Playin' The Blame Game

by Eric Simon on Jul 23, 2008 8:00 AM EDT in Commentary Comment 29 comments

I didn't see any of it. I *did* see The Dark Knight at the Alamo Drafthouse Cinema in Austin, where you can eat and consume adult beverages while watching a moviefilm. So I watched the latest Batman installment (editor's note: it rocked), blissfully unaware of the brilliant catastrophe taking place 1,800 miles away. Even as we left the theater and I pulled up MLB.com mobile on my iPhone I had no idea that the Mets' disappointing 8-6 loss was anything but a typical 2008 New York Mets letdown. I figured Johan Santana had a blah start against the Phillies and the Mets weren't able to put enough runs on the board against Joe Blanton to overcome an early deficit.

Again, I saw none of the game, and the internet connection at the Embassy Suites here isn't really strong enough to support the archived video feed from MLB.tv. Nor, for that matter, is the wireless connection I'm stealing from the Mexican restaurant adjacent to our hotel. With that in mind, what follows is based solely on what I've been able to glean from reading the boxscores and the wire service recaps of the game.

I can probably skip the first eight innings, since nobody really cares what happened before the ninth. The pertinent details of those glorious eight frames can be distilled to the following:

Johan Santana allowed two runs
Johan Santana threw 105 pitches

If there's a corollary to those points it's that Billy Wagner was unavailable for the game because he's old, but that's okay because, as I just read on Mets.com, "Manuel [is] confident [that] Sanchez can close". Duaner Sanchez. I kid you not: that article appears on the Mets' homepage, a few links down from last night's recap. From that article by Jon Blau:

"Duaner is a guy who has a tremendous makeup for that particular role," Manuel said. "I have no hesitation about that. His makeup is really off the charts."

*flips to boxscore* Yes, here it is. Duaner Sanchez, in his first taste as closer in absence of Billy Wagner: 0.000 innings pitched, three hits, three runs, three earned, tremendous makeup, zero outs recorded, every batter reached base, off-the-charts makeup. You just can't make this up. Unfortunately, I have no quote from Manual suggesting that Joe Smith and Pedro Feliciano would also make great closers because of their great strength of character, so they have to settle for simply not getting the job done and can only hope that Jerry Manuel's ironic touch can strike them down some other fine day.

I got an e-mail from some dude last night about signing a petition to stop the pitch count, and I guess you can go sign it if you want. Then again, if you're simply dead set on wasting your time you might as well just go pull the internet's finger and at least get a few cheap laughs out of the deal. I can buy the argument that Santana should have been left in to pitch the ninth with a three-run lead and a high-but-not-Livan-Hernandez-high pitch count. Even if you want to give him fifteen pitches -- bumping him up to 120 for the game -- to try to get through the inning, that would have worked for me.

A lot of people are going to pillory Manuel for taking Santana out of the game, and there is plenty of merit to that argument. The other side of the coin is that the burden of responsibility for this loss is on Sanchez, Smith and Feliciano (Sanchez in particular), for allowing six runs while recording just two outs. ~~Randolph~~ Manuel made a questionable bullpen decision and it backfired, but I don't think it was clearly the wrong decision. In retrospect, sure, it looks terrible, but it's not totally unreasonable to expect your bullpen to get three outs before allowing three (or six!) runs to score. Without the data immediately available to corroborate this, I bet that nine times out of ten, a decent non-closer late-innings guy will get the save with a three-run lead in the ninth. It didn't happen this time, and I think that's on Sanchez et al.

This was an awful, awful loss that will linger for a long, long time, or at least until tonight's awesome win/horrible loss, but it wouldn't be baseball if we didn't dwell on the past a bit. I wanna hear in the comments who you think is to blame for this loss and why. If you think it was Manuel's fault, don't just say that it was clearly the wrong decision. I want to know why.

