Post-game reflections…
April 19th, 2007 by ubelmann
- The play that ended the game last night was pretty interesting. I'm thinking that the decision on whether or not to send Beltre home last night could've gone either way. On the one hand, the Mariners could've had a baserunner on third with two outs. That would give them probably about a 20-30% chance to tie the game, depending on how much you think Nathan was struggling. So to justify sending Beltre, you'd have to think it'd work over 30% of the time.
Lately, it seems like I've seen Cuddyer air-mail some throws in the style of Jacque Jones. I also get the impression that this play gets messed up reasonably often--there's just a lot of places where things could go wrong. Throw to the cutoff man, cutoff man catches the ball, cutoff man throws the ball, catcher catches the ball, catcher applies tag. These are professional players, and the odds of each of those things happening independently is indeed very high. But how many times have you seen something like that screwed up? I don't think 20-30% is a completely unreasonable estimate for that. Either way, I'm quite happy the Twins completed the play for the victory.
- Note to the offense: I really like it when you score five runs in the first two innings. Managing only two baserunners over seven innings gives me a sinking feeling in my stomach. More of the former, less of the latter. Thanks.
- Given what happened to Liriano last year, I think we can all agree that this sort of thing is no fun.
SBG replied on April 19, 2007 at 5:47:06 am
I fell asleep and missed the last couple of innings. I woke up and Lucy had turned the channel to the Fox Noise Channel. Horrors!
Sounds like Nathan struggled again. I'm not that worried. He doesn't struggle much, but when he does, it seems like it lasts a few appearances and then things are fine.
Good win from the getaway day lineup.
ubelmann replied on April 19, 2007 at 10:49:45 am
Actually, I'd say he didn't throw the ball all that poorly. He lost Betancourt after getting ahead of him, but didn't give him anything too terribly meaty. Lopez hit a grounder that was pretty close to being a DP for the first two outs of the inning. Nathan fell behind to Ichiro, but managed to pop him up, which seems to almost never happen to Ichiro, let alone on a 3-0 count. Against Beltre, his worst pitch was something meaty down the middle that Beltre was just under, but Joe got ahead of him with two pitches low and away, one of which seemed to be a nice slider. Then Beltre grounded up the middle, on a ball that wasn't hit all that well, but JB was playing him to pull quite a bit, had to go a long way to get the ball, and messed up the transfer from his glove to his throwing hand. If he makes that transfer, the inning's over. It was a tough play, but a play that Bartlett should've made. Then Vidro looped one into RF for the 9-4-2 putout.
I certainly wish Nathan would start missing some more bats, but I don't know that I'd say he struggled last night. A couple things didn't go his way, and he still managed to get out of the inning with the save.
brianS replied on April 19, 2007 at 11:56:24 am
Dazzle and Gordo (and Jack?) really were hammering Ichiro for swinging on 3-0 last night.
freealonzo replied on April 19, 2007 at 1:12:56 pm
It is curious that Nathan has been lucky (bad baserunning) and unlucky (poor defense, batter hitting a good pitch) this season. We're just so used to him being lights out, it's easy to forget that most MLB teams go through the same thing with their closer. Agree with U -- like to see more K's from Nathan.
Beau replied on April 19, 2007 at 8:48:33 am
Yeah, I don't have a problem with sending Beltre, either. Cuddyer could have panicked and tried to throw it straight to the plate. Castillo could have been so surprised that he messed up the relay. Etc, etc. The throw beat him by a mile, but Beltre still almost got his foot in there.
AMR replied on April 19, 2007 at 11:30:30 am
In both of these opponent's running goofs, I've been impressed with Castillo. Gets the ball, quickly assesses the needed throw, and makes it. Makes me think that a running against the Twins corollary: "Don't run when Castillo is the cutoff man."
Maybe I'm easily impressed or maybe I've watched too many Royals games.
ubelmann replied on April 19, 2007 at 12:12:11 pm
I've said it before, but I feel compelled to say it again: Castillo is maybe the most fascinating player on the whole 40-man roster. Watching him out there, he just has such strange mannerisms. On Ichiro's pop-up last night, for a long time as the ball was in the air, I really couldn't tell whether Castillo was having trouble tracking the ball or what, but he seemed to be staggering around as the ball came down. (On a somewhat related note, I noticed Raul Ibanez was doing Torii's "where's the ball?" routine last night when Cuddyer was on second base.)
Anyway, I haven't noticed it a whole lot, but the Castillo-as-ace-cutoff-man is an interesting thought.
