PDA

View Full Version : Oz's First Managerial Brain-Cramp?


CubKilla
04-12-2004, 12:30 AM
Forgive me if this has been posted somewhere else. If it has, I haven't seen it.

Willsy brought up a good point during today's PostGame. Top 9, down by a run, Crede HBP, Uribe PR's for Crede, Ozzie PH's for Rowand with Perez, and Perez is swinging away..... against Rivera and everyone knows that Rivera just eats up LH's. Why didn't Ozzie have Timo attempt to sacrifice Uribe to 2B with no outs? Next batter was Gload who hit a broken bat single. If Timo gets Uribe over to 2B, the game is tied at 5 and it's a blown save for Rivera.

I was wondering this during the game. Thoughts?

I don't blame Ozzie for Monday and I highly doubt Timo missed the bunt sign. If he did on the first pitch, Cora should have been up his ***. Ozzie's first gaffe as Sox manager IMHO.

npdempse
04-12-2004, 12:34 AM
Agreed, unless Ozzie was thinking that Timo's had one hit with an RBI against Rivera in the past, and that's not too shabby, really.

beckett21
04-12-2004, 12:35 AM
Made no sense to me. Timo should have been sacrificing all the way. Gload gets his single, then at worst we have first and third with one out, and Harris coming up who would be tough to double up. Went against the smallball mantra IMO.

RedPinStripes
04-12-2004, 12:37 AM
Only brain fart i saw was letting Polite come out in the 9th opening day, but i dont blame Ozzie for the loss when 4 pitchers couldnt get 3 outs with a 5 run lead. He's impressed me so far especially for a Rookie manager. He made all teh right moves today in the 9th with pinch running and hitting. Manuel either used to be sleeping in these situations or already started tinkering just to get guys in the 7th.

Hangar18
04-12-2004, 12:46 AM
Ozzy was on FOX tonite, and he said he was playing for the WIN, and not a TIE since they were on the Road. He said he didnt want to waste an out by sacrificing .............

CubKilla
04-12-2004, 12:49 AM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Ozzy was on FOX tonite, and he said he was playing for the WIN, and not a TIE since they were on the Road. He said he didnt want to waste an out by sacrificing .............

Understandable but that's a tall order against Mariano Rivera.

Randar68
04-12-2004, 12:54 AM
Originally posted by CubKilla
Understandable but that's a tall order against Mariano Rivera.

Gotta tie it up before you can take the lead. Playing for the 2-run HR already?

You don't play for 2 runs against one of the best closers in baseball. Hope for the tie, at least get it to extra innings and hope you can get it off of someone else in the bullpen. I was dumbfounded by the decision, especially PH'inig Perez and then not bunting...

OurBitchinMinny
04-12-2004, 01:01 AM
Originally posted by CubKilla
Forgive me if this has been posted somewhere else. If it has, I haven't seen it.

Willsy brought up a good point during today's PostGame. Top 9, down by a run, Crede HBP, Uribe PR's for Crede, Ozzie PH's for Rowand with Perez, and Perez is swinging away..... against Rivera and everyone knows that Rivera just eats up LH's. Why didn't Ozzie have Timo attempt to sacrifice Uribe to 2B with no outs? Next batter was Gload who hit a broken bat single. If Timo gets Uribe over to 2B, the game is tied at 5 and it's a blown save for Rivera.

I was wondering this during the game. Thoughts?

I don't blame Ozzie for Monday and I highly doubt Timo missed the bunt sign. If he did on the first pitch, Cora should have been up his ***. Ozzie's first gaffe as Sox manager IMHO.



pinch hitting for rowand was a good idea. He cant hit. At least not right now. Timo should have started. He didnt come through, but PH is hard.

NonetheLoaiza
04-12-2004, 01:31 AM
I agree. Playing for the win against Mariano?

TornLabrum
04-12-2004, 08:33 AM
Most managers will play for the win on the road because if you play for the tie the home team has the advantage. One run in the bottom of the inning kills you. If you play for the win and get the lead, one run just sends it into extra innings. At least according to conventional baseball wisdom, Ozzie did the right thing.

poorme
04-12-2004, 09:40 AM
This is a very common strategy. I have no problem with it. A ballsy strategy would have been a stolen base attempt.

jabrch
04-12-2004, 10:21 AM
At least it was a conscious decision. It could have gone either way. I'll take that.

