The move with Molina attempting a squeeze bunt with two strikes wasn't half dumb. The situation was down by a run, one out and Pena on 1st and Rodriguez on 3rd. Maddon decided Molina potentially striking out on a two strike bunt attempt was preferable to potentially grounding into an inning-ending DP.

As far as using 5 relievers, so what? Howell threw five pitches and Badenhop one, and only Peralta went over 20. It's the first game of the season. Most of them should be able to come in today if needed, and it's not like David Price isn't capable of going at least six innings.

I thought yahoo was having early-season hiccups or something when I saw the description of that striking out bunting foul play.

Maddon decided Molina potentially striking out on a two strike bunt attempt was preferable to potentially grounding into an inning-ending DP.

I've seen exact situations like that where Boston (Interleague, natch) wouldn't let a PITCHER bunt with 0 outs on a 0-0 count, and 1 out on a 0-0 count. This was in a close game also.

edit: Absolutely no mention of Girardi walking Rodriguez to get to Pena in the first.

The Rays actually tried the bunt attempt with 2 strikes twice, as Molina missed a sign and swung away (as Rodriguez was charging down the line) before he bunted foul. For a batter with Molina's "skills" at the plate, I liked the call -- the chance of a DP was so high there, and if he could've gotten even a halfway decent bunt down, it meant the tying run. And even after the strikeout, the Rays had lefty Matt Joyce up who should've had a decent shot at a hit.

I liked the call -- the chance of a DP was so high there

Are you saying the chances of a DP, with Molina, are that much greater with two strikes, then with 0 or 1 strike? Molina already has a big strike zone doesn't he?

...Gawd and that stance.

Regarding the last two plays of the game (and the two walks leading up to it)...obviously your chances are not great with bases loaded no out there....and i think the 5 man infield was the way to go (might be the slowpitch softball player in me)....but was bringing in nunez the right way to go?

Swisher can handle first - and as close in as you have to play, there's not all that much difference between 1st and 2B - so Tex should have been able to handle that - and cano is stronger all around defensively than nunez - so him in the middle of the diamond would have only been an upgrade.

If the move as Girardi lays it out - and you get 2 outs - now you have the choice of either burning another bench player in Jones to insert into right - or using nunez out there (where he has played, but not a lot, and not particularly well), have nunez (or Jones) hitting 6th in the lineup if the game goes to extra innings - and are now down to 2 bench players (both fairly limited - stewart only getting used if martin is hurt - jones probably only off the bench to hit for gardner or ibanez against a lefty.)

The game was basically over once zobrist hit his triple...but just something I was thinking as I was watching it.

Edit:***forgot about chavez on the bench too...so the bench flexibility is still there a little more than I give them credit for...but again, only people in the lineup he might hit for at that point are nunez or martin.

Are you saying the chances of a DP, with Molina, are that much greater with two strikes, then with 0 or 1 strike?

Not the count, specifically -- just the whole AB. I would've called for the bunt on all 3 strikes, personally.

All of Madden's choices were a lot more defensible than Girardi's decision to walk the bases loaded in the first inning, when Sabathia was clearly having trouble with his control. That was the decision that put the Yanks deep in a hole and likely cost them the game in the end.

But even with that, one little hit with the bases loaded might have helped. Those 12 stranded runners were the real culprit in the loss.

and thats another thing - I know that service time and options come into play...but if there was ever a day to carry 10 or even 9 pitchers and an expanded bench, isn't it opening day? at the earliest the 5th starter won't be needed for a week - everyone is fresh in the bullpen so the long/mopup guys aren't exactly essential - and in an emergency, you could really use the 3/4 starters if needed, and have plenty of time to adjust...again, just one game...but I'd have to think that you get more use out of the 24th and 25th spots on the roster on days like this (and to a lesser extent days around off days and the all start break) with an extra catcher, bat off of the bench, or set of wheels for late in the game...than with david phelps who will only pitch if the score is 10-1.

All of Madden's choices were a lot more defensible than Girardi's decision to walk the bases loaded in the first inning, when Sabathia was clearly having trouble with his control. That was the decision that put the Yanks deep in a hole and likely cost them the game in the end.

Girardi can't help putting runners on base. It was dumb in the first inning; it was dumb in the ninth inning.

But even with that, one little hit with the bases loaded might have helped. Those 12 stranded runners were the real culprit in the loss.

I disagree with this type of analysis; that they didn't hit with men on base in no way excuses Girardi's horrible moves.

