Thanks all for the replies. But this is what I wanted to ask about. This guy was just unbelievable. So if you knew that your number one guy wasn’t as good as the other guys number one, then wouldn’t you be better off using him on game two? So for example instead of:
[ul]
[li]#1 pitcher vs. #1 pitcher[/li][li]#2 pitcher vs. #2 pitcher[/li][li]#3 pitcher vs. #3 pitcher[/li][li]#4 pitcher vs. #4 pitcher[/li][li]#5 pitcher vs. #5 pitcher[/li][/ul]
Where you’re evenly matched for the most part, you did:
[ul]
[li]#1 pitcher vs. #5 pitcher[/li][li]#2 pitcher vs. #1 pitcher[/li][li]#3 pitcher vs. #2 pitcher[/li][li]#4 pitcher vs. #3 pitcher[/li][li]#5 pitcher vs. #4 pitcher[/li][/ul]
Wouldn’t you be better off? I know it’s probably only in this particular match up that it’s applicable, but it seems to me that the Red Sox have one increadible pitcher a couple of good pitchers, and the rest are just so-so. Where the Indians have one or two great pitchers, but then all the rest are at least good. Does that make sense?
One problem with that is how often the pitcher gets up in the series. The game 3 pitcher will likely get only one pitcher, while the game 1 pitcher will get at least two. And It’s not unheard of to pitch the same guy game 1, game 4 and game 7. Althought it’s getting really rare lately. One of the big debates right now is how effective certain guys are on only 3 days rest. Is an Ace(the best starter on the staff) on three days rest better that the 4th best starter? And Managers have considered really limiting the pitches of the Ace on the first start, so he won’t be as tired for a only three days rest game.
Largely that is what a manager gets paid for these days. Figure out which pitcher to use and when.
This is how they have been playing all year long. The heart of the lineup certainly gets the most attention, but the entire team has been contributing. Taveras and Matsui - If either of these guys get on base, and possibly steal second, they will most likely score with a hit from Holliday or Helton. Torrealba - This guy gets clutch hits. His season average is not impressive, but he hits the ball when it counts. Spilborgs and Sullivan - Taveras spent most of the second half of the year on the DL so these two got plenty of playing time in CF. Both are evenly matched, but Spilly is the better hitter while Sullivan is the better fielder. Its comforting for a manager to know that if you lose a “star” out fielder you can replace him with someone just as good.
Overall, Rockies’ hitting is good. Not great, just good. Like you said, Pitching and Defense are the biggest reason Colorado has made it this far. Fielding has been consistant all year. The bull pen has been phenomenal the second half. The craziest thing is the duct-tapped starting rotation. Francis and Fogg are the only starters left from the begining of the season. Lopez, Hirsch and Cook are all on the DL. The Rockies have used Bucholtz, Ortiz, Dessens, and Redman as starters. Jimenez has proven his worth, but Morales is only still here out of necessity. Fortunately, a team can get away with a limited rotation in this year’s spaced-out post season schedule.
I think what you say is mostly true. I get that momentum lasts until today’s starting pitcher, and all that. But there is this: the Rockies had the opportunity to “come back to probability” going into the Phillies series, and didn’t (to my chagrin). They had a second chance starting the Arizona series (facing B. Webb, arguably the best starter in the NL), or for that matter, in any of the individual games of either series–and they’re still chugging along, and they aren’t even really getting out of that rocking chair to swat those flies. It means a little bit of something, even if it just means they think they have a four-leaf clover the size of Greenland in their collective back pocket. Confidence helps, and the Rockies have it. In droves.
And for the record, I’d prefer the Indians to be the ones to humiliate the Red Sox. The sooner the better. (They found Boston’s soft white underbelly on Saturday night; get Matsusaka out early and the scrub relievers in there, and the feasting will commence.)
Also, I think he might be the only MLB player left who’s older than me Okay, not entirely true; there’s still Clemens (for the moment), Schilling, and Randy Johnson, and maybe a couple others. Meanwhile, I look at my Seattle Mariners roster and see a number of players who were born after I graduated from high school …
But yeah, Moyer is good people, no doubt about that. Class all the way. He’s one who will get a standing ovation in Safeco Field if he happens to pitch against the Mariners in interleague play. Which could happen – he once said he’d like to pitch until he’s 50, and so far I don’t see any reason why he couldn’t
What you’re seeing is essentially a modern strategic innnovation; teams carry more pitchers and use them less. It really is just a product of what major league teams think is good strategy, and an awareness of the possibility of injury. The jury is still out as to whether this is actually a wise thing.
