Cole gets something in his stocking: Phillies 10, Marlins 6
by PhillyFriar on Sep 9, 2010 12:18 AM EDT
Email
PrintThe beautiful thing about this new look, frontline pitching-led Phillies squad is that they have the starting pitching advantage more often than not. A night after wresting back the division lead from the Braves for the first time in over three months, it must have been comforting for Charlie Manuel to be able to hand the ball to Cole Hamels (and his 3.21 SIERA) to face Andrew Miller (and his 5.00 SIERA and Megan's Law facial hair) as the Fightins sought to maintain that division lead.
To virtually no one's surprise, Hamels was once again excellent; he allowed just 5 baserunners over 7 scoreless innings while whiffing 5. But to my surprise -- and, I'm sure, the surprise of anyone who's watched the Phillies this year -- the offense decided to back up their lefty change up artist for once.
The bats put runs on the board in each of the first five innings en route to an eventual 10-0 lead. Ryan Howard started things off with an RBI single in the 1st, closed the Phils' scoring with another RBI single in the 7th, and walloped a 3-run homer to left field in the 4th inning as the meat on the sandwich. That makes the big guy 11-for-34 this month with 5 homers and a tidy .324/.395/.765 line. Isn't September Ryan Howard just swell?
Chase Utley jumped into the act with a 2-for-3 night including a pair of RBIs and a walk, Shane Victorino had a pair of doubles as part of a 3-for-6 night, and Raul Ibanez went 2-for-4. The double digit outburst was the most support Hamels has gotten since June, and helped deliver him his long-awaited 10th win of the season.
It wasn't all sunshine and lollipops, however, as Jimmy Rollins pulled up with a bum hamstring while scoring in the 3rd inning and was replaced by Wilson Valdez. He's been labeled day-to-day for now, but with the nagging injuries Rollins has put up with this year, it's natural to be a little wary of the situation. Additionally, Nate Robertson showed that his 5.45 ERA this year was no fluke (and further drove home the point that this performance was) by making this game interesting down the stretch, inviting the Fish to put a 6-spot on the board in the 8th. The ensuing chain of events led Charlie Manuel to call on Ryan Madson for what felt like the 8th time in the last 4 days. Tomorrow's day off should certainly be a welcome one for the lanky righty.
The Braves finally righted the ship out in Pittsburgh with a 9-3 win, so the Phils' lead stays at a half-game. Additionally, if you're into the whole scoreboard watching thing, the Giants lost 3-1 to Dan Hudson and the D'backs, while the Padres currently lead the Dodgers behind rookie Cory Luebke.
via www.fangraphs.com (Kind of amazing that Robertson barely put a dent in it, huh?)
65 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
first
& cinci lost so the phills & the braves are 1 & 2 in the NL.
Kolb - a heavy medieval war club with a spiked or flanged metal head, used to crush armor - Wikipedia of course
I've been waiting my whole life for an Eagles Championship
RIP JJ
Nate Robertson’s WPA for this game is -.011. I believe the Phils’ win probability never dipped below 98% during the 8th inning. Sure didn’t feel that way. Cole’s WPA stands at a robust .199.
by ThinMountainAir on Sep 9, 2010 12:29 AM EDT reply actions
b/c Charlie looks at WPA when telling Dubee to call the bullpen. . . Looking solely at the statistical standpoint, we did still have a very, very high probability to win the game. However, if another guy gets on base, Hanley Ramirez is available to pinch hit and can obviously do some damage with a bat. If we had someone else that could be relied upon to get some outs in that situation, i don’t think Charlie goes to Madson. It’s probably just b/c of how inconsistent the rest of the bullpen has been
"My grandmom's favorite grandson, ask my grandmom" --Rone
by layout ultimate on Sep 9, 2010 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions
sure….because if Robertson hadn’t blown the other 4 runs too, nobody’d be callin’ for Chollie’s head.
He shouldn't
Not killing Madson should be a priority at this point. The tiny chance that the bullpen will cough up another four runs is not worth using your most important reliever for the third game in a row and the sixth time in eight days this month.
No, Madson is a pitcher we can’t risk losing.
Lose the game, and we’re 1/2 game back with 16 to play, including 6 against the team we’re trailing. Big deal.
I’d like to beat the Braves and win the division, but Madson has been badly abused the last week and I’d rather give him an extra day off at the unlikely cost of losing one game.
“unlikely” is the iffy term there. You really don’t wanna blow a 10-0 game in th 8th inning. It was 10-6 with runners on and 4 outs to go. He didn’t throw a million pitches, today’s an off day, maybe you don’t need him tomorrow.
Ehh.
I see the result. I see the line. It bottomed out at maybe 97%.
Chollie has run out crap pitchers the past few nights in an attempt to save bullpen arms and it’s blown up on him both times. He got 2 of 6 outs from the dregs, which does help the bullpen. Sad fact is he couldn’t risk letting them try to get the other 4, and once you got Madson in to clean up the mess and he’s warmed up, you might as well leave him in to pitch the 9th.
Anybody here who thinks that Chollie wouldn’t have been lambasted by everybody if Herndon/Robertson/Bastardo/Zagurski were allowed to blow that game is full of poop. Blowing a 10-0 game in the 8th inning in a playoff race is an embarrasment and he couldn’t allow that to happen. He tried to save the arms, it wasn’t meant to be so he had to put the safety net in place.
