Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Dog Football! Which Breeds Are Best Suited For The Gridiron?

Jerry Manuel's (mis)use of his 55th out

This past Saturday’s game between the St. Louis Cardinals and the New York Mets was truly one for the ages. Any 20+ inning contest draws a great deal of attention, but this game was particularly odd because it occurred almost 42 years to the day of a 24 inning game between the New York Mets and our Houston Astros on April 15, 1968. Fittingly the game was at the offense suppressing environment of the Astrodome and saw both starting pitchers, Don Wilson and Tom Seaver, pitch at least nine innings. Third baseman Bob Aspromonte had the game winning and only RBI, while Mets pitcher Les Rohr took quite possibly one of the hardest losses of all time.

Baseball is great like that. The temporal confines of the game are determined not by a clock but by the actions of the players on the field. This is what makes the sport unpredictable and always hotly contested. There is no Bill Parcells-esque running down of the clock in the fourth quarter or a shoot the ball with one second left on the shot clock slow down like in basketball. No matter what’s going on with the score, be it down one or up one, a baseball team puts the same intensity into every at bat. Garbage time simply doesn’t exist.

 One of the other odd aspects of baseball is that teams on occasion will find themselves forced to use players in unorthodox ways. The most obvious of which is the positional player turned pitcher. Whether it be a nine inning blow out where a manager doesn’t want to use a real pitcher or an extra inning game where all the pitchers have already been used, it’s always exciting/funny to watch this fish out of water take the mound.

 In the Cards-Mets game, such a situation arose for St. Louis. Felipe Lopez, a jack of all trades to begin with, pitched the top of the 18th with no runs crossing the plate. The next inning outfielder Joe Mather took the ball and had trouble finding the strike zone and walked lead off hitter Jose Reyes. With no outs and the speedy Reyes on first and a "pitcher" who had no idea how to throw over or pitch from the stretch on the hill, I figured the Mets would send Reyes to put a runner in scoring position with no outs. They did not. Instead, Luis Castillo, a man whose contact percentage throughout his career is 92.3%, was asked to was to sacrifice bunt. He did just that, and with one out in the inning, David Wright was intentionally walked, and then Jason Bay was hit by a pitch. Saber-favorite Jeff Francouer hit a sacrifice fly to deep left, scoring the first run of the game.

Now, I'm not a major league manager but I have to question that decision on the part of Jerry Manuel. Why would you use your first out of the inning, an out which in this game more than any other is extremely important, to sacrifice against Joe Mather? The man was unaccustomed to pitching and definitely unaccustomed to pitching with runners on base. Make the guy throw a strike, and if he doesn't prove he can, don't give him an out even if it does get a runner into scoring position.

After writing all this, I do understand that after 18 innings of play, Manuel must have felt some sort of pressure to get a run home and that was his way of doing it. The Mets would score that inning, only to see the Cardinals tie it up in the bottom of the 19th. Maybe Castillo had been allowed to swing away, they could have scored multiple runs in the top half of the inning and not needed to head into a 20th frame. This is nit-picking on my part, but after making 54 outs, Jerry Manuel's willingness to give away a 55th made me raise an eyebrow.

Comment 17 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

That game had numerous questionable managerial decisions. While that was a bad decision by Manuel under the circumstances, I think Manuel outmanaged LaRussa in this game. LaRussa’s overmanaging style, which ultimately led him to run out of relievers earlier and putting a big “walk me” sign on Pujols, cost the Cards the game. However, I think the worst managment was by LaRussa in the 14th. The Cards had runners on 2d and 3d with no outs. This was a situation tailor made for a run scoring bunt, since the Cards would still have a runner at 3d with 1 out even if it failed. LaRussa who uses the suicide squeeze more than any other manager, didn’t take the obvious move. After 2Ks and a walk to Pujols, the Cards had the bases loaded with the relief pitcher, Motte, coming to bat. The Cardinals had one position player left, catcher Brian Anderson, and LaRussa refused to use him. Motte whiffed on his three pitches. I understand that some managers always want to keep one catcher on the bench for an emergency. But this is taking it to excessive lengths. Mills took a different tact in yesterday’s Astros’ game, when he double switched Towles into Quintero’s slot in the 9th.

by clack on Apr 19, 2010 7:12 AM CDT reply actions  

I agree, LaRussa was out-managed.

I listened to the entire game. LaRussa’s blew it my opinion by taking Albert’s protection out of the game. From the 10th inning on, the Cardinals pitcher batted behind Pujols. He used his relievers poorly in my opinion. It surprises me how many commentators on the radio have the opinion that the guy whose team won (and did not end the game with a utility infielder/outfielder pitching and a starting pitcher playing left) was outmanaged. Another play that showcases LaRussa’s flair for the pragmatic is the decision to run Ryan Ludwick with no outs and Pujols at the dish. I guess he wanted to take the bat out of Albert’s hands again. Anyways, Ludwick was thrown out and Pujols promptly delivered a double and later scored on Yadier’s hit.

by Brad E on Apr 19, 2010 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

Pretty dodgy managing overall

I still don’t get Manuel’s decision to not walk Pujols after Ludwick K’s the half-inning after the first run crosses. He’d been given the pass intentionally twice in the extras, pitcher’s spot and a catcher is coming up. I suppose it’s a case of not putting the winning run at the plate, but come on, it’s Albert Pujols and you already nullified that first point with previous examples.

