707572747C766F727B686E631A0 wrote: Hurdle said that Marte was bunting on his own. He can be pretty exasperating sometimes. At this point in his career he should which side of the field to bunt toward.
I wouldn't have guessed that at all, that's interesting. I wasn't fully paying attention to that at-bat - didn't he show bunt on an earlier pitch? I could see him trying to catch the defense off guard, but it seems odd that he would have tried it again on his own. Apologies to Mr. Hurdle for my undue criticism on that one then.
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
Bobster21
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
3A3F383E363C253831222429500 wrote: Hurdle said that Marte was bunting on his own. He can be pretty exasperating sometimes. At this point in his career he should which side of the field to bunt toward.
IIRC, didn't Marte square to bunt the pitch before that? If so, then he was clearly trying to sacrifice rather than surprise the defense for a bunt single. It has to be the mgr's call for a sac bunt. If Marte did that on his own, he needs to be talked to.
IIRC, didn't Marte square to bunt the pitch before that? If so, then he was clearly trying to sacrifice rather than surprise the defense for a bunt single. It has to be the mgr's call for a sac bunt. If Marte did that on his own, he needs to be talked to.
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
113C31202736216162530 wrote: Hurdle said that Marte was bunting on his own. He can be pretty exasperating sometimes. At this point in his career he should which side of the field to bunt toward.
IIRC, didn't Marte square to bunt the pitch before that? If so, then he was clearly trying to sacrifice rather than surprise the defense for a bunt single. It has to be the mgr's call for a sac bunt. If Marte did that on his own, he needs to be talked to.
I'm more ok with it. He was likely bunting knowing that Sandoval was the third baseman and that it would take a perfect play from Sandoval to get him at first. Then, worst case scenario would be that he moved Mercer to 2nd and it because a sac bunt. Problem was, he didn't execute.
IIRC, didn't Marte square to bunt the pitch before that? If so, then he was clearly trying to sacrifice rather than surprise the defense for a bunt single. It has to be the mgr's call for a sac bunt. If Marte did that on his own, he needs to be talked to.
I'm more ok with it. He was likely bunting knowing that Sandoval was the third baseman and that it would take a perfect play from Sandoval to get him at first. Then, worst case scenario would be that he moved Mercer to 2nd and it because a sac bunt. Problem was, he didn't execute.
-
Bobster21
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
4955584E4E443D0 wrote:
I don't like the 2-0 green light because I don't think the numbers support it. Fudging things a bit here but but with league average .250 hitters the likelihood of back to back hits is 1/16. If Marte steals at a 50% clip the likelihood of a successful steal and a Cutch hit to knock him in are 1/8. Of course Cutch could have clobbered the 2-0 pitch over the green monster, anything can happen and it's a debatable call, I just don't like it given that particular set of variables (who was on base, who was batting, that point in the game, etc.).
I don't think strategy should be reduced to odds, especially in a game where .300 is considered a good percentage. The odd of getting a hit are never good so you have to maximize the chances. Using your example, once a .250 hitter has already singled, the odds of another .250 getting a hit are better if he gets a fat 2-0 pitch to hit. Stats show a significant drop off in BA from 2-0 pitches to 2-1 pitches. On 2-0 the batter is more likely to see a fastball to reduce the odds of the pitcher going to 3-0. If the batter sees the pitch he wants in the spot he wants, the likelihood of getting a hit is increased. If he takes that pitch, he's got even less chance of getting a hit on the 2-1 pitch.
I don't like the 2-0 green light because I don't think the numbers support it. Fudging things a bit here but but with league average .250 hitters the likelihood of back to back hits is 1/16. If Marte steals at a 50% clip the likelihood of a successful steal and a Cutch hit to knock him in are 1/8. Of course Cutch could have clobbered the 2-0 pitch over the green monster, anything can happen and it's a debatable call, I just don't like it given that particular set of variables (who was on base, who was batting, that point in the game, etc.).
