Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=32865:date=Apr 24 2009, 03:01 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 24 2009, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=32864:date=Apr 24 2009, 02:56 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Apr 24 2009, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->i still don't see how putting marmol into a game after the 6th inning could ever be the wrong move. if he was putting in some scrub, i could see it, but not marmol.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would you ever pull your best starter in a tie playoff game after 6 innings and 85 pitches? If we had a big lead, then you put in Howry (he was actually good that year). If we had a small lead (one or two runs), you leave Z in for one more inning and THEN put Marmol in.
It was a mistake, any way you slice it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you are missing Tom and my point. Pinella put in the Cubs BEST FUCKING PITCHER in the 7th inning, and multiple people on this board keep referring to this "mistake" as a no brainer. That's nuts. It's not a no brainer. It's a completely justifiable move. It makes complete sense. At the very worst, it's at least ARGUABLY the right move (and before you guys shit yourselves, note that I am NOT saying it was the right move, simply that it was justifiable). I can't tell you for sure that it was the right move, but the only "proof" you guys have is that the Cubs subsequently lost the game. But as I've stated, no amount of pitcher wrangling was going to get the Cubs pathetic offense another run.
Conversely, if Marmol had shut down the Dbacks, and the Cubs somehow won, or if Zambrano had let up 2 runs in the 7th, it would be completely fucking stupid for me to say that putting in Marmol was the obvious right move, and that leaving Zambrano in would have been a mistake no matter what. Leaving Zambrano in would have been a completely justifiable move as well.
Again, this feeds into my peeve that people tend to think "If he had just put in the pitcher I wanted, the opponents wouldn't have scored ANY runs" or "If he just pinch hit the guy I wanted, he surely would have hit a game winning single". We have no idea what Zambrano would have done had he stayed in.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 11,761
Threads: 388
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=32870:date=Apr 24 2009, 03:25 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Apr 24 2009, 03:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=32865:date=Apr 24 2009, 03:01 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 24 2009, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=32864:date=Apr 24 2009, 02:56 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Apr 24 2009, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->i still don't see how putting marmol into a game after the 6th inning could ever be the wrong move. if he was putting in some scrub, i could see it, but not marmol.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would you ever pull your best starter in a tie playoff game after 6 innings and 85 pitches? If we had a big lead, then you put in Howry (he was actually good that year). If we had a small lead (one or two runs), you leave Z in for one more inning and THEN put Marmol in.
It was a mistake, any way you slice it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you are missing Tom and my point. Pinella put in the Cubs BEST FUCKING PITCHER in the 7th inning, and multiple people on this board keep referring to this "mistake" as a no brainer. That's nuts. It's not a no brainer. It's a completely justifiable move. It makes complete sense. At the very worst, it's at least ARGUABLY the right move (and before you guys shit yourselves, note that I am NOT saying it was the right move, simply that it was justifiable). I can't tell you for sure that it was the right move, but the only "proof" you guys have is that the Cubs subsequently lost the game. But as I've stated, no amount of pitcher wrangling was going to get the Cubs pathetic offense another run.
Conversely, if Marmol had shut down the Dbacks, and the Cubs somehow won, or if Zambrano had let up 2 runs in the 7th, it would be completely fucking stupid for me to say that putting in Marmol was the obvious right move, and that leaving Zambrano in would have been a mistake no matter what. Leaving Zambrano in would have been a completely justifiable move as well.
Again, this feeds into my peeve that people tend to think "If he had just put in the pitcher I wanted, the opponents wouldn't have scored ANY runs" or "If he just pinch hit the guy I wanted, he surely would have hit a game winning single". We have no idea what Zambrano would have done had he stayed in.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, I have to ask -- why would you ever pull your best starter in a tie playoff game after 6 innings and 85 pitches?
Posts: 11,761
Threads: 388
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Let me just add...
If Marmol shut the D-Backs down and the Cubs went on to score 10 runs the next half-inning, it still would've been a bad move. None of us would be talking about it, because we would've won the game. Good results from a bad decision doesn't turn the decision into a good one.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=32872:date=Apr 24 2009, 03:34 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 24 2009, 03:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Let me just add...