.500 after 4 vs NY and 2 vs KC - that's fine with me.

Paulwny
04-12-2004, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Most managers will play for the win on the road because if you play for the tie the home team has the advantage. One run in the bottom of the inning kills you. If you play for the win and get the lead, one run just sends it into extra innings. At least according to conventional baseball wisdom, Ozzie did the right thing.

Yep, agree, Oz appears to be playing by the book, "play to win on the road, play to tie at home"

Randar68
04-12-2004, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Most managers will play for the win on the road because if you play for the tie the home team has the advantage. One run in the bottom of the inning kills you. If you play for the win and get the lead, one run just sends it into extra innings. At least according to conventional baseball wisdom, Ozzie did the right thing.

"Conventional Wisdom" cannot be deployed completely independent of "common sense." Every situation and every decision cannot be cast in the same light only under the guise of "conventional wisdom" without taking each individual situation into consideration. You're facing Esteban German in the 9th and playing for 2 runs??? Fine, Great. Not against Mariano Rivera you'd better not be.

samram
04-12-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by Randar68


"Conventional Wisdom" cannot be deployed completely independent of "common sense." Every situation and every decision cannot be cast in the same light only under the guise of "conventional wisdom" without taking each individual situation into consideration. You're facing Esteban German in the 9th and playing for 2 runs??? Fine, Great. Not against Mariano Rivera you'd better not be.


Agreed. Furthermore, Timo was cold off the bench facing one of the toughest pitchers against lefites in the game. If he was going to play for the win, why not let Rowand, who had at least been in the game on a cold day, try to hit one of those cut fastballs into the gap in right center. I'm not saying he would have, I just don't think Timo had as good a chance as Rowand would have.

Paulwny
04-12-2004, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by Randar68
"Conventional Wisdom" cannot be deployed completely independent of "common sense." Every situation and every decision cannot be cast in the same light only under the guise of "conventional wisdom" without taking each individual situation into consideration. You're facing Esteban German in the 9th and playing for 2 runs??? Fine, Great. Not against Mariano Rivera you'd better not be.

This actually may be the time of the year to try winning against Rivera. According to Kaat, with low humidity Rivera's cutter doesn't move in on left handed hitters. He doesn't get the proper feel. He has had problems so far going 1,2,3 in his relief appearances.
He was continually blowing on his throwing hand yesterday.

HomerCoach
04-12-2004, 11:24 AM
I was kinda thinking Sandy would pinch hit vs Rivera instead of Timo and Gload, Rivera is nasty vs. lefties.

poorme
04-12-2004, 11:27 AM
Guillen figured Timo would make contact (which he almost always does), then you'd have two speed burners on the bases.

Jjav829
04-12-2004, 02:28 PM
I can't say I disagree that bunting Uribe over would have been the better play. But hell, would they even have gotten the bunt down? This team is still pathetic at bunting, and after 2 bunts popped up, I can't help but wonder if that crept into Ozzie's mind. For a team that is supposed to be playing some small ball, we have the worst bunters. They don't even have the proper bunting form.

habibharu
04-12-2004, 02:30 PM
i think that having perez hit was fine. he already has a two hit game.

jeremyb1
04-12-2004, 03:49 PM
I think arguing for the bunt is relying too much on the 20/20 hindsight that Gload ended up getting a hit. Expecting anyone to get a base hit against Rivera is really tough. Your best option in that situation is to give three players a chance to swing the bat with no one out as opposed to letting only two hitters swing away because the odds are you will leave the runner on second.

The error Ozzie made was pinch hitting Perez for Rowand. He simply relied on the traditional baseball knowledge that lefties hit righties better than righties do. If he would've taken a more critical approach he could've easily discovered that Rivera is actually much tougher on lefties and Rowand hasn't hit righties all that terribly over the past three seasons. Neither Rowand or any of the guys on the bench are probably going to get a hit on the bench there but Perez was a particularly poor choice in my opinion.

poorme
04-12-2004, 04:04 PM
career vs. righties:

rowand: .258
perez: .290

plus perez makes a lot more contact than rowand.

jeremyb1
04-12-2004, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by poorme
career vs. righties:

rowand: .258
perez: .290

plus perez makes a lot more contact than rowand.