I don't think strategy should be reduced to odds, especially in a game where .300 is considered a good percentage. The odd of getting a hit are never good so you have to maximize the chances. Using your example, once a .250 hitter has already singled, the odds of another .250 getting a hit are better if he gets a fat 2-0 pitch to hit. Stats show a significant drop off in BA from 2-0 pitches to 2-1 pitches. On 2-0 the batter is more likely to see a fastball to reduce the odds of the pitcher going to 3-0. If the batter sees the pitch he wants in the spot he wants, the likelihood of getting a hit is increased. If he takes that pitch, he's got even less chance of getting a hit on the 2-1 pitch.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
567B76676071662625140 wrote:
I don't like the 2-0 green light because I don't think the numbers support it. Fudging things a bit here but but with league average .250 hitters the likelihood of back to back hits is 1/16. If Marte steals at a 50% clip the likelihood of a successful steal and a Cutch hit to knock him in are 1/8. Of course Cutch could have clobbered the 2-0 pitch over the green monster, anything can happen and it's a debatable call, I just don't like it given that particular set of variables (who was on base, who was batting, that point in the game, etc.).
I don't think strategy should be reduced to odds, especially in a game where .300 is considered a good percentage. The odd of getting a hit are never good so you have to maximize the chances. Using your example, once a .250 hitter has already singled, the odds of another .250 getting a hit are better if he gets a fat 2-0 pitch to hit. Stats show a significant drop off in BA from 2-0 pitches to 2-1 pitches. On 2-0 the batter is more likely to see a fastball to reduce the odds of the pitcher going to 3-0. If the batter sees the pitch he wants in the spot he wants, the likelihood of getting a hit is increased. If he takes that pitch, he's got even less chance of getting a hit on the 2-1 pitch.
Yeah, but if you're playing the long game you want the pitcher to work harder so that the end of his outing is shortened.
Not saying to always take of course, but I think it's complicated (which makes this game great).
I don't like the 2-0 green light because I don't think the numbers support it. Fudging things a bit here but but with league average .250 hitters the likelihood of back to back hits is 1/16. If Marte steals at a 50% clip the likelihood of a successful steal and a Cutch hit to knock him in are 1/8. Of course Cutch could have clobbered the 2-0 pitch over the green monster, anything can happen and it's a debatable call, I just don't like it given that particular set of variables (who was on base, who was batting, that point in the game, etc.).
I don't think strategy should be reduced to odds, especially in a game where .300 is considered a good percentage. The odd of getting a hit are never good so you have to maximize the chances. Using your example, once a .250 hitter has already singled, the odds of another .250 getting a hit are better if he gets a fat 2-0 pitch to hit. Stats show a significant drop off in BA from 2-0 pitches to 2-1 pitches. On 2-0 the batter is more likely to see a fastball to reduce the odds of the pitcher going to 3-0. If the batter sees the pitch he wants in the spot he wants, the likelihood of getting a hit is increased. If he takes that pitch, he's got even less chance of getting a hit on the 2-1 pitch.
Yeah, but if you're playing the long game you want the pitcher to work harder so that the end of his outing is shortened.
Not saying to always take of course, but I think it's complicated (which makes this game great).
-
Bobster21
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
467478786C5E7D74797C7374150 wrote:
I don't like the 2-0 green light because I don't think the numbers support it. Fudging things a bit here but but with league average .250 hitters the likelihood of back to back hits is 1/16. If Marte steals at a 50% clip the likelihood of a successful steal and a Cutch hit to knock him in are 1/8. Of course Cutch could have clobbered the 2-0 pitch over the green monster, anything can happen and it's a debatable call, I just don't like it given that particular set of variables (who was on base, who was batting, that point in the game, etc.).
I don't think strategy should be reduced to odds, especially in a game where .300 is considered a good percentage. The odd of getting a hit are never good so you have to maximize the chances. Using your example, once a .250 hitter has already singled, the odds of another .250 getting a hit are better if he gets a fat 2-0 pitch to hit. Stats show a significant drop off in BA from 2-0 pitches to 2-1 pitches. On 2-0 the batter is more likely to see a fastball to reduce the odds of the pitcher going to 3-0. If the batter sees the pitch he wants in the spot he wants, the likelihood of getting a hit is increased. If he takes that pitch, he's got even less chance of getting a hit on the 2-1 pitch.
Yeah, but if you're playing the long game you want the pitcher to work harder so that the end of his outing is shortened.
Not saying to always take of course, but I think it's complicated (which makes this game great).