And yeah, what clack said about TLR’s failed management in the 14th when the Cards had the winning run at third with no outs.

Remember to retire Fin's number, Mark.

by jonthefon on Apr 19, 2010 7:15 AM CDT reply actions  

Manuel

Also had the guts to use starters while LaRussa refused to.

I think LaRussa is confident that he’ll win the NL central pretty easy and therefore was comfortable with losing a long game.

by Timothy De Block on Apr 19, 2010 7:40 AM CDT reply actions  

LaRussa really seemed to be waving the white flag when he decided to use position players instead of starting pitchers near the end. He says he would never use a starting pitcher in relief in an extra inning game. I can understand the long term thinking of “let’s just take a loss, and keep our starters in good shape for future games.” And maybe he is right. But I wonder if he sends the wrong message to players by just giving up. At the least, it seems kind of arrogant to imply, “we are such a cinch to win the division, we don’t have to care about 1 game.” The Mets used Pelfrey as their last pitcher, and he was on his “side pitching” day, which doesn’t necessarily seem abusive to the starter (although you have to be careful on the pitch count).

The link, above, provides a forum for LaRussa to defend his moves in the game. He doesn’t attempt to defend the decision to leave Anderson on the bench twice with the bases loaded. His defense of the double switch on Holliday (leaving the pitcher behind Pujols) is passable, though kind of weak. Remember the steal attempt by Ludwick in which a great swipe got him called out…during Pujols’ at bat? LaRussa says that this was a hit and run which Ludwick botched with a bad slide. I hadn’t thought much about this decision, but LaRussa’s explanation is so inexplicable that I have to put this on the list of bad moves. LaRussa said he didn’t call for squeeze play in the 14th with Schumaker at bat because he prefers a squeeze with 1 out instead of no outs. I don’t understand his reasoning for that. All of the “bad things” which LaRussa is worried about can happen with a 1 out squeeze as easliy as a no out squeeze, and you are worse off if they happen with 1 out.

by clack on Apr 19, 2010 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions  

that was awfully close, and I thought Ludwick might have been safe. but it did matter, since Pujols doubled after him. or maybe it didn’t matter, because Pujols almost certainly would have been walked with 1st base open (which is why allowing Ludwick to steal is a strange call).

by clack on Apr 19, 2010 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions  

My son & I watched that game.

We wanted to stop around the 14th, but we just couldn’t. When LaRussa brought in the non-pitchers, he had basically given up at that point. But we were rolling watching those guys try to pitch.

by titansfan4ever on Apr 19, 2010 9:33 AM CDT reply actions  

i would question a lot more of larussa moves then manuel's

i think larussa did his best Coop impersonation there….

In my opinion he was awful that game

by EveryHoustonTeamRox! on Apr 19, 2010 10:31 AM CDT reply actions  

18th, 19th and 20th inning, why let guys swing

look Lopez and Mather weren’t throwing strikes. The Mets could have stood up there in the 18th and just taken pitch after pitch and probably gotten 5-6 walks, or 3-0 counts and fat slow pitches to crank like BP. it is horrible thatthey only got 2 runs in 3 innings against fielders.

and yes reyes should have been running, he should have been on 2nd after the 1st pitch, and 3rd after the second, probably force a balk. let Castillo swing and the inning continues

manuel is a horrible manager

by Rickfansince76 on Apr 19, 2010 11:43 AM CDT reply actions  

FWIW, I thought Lopez pitched pretty well. He could throw strikes and he even threw a few breaking pitchers. Mather didn’t appear to be able to throw strikes.

by clack on Apr 19, 2010 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions  

In the game the day before he bunted with a man on first in both the 8th and 9th innings.

It is the only consistent part of his managerial strategy, and as a Met fan it is heartbreaking. He gives away outs like it’s halloween.

by twon8 on Apr 19, 2010 2:09 PM CDT reply actions  

Dude, can I just say something to you here....

Until you’re an Astros fan, you don’t even know the meaning of the word “heartbreaking”.

by titansfan4ever on Apr 20, 2010 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions  

except the Mets

collapsed in both 2007 and 2008 after leading by 7 games and 3.5 games respectively in their division with 17 games to play.

by Timothy De Block on Apr 20, 2010 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions  

baseball is a heart breaking game by its nature.

by clack on Apr 20, 2010 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Crawfishboxes, the SBNation blog for the Houston Astros.

FanPosts

TCB Tweets!

    

Current Series

3 game series vs Rockies @ Minute Maid Park

Sat 04/07 6:05 PM CDT
Sun 04/08 1:05 PM CDT

NL Central Standings

W L PCT GB STRK
Chicago 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Cincinnati 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Houston 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Milwaukee 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Pittsburgh 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
St. Louis 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0

(updated 2.15.2012 at 6:05 PM CST)


Managing Editors

Tcb_icon_small Timothy De Block

Old_school_dome_logo_small David Coleman

Editors

Nsapcs13_large_small clack

H_astros_small Subber10

Astrobritrs2_small AstroB

Small conroestro

Small native_astro

Small CRPerry13

Authors

Astros_logo121009_small OremLK

This-is-my-boom-stick_small allphilla

Th_houston-astros-logo-3_small Will Bonn