0 recs | Comment 29 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Now is the Time

I went to bed a bit frustrated about Santana being pulled after only 105 pitches. The loss bothered me. But on the way to work I wondered about Manuel – he was facing the loss of his closer (for at least a few days) and he needed to know if a 3-run lead was safe. He pub Dirty in there with a lead against the big-bad division rival, and the Mets lost. I hope Jerry learned a lesson. Maybe Heils should close. Maybe Omar needs to trade for George Sherril. I don’t know. But I’m pretty sure that it’s only July and there are two more games in this series against the Phils. We got to give Jerry some room here.

by IanB in MD on Jul 23, 2008 8:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Anyway, last night

So last night I was in a luxury box at Camden Yards with the office. Happily drinking cans of Amstel Light and chomping on Boogs BBQ, the O’s were doing whatever they were doing. On the out-of-town scoreboard the Mets looked pretty good. My bro (that Catsmeat guy) texted me right when he got out of the new Batman movie. (Terrific movie, right?) Minutes later we were cursing So Taguchi and the bullpen. (We hate So Tagushi and Edgar Renteria.)

Walking out of the stadium, O’s fans were a bit upset because their game slipped away, but I walked towards my car super pissed because the Mets broke down at home against the damn Phillies. No one cared what I thought.

by IanB in MD on Jul 23, 2008 8:43 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Dogg

Yes I hate me some So Taguchi. Howie Rose all had to point out on the radio how Taguchi couldn’t buy a hit over the last month, practically guaranteeing that he was going to knock in the tying runs.

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Jul 23, 2008 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Dark Knight

It wasn’t just terrific; it was awesome. I have no idea how many times I will see it, but it will be quite a few. Thank Jeebus for matinee prices.

by BobbyV_Incognito on Jul 23, 2008 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

HELP SAVE BASEBALL..

Sign the petition to Stop the Pitch Count!

http://www.stopthepitchcount.com

Mike & Sons
Hurting Mets fans

by cnotes on Jul 23, 2008 9:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I can't see dumping this one in Manuel's lap

Could there be a more tailor-made situation in which to use your bullpen absent Wags? Seriously, a three run lead with one frame to go is about as easy street as it’s going to get. If you can’t trust your bullpen in that situation, under what circumstances will they be allowed to pitch? This is precisely the situation-top of the 9th inning, a 3-run lead with no base runners-cited by those who think the save statistic is worthless as the very reason it’s worthless. This situation is supposed to be a Rumsfeldian “slam dunk.” Unfortunately, as we are now painfully aware, in baseball and in imperialist global domination “stuff happens.” But seriously, criticizing Manuel for that one seems a pretty clear case of hindsight bias.

To the extent that there were coaching issues, they resided with the 3rd base coach. It’s funny, with Alomar we all complained that he was too passive at third. Aguayo on the other hand was over-aggressive last night. On the first call, he was aggressive and the Phillies just made a better play. That wasn’t egregious but probably more aggressive than necessary. The second time was uncalled for. You simply have to play it more conservatively with no one out. Running yourself into outs at home when the bats are working (how many 3 hit nights do you expect to get out of Endy?) is just bad coaching.

What chafes is that EVERYONE was awful in the 9th. If they could have just limited the damage to three we still had a shot. Lost in the shuffle was that we scratched out a run against Lidge in the bottom of the 9th. These jokers gave up 5 runs before recording an out. That’s a level of embarrassing that I didn’t think was possible. Perhaps there’s a conspiracy going on. Maybe these guys are deliberately destroying their trade value to make sure they’re on the team after the deadline. ;)

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Jul 23, 2008 9:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Long Time Lurker

but a longer time Mets Fan! I watched the entire game last nite, as usual, and was quite peeved at the baserunning last nite. My beef isnt so much with Aguayo but more so with Endy. Id rather have my guys make aggressive outs than laxidasical (sp?) ones. On the first Wright double, I kept saying that should score two. And nine times out of ten it does. Just a good play by the Phils. The second Wright hit is where Im more worried. Endy should have easily made it to third base on his own hit. Why he stopped at second is beyond me. Then it appeared as if he tried to make up for his base running gaff by trying to make a great run. Had he not hesitated at the instant the ball was hit, Endy probably scores. Since he did wait and the fact that the Carlos’ were coming up, he should have played it safe.

And I think that Harold Reynolds and Lee Mazzilli made a great point after the game. If Sanchez was your closer for last nite, you have to give Sanchez the same liberties that Wagner should/would have gotten. Meaning, if Billy loaded the bases with no out you would let Billy close the game out. I actually think that Manual panicked and tried to play the number game. This time it didnt work and I hope it hasnt crushed Duaner’s confidence.