It's good to work the count and make the pitcher work. But hits are always hard to get. So you want to get pitchers in those 2-0 and 3-1 counts because it maximizes the chance of getting more hittable pitches. Letting those pitches go by just to increase the pitch count is probably not a good strategy.
I don't like the 2-0 green light because I don't think the numbers support it. Fudging things a bit here but but with league average .250 hitters the likelihood of back to back hits is 1/16. If Marte steals at a 50% clip the likelihood of a successful steal and a Cutch hit to knock him in are 1/8. Of course Cutch could have clobbered the 2-0 pitch over the green monster, anything can happen and it's a debatable call, I just don't like it given that particular set of variables (who was on base, who was batting, that point in the game, etc.).
I don't think strategy should be reduced to odds, especially in a game where .300 is considered a good percentage. The odd of getting a hit are never good so you have to maximize the chances. Using your example, once a .250 hitter has already singled, the odds of another .250 getting a hit are better if he gets a fat 2-0 pitch to hit. Stats show a significant drop off in BA from 2-0 pitches to 2-1 pitches. On 2-0 the batter is more likely to see a fastball to reduce the odds of the pitcher going to 3-0. If the batter sees the pitch he wants in the spot he wants, the likelihood of getting a hit is increased. If he takes that pitch, he's got even less chance of getting a hit on the 2-1 pitch.
Yeah, but if you're playing the long game you want the pitcher to work harder so that the end of his outing is shortened.
Not saying to always take of course, but I think it's complicated (which makes this game great).
It's good to work the count and make the pitcher work. But hits are always hard to get. So you want to get pitchers in those 2-0 and 3-1 counts because it maximizes the chance of getting more hittable pitches. Letting those pitches go by just to increase the pitch count is probably not a good strategy.
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
5F727F6E69786F2F2C1D0 wrote: That was an ugly inning. Not sure why he didn't let Nicasio pitch 2 innings.
Exactly totally head scratching move. Nicasio is your long guy and for sure Bastardo is a one player reliever, if even that. Hurdle is just awful.
I know you guys are just venting, but I'm going to disagree. It's game 2...of 162. Against an AL team, who won't be competing against us for a division title, or a WC birth. If we throw Nicasio for two innings tonight, that's an inning he might not have in the tank in August against St. Louis or the Mets. I know, it's only one inning. But an extra inning here, an extra inning there, they add up. Not that you throw these games away, but in terms of importance, interleague games are objectively the least important games of the year.
Still worried about #22. :-/
I disagree with you IA. Every game counts the same and every game that's a W or and L counts the same as well especially early in the season. We have seen the Pirates poor April's come back to haunt them in the past costing them a division title and forcing them to play in the wildcard round so I don't believe in the theory that these games don't mean as much right now because they do. They don't give you an extra 1/2 win for winning a game against your division or a wildcard contender, as opposed to winning a game against an AL team like the Red Sox. A few years ago the Pirates had one of the better records in baseball against the AL and in Interleague play, and that was a big reason why they won 94 games in 2013, and 98 games in 2015. I'm not playing to win a game in July or August in April now and worrying about that yet. The Pirates need to win games now. If they don't win games now those games later on in the season that you speak of against the Cardinals or the Mets in August aren't going to matter much because the Pirates could be out of contention by then if they don't win enough games now.
I have to agree with Freddy. While early losses mean little in terms of standings, a loss is a loss and when we see if the record is good enough at the end of the season to make the playoffs, they don't discount losses that were early or to AL teams. IMHO, every game is of equal importance. Unless you've already clinched a playoff spot, there's no game on the schedule that's less important to win. I understand that we aren't competing with Boston for a playoff berth. But we just added one to the L column that we can never get back and that can be the difference between the Pirates playing a WC game or watching it on TV. If they finish a game out of the WC spot, it won't be any consolation that Nicasio was rested after 1 inning on April 5.
But the thing is, your head to head games against teams you are directly competing against for playoff spots are the only guaranteed times when you can influence what your competition does. If we beat the Mets, say, it's not only a win for us, it's (obviously) a loss for them. So, yes, I will stick with my premise that games against AL teams are objectively less important. Does that mean you should throw them away? Of course not. But I'd rather go 0-3 against Boston than go 0-3 against San Fran. After this series, I couldn't care less what Boston does the rest of the year, outside of when they play the Cubs and Cards. I plan to check on the Mets, Giants, Dodgers, Gnats, etc until it's clear they aren't our WC competition.