Not in baseball, no.
To answer your first question, the coloured part is the actual strike zone, at least in the estimation of whoever runs that graphic.
To answer the second part, major league umpires do not call balls and strikes with a great deal of accuracy, and until fairly recently they did so with blatant disregard for the rulebook. It’s a problem, in my opinion, although nobody wants to discuss it.
No manager in the major leagues will start the same pitcher in Game 1 and 3 of a series, which would be only two days of rest. Pitchers aren’t trained to be able to do that. The usual strategic decision is to either start your pitchers 1-2-3-4-1-2-3, with your ace pitching games 1 and 5, or 1-2-3-1-2-3-1, which gets your ace in three times but with less rest. Of course, previous playoff series might mess up your rotation, but that’s the basic dillemma; go with three starters or four? To a large extent it depends on how good your fourth starter is.
Generally speaking, the wisest strategy in a short series is to win the game you’re playing at almost any cost. Deliberately punting a game is a receipe for disaster; you just don’t have the same room for error in a short series as you do in a regular season. However, practically speaking, a pitcher cannot start with only two days’ rest, unless he didn’t last very long in the first game.
Seventh inning now, although Hawkins just made an error to give Arizona a free runner.
Hawkins then gets Young to ground out 5-3. Six outs away!
If Colorado wins this will be the first time an NL team has won seven straight postseason games to commence a postseason since Cincinnati in 1976; of course, in 1976, those seven wins were the entire postseason.
I’m rooting awfully hard for an Indians-Rockies World Series. I just like their games.
An old college buddy of mine (originally from Denver) has promised to buy us a pair of tickets to Game Two at Jacobs when (he said ‘if’, the jerk) the Tribe manages to finish off the Sox.
If he pays, am I allowed to power-noogie him when we win?
While I agree that Rockies-Red Sox would have the better TV viewership and built-in storyline, I too am pulling for the Indians. If nothing else, maybe a couple games will have to be delayed due to snow or something and then finally MLB will stop with this “all night games, all of October, including unneeded days off” crap.
It would be worth a try, if you’re managing a weaker club playing a distinctly stronger club. Otherwise, I think you’d hate to basically give up a game for a mild advantage in each of the others. But you’d have to start timing your rotation with that goal in mind a ways out, to make that happen. You’d have to be easily the best team in a really sucky division.
I actually used a close variant of that in a high-school chess match once. I was captain and top board, and my opposite number would have immediately protested if I’d moved myself down a board. But he didn’t know the rest of my team, so I moved my #5 board up to #2, and moved my 2-3-4 boards down to 3-4-5, respectively. I drew with the other #1, we lost the second board, and swept the bottom 3.
In chess, that’s called 'board-stacking and it’s quite unethical in that environment, and I only did it that once. (What the hell, you’re only 16 once - might as well have some fun. :)) But no similar strictures apply to baseball.
Congratulations, Rockies! You beat those stinky DBacks, with whom I have a personal grudge.
A Rockies-Indians series would be great! (although Fox and TBS would disagree) They are both very much alike as far as “style” goes, I think. Just two teams that nobody else cares about that rose up and kicked some major ass.
That being said, this is the last time you’ll hear me congratulate the Rockies this year
We did that to win the nationals. I was a senior and only the 4th board, but I had the second highest rating. So at my suggestion, for the nationals, I moved up to 2 allowing the normal 2 & 3 boards to play weaker opponents. I managed to go .500 at 2. Our 1 board also went .500 and our 3 & 4 boards only lost one between them. We won the nationals.
I am not sure this was unethical as by the only scale High School chess had, I was the #2 rating. It just did not match our regular season, but that also had 5 boards instead of 4. Our 5 was a strong Freshman and a very solid 5 that usually won. He was probably as good as I was and more dedicated to the game. Losing that advantage, we played within the rules to get a different advantage. As I held my own by going .500 and the 2 & 3 boards were also younger, I don’t think there was any reason to cry foul that we used some basic tactics to help us out.
It’s also impossible, in baseball, to consistently pit #1 pitcher against #1 pitcher, given that every team doesn’t have the same days off. It might work for the first couple weeks of the season, and again for the first couple weeks after the All-Star Game, but then different schedules start offsetting these things.