If Marmol shut the D-Backs down and the Cubs went on to score 10 runs the next half-inning, it still would've been a bad move. None of us would be talking about it, because we would've won the game. Good results from a bad decision doesn't turn the decision into a good one.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that is exactly my point. The fact that Marmol let up runs doesn't make it a bad move either. It was a decision you didn't agree with Butch. Taking out a starter after 6 innings to put in your best pitcher in a tie game is NOT a bad decision, no matter how much you guys disagree with it. It might not be the decision you would have made, but that doesn't make it bad. Taking Zambrano out, and putting in virtually any other pitcher would have been a bad move. Putting Marmol in, and keeping Zambrano fresh, is again, COMPLETELY justifiable.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 3,011
Threads: 81
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
quickly, for the record, I would not have taken Zambrano out. My point is simply that it wasn't a bad move.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
Posts: 1,407
Threads: 18
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
Guess we will have to disagree on this one because it was an awful decision. Even if your point is, that its ok because our best pitcher was coming in, why not use him in the 8th or the 9th when Z is finally gassed? The rest of our pen sucked that year. Marmol wasn't going to pitch 3 innings. It was dumb and I bet Lou knows it was dumb and would never do it again.
Posts: 5,185
Threads: 174
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=32877:date=Apr 24 2009, 05:01 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Apr 24 2009, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->quickly, for the record, I would not have taken Zambrano out. My point is simply that it wasn't a bad move.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is close to where I'm at. I think it was probably a bad move, but not the jaw-dropping awful move others do. Things aren't always black and white.
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena. ![[Image: ITgoyeg.png]](http://i.imgur.com/ITgoyeg.png)
Posts: 11,761
Threads: 388
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Marmol would've been better off being saved in case Z (or some other pitcher) got into trouble. Or for the 8th -- whichever came first. By using him in the 7th, Lou ensured that he couldn't come in to put out any fires.
Bad move.
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
We were going to lose anyway, so it really doesn't matter to me.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 11,761
Threads: 388
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=32885:date=Apr 24 2009, 04:22 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Apr 24 2009, 04:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->We were going to lose anyway, so it really doesn't matter to me.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif[/img]
Posts: 301
Threads: 3
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=32885:date=Apr 24 2009, 04:22 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Apr 24 2009, 04:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->We were going to lose anyway, so it really doesn't matter to me.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Clapp wins this thread
Posts: 14,097
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
We'll never know, but there was always the possibility that another solid inning (big assumption on my part) could have sparked the team in some way. I guess the same could be said if Marmol pitched a shutout inning as well. Again, we'll never know because Lou was planning for game 4 before game 1 was decided.
Posts: 11,761
Threads: 388
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=32891:date=Apr 24 2009, 04:27 PM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Apr 24 2009, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->We'll never know, but there was always the possibility that another solid inning (big assumption on my part) could have sparked the team in some way. I guess the same could be said if Marmol pitched a shutout inning as well. Again, we'll never know because <b>Lou was planning for game 4 before game 1 was decided.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bingo. And therein lies the stupidity of it all. If the Cubs had a huge lead, then go ahead and save Z for game 4. Turns out there wasn't even a game 4 to plan for. Silly Lou.
Posts: 2,696
Threads: 47
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=32880:date=Apr 24 2009, 05:12 PM:name=Fella)-->QUOTE (Fella @ Apr 24 2009, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The rest of our pen sucked that year.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This was when Howry was a shut down setup guy, Eyre and Wuertz were above average relievers, and Dempster was our closer (who despite a rough year was going to close any game we had a save situation in and actually had a high save percentage if I remember correctly). It's not as if we were doomed or Lou had no plan for after the 7th.
I'm with BT on this one and I do NOT think Lou was planning for game 4. That's pure speculation unless I'm forgetting him make a statement about saving Z's arm for a game 4. I know Zambrano was on that night, but he had a .867 opponent OPS in 19 games that he went into the 7th inning that year. I believe Marmol was facing the heart of the order in that game and Lou probably figured use his best pitcher to maximize his tools. Then use Howry and Dempster to finish the game. Again, this is pure speculation... but it's not better or worse than the speculation that he was "playing for game 4".
Posts: 14,097
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
Not to beat a dead horse, and I don't have the quote in front of me, but I recall Lou saying that he was trying to preserve Z for his next start. The local media had a field day with it too.
|