I don't fault you guys for your opinion. But I'm of the mindset that we need to try and go 12-12 in April (now 12-11 with the rainout). If we do that, I'll feel good about where things are at on May 1.
Exactly totally head scratching move. Nicasio is your long guy and for sure Bastardo is a one player reliever, if even that. Hurdle is just awful.
I know you guys are just venting, but I'm going to disagree. It's game 2...of 162. Against an AL team, who won't be competing against us for a division title, or a WC birth. If we throw Nicasio for two innings tonight, that's an inning he might not have in the tank in August against St. Louis or the Mets. I know, it's only one inning. But an extra inning here, an extra inning there, they add up. Not that you throw these games away, but in terms of importance, interleague games are objectively the least important games of the year.
Still worried about #22. :-/
I disagree with you IA. Every game counts the same and every game that's a W or and L counts the same as well especially early in the season. We have seen the Pirates poor April's come back to haunt them in the past costing them a division title and forcing them to play in the wildcard round so I don't believe in the theory that these games don't mean as much right now because they do. They don't give you an extra 1/2 win for winning a game against your division or a wildcard contender, as opposed to winning a game against an AL team like the Red Sox. A few years ago the Pirates had one of the better records in baseball against the AL and in Interleague play, and that was a big reason why they won 94 games in 2013, and 98 games in 2015. I'm not playing to win a game in July or August in April now and worrying about that yet. The Pirates need to win games now. If they don't win games now those games later on in the season that you speak of against the Cardinals or the Mets in August aren't going to matter much because the Pirates could be out of contention by then if they don't win enough games now.
I have to agree with Freddy. While early losses mean little in terms of standings, a loss is a loss and when we see if the record is good enough at the end of the season to make the playoffs, they don't discount losses that were early or to AL teams. IMHO, every game is of equal importance. Unless you've already clinched a playoff spot, there's no game on the schedule that's less important to win. I understand that we aren't competing with Boston for a playoff berth. But we just added one to the L column that we can never get back and that can be the difference between the Pirates playing a WC game or watching it on TV. If they finish a game out of the WC spot, it won't be any consolation that Nicasio was rested after 1 inning on April 5.
But the thing is, your head to head games against teams you are directly competing against for playoff spots are the only guaranteed times when you can influence what your competition does. If we beat the Mets, say, it's not only a win for us, it's (obviously) a loss for them. So, yes, I will stick with my premise that games against AL teams are objectively less important. Does that mean you should throw them away? Of course not. But I'd rather go 0-3 against Boston than go 0-3 against San Fran. After this series, I couldn't care less what Boston does the rest of the year, outside of when they play the Cubs and Cards. I plan to check on the Mets, Giants, Dodgers, Gnats, etc until it's clear they aren't our WC competition.
I don't fault you guys for your opinion. But I'm of the mindset that we need to try and go 12-12 in April (now 12-11 with the rainout). If we do that, I'll feel good about where things are at on May 1.
-
Bobster21
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
666E6D5A4C694E412F0 wrote: That was an ugly inning. Not sure why he didn't let Nicasio pitch 2 innings.
Exactly totally head scratching move. Nicasio is your long guy and for sure Bastardo is a one player reliever, if even that. Hurdle is just awful.
I know you guys are just venting, but I'm going to disagree. It's game 2...of 162. Against an AL team, who won't be competing against us for a division title, or a WC birth. If we throw Nicasio for two innings tonight, that's an inning he might not have in the tank in August against St. Louis or the Mets. I know, it's only one inning. But an extra inning here, an extra inning there, they add up. Not that you throw these games away, but in terms of importance, interleague games are objectively the least important games of the year.
