Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Two Minutes Of Thunder Basketball Wins The Game

Cubs 6, Pirates 4

If you watched the Pens game instead, you missed yet another frustrating, entertaining, and ridiculously long Pirates game. This one went into extra innings yet again, although this wasn't one of those wild, football-score games we've come to expect, at least not at first. Instead, it was very quiet for a while, as Ryan Dempster somehow one-hit the Pirates for seven innings.

For the Pirates, Zach Duke was the best I've seen him in at least a year. The velocity still isn't there, but he struck out six batters, including three very good ones (Derrek Lee, Alfonso Soriano and Kosuke Fukodome). They weren't cheap strikeouts, either - he was just outsmarting his opponents and making them look silly, Fukudome especially. I don't know if this start really meant anything, but Duke was just terrific.

In spite of that, he left the game with the Pirates one run behind. Franquelis Osoria allowed another run when he made an error, dropping a good throw from Adam LaRoche. (How many errors will Pirates pitchers make this year?)

The first two Pirates reached base in the bottom of the eighth, but couldn't really capitalize. Again, a bunt was involved. Something worth keeping in mind when a bunt takes place is that it may not be successful. Even forgetting about the fact that you're giving up an out, it's a risky play. In this case, pinch hitter and BD whipping boy Luis 0-for-3vas attempted a bunt with a 2-0 score and runners on first and second with no outs in the eighth. I know the second run (represented by the runner on first) is very important in that situation, but look:

Run expectancy, 0 outs and runners on 1st and 2nd: 1.573

Run expectancy, 1 out and runners on 2nd and 3rd: 1.467

The bunt is a good play in that situation only if it's actually successful. Add in the probability that the batter flubs the bunt, and I'd say it's generally not a good play.

Well, Rivas flubbed the bunt - he popped it up and Lee made a great diving catch to get to it, then doubled off the runner at first (Nyjer Morgan, who was only in as a pinch hitter anyway), who was inexplicably stuck between first and second.

So, if you're keeping track at home, that's one player (Rivas) brought in only to bunt and failing in just about the worst way possible, and another (Morgan) who's on the bench largely for his baserunning ability getting caught with his pants down while trying to run the bases. Which raises an obvious question: what in the world are either of these guys doing on the team? Seriously? This team is built like a car that you can fry eggs on but that you can't drive anywhere. Morgan would make a heck of a track star, but a baseball player? No, not so much. (By the way, big props to the fans at PNC Park who started chanting "M! V! P!" when Rivas came to bat in the 13th.)

You can add the Pirates' first- and third-base coaches to the question, too - what is their function? On Monday, third base coach Tony Beasley was caught in the headlights while Jose Bautista made a safety squeeze. Today, Doug Mientkiewicz (who, by the way, might well come in last in a 100-yard dash against Wilford Brimley, Ronny Paulino, John Kruk, and a caterpillar) was gunned down easily while trying to stretch a single into a double. That's at least the third time this year a Pirate runner has been thrown out in embarrassing fashion in exactly that circumstance. What, exactly, is first-base coach Lou Frazier doing out there?

Anyway, the Pirates ended up picking up a run in the eighth on a hit by Nate McLouth, and then another in the ninth on a solo homer by Jason Bay (who had a great game), so the Bucs went to extra innings for the fourth time already this year.

After that, there was some pretty heroic work by the bullpen, which didn't allow a run in extras until the 14th. (That was a two-run homer by Aramis Ramirez off Phil Dumatrait.) I figured that would be it for the Bucs, but in the 14th, a miracle occurred. Bay legged out an infield single, and LaRoche - yes, LaRoche, who'd been 2-for-27 on the year up to that point - smacked a two-run homer into the right-field seats. It seemed 1980-Olympic-hockey improbable, but that's what happened, and the game went to the 15th.

Then, Rivas botched a critical double play, tagging second but failing to make the throw to first to get Kevin Hart. Geovany Soto had made a decent slide, but Rivas was a bit slow getting to the bag and shouldn't have allowed himself to be taken out of the play. That turned out to be very important, because Dumatrait made a wild pitch to move the runners up to second and third (and maybe it's my own bias shining through here, but I'm not inclined to blame the wild pitch on Doumit; only a fantastic defensive catcher would've gotten to it). After intentionally walking Alfonso Soriano, Dumatrait allowed Felix Pie to single in two more runs.