All in all its just another typical 2008 Mets game. Santana pitches very well and we somehow manage to cough up a late lead. I just wish it wasnt against the damn Phillies!

by tbach81 on Jul 23, 2008 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lackadaisical

... is the word you were looking for.

by JoshNY on Jul 23, 2008 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

New

Id botch that won…. and yes I know I spelled those wrong. Im picking on myself lol

by tbach81 on Jul 23, 2008 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

it's all Dirty Sanchez's fault

I assure you his makeup sucks.

We've got ourselves a ball club, the Mets of New York town!

by kingcritical on Jul 23, 2008 9:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Hey, I completely agreed with relieving Sanata

...and then I realized they were bringing in Joe Smith.

"It's Father's Day today at Shea, so to all you fathers out there, Happy Birthday." -- Ralph Kiner

by dissento on Jul 23, 2008 9:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Dirty's Make-up

I submit that, after last night, we can all agree that even Heath Ledger’s Joker has better make-up than Dirty Sanchez.

ZING!

But, seriously, The Dark Knight rocked and leaving the movie to hear the Mets bully melt down was quite a bring down. Jerks.

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Jul 23, 2008 10:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

http://www.baseball-analysis.com/article.php?articleid=2603

by gogomets on Jul 23, 2008 10:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

how to run a bullpen, by derek zumsteg

basically says anyone can protect a 3-run lead, so why bother leaving your best guy in for it? i completely agree with that, too bad duaner can’t even get a fuckin’ out.

by gogomets on Jul 23, 2008 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Joe Smith?

Why blame him? Dude threw to one batter. Got what could have been a double play if Reyes was positioned correctly and should have gotten at least one out anyway. Then he gets pulled.
Pedro Feliciano ain’t what he used to be.
Bottom line is, I do blame Manuel and maybe Santana as well for not insisting he stay in the game. Without your closer, you have no business pulling your ace after only 105 pitches. There is babying in today’s game but this went beyond even the accepted status quo in my view. I am not saying other managers wouldn’t have pulled Santana also. But I am saying that some managers would have left him in and that is the correct call.

by Endys Game on Jul 23, 2008 11:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

dammit wagner

take a cortisone shot and suck it up you effing pooswah.

by kendynamo on Jul 23, 2008 11:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I hope this stops all the "Manuel is a genius" talk

Yes. Duaner Sanchez should be able to get three outs with a three run lead.
Yes. Joe Smith, et. al. should be able to limit the damage.
Yes. this was not a patently absurd decision like say… batting Marlon Anderson second or continuing to play Brian Schneider on a regular basis.

But, in the absence of having your best pitcher available to close games, your second best pitcher should get the call. In a game where Johan Santana (your statistical and contractual ace) was pitching well and had not run up an excessively high pitch count, Johan was your second best choice to close the game and should have been given the chance. If he got into trouble you can bring someone else in.

I don’t believe Sanchez failed because he didn’t have the “makeup”. He had a bad outing. He’s had a bunch of them this year. The entire bullpen has been pretty sketchy except during the 10 game streak. That’s why I blame Manuel for a making a bad decision. I questioned the move before it backfired. If Sanchez has come in to get three outs, it still would have been a bad decision but the outcome would have been good.

by Reg Dunlop on Jul 23, 2008 12:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

couldn't agree more, Endys Game...

Usually, we blast the “save” statistic (thanks a lot, Jerry Holtzman, RIP), but how can we take “wins” and “losses” seriously when Joe Smith was the guy who took the “L” last night???

How can anyone object to allowing one of the best pitchers around, a guy who has thrown over 200 innings in every season since 2004, to go 120 pitches in a game that amounts to a two-game swing in the NL East standings? While I certainly agree with Eric that any bullpen - yes, that means ANY - should be able to protect a three-run lead with three outs to go, I highly doubt that Johan would have gone out there for the ninth even if we had only been up by one.

by JE on Jul 23, 2008 12:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

can't go crazy over one game

but if we must, I would blame Reyes and Aguayo. The bullpen couldn’t physically get the job done. You can’t blame Manual since no pitcher is expected to go nine anymore. Same for Santana who was hit pretty hard in 7th and 8th. But Reyes and Aguayo made mental errors in failing to shovel to 2nd base and twice sending Endy home with no outs and big hitters coming up. Sanchez might have been better with a 5 run lead rather than a 3 run lead. You can throw in Utley too for making the catch to rob Tatis of a two run single. Just forget about it and win the next two

