Comments on: Game 3, Rangers at Mariners

By: joser

joser — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:55:16 +0000

The problem with using Batista in that situation and having it work is that it will just reinforce the faulty decision-making. It’s exactly what doomed the space shuttle Columbia. “Well, crap has fallen off the tank on every launch and we’ve never lost a shuttle to it, therefore having crap fall off the tank on launch is completely safe.” If you don’t understand the problem, you don’t know if your decision-making is sound or you’ve just been lucky (so far).

By: joser

joser — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:37:19 +0000

Well, you could make a case for Bloomquist as a defensive sub in RF in late innnings with a sizable lead. Not for “enthusiasm” but just based on watching Wilkerson trundle out to the wall on those deep hits. Of course, that assumes you didn’t have an even more glaring need for a defensive sub in LF….

By: msb

msb — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 05:10:28 +0000

ah, the perils of waiting around to hear Drayer on the postgame show.

you get to hear callers say things like “I’m worried about our right-fielder. He has no enthusism. Why are Morse and Willie sitting on the bench instead of playing in right?”

By: 23daysfordavis

23daysfordavis — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 05:02:57 +0000

186, I’m with you. Sometimes you throw conventional wisdom out the window. Like last night, Putz wasn’t ready, he started warming up later than usual, and the “go with the closer in the 9th” wisdom, didn’t work.

I would like to see Mac alter the starting lineup though, there is no reason why Sexson should stay at #4, that is just wrong

By: F-Rod

F-Rod — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 05:02:28 +0000

With a three run lead it is a nice time to rest the arms…they have been worked fairly hard lately. It would have been a dicier move with a slimmer lead…..

Are we gonna move Baek to the rotation and keep Batista in the pen? Not a terrible way to go, Baek is fairly close to Batista as a starter I would think.

By: lailaihei

lailaihei — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 05:00:04 +0000

Luckily, the chance of the Mariners blowing it in that situation were extremely low, no matter who was on the mound. The criticism here comes from none of us wanting to see that kind of decision made when there’s a good chance at blowing the lead.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 05:00:00 +0000

Uhh, what exactly were we wrong about? That going after that part of the line-up with Green/Batista didn’t make any sense?

With a 3 run lead in the 9th, the M’s were approximately 93% favorites to win regardless of which pitcher they brought in there. No one was predicting that Batista was going to blow the save and they’d lose the game – we were simply stating that it was an illogical, inefficient move born out of a slavery to experience that simply isn’t good baseball strategy.

They’d have been better off going to Ryan Rowland-Smith in that situation. If that situation occurs again, and they again go with the experienced RHP, I’ll kill McLaren for it again. It’s a stupid move.

By: thowe1

thowe1 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 04:53:46 +0000

I hate to say it, but I love it when you guys are wrong. Nice showing for the save, however I will agree that it was an extremely STUPID move. Should I reference Les Miles and LSU tossing the last second touchdown when he could have gone for the field goal to win over Auburn? Sometimes coaching is shear lunacy, and nobody will ever be able to explain it.

They only ridicule you if you’re the goat….

By: Danno

Danno — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 04:50:51 +0000

@176

Krueger is old, HD just proves it. He is a walking cliche, and he can’t even get the names right.

By: DizzleChizzle

DizzleChizzle — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 04:49:53 +0000

So we’re 3 games into the season and after seeing Mac make some bonehead questionable decisions I have but one question.

Is it safe to say that if the M’s are successful this year it would be a result of just plain dumb luck on Mac’s part?