- This topic has 130 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Okay, I’ll go with premise that the illustrious science of analytics clearly indicate that after 89 pitches and twice through the order it was a reasonably sound decision to remove the baseball from Montgomery’s hand and place it elsewhere. However, I’m also going to have to believe that those precise same analytics undoubtedly say that with a precarious 1 run lead in the 7th inning it would be a better idea to hand the baseball to Zsa Zsa Gabor than to place it in the hand of the pitcher who was entrusted to protect that 1 run lead. Does anyone have a vague idea of what the analytics indicate about that?
Using analytics makes the dull tools think they are sharper than they are.
Yesterday I read some quotes on Dusty Blake’s “race to two strikes” philosophy that indicate the author and some coaches are out of their element in understanding the totality of what the numbers mean. It’s not unusual to see examples of this because they’ve got to talk the talk. It becomes a buzz word chamber, and by golly, do something with those numbers even if it’s wrong.
And yeah, the unquestionable omnipresence of the evil baseball gypsies were clearly evidenced by the GRD in the home half of the 8th. With all of these silly rule changes, why hasn’t a rule that is clearly in the best interest of a fair and just disposition been placed into effect that allows the umpires discretion regarding whether that baserunner at 1B would have scored? I’ve seen that precise same baseball play unfairly penalize teams since the days of cavemen. I myself could have taken the time to administer two applications of WD-40 to my knee and ankle joints on my journey from 1B to cross HP on that double into the RCF alley. It simply ain’t fair. If they desire to change a rule that would have the genuine desired consequences of not penalizing a team for an all important run (yeah, runs are still pretty important) they’ll change that rule.
“I’m also going to have to believe that those precise same analytics undoubtedly say that with a precarious 1 run lead in the 7th inning it would be a better idea to hand the baseball to Zsa Zsa Gabor than to place it in the hand of the pitcher who was entrusted to protect that 1 run lead. Does anyone have a vague idea of what the analytics indicate about that?”
Okay, whoever had Zsa Zsa Gabor in the comments thread celebrity pool, collect your winnings. 🙂
It isn’t enough to criticize Marmol for removing Jordan Montgomery who (1)was cruising and (2)at just 89 pitches and (3)about to face the bottom of the Tigers order — and inexplicably inserting Hicks with a slender 1-run lead. Marmol did even more than that! After Hicks issued the leadoff walk, and two batters later plunked a man after getting ahead in the count 1-2, Marmol still left him in. Whereupon poor Hicks immediately surrendered the double that put the Birds behind to stay.
For Ollie Marmol the 7th inning clearly wasn’t about trying to stop a losing streak. It was about trying to fix a pitcher who hasn’t had a sub-4.80 ERA since 2019. Marmol is a bad leader, a bad tactician, a bad, well, pretty much everything you can be as an MLB manager. He was bailed out of a mediocre 2023 season by the spectacular trade deadline results. That ain’t happening again.
Who is going to bail out the front office for putting forth the worst pitching staff in MLB and signing a DH for five years and $87M?
Actually Bob hat tip to you for predicting this is how the Contreras signing would go.
Yeah, they were really floundering at about 4 back in late July and then took off. I had the impression that he was featuring a decent job as a young, first year manager until the numerous bizarre events of Oct. 7th raised some serious red flags. He’s displayed the said same bizarre behavior ever since that fateful day. He should have been gone long ago.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.