- This topic has 7 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Very happy for the win tonight. But now at 14 games with 4 runs or less. Big burden on the pitching staff. Good outing by Hicks but as has often happened the runners he leaves score all too often.
One of my complaints about our offense over the last few years have been the lack of plate discipline and control of the strike zone.
Even though we won tonight I kept track of some interesting stats tonight beginning with the 4th inning.
– Cardinals swung at 18 pitches out of the strike zone vs the Giants only 5. And Bader’s homer was a few inside off the zone.
– Cardinals struck out 7 times on pitches out of the strike zone vs the Giants 0.
– Giants fouled off three close pitches with two strikes, Cardinals none.
– Giants called out on close pitches 3 times. Cardinals none.
No mystery why the inconsistent offense with plate discipline that poor. We bomb them out last night and have to scratch one out tonight.By the way I see Helsley as our ultimate 9th inning guy. Gallardo is ok in the 9th but I think better suited for the 8th. When he has a bad outing it is usually seriously bad.
I see Helsley as our ultimate 9th inning guy.
I would want to see Helsley be the guy who comes in with the tying runs on base in the 5th.
I believe there was some noise made preseason to the effect analytics would be employed to guide in game decisions such as pitcher usage rather than relying upon traditional set roles. But then reality happened and what we are seeing is assigned roles. We have the ‘tight game ahead late’ roles like we have always had. I can’t believe that is the approved philosophy.
Offensively, we seem to be competitive, which allows for continuing with the same thinking that gave a .197 hitter 400+ PAs last year. But I guess there are about 17 million reasons why that would be the approved philosophy.
There have been articles written for years now where guys will say that the bullpen role-style of pitching is not the best way to win ball games. What they say is you need to use your best pitchers at the times a game is on the line.
So if it is 2-2 in the 7th, and the other club has runners on first and third with one out, that is where you bring in your out-maker. The reasoning is that if you give up a couple of runs there, your ninth inning is possibly not even a factor.
Definitely something to think about, but then this discussion has gone on for years now and I think it is just easier for managers to think of guys as pitching in a particular inning most of the time, despite it not necessarily corresponding to an individual game’s cadence.
Probably also has something to do with the pitchers wanting a specific role. I would buy into Helsley being a earlier inning distress guy if we had a strong closer. My feel is that Gallegos is an adequate closer but not much above that level.
The reason I feel that Gallegos is not a strong closer is that when he has an off day you can lose a 2 or 3 run lead. That doesn’t happen with closers like Chapman and Hader and other strong Cardinal closers in the past. They give up one run and occasionally two but not 3 or 4.
I know the analytics say to use your best reliever when the game is on the line but I still maintain that the final three outs are tougher to get than the others. If your best reliever gets out of the 7th inning jam then your lesser reliever blows it in the 9th then what have you accomplished? It is the chicken or the egg conundrum.
As for Helsley I have been wrong about him so far this year. He looks like a completely different pitcher. Perhaps the injuries really were the difference last year. He looks like vintage Goose Gossage right now.
Gallegos has 9 appearances, 7 scoreless, one 1 run allowed and one 4 runs allowed blown save.
It’s a save with no runs allowed if Arenado doesn’t overthrow 1B. That was a team meltdown, but they don’t give 3Bmen blown saves.
Reminds me of last season when Reyes set a mlb record for saves before his first blown save, but as soon as he chalked up a BS there was a thread calling for a new closer.
The irony was the “new” closer being called for was… Yep, you guessed it, Gallegos.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.