Still worried about #22. :-/
I disagree with you IA. Every game counts the same and every game that's a W or and L counts the same as well especially early in the season. We have seen the Pirates poor April's come back to haunt them in the past costing them a division title and forcing them to play in the wildcard round so I don't believe in the theory that these games don't mean as much right now because they do. They don't give you an extra 1/2 win for winning a game against your division or a wildcard contender, as opposed to winning a game against an AL team like the Red Sox. A few years ago the Pirates had one of the better records in baseball against the AL and in Interleague play, and that was a big reason why they won 94 games in 2013, and 98 games in 2015. I'm not playing to win a game in July or August in April now and worrying about that yet. The Pirates need to win games now. If they don't win games now those games later on in the season that you speak of against the Cardinals or the Mets in August aren't going to matter much because the Pirates could be out of contention by then if they don't win enough games now.
I have to agree with Freddy. While early losses mean little in terms of standings, a loss is a loss and when we see if the record is good enough at the end of the season to make the playoffs, they don't discount losses that were early or to AL teams. IMHO, every game is of equal importance. Unless you've already clinched a playoff spot, there's no game on the schedule that's less important to win. I understand that we aren't competing with Boston for a playoff berth. But we just added one to the L column that we can never get back and that can be the difference between the Pirates playing a WC game or watching it on TV. If they finish a game out of the WC spot, it won't be any consolation that Nicasio was rested after 1 inning on April 5.
But the thing is, your head to head games against teams you are directly competing against for playoff spots are the only guaranteed times when you can influence what your competition does. If we beat the Mets, say, it's not only a win for us, it's (obviously) a loss for them. So, yes, I will stick with my premise that games against AL teams are objectively less important. Does that mean you should throw them away? Of course not. But I'd rather go 0-3 against Boston than go 0-3 against San Fran. After this series, I couldn't care less what Boston does the rest of the year, outside of when they play the Cubs and Cards. I plan to check on the Mets, Giants, Dodgers, Gnats, etc until it's clear they aren't our WC competition.
I don't fault you guys for your opinion. But I'm of the mindset that we need to try and go 12-12 in April (now 12-11 with the rainout). If we do that, I'll feel good about where things are at on May 1.
I hear ya, IA. Beating a league rival has the added benefit of giving them a loss. An inter-league win can't prevent league rivals from also winning. But the final W-L record will be a combination of both and that's what gets compared to the other league rivals. Let's say the Bucs are in a dogfight for a WC spot with 5 other NL teams. The Bucs can beat the one they're playing on any given day but can't stop the other 4 from winning. The Bucs can win an inter-league game but can't stop all 5 of those NL rivals from winning. All they can do is win the game they are playing so that they total more wins than their NL rivals. In that regard, the inter-league games count just as much. In 2014, 2 games separated the Pirates from the division winning Cardinals. Three more inter-league wins for the Bucs would have had no effect on the Cards' record but would have put the Pirates in 1st place with no WC game.
Exactly totally head scratching move. Nicasio is your long guy and for sure Bastardo is a one player reliever, if even that. Hurdle is just awful.
I know you guys are just venting, but I'm going to disagree. It's game 2...of 162. Against an AL team, who won't be competing against us for a division title, or a WC birth. If we throw Nicasio for two innings tonight, that's an inning he might not have in the tank in August against St. Louis or the Mets. I know, it's only one inning. But an extra inning here, an extra inning there, they add up. Not that you throw these games away, but in terms of importance, interleague games are objectively the least important games of the year.
Still worried about #22. :-/
I disagree with you IA. Every game counts the same and every game that's a W or and L counts the same as well especially early in the season. We have seen the Pirates poor April's come back to haunt them in the past costing them a division title and forcing them to play in the wildcard round so I don't believe in the theory that these games don't mean as much right now because they do. They don't give you an extra 1/2 win for winning a game against your division or a wildcard contender, as opposed to winning a game against an AL team like the Red Sox. A few years ago the Pirates had one of the better records in baseball against the AL and in Interleague play, and that was a big reason why they won 94 games in 2013, and 98 games in 2015. I'm not playing to win a game in July or August in April now and worrying about that yet. The Pirates need to win games now. If they don't win games now those games later on in the season that you speak of against the Cardinals or the Mets in August aren't going to matter much because the Pirates could be out of contention by then if they don't win enough games now.