Evan Meek loomed large in this game yet again, even though he wasn't allowed to actually pitch. When Dumatrait went to the mound, Meek was the only guy left in the 'pen. Because the Pirates understandably weren't comfortable with Meek, they had no choice but to allow Dumatrait to pitch three innings and allow four runs. Those last two stood up as the Pirates failed to score in the 15th, and the Cubs won, 6-4.

Again, it seems to me that the Pirates are hurting themselves a lot by continuing to have Rivas and Meek on the roster. I can understand why the Pirates shouldn't make any rash decisions - most weeks of baseball aren't anything like this, and it's usually much easier to hide a player like Meek. Still, though, Rivas in particular has been incredibly frustrating to watch.

Comment 32 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

In other news

Sean Burnett pitched THREE yes THREE scoreless innings to notch a save for Indy tonight.

Here's his line so far this season

6 IP 2 H 0 Runs 4 BB 6 SO opp BA .105

Who's up for creating an online petition to bring Burnett to PNC?

by Bad Andy on Apr 9, 2008 11:39 PM EDT reply actions  

I'll sign it!

Biased Fan
A disillusioned Pirates fan in Utah...

by UtesFan89 on Apr 10, 2008 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions  

Are we sure

Meek has to be the one to go?
Why not Rivas? It leaves you one short on the bench, but that should be alright... no?

Biased Fan
A disillusioned Pirates fan in Utah...

by UtesFan89 on Apr 10, 2008 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

I still think Meek

deserves another shot though... but calling up Burnett for Rivas doesn't work because the bench is crap as it is.
Maybe give Meek another week or so.
Meanwhile, call up someone to take bench spot at the least.

Hopefully LaRoche will start hitting now.

Biased Fan
A disillusioned Pirates fan in Utah...

by UtesFan89 on Apr 10, 2008 12:03 AM EDT reply actions  

Blaming Meek

I posted this on the game thread, but it was after the game was over so it got no response:

"John Russell used his 4 best relievers for 3 innings and now it's Meeks' fault he only had Yates and Dumatrait left in extra innings? Russell's lack of forethought is not Evan Meeks' problem."

I agree that Evan Meek has not been impressive (or even effective) so far, but I also don't think it's fair to say the Pirates lost this game because he was the only guy left in the bullpen so they had "no choice" but to send Dumatrait back out there. Candidly, yes they did have a choice; Better use of their relievers in the first place would have helped, and there are 3 pitchers on the team who aren't starting tomorrow.

by bryanzane on Apr 10, 2008 12:55 AM EDT reply actions  

I agree

Matt Morris has a 300-inning salary, but, is on pace to pitch only 150 innings. 30 starts X 5 innings = 150 innings.

by Pirate in Ole VA on Apr 10, 2008 1:48 AM EDT up reply actions  

Russell

I would prefer he play to win today, rather than play not to lose the next 3 to 5; especially when the
opportunity to win presents itself.

by Pirate in Ole VA on Apr 10, 2008 1:59 AM EDT up reply actions  

One thing

he could have done by using his relievers better and playing to win is by throwing Capps 2 innings. He didn't throw an excessive amount of pitches in the 9th, and he could probably still come in for a save situation if needed tonight because they were off on Tuesday.

by DITO on Apr 10, 2008 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

Even worse

30 starts X 5 runs = 150 runs

by WTM on Apr 10, 2008 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

A Very Good Point

Why not use a starter who is not pitching for a couple of days, especially this early in the season?

by patthatt on Apr 10, 2008 1:52 AM EDT reply actions  

yet another hard loss

I agree that they should play to win. But the first step should be to have made the right roster moves to have the talent available to do so. Meek needs to go. Sorry but thats the way things go when you get paid millions of dollars, or in his case thousands of dollars to win. When it comes down to it in any sport the point of playing is to win as many games as possible. This team so far this year has definetly been more exciting but the same result in the win / loss column. If you take away a few stupid errors and base running mistakes then they could be first in the division right now. I just hope they can work things out before its too late for the 16th straight year.

by gorillakilla34 on Apr 10, 2008 2:37 AM EDT reply actions  

Dammit

Even Royals and Marlins fans get to enjoy a few minutes in first place this late in the season. Why not us? Why never us?