Save America. Impeach Bush

by elifriedman on Jul 23, 2008 12:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The worst part of this whole thing is

This will probably (inevitably?) lead to a panic move for bullpen help before the trade deadline. (remember these gems? Isringhausen for Billy Taylor, Brian McRae for Chuck McElroy, Jason Tyner and Paul Wilson for Rick White, and of course Nady for Hernandez)

These moves rarely seem to work out in the short term due to the fact that consistency from relievers is hard to find and harder to evaluate. Most bullpens in MLB are suspect and when relievers have meltdowns they are usually more memorable than their successes.

I don’t want to see the Mets overpay for Brian Fuentes or Damaso Marte since they are just as likely to be prone to meltdown as the people the Mets have now. But I fear that the last few games will force Minaya’s to make a move if only for appearances sake.

by Reg Dunlop on Jul 23, 2008 1:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

ugh, I hope you're wrong

I’d much rather see a new corner outfielder than any new relievers.

We've got ourselves a ball club, the Mets of New York town!

by kingcritical on Jul 23, 2008 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

To be fair,

Tyner and Wilson didn’t exactly set the league on fire, while we got a couple of really good years out of White. Also, Nady not only brought us Hernandez, but also Ollie. And that one was necessitated by Dirty’s injury right before the deadline. And if we’d kept Nady, we would have had to trade him to make room for Milledge anyway.

by BobbyV_Incognito on Jul 23, 2008 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another thing that pisses me off about that meltdown...

Santana doesn’t “win” the game, and people use that as ammunition to support the point that “he hasn’t been good enough,” when he was perfectly great last night in fact.

by JoshNY on Jul 23, 2008 2:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Aguayo, then Sanchez, then Feliciano

Obviously Sanchez didn’t get it done: You could see him sorta lose his cool after that slow change to Werth was called a ball. Reyes made a bad play but it was kind of freaky. The real goat was Aguayo who cost us untold runs - we might still be batting - with terrible sends that weren’t mistakes in judgement as much as they were acts of pure stupidity.

Had those baserunning errors not been made, we’d be somewhat less tempted to bat for Santana in the 8th—and the pen would barely have been a concern.

Meantime, Feliciano was awful, and has been awful all year. Nobody wants to “overpay” but slotting Fuentes in where Feliciano is now I think could make a real difference.

by mbtn01 on Jul 23, 2008 2:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I blame myself

for watching this team.

Luckily, i have a new hobby, just sitting all zenlike and pulling the internet’s finger. Doctors hope this will keep me away from watching any more upsetting baseball.

I.M. Forme

by itsmetsforme on Jul 23, 2008 3:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Should've brought in... Heilman

Talkin' Sports

by BlackOps on Jul 23, 2008 3:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Not really Manuel's fault

I’m not a fan of the guy (as was already pointed out, he makes some absolutely awful lineup decisions), but it was the bullpen that screwed up this one. The one thing he did that I absolutely hate is taking out relievers after just one or two batters. In this game, Joe Smith. You want balls that stay in the infield. Joe Smith is great at getting ground balls. He is also a better reliever than Pedro Feliciano at this point in time. Why take him out?

by yellomellojello on Jul 23, 2008 4:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Book Suggestion, Eric (And To Everyone Else, Too)....

Eric, have you ever read a book called “A Year At the Movies: One Man’s Filmgoing Odessey”, written by Kevin Murphy, who was Tom Servo on “Mystery Science Theater 3000”, as well as on Rifftrax? His book was about him going to one movie a day for a whole calendar year. He traveled around the country and to other countries, going to different types of movie theaters. The book was about an appreciation of films and watching films, amongst other things? I would recommend this book to you, and to anyone else in this forum or who visits this forum who reads this, if you love movies. Kevin’s writing is funny and intelligent, his movie knowledge vast.

This book is for those who love movies who still love them, or for those who’s appreciation one shone brightly but has dimmed in this day and age. Give it a try.

(I am in no way affiliated with Kevin Murphy. I’m just a really big fan of his. Thank you.)

"We praise or blame as one or the other affords more opportunity for exhibiting our power of judgment." Friedrich Nietzsche, "Human,All Too Human" (1878)

by wgarrett on Jul 23, 2008 6:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs