04-24-2009, 04:25 PM
<!--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.
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.