And because it wouldn't be baseball season if I didn't raise my annual gripe: Why is it we have to beat out five other teams to win our division when teams in the AL West only have to beat out three and everyone else has to beat out four? Where's the fairness in being forced to play in the biggest division in the four major North American sports?

If you just randomly distributed the championships, we would average 16.7 every 100 years, while Seattle would get 25. That's just not freaking right. The other three major pro sports all made moves to equalize their divisions years ago. Only baseball thinks it's perfectly fine to have one division with 50% more teams in it than another division.

Scheduling problems? I call bullspit. As long as we're going to have interleague games, just have 15 teams in each league and play the interleague series one at a time, rather than bunching them into a couple weeks.

Or ... you could have a rule that the NL Central ALWAYS gets the wild card while the AL West NEVER can.

There are ways to make it fair, but I guess somebody'd have to care. And nobody at the official level ever seems to raise hell about this. If I owned a team in the NLC, I would, and loudly, and all the time.

by bucdaddy on Apr 10, 2008 9:36 AM EDT reply actions  

The easy solution...

...would be to send the Brewers back to the AL. I'd miss watching 'em, but it'd give us six 5-team divisions.

by Vlad on Apr 10, 2008 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

true, but it will never happen while bud selig is running the show.

by johnnycuff on Apr 10, 2008 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Is it just me or what?

I did not see the game last night on MLB Extra Innings because it's still income tax season but I fail to understand the totally positive note of DK's article on the game and Russell's equally positive analysis when we continue to play horrible fundamental baseball. Rivas can't bunt. Morgan can run. Our relievers can't field their positions and walk a lot of batters. Has our failure to achieve victory (finish over .500) for soon-to-be a record 16 consecutive season diminished our expectations so much that we are left to looking for small positives in our losses? It is only when our fundamentals improve, we finally get some true talent, and our expectations exceed our grasp that we will ever make the playoffs. These problems must be laid at Huntington's feet for deciding to stand pat with a 69-victory team. Changing front offices never won a game yet.

Gus J. Skeadas

by Illinois Pirate Fan on Apr 10, 2008 10:11 AM EDT reply actions  

I hate this

Run expectancy, 0 outs and runners on 1st and 2nd: 1.573

Run expectancy, 1 out and runners on 2nd and 3rd: 1.467

It just removes all context You're right about the bunt being bad, but you're leaving out the context of who the batter is. It's a man you've nicknamed "0-for-3vas". And you want him swinging away? What's the run expectancy for 2 outs, runner on 3rd (after Rivas GIDPs)? What's the run expectancy for 1 out, runners still on 1st and 2nd (after Rivas whiffs or pops out)? Moving the runners while making the inevitable out is a pretty good outcome.

by azibuck on Apr 10, 2008 1:11 PM EDT reply actions  

I think Charlie's point was

...what is Rivas doing on this team? If the second guy you bring in off the bench to pinch hit is so terrible you have him bunt in a situation where it barely helps, and he can't even do that, he's just about useless. That's why the two numbers Charlie cited were the most germane to the issue.

If you're looking for the rest of the numbers, Charlie linked to the page.

by scoreboard on Apr 10, 2008 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not the point of the REM

That was a greater point, but the point of quoting the run expectancy matrix focused on the bunt as a play, not the player.

by azibuck on Apr 10, 2008 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

RIght, but rather than sending in Rivas and calling a bunt (the pitcher was a lefty, correct?), Russell could've sent in someone like Paulino, who pastes lefties.

by Charlie Wilmoth on Apr 11, 2008 11:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

BP's Baseball by the Numbers

Has a great chapter on the subject. First, the only instance in which a successful sacrifice actually increases a team's chance to win the game is in a tie game in the ninth inning (I would assume the same holds true for extra innings). Sacrificing when losing by one reduces win probability by 3.6%. BP notes, as you do azibuck, that this does not take into account a) the success rate of the bunt and b) the batter.

