Brewers 7, Pirates 4: Bucs Drop 17th Consecutive Game Against Milwaukee
by Charlie on May 5, 2009 12:08 AM EDT
26 comments
The Bucs grabbed an early lead in this one off a suddenly-hittable Yovani Gallardo with an RBI triple by Brandon Moss and a homer by Andy LaRoche that smacked the left-field foul pole. When those two events happened, any Bucs fan could be forgiven for wondering how the Pirates could've possibly lost. After all, it was only Moss' third RBI and Luigi's first homer--the gods had to be on Pittsburgh's side, right?
Well, no. Paul Maholm looked great the entire evening, locating his pitches well, throwing nifty breaking balls and racking up strikeouts and ground balls. He left the game with one out and a man on in the eighth. Flood Gates Yates shockingly faced a batter without allowing a walk. But then John Grabow allowed two batters to reach base and gave up a two-out double to Ryan Braun that tied the game. Jason Jaramillo put the Pirates ahead with an RBI double in the bottom of the eighth inning. (It was Jaramillo's second double of the game; remarkably, seven of his 39 at bats have been doubles.)
And then... Matt Capps. Capps allowed four runs on a couple of singles, a walk, a sacrifice fly, and a three-run jack by Rickie Weeks. It was Capps' second meltdown in three days, which will really get you if you're a reliever--he could be dominant the rest of the year and still be fighting to get that ERA down. It's entirely possible that he'll run off a streak of great outings for the next month and this blowup will be forgotten everywhere but in Capps' stat line, but for now, he has an ERA of 7.56. Before the season, if you'd asked me to list the Bucs' relievers from most reliable to least reliable, I probably would've said something like this:
Capps, Grabow, Yates, Chavez, Burnett, Hansen, Veal
...And if I'd written that, some of you might've chimed in to endorse Burnett over Chavez, but that's about it. Everything else is straightforward. Today, though? Hansen is gone for the time being and Veal is still down at the bottom, but based on what's happened so far, it might go
Grabow, Chavez, Burnett, Meek, Capps, Yates, Veal
...With Meek and Veal getting docked a bit for all their walks. Grabow has been fine (despite his struggles today and the fact that he hasn't done a good job preventing inherited runners from scoring), Chavez and Burnett have been surprisingly good, and Capps and Yates have been disastrous. There's not much sense worrying about small sample sizes, but my sense is that Capps will recover and Yates will not. If either of them continue to struggle, Chavez will start seeing some more high-leverage innings. He's already starting to, but my sense is that we'll be seeing him more in the seventh and eighth. It'll be interesting to see how the league reacts to seeing him a few times--he's already adjusted some by adding more breaking balls than he was throwing a few weeks ago.
This has been a surprisingly long tangent. But here are the basics.
Maholm = good
Pirates = can't beat Brewers
Bullpen = ???
0 recs |
26 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I spent
the top of the eighth cursing Russell for being one of those managers who will ONLY EVER use the closer to start the ninth with no one on. Well, meltdown or no meltdown to come, I’m sticking to that. If Capps is supposed to be your best reliever, there’s abso-freaking-lutely no reason not to use him to get the last out of the eighth as well as the three outs in the ninth.
I mean, why is a lefthander facing right-handed Braun with the bases loaded and the game on the line? What are you saving Capps for, a HIGHER-leverage situation in the ninth? Which always starts with nobody on?
Why does a new-age guy like Huntington allow a stone-age manager like Russell to run his team?
by bucdaddy on May 5, 2009 12:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If Russell were a stone age manager he would have either left Malholm in there to try to finish at least the 8th himself, or would have brought Capps right in after he took Malholm out.
I didn’t quite catch the exact reasoning that Malholm was taken out when he was, but it seems to me that it was only really due to pitch count. If the stupid pitch count is just done away with as it should be, then I don’t think that just one walk, his first of the night, is reason enough to take him out.
by Schide on May 5, 2009 12:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I couldn't agree with you more...
Why in the world did JR pull him in the eighth? I know hindsight is 20/20, but he was cruising. He walked a batter in the eighth, his first walk of the game, and he immediately gets yanked. I don’t think pitch count can be used as an excuse because Snell stayed in the game in Milwaukee and threw 130 pitches! I didn’t understand the move at all.
by thelumberco. on May 5, 2009 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
disagree
I agree that Russell makes some strange (bad?) decisions, but I thought that removing Maholm there was good move. How many times do we see the manager leave the pitcher in for ONE batter too long? After absolutely cruising all night, Maholm seemed to be losing it a little. He went 3-2 on Hardy and struck him out on what was clearly ball 4, then walked Hardy — his first of the night. To my amateur eye, he looked like he was losing command, and I thought it was a good preemptive move to replace him, though of course I cringed when they brought in Yates. And I agree that it would probably have been better strategy to bring in Capps to face Braun, but it wasn’t egregiously stupid to leave in Grabow. He’s theoretically our second best reliever, and isn’t he supposed to OK against righties? He almost had Braun struck out, and the double really was just a soft fly ball.