That's true but that discounts Rivera's ability to get lefties out better than righties. That might suggest he's not a typical right handed pitcher in terms of how hitters hit him.

poorme
04-12-2004, 04:49 PM
Which is more important, a pitcher's BA against the hitter or the hitter's BA against the pitcher? I guess my point is that neither strategy is so obviously correct that you can harshly criticize Guillen for doing it. When I visualize Rowand vs. Rivera I see a three pitch K. I haven't seen Timo enough to visualize anything yet.

pudge
04-12-2004, 04:58 PM
FYI, Yankee broadcasters during the game kept saying they did not expect Timo to bunt because, "You never play for a tie on the road."

So I guess Ozzie did follow conventional wisdom, but this seems totally absurd to me... Didn't the Cubs just win a game on the road in 15 innings?? Why is it a given that the home team is going to win an extra inning game?? Why not try to tie it up and win the game in extra innings?

On one day, we get Cooper saying our starters will 120 pitches because we want to do whatever we can to win every game. Then the nexy day we get this conventional wisdom garbage. Argh.

harwar
04-12-2004, 07:54 PM
I was bitchin Timo Perez out all day because i thought he missed a sign.I can't believe that Ozzie would refuse to bunt in that situation.This news makes a bit uneasy about future situtions of the same ilk.

TornLabrum
04-12-2004, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by pudge
So I guess Ozzie did follow conventional wisdom, but this seems totally absurd to me... Didn't the Cubs just win a game on the road in 15 innings?? Why is it a given that the home team is going to win an extra inning game?? Why not try to tie it up and win the game in extra innings?

Answer to question 1: The Cubs tied it up swinging (home run), not bunting.

Answer to questions 2-3: It isn't a given that the home team is going to win the extra inning game. It is a given that they get the last at bat, so if you tie in the 9th, one run for them wins it. If you go one run ahead, one run by the home team ties it and the game goes on.

pudge
04-12-2004, 08:12 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Answer to question 1: The Cubs tied it up swinging (home run), not bunting.

Answer to questions 2-3: It isn't a given that the home team is going to win the extra inning game. It is a given that they get the last at bat, so if you tie in the 9th, one run for them wins it. If you go one run ahead, one run by the home team ties it and the game goes on.

Yes solo homerun with two outs, obviously you wouldn't want to bunt in that situation...

I understand your points, I guess what people are saying here about matchups makes sense to me... ie, you'd be lucky to get one off Rivera, why not get the one and get him out of the game, take your chances that you can hold them off in the 9th? The Yankees did not look impressive at the plate for four straight games.

RKMeibalane
04-12-2004, 08:18 PM
I don't blame Ozzie for what happened. The Sox just didn't have it yesterday. I've been impressed with Guillen's aggressiveness so far. He seems determined to "take the fight to enemy," if you know what I mean. Even though not all of his decisions have had positive results, I like the fact that he is really trying to take advantage of the team's strength's, as well as trying to keep the other team off balance. Manuel never did anything like that, probably because he spent most of the game sleeping.

beckett21
04-12-2004, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Answer to question 1: The Cubs tied it up swinging (home run), not bunting.

Answer to questions 2-3: It isn't a given that the home team is going to win the extra inning game. It is a given that they get the last at bat, so if you tie in the 9th, one run for them wins it. If you go one run ahead, one run by the home team ties it and the game goes on.

But it IS a given that the home team will win when up by one run already in the 9th, and the visitors fail to score.

I understand the logic and the 'ol axiom. In this case I disagree with it. If we score one run, the game goes on. By scoring no runs, we automatically LOSE.

As far as jeremyb1's comment about the 20/20 hindsight on Gload's hit: good point, can't argue with you necessarily. BUT, 20/20 hindsight also shows that we ended up losing, so what we did do really didn't work out too well either, did it?

I'm satisfied to agree to disagree on this one. Still I applaud Ozzie and what he has done so far this season. No one can convince me that letting Timo Perez swing away (or just stand there and stare at strike three--if you're gonna swing then SWING) was the right move there. Not knocking Ozzie or the team, just didn't like the move personally.