So BP crunched the numbers and determined "threshholds" of ability above which a batter should not be bunting. If a batter falls below these thresholds of ability, it does actually increase win probability to have him bunt. In this situtation, men on 1st/2nd nobody out and only needing one run, your batter better be no better than a .500 OPS hitter. And if you've got .500 OPS hitters on your bench instead of in your bullpen, you've got issues, as scoreboard notes.

BP points out that there are one-run strategies that can improve win probability. Giving away outs is not one of them.

by matskralc on Apr 10, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd like to read that

I've seen it mentioned so many times but just haven't gotten to it. Not having read it, I won't refute what you say, but it sure seems counterintuitive. I mean, when Rivas stepped in, the RE was 1.573. Rivas's lifetime OBP is .307. So less than 31% of the time, the RE will increase, while over 69% of the time the number will decrease. And if it decreases, it's by quite a bit -- over half a run at least, unless the out moves both runners up.

And this has quickly become a cliche, but our bench, right now, "is what it is." Sure, Rivas needs to go, and he'd only be leading the parade of bench players we need to be rid of. But last night, he was on the roster. You have to work with what you have in a given game. The bunt was fine idea, poorly executed.

by azibuck on Apr 10, 2008 9:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

Just wanted to point out

OBP assigns a negative value to outcomes that result in defensive errors on a ball in play (since those should've been outs), but those are actually strongly positive outcomes in terms of run expectancy. Thus, relying on OBP for a "success rate" is going to give you inaccurate results.

by Vlad on Apr 11, 2008 8:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

Whoa....

the rivas thing i totally agree with. BUT you can't be all over Morgan for getting doubled off. The bunt is expected to be laid down and he has to take off. If he's close enough to first to get back that means he is not hustling

http://raisethejollyroger21.blogspot.com

by Raise the Jolly Roger on Apr 10, 2008 3:42 PM EDT reply actions  

Disagree

Bautista didn't recklessly start sprinting for 3rd. Morgan either didn't see it or didn't read the ball. Once it's in the air, he's got to see if it's caught. Did you see the play? Morgan wasn't anywhere near 1st. He was still heading for 2nd when Bautista was already going back to 2nd. It was bad baserunning.

by azibuck on Apr 10, 2008 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

The daily drill

Folks, the bottom line is that this just isn't a very good team, and we all knew that. Every game, it is another litany of "if but for (insert error of omission here) happening" or "if but for (insert error of commission here) not happening," they would have one. The fact is that these things happen to bad teams night after night, not by chance, but because they are bad teams. The trick is to limit those days and night to somewhere between 65 and 70, rather than 85 and 90, or worse. We have too many candidates every given night to make either the error of omission or commission, so shit happens, and happens and keeps on happening, often in the same game.

by RichieHebner on Apr 10, 2008 7:09 PM EDT reply actions  

*sigh*

Alas, 'tis true.

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. -- HST

by cocktailsfor2 on Apr 10, 2008 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Pittsburgh Pirates.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Insetcommodoreperry_small
Guess the Score Game 41: Pirates @ Tigers
Insetcommodoreperry_small
Guess the Game Score Game 40: Pirates @ Tigers
Insetcommodoreperry_small
Guess the Score Game 39: Pirates @ Tigers
Bloody_mary_small
Bucs / Gnats o'flow
Small
5 tool players
Espn_avatar_small
Pirates' Struggling Offense: OBP and Runs Scored
Small
Quick Fixes for the Offense
Insetcommodoreperry_small
Guess the Score Game 38: Pirates @ Nationals
Small
How much longer do we fans have to keep looking at this offense and it's lack of production!!
Small
Bucco Lineup - 5/16/2012

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Charlie_small Charlie Wilmoth

Editors

18470r_small Vlad

Davidtodd_small David Todd

Authors

Img_1692_small WTM

Mark_profile_pic_small MarkInDallas