It seems to me that in the past, when Capps has been lit up for a few games in a row, he’s wound up on the DL. His velocity wasn’t bad, but boy does he look like a bad pitcher, which he’s not. I have to wonder if there’s some health issues lurking there.
by brooklynpirate on May 5, 2009 8:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except
it sounded like Grabow was struggling, hit and a walk before Braun.
My issue is that the “closer” has evolved into an almost useless role, if you’re ONLY going to use him to START the ninth with the bases empty. Geez, almost every reliever in the majors ought to be able to get you three outs without allowing a run two-thirds of the time (Yates and Hansen, mebbe not …) if you hand him that situation.
And why is it JAYson HAIR-a-MEE-yo? Shouldn’t it either be HAYson HAIR-a-MEE-yo or JAYson JAIR-a-MEE-yo?
by bucdaddy on May 5, 2009 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, like I said, I think he probably should have brought Capps in then, but it’s not clear cut enough in my mind that I can really get upset about it. Grabow did give up a hit and a walk, but was making some good pitches — he didn’t look like a batting practice pitcher like Capps did the next inning — and it didn’t seem impossible that he could get Braun. Essentially he did he job; Braun didn’t hit the ball well at all.
I do agree, though, that the way closers are used now seems generally insane.
by brooklynpirate on May 5, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree about the evolution of a "closer", vs. a "fireman"
where have you gone, Dave Giusti?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/giustda01-pitch.shtml
by humbucker on May 5, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The name Jason is English in origin (remember, he was born in Wisconsin) and should be pronounced as such. The name Jaramillo, however, comes from Spanish roots.
by shayborg on May 5, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess that’s why they say hindsight is 20/20. The only thing I can say is that he wasn’t getting hit before he came out. You know, usually the pitcher will give up a single here, a double there, and another single, and then he gets pulled once he starts getting hit late in the game. But Maholm wasn’t getting touched. He walked a batter in the eighth after getting one out in the inning, and he was pulled. Nobody knows what would’ve happened if he had stayed out there, but he looked really good and the way our bullpen has been performing lately, I had much more confidence in Maholm.
by thelumberco. on May 5, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not saying Russell is a good manager, but good managers (maybe the pitching coach makes the call — I’m in no position to know) have a feel for pulling their pitchers just before they melt down, not after. Of course we’ll never know (until the earth hits a black hole and all of history is changed) what would have happened, but Maholm was clearly losing his sharpness. He was starting have a problem throwing strikes (his K that inning clearly came on what would have been ball 4), and when a pitcher who has been a strike throwing machine gets into the 8th inning and begins to lose the plate, it’s very often a sign of impending doom. Could Maholm toughed it out and gotten through the inning? Maybe yes, maybe no. I’m inclined to let people do their jobs — the job of the bullpen is to get the last 5 outs. It shouldn’t be that difficult.
by brooklynpirate on May 5, 2009 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No wonder
I just watch the video replays of Weeks’ bomb and Hardy’s sac fly (it was more like a sac bullet) and Capps is just throwing fastballs down the middle! Where is his command? I don’t care if you throw 98, fastballs right down the middle in this league are going to get hit a long way, especially when that’s all you throw. I think Capps will be fine, but he’s got to find that command again and start mixing his slider and changeup in there some more, obviously. Every closer blows at least one save every year. It happens, but Capps has been getting hit pretty good lately. I think he’ll turn it around. He’s a good closer.
by thelumberco. on May 5, 2009 12:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Maholm had to come out
At that point in the game, with a runner on and a one run lead with no outs, and Weeks up it was the good move. But bringing Yeats in was awful. And then leaving Grabow in to face Braun was a big mistake too. To his credit the Braun hit was a little dink shot (thats 2 second win in a row by the Brewers on a dink hit).
The Pirates will hold onto Russell just like the Brewers did with Yost while there are a lot of young players. The team is greatly improved over last year but the little decisions that make the difference between being successful and being in last place are not being made correctly by JR. When the teams talent starts to win them games Russell will be moved out to make way for a veteran manager that will make the decisions to win games like last night.
by backtocali on May 5, 2009 7:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
But bringing Yeats in was awful.
although you hide in the ebb and flow
of the pale tide when the moon has set,
the people of coming days will know
about the casting out of my net,
and how you have leaped times out of mind
over the little silver cords,
and think that you were hard and unkind,
and blame you with many bitter words
- w.b. yeats
i suppose i wouldn’t want him pitching the eighth either.
by johnnycuff on May 5, 2009 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bullpen issues will dog us this year...
Taking a long range view of the Pirates, the fact that our bullpen is crappy isn’t that big of a deal. We weren’t expected to be a winning, competing club this year. This season is all about transition. Having a cruddy bullpen actually allows Russel and Kerrigan to challenge the starters to work deeper into games. We’ve seen that thus far this season, with Russell getting flamed for leaving pitchers in for too long.
It will benefit these pitchers in the long run to be left in there a bit too long. Stretching out your young-ish starters is a worthy goal leading up to seasons when all the components are in place – and they clearly are not yet in place.