I have to agree with Freddy. While early losses mean little in terms of standings, a loss is a loss and when we see if the record is good enough at the end of the season to make the playoffs, they don't discount losses that were early or to AL teams. IMHO, every game is of equal importance. Unless you've already clinched a playoff spot, there's no game on the schedule that's less important to win. I understand that we aren't competing with Boston for a playoff berth. But we just added one to the L column that we can never get back and that can be the difference between the Pirates playing a WC game or watching it on TV. If they finish a game out of the WC spot, it won't be any consolation that Nicasio was rested after 1 inning on April 5.
But the thing is, your head to head games against teams you are directly competing against for playoff spots are the only guaranteed times when you can influence what your competition does. If we beat the Mets, say, it's not only a win for us, it's (obviously) a loss for them. So, yes, I will stick with my premise that games against AL teams are objectively less important. Does that mean you should throw them away? Of course not. But I'd rather go 0-3 against Boston than go 0-3 against San Fran. After this series, I couldn't care less what Boston does the rest of the year, outside of when they play the Cubs and Cards. I plan to check on the Mets, Giants, Dodgers, Gnats, etc until it's clear they aren't our WC competition.
I don't fault you guys for your opinion. But I'm of the mindset that we need to try and go 12-12 in April (now 12-11 with the rainout). If we do that, I'll feel good about where things are at on May 1.
I hear ya, IA. Beating a league rival has the added benefit of giving them a loss. An inter-league win can't prevent league rivals from also winning. But the final W-L record will be a combination of both and that's what gets compared to the other league rivals. Let's say the Bucs are in a dogfight for a WC spot with 5 other NL teams. The Bucs can beat the one they're playing on any given day but can't stop the other 4 from winning. The Bucs can win an inter-league game but can't stop all 5 of those NL rivals from winning. All they can do is win the game they are playing so that they total more wins than their NL rivals. In that regard, the inter-league games count just as much. In 2014, 2 games separated the Pirates from the division winning Cardinals. Three more inter-league wins for the Bucs would have had no effect on the Cards' record but would have put the Pirates in 1st place with no WC game.
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
True. But, what's easier? Three more interleague wins, or one more head to head win against the Cardinals?
-
SteadyFreddy
4/5 Game Thread-Game 2-Bucs vs. Red Sox
727A794E587D5A553B0 wrote: That was an ugly inning. Not sure why he didn't let Nicasio pitch 2 innings.
Exactly totally head scratching move. Nicasio is your long guy and for sure Bastardo is a one player reliever, if even that. Hurdle is just awful.
I know you guys are just venting, but I'm going to disagree. It's game 2...of 162. Against an AL team, who won't be competing against us for a division title, or a WC birth. If we throw Nicasio for two innings tonight, that's an inning he might not have in the tank in August against St. Louis or the Mets. I know, it's only one inning. But an extra inning here, an extra inning there, they add up. Not that you throw these games away, but in terms of importance, interleague games are objectively the least important games of the year.
Still worried about #22. :-/
I disagree with you IA. Every game counts the same and every game that's a W or and L counts the same as well especially early in the season. We have seen the Pirates poor April's come back to haunt them in the past costing them a division title and forcing them to play in the wildcard round so I don't believe in the theory that these games don't mean as much right now because they do. They don't give you an extra 1/2 win for winning a game against your division or a wildcard contender, as opposed to winning a game against an AL team like the Red Sox. A few years ago the Pirates had one of the better records in baseball against the AL and in Interleague play, and that was a big reason why they won 94 games in 2013, and 98 games in 2015. I'm not playing to win a game in July or August in April now and worrying about that yet. The Pirates need to win games now. If they don't win games now those games later on in the season that you speak of against the Cardinals or the Mets in August aren't going to matter much because the Pirates could be out of contention by then if they don't win enough games now.
I have to agree with Freddy. While early losses mean little in terms of standings, a loss is a loss and when we see if the record is good enough at the end of the season to make the playoffs, they don't discount losses that were early or to AL teams. IMHO, every game is of equal importance. Unless you've already clinched a playoff spot, there's no game on the schedule that's less important to win. I understand that we aren't competing with Boston for a playoff berth. But we just added one to the L column that we can never get back and that can be the difference between the Pirates playing a WC game or watching it on TV. If they finish a game out of the WC spot, it won't be any consolation that Nicasio was rested after 1 inning on April 5.