Look, I agree that Charlie would have been lambasted if the front end of the bullpen blew that game, but it doesn’t mean he made the right move bringing Madson in. I understand the rationale behind the decision, I just don’t agree with it; given Madson’s importance to this pen, I’m willing to gamble the 1.6% that it blows up instead of Joe Torre-ing him.
Charlie would have been lambasted if Madson blew out his arm too. What’s your point? Charlie’s job isn’t to avoid criticism, it’s to make the correct decisions. The fact that he would have been criticized if they’d lost with Herndon is a non sequitur. That means an argument whose conclusion does not follow from its premises, by the way.
The WE is based on averages. It’s based on a 10-6 score, at that point in the game, with a guy on first. It doesn’t “know” the Marlins had just come back from 10-0 to make it 10-6, that they had all the momentum. It doesn’t know that it’s David F-in Herndon out there trying to stop the bleeding. There are losses, and then are very bad losses, and this would have been one of the latter. It was imperative to cut the crap, put the thing to bed, and move on to the next metaphor.
My point is you can’t lose that game. You have to make sure that you win it.
Putting Madson in at the point he did was the best way to salvage his earlier gambling that backfired. I have no problem putting in robertson in for a 10 run game with 6 outs to go. The hook on Herndon was a little quick, but if anything, I’m going to credit him for getting quicker with the hook (ala Blanton in inning 7) than for staying status quo (that means keeping things how they are, by the way).
It would also be a shame if a meteorite fell on the mound while Madson was out there.
The purpose is to win the game, that’s what happened, he tried to let the crap arms do it and they failed. They put the team in a position where good arms were needed, and he chose to use Madson, which worked. Don’t forget madson missed like 6 weeks for kicking a chair, he shouldn’t be as prone to late year dead arm, and the Phils bullpen is last in the league in IP.
You really have trouble sticking to a consistent rationale when you argue a position. Your previous argument had been that we know Charlie was right to make the decision he made because he would have been criticized in the event that the opposite decision had not worked out. Before we continue with this debate, can we agree that you have abandoned your original rationale and have moved onto an entirely different rationale in support of your position?
dude…this isn’t a court of law. it’s a baseball message board. I said Charlie would be lambasted for leaving in Herndon/Robertson and losing a game with them.
If you wish to nitpick minutae for the purpose of argumentation, you are the one missing the point.
My statements are not made to win an argument with you, they are made to state point, and if you get hung up on one initial statement to try and disregard anything further, that’s your issue.
Yes, Charlie should not make decisions based upon public opinion.
Are you happy now? Is that what you wanted?
It doesn’t change the fact that leaving them into lose the game would’ve been a travesty, and fact is, it’s quite possible that losing only one winnable game could be the difference between playoffs or no playoffs.
In order for a debate to be fruitful, both sides have to argue in good faith. There’s no point in even engaging with you if you’re going to change your rationale every five minutes whenever it’s convenient for you. Make an argument and if someone points out that it’s flawed, then back down from it and say you have a separate argument. Don’t just throw a bunch of random crap against the wall simultaneously. It makes it impossible for anyone to have an intelligent conversation with you because there’s no logical thread in your comments that anyone can follow.
arguing in good faith means not getting hung up on one statement and trying to discredit everything else based upon it because you take issue with it.
Statement:
You can’t lose that game.
Supporting ideology:
Herndon more prone to blowing 4 run lead than Madson.
Fallout:
Media circus, crucifixation of Manuel’s stubborness, possible missing of playoffs.
I’ll be sure to put all posts on a 3rd grade reading level for you in the future.
But to be kind, I’ll add more latin, because you think that makes you look smarter.
Agreed, which is what I was hinting in the recap. Stated frankly, there was no reason to yank Herndon with a man on and 1 out, up by 4 runs, in the 9th. The win expectancy at that point was still 98.4%, and while I know Sanchez and Uggla were headed to the dish, both would have needed to get on base to even bring the tying run to the plate.
Uggla has OBP 0.360, Sanchez 0.347. That’s a 12.5% chance of both getting on base (or 1 in 8). Thing is, there was only 1 out, so even if one of those guys gets out, they guy behind them can get on base still.
so at what point do you think it’s appropriate to make the move?
Also, the 90% WE is still ~50% if it becomes a tie game and goes to extras, which you also really want to avoid when trying to rest the bullpen, and you’ve got Mayberry, Gload, and Valdez in the game.
Frankly, if I were manager, I would have given Madson the night off regardless. I yelled at my TV when I heard Madson was warming up, and yelled again when he was brought in.
ok…so you don’t want Madson.
At what point do you bring in Contreras/Durbin/anybody other than Bastardo/Zagurski?
That’s a very different question. Without looking, I don’t think any of those guys have been worked like Madson recently, so I guess I’d have a pretty quick hook. If Herndon let on another guy, probably time to make a move.
(the reason I’m altering the question is because if we’re going to question Manuel’s decisions, we need to consider what we would do in that situation, and the contingency plan in place….if you wish to complain about somebody else’s performance, you need to have a viable alternative present for what you’d have done..simply saying "I wouldn’t have done “that” isn’t really a fair critique)
Also, Trevor May! 6.2 IP, 4 H, 0 R, 1 BB, 13 K! Nice line. Not the first time he’s done something like that this year.
Playoff record for Lakewood too.
I think the question at this point is not whether Lakewood will win the SAL championship.
It’s whether they give up a run in their pursuit of the title.
by philsandthrills on Sep 9, 2010 2:03 AM EDT up reply actions
So… maybe Nate Robertson isn’t a serviceable #5 starter anymore. It’s not like he just started to suck last night, either.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