Grabow, Chavez and Burnett (against lefties) are the only guys that can be counted on, with Yates, Veal and Hansen struggling in limited work. And it’s only a matter of time before Chavez has a melt down. Capps has been off the last few weeks. His 4 walks are 1 less than he had all last season.
All this to say – a loss like last night’s is poor. We should have won. But I’d rather see the positives – Maholm struggling at first and then righting his ship; AnLaroche with his first HR of the season; Freddy with a couple more doubles to increase his trade value; Jaramillo playing way above his minor league averages as a fill-in for Ryan Doumit.
These are the sorts of things we said we were going to focus on before the season started out so well W-L-wise. Let’s not forget – the goal is 2011/2012.
by SloshyJ on May 5, 2009 9:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I doubt that it will be to the Pirates long-run benefit
if Russell starts/continues to leave his starters in too long. It has been well understood for many years that the combination of a bad bullpen, and pressure on the manager to win now leads to the over use of the starters, which in turn leads to arm trouble.
by WestCoastBuc on May 5, 2009 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Arm troubles...
Leaving a starter in routinely for 130-140 pitches per start will definitely lead to arm fatigue and injury. Dusty Baker could write a book on the practice. I’m certainly not advocating that.
What I mean is leaving a starter in at 95 pitches who is challenged to get the last out of the inning with runners on. If we really cared all that much about the score, we’d go to the bullpen. I’d rather let Maholm try to work his way out of it. That sort of training is only available in real-life scenarios. If he gives up a 3-run HR, it’s one to grow on… how to work out of a jam with the game on the line and your stuff somewhere south of 100%.
Also, I think the 100 pitch cutoff is an arbitrary number. While I don’t want to see a pitcher go much above 125 pitches per start, there is such a thing as stretching out starters. Snell, Duke and Maholm are all in their 4th full seasons. I think it’s fair to push them a bit.
by SloshyJ on May 5, 2009 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with SloshyJ..
about the 100 pitch count. He hadn’t lost that much control and shouldn’t have been pulled from the game. It was his first walk. After his performance in his last start vs the Brewers, especially Braun, why not warm Snell up to face Braun. Haha.
by gorillakilla34 on May 5, 2009 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that it is pretty speculative
to posit that leaving in a tiring pitcher in crucial situations late in the game is somehow good for his future development. Or that allowing Snell Duke and Maholm to routinely throw 125 pitches won’t increase the probablity of arm trouble and will eventually make them more effective once they reach 100 pitches by stretching them out.
by WestCoastBuc on May 5, 2009 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two things
1. I never said routinely throw 125 pitches; I was stating that as a cap for any start, and that 100 pitches is arbitrary. I actually believe pitching mechanics have much more to do with pitcher injuries than crossing the magical 100 pitch threshold. For some pitchers, 85 pitches are too much.
2. Speculative? That there is no statistical basis – or at least, it is hard to measure – doesn’t mean it lacks merit or a basis in how real-life managers develop players.
by SloshyJ on May 5, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess I misunderstood then
your earlier remarks about stretching the starting pitchers out (which I understood to mean that they will be able to routinely throw more pitches without tiring once they have been stretched out) and leaving them in even while they are tiring to give them experience pitching in crucial situations without their best stuff.
To me it seems obvious that human arms were not designed to throw baseballs at 90+ MPH and doing it frequently runs the risk of injury. It seems logical, and I am sure I read it somewhere, perhpaps on this blog, that tired pitchers are more prone to serious injury than those that are not. For this reason I am skeptical that the approach you advocate is in the long-term interests of the PBC.
by WestCoastBuc on May 5, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Moss....Andy....of course we blew it
I couldn’t watch the game last night and when I brought up the 3-1 score on my phone after all the bashing/ defending of Moss yesterday (and previously Andy) in the fanshots, I had a weird feeling that Moss drove in a run. Of course I find out he hit an RBI TRIPLE and ANDY HIT A HOMERUN and it was awesome. Of course the next time I opened it we were losing 7-4. go bucs.
McLouth is The Trouth
by GTrain on May 5, 2009 11:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Littlefield was in attendance again.
This time I asked him how “that Wieters kid” was doing. Shockingly, he didn’t respond. I’m guessing that was either because he didn’t know how he was doing, or he didn’t want to acknowledge that minor mistake of his. I’d go with the latter.
by Isotopes on May 5, 2009 3:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The poor guy must hear that every time a Pirates fan sees him. He was incompetent, sure, but I think it’s more appropriate to blame the direct supervisor that quietly watched him screw up the organization for half a decade.
by shayborg on May 5, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Luckily, we don’t have to only blame one.
by Charlie on May 5, 2009 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He ought to get an earfull anytime he sees a Pirate fan! He has put this organization in such a deep hole to try to climb out of. I seriously think his ritual was to get drunk on draft day because those were some drunk picks! Bryan Bullington? Daniel Moskos? Are kidding me? DL was either drunk, or he’s borderline retarded.
by thelumberco. on May 5, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