I think the 5 man infield is a good play for the Yankees considering that Gardner and Granderson can probably cover as much ground as an entire three man mid-00s Bernie Williams/Gary Sheffield/Hideki Matsui Yankee outfield.

#11, i assume you're being sarcastic. There's no way that's true.

The 5 man infield is pretty much always a good idea in a walkoff situation with a decently fast runner at third. Most flyballs are going to end the game anyway, so why not close up the infield more and give yourself a better shot at keeping the game alive on a grounder?

The Jays turned a DP with they 5 man infield in a similar situation on Thursday and went on to win the game.

I think within 5-10 years basically all teams will be using the 5 man infield in that situation. I've seen Maddon do it several times over the past 4-5 years, I've seen Farrell and Girardi do it now, and I'm sure there are others who have done it in games that I wasn't watching. I'd be surprised if Roenicke doesn't already do it as well.

I'd be surprised if Roenicke doesn't already do it as well.

Scioscia has done it for years in Anaheim, so I assume Roenicke will as well. I saw Bud Black (another ex-Scioscia coach) do it last year too.

I know that service time and options come into play...but if there was ever a day to carry 10 or even 9 pitchers and an expanded bench, isn't it opening day?

I believe there's a rule that a player brought onto the 25-man roster must remain there for at least 10 days, to prevent exactly that sort of spot starting shenanigan. Otherwise you could keep every starting pitcher in AAA and move him up to the MLB roster only on his starting days.

[15] I think it's the opposite. When a player leaves the 25-man roster, he can't be brought back for 10 days, unless somebody is placed on the DL.

I believe the 10-day rule applies in the other direction - a player optioned down must remain down for 10 days before being called up.

I don't know how that rule applies at the beginning of the season - could a club option a couple arms down in late March, so that they'd be eligible to be called up for the second or third game of the season?

I believe there's a rule that a player brought onto the 25-man roster must remain there for at least 10 days, to prevent exactly that sort of spot starting shenanigan. Otherwise you could keep every starting pitcher in AAA and move him up to the MLB roster only on his starting days.

You have it backwards -- if you send someone down, you have to keep them down for 10 days unless there's an injury.

I think it is the opposite - someone sent down has to spend 10 days down unless there is an injury...still handicaps the idea a little - but if your rotating 3-4 guys through 2 spots, it should be workable I think- especially at the beginning of the season.

I was actually sort of half expecting a chess discussion. If anyone would play the Dutch defense, or Tromposky it would be Maddon.

No, the rule is that you can't RECALL a player after being optioned for 10 days, unless there's an injury on the MLB team that necessitates that player coming back to replace the injured player. You can bring up a pitcher to pitch and option him back immediately after the game. Teams do it all the time for double headers, and will start doing it for every single doubleheader with the new 26 man roster rule for double headers.

Guess I took too long writing my post.

Ray, I wasn't being "sarcastic" necessarily, and I do think it was the right play, but I didn't think that it was literally true that a two-man outfield could be superior to a three man outfield, no.

The move with Molina attempting a squeeze bunt with two strikes wasn't half dumb.

Molina missing the sign, however, was all dumb.

Girardi can't help putting runners on base. It was dumb in the first inning; it was dumb in the ninth inning.

Well, you're half right.

...that they didn't hit with men on base in no way excuses Girardi's horrible moves.

So what? Or, who says it does? The point was that hitting with men on base would have prevented the situation that led to the horrible moves.

I think within 5-10 years basically all teams will be using the 5 man infield in that situation.

Wait, do people think the five man infield is some kind of recent innovation? I've seen it for as long as I've been watching baseball (early 1960s), and I'm pretty sure I've read about it from earlier eras.

Also, could someone please explain this whole ten-day waiting period thing?

The Rockies started the season w/3 starters, 10 total pitchers, I think. Though they originally planned to have 11 pitchers until Outman's vomiting problem. It looks like they stuck with 14 position players, so no moves are necessary to add Moyer to the roster for today's game.

Joe Girardi and Joe Maddon play game of chess in bizarre Opening Day game

Pretty sure that, in this analogy, Girardi was playing checkers.

Pretty sure that, in this analogy, Girardi was playing checkers.

And losing. Badly. From a strategic standpoint Girardi seems like a real dumbo. A classic legacy case.

Also, could someone please explain this whole ten-day waiting period thing?

What ten-day waiting period?

What ten-day waiting period?

Maybe he wants to buy a gun? #butimmadnow

Fancy pants made my joke....

Goodbye for now.