But I'm of the mindset that we need to try and go 12-12 in April (now 12-11 with the rainout). If we do that, I'll feel good about where things are at on May 1.
Looking at the Pirates schedule the rest of the month I think they are going to have a hard time going 12-12 this month. They will play 24 games now this month since they are making up the game with Boston that was cancelled today next Thursday. If they are going to go 12-12 this month the Pirates better go at least 4-2 in these next 6 games they have with both the Braves and Reds because after that the next 16 games are very very tough as the Pirates have the make up game at Boston, 3 at Chicago, 3 at St Louis, 3 at home against the Yankees, 3 at home against the Cubs, and then finish the month out by playing 3 games in Miami against the Marlins. That is going to be a tough stretch for the Pirates. So while these next 6 games at home with both the Braves and Reds aren't absolute MUST wins the Pirates really need at least 4 out of 6 wins in that stretch. Anything less then that and I think they are going to be in serious trouble for the rest of the month looking at that upcoming schedule. And if your goal is to go 12-12 this month and win this division 12-12 is most likely going to probably put you around 6-7 games back of the Cubs at the end of this month as good as they are.
Exactly totally head scratching move. Nicasio is your long guy and for sure Bastardo is a one player reliever, if even that. Hurdle is just awful.
I know you guys are just venting, but I'm going to disagree. It's game 2...of 162. Against an AL team, who won't be competing against us for a division title, or a WC birth. If we throw Nicasio for two innings tonight, that's an inning he might not have in the tank in August against St. Louis or the Mets. I know, it's only one inning. But an extra inning here, an extra inning there, they add up. Not that you throw these games away, but in terms of importance, interleague games are objectively the least important games of the year.
Still worried about #22. :-/
I disagree with you IA. Every game counts the same and every game that's a W or and L counts the same as well especially early in the season. We have seen the Pirates poor April's come back to haunt them in the past costing them a division title and forcing them to play in the wildcard round so I don't believe in the theory that these games don't mean as much right now because they do. They don't give you an extra 1/2 win for winning a game against your division or a wildcard contender, as opposed to winning a game against an AL team like the Red Sox. A few years ago the Pirates had one of the better records in baseball against the AL and in Interleague play, and that was a big reason why they won 94 games in 2013, and 98 games in 2015. I'm not playing to win a game in July or August in April now and worrying about that yet. The Pirates need to win games now. If they don't win games now those games later on in the season that you speak of against the Cardinals or the Mets in August aren't going to matter much because the Pirates could be out of contention by then if they don't win enough games now.
I have to agree with Freddy. While early losses mean little in terms of standings, a loss is a loss and when we see if the record is good enough at the end of the season to make the playoffs, they don't discount losses that were early or to AL teams. IMHO, every game is of equal importance. Unless you've already clinched a playoff spot, there's no game on the schedule that's less important to win. I understand that we aren't competing with Boston for a playoff berth. But we just added one to the L column that we can never get back and that can be the difference between the Pirates playing a WC game or watching it on TV. If they finish a game out of the WC spot, it won't be any consolation that Nicasio was rested after 1 inning on April 5.
But I'm of the mindset that we need to try and go 12-12 in April (now 12-11 with the rainout). If we do that, I'll feel good about where things are at on May 1.
Looking at the Pirates schedule the rest of the month I think they are going to have a hard time going 12-12 this month. They will play 24 games now this month since they are making up the game with Boston that was cancelled today next Thursday. If they are going to go 12-12 this month the Pirates better go at least 4-2 in these next 6 games they have with both the Braves and Reds because after that the next 16 games are very very tough as the Pirates have the make up game at Boston, 3 at Chicago, 3 at St Louis, 3 at home against the Yankees, 3 at home against the Cubs, and then finish the month out by playing 3 games in Miami against the Marlins. That is going to be a tough stretch for the Pirates. So while these next 6 games at home with both the Braves and Reds aren't absolute MUST wins the Pirates really need at least 4 out of 6 wins in that stretch. Anything less then that and I think they are going to be in serious trouble for the rest of the month looking at that upcoming schedule. And if your goal is to go 12-12 this month and win this division 12-12 is most likely going to probably put you around 6-7 games back of the Cubs at the end of this month as good as they are.