanded roster," I don't mean "ability to send Casey McGehee to the plate with the winning run on base when a half-dozen better options are available.)
And how much slower could he have pulled him? He gave up 3 rockets.
Aren't there run expectancy tables out there? I seem to recall that you're more likely to score 1 run with a runner on 2nd and 1 out than with a runner on 1st with no outs.
You are right. The odds of scoring one run increase slightly, while the odds of scoring multiple runs decreases. The Cubs only needed one run, so maybe the odds were with them. Of course, that's assuming a 100% sac bunt success rate.....
DeRosa has been so clutch all year long. I hated seeing the bat taken out of his hands, and I hate giving outs away, especially when they were bringing in a cAAAsey friggin Mcgehee up next (he was already on deck before the bunt failed, if that answers your initial question).
So what's the deal with Z, anyway?
Or, what VoodooR said in 14.
Oh, and not that it really affected the outcome, but it was annoying as hell to see Wesley friggin' Wright getting the multiple vintage Tom Glavine strike calls on pitches that weren't even over the plate when they were finished curving toward it and in the catcher's glove.
Totally. And what about that 3-2 pitch from Wood to Berkman that was right over the plate, belt high and the ump called it a ball four??? Two pitches later, Blum homered.
Interesting. Glad to see the data jibes with my aesthetic preference...
newhan just hit a grounder single and so did quintero. but walking reggie abercrombie???!!! and bourn hit a single up the middle
so i wouldn't say he got slammed. and he got pulled immediately after that.
AND the pitchers shut berkman/wigginton DOWN all freaking night
- but i was REAL surprised when i saw a really good hitter like derosa bunting.
but sorry, ball 4 to berkman WAS ball 4. or i should say that the ump called pitches that high a ball all night
and yes, it is unusual to see the astros getting the borderline calls
I must have wandered into some alternate universe.
(And if folks cannot stand this level of minor tweaking then nobody is any type of fun anymore)
In the bottom of the 9th of a tie game, the goal is to score exactly one run.
In other words, the issue isn't the probability of scoring 1 run (exactly 1, anyway, which is what would be in the table). The issue is the probability of scoring 0 runs.
There has to be a different number when we're talking about a walk off situation.
I was the one arguing with you, and you're intentionally missing the point. Both in that thread, and in this one.
Sigh. Still won't relax.
Okey dokey.
Well, there is no act.
The original comment was innocuous on my part. I specifically wrote "few" meaning not many or of small quantity. It was nothing.
And you jumped on me with both feet like I was an addled schoolchild or worse yet some dimwitted Brewer fan looking to start some silly namecalling episode.
If it's at the point of the season where folks can "taste it" and cannot separate the wheat (good posters) from the chaff (you know who among Brewer fans) then I will work to just stay in the background.
But as a reminder, I was a Cubs fan before most of the folks here PARENTS were born. In my heart of hearts I still root for the Cubs.
Right, but the way you'd score exactly one run in a generic inning (which would appear in a run expectancy table) and the way you'd do it in the bottom of the ninth are not the same. In the walkoff situation, all innings in which you would score one run or more are equivalent - but you still have to add all of them up to find the chances of scoring a run in that situation.
What I meant by the zero runs statement... that's not really the issue either; of course the issue is the probability of scoring any runs, which is 1-(probability of scoring 0 runs). In other words, if the run expectancy table looks like this:
First base/0 out: 40% 0 runs, 30% 1 run, 30% multiple runs
Second base/1 out: 45% 0 runs, 35% 1 run, 20% multiple runs
then the sac bunt is still a bad idea, because you still win the game if you score multiple runs.
It's not really fair to single out NTN like that, is it HW?
Wow. Quite a revelation. I was not aware of that. Here's hoping that you are further torn in your "heart of hearts" come NLCS time...
Well, there is no act.
The original comment was innocuous on my part. I specifically wrote "few" meaning not many or of small quantity. It was nothing.
And you jumped on me with both feet like I was an addled schoolchild or worse yet some dimwitted Brewer fan looking to start some silly namecalling episode.
I can settle this easily. A pox on all your houses. You're all worthless and weak!! Now drop and give me 20!!
Oh, and for the record, Moses doesn't need me to stick up for him, but I don't think this is an entirely fair representation of what occurred, assuming that I'm looking in the right place.
Here's what Moses said:
"You think Cubs fans are fretting, Harvey? Ha. Sounds like your confidence is this team has grown and is almost as big as CC's waistline."
Seems innocuous enough to me, but then you DID respond with a dig at his reading comprehension. Here's his followup:
"Hey, I don't know a single Cubs fan that's been half as worried about 2 (2!) losses as you were about the Brewers the majority of the season. That's all I'm getting at...
But, man, it's a great day when 2 straight home losses can cause some concern."
I don't see either being jumpy or insulting, but maybe that's just me.
Quiet, calendar non-flipper.
Sure, in that particular situation. Not in the generic inning that would be reflected in a run expectancy table.
The run expectancy figures in #30 were hypothetical, for illustration only. The point is that, when using a generic run expectancy chart in a walkoff situation, the probability that matters is the chance of scoring the needed number of runs (in this case, 1) or more.
The win expetancy chart is here:
http://www.tangotiger.net/welist.html
so tell me are you rooting for an astros sweep tonight????
---
SSR, if that's true, then yeah, that'll be a problem. Technically SYTH was the first righty yesterday. But he's not a big leaguer, and I trust Lou enough to not jump to the conclusion the he trusts McGehee. And just cause Len and Bob mentioned he had some big hits in ST doesn't mean that's why Lou made that decision.
But the bigger point is that it doesn't matter. It's 1 game, it just feels worse because of the losing streak. And the Cubs still had plenty of other chances to win.
I really wish you guys wouldn't talk about me behind my back.
As pointed out, what you really want is 1-p(0 runs) not p(exactly 1 run).
Think of it this way. Bottom 9, tie game. First guy walks, next guy triples. OK, the game is over and you've scored exactly one run but your "run expectancy" of this inning is now nearly 2 (1 in, runner on 3rd no outs). In the average run expectancy table, most of those scenarios are contained in the >1 run cells.
But really, probably easiest to think of it from the p(0 runs) perspective. Runner on 1st, 0 outs is less likely to lead to 0 runs than runner on 2nd, 1 out ... therefore you are more likely to score in the first scenario.
All that said, run expectancy tables kinda suck for this purpose. The outcomes are not limited to man on first no outs and man on 2nd 1 out. The quality of the batter up now and who's coming up next. The speed of the runner and batter. The defensive quality of the guys at 1B, 3B, P, C, 2B. Where defenders are positioned. If the Brewers were thinking like you guys were -- no way he's having DeRosa bunt here with that weak kid on-deck -- then the surprise factor was in the Cubs' favor and the chance a bunt ends up with 2 men on with no out increases.
Now, bringing in a leftie to face Ramirez, DeRosa and probably Soto -- that's a questionable managerial decision (not knowing who he had left in the pen).
Len mentioned the Astros had 5 righties in their pen left. Outside of Valverde, I'm not sure how good any of them are.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main