Banjo replied on April 19, 2007 at 1:37:57 pm
It's part of his intricate "fake 'em out I'm gonna drop it" routine. He started after he realized the "Whose on First" gag was already taken.
freealonzo replied on April 19, 2007 at 2:52:11 pm
Hey Banjo, I got a BB bike bag for christmas (specifically requested). Now that's finally warm I get to put it to use. Loving it!
Banjo replied on April 19, 2007 at 2:54:55 pm
Sweet. What did you get? Seat Bag? Racktop?
brink replied on April 19, 2007 at 4:39:17 pm
Old Man Castillo. On that play, he was Drunk Old Man Castillo.
Rhubarb_Runner replied on April 19, 2007 at 12:34:51 pm
I think sending Beltre was the right move, no matter WHO was in RF, taking the cutoff, or applying the tag. Cuddyer booted the ball, and Beltre had a head of steam at 3rd. Chances were just as good that Cuddyer takes too long to eventually come up with the ball, regardless of a perfect cutoff or not.
frightwig replied on April 19, 2007 at 3:32:04 pm
I got the impression that Cuddyer threw to Castillo because he assumed there would be no play at the plate. He wasn't in a great hurry to recover the ball in the first place, and didn't put much zip on the throw to the 2nd baseman. It looked like just a "return the ball to the infield" kind of throw.
If Cuddyer had tried to hurry a throw to the plate, who knows, Beltre may have made a good, aggressive play to score the tying run. If Cuddyer had shown more urgency in getting after the ball, maybe Beltre doesn't even try to score.
Speaking of middle infield play, I thought it was funny to hear Dick marvel at how the Twins have managed to continue their run of success despite losing their supposed "strength up the middle" in Guzman and Rivas. Bert stepped in to note that the duo essentially played themselves out of a job, but only because "they quit hitting." (When did Rivas start hitting?) They didn't discuss their poor fielding or explore any ideas on how the Twins ever got to be successful despite a middle infield that pretty well sucked.
brink replied on April 19, 2007 at 4:38:36 pm
Dude, Rivas owned the Royals. Why do you think the Twins went 108-4 vs. KC during the Rivas Years?
New Britain Bo replied on April 19, 2007 at 8:43:26 pm
The Rivas Years.... Ah, who can forget. Grand Cru.
ubelmann replied on April 19, 2007 at 5:21:10 pm
I don't think Guzman was that poor of a fielder. He wasn't as good as the Twins wanted you to believe, but he was alright. Rivas was pretty crappy, though.
frightwig replied on April 19, 2007 at 6:32:04 pm
I think Guzy generally made plays on balls hit within easy range, notwithstanding the occasional lapse of concentration, and he probably had respectable range into the hole. But he had absolutely no range towards the middle--a groundball past the mound was always a clean hit--and I'm sure Dougie saved him several errors a season on his lackadaisical throws in the dirt. Even on routine plays, Guzy had a bad habit of flipping the ball in the general vicinity of 1st base and really making the 1st baseman work.
ubelmann replied on April 19, 2007 at 10:54:03 am
From the Strib (but written by some AP dude):
The horror!
AMR replied on April 19, 2007 at 11:26:05 am
The Royals only have 2 catchers on their 40-man roster, something I haven't seen in any other team I've done an Mugshot Purgatory for.
brianS replied on April 19, 2007 at 11:53:58 am
You can do that when you have the League MVP as your backstop.
spycake replied on April 19, 2007 at 2:07:18 pm
Wow, you're right. The guy listed third on their MLB.com depth chart is Paul Phillips, who indeed is not on the 40-man roster. Although he is playing in Omaha, which is quite close to KC if they needed him.
AMR replied on April 19, 2007 at 4:29:05 pm
The Royals have had this tendency to call guys up straight from AA Wichita, which is also close. Maybe they need to find new affiliates, make it harder to call guys up on a whim to see who sticks.
Rhubarb_Runner replied on April 19, 2007 at 11:35:57 am
I really wish that people (esp. in media) would realize that the DH is essentially part of the bench, for all intents and purposes. *sigh*
btw, the new avatar is in honor or Matt Gurrier, Private Eye, and our new go-to guy in the pen.
brianS replied on April 19, 2007 at 11:54:53 am
what you really need is an all-seeing wedge of cheese (a la the pyramid w/the eye).
Rhubarb_Runner replied on April 19, 2007 at 12:35:53 pm
too Wisconsiny for my tastes
frightwig replied on April 19, 2007 at 3:33:53 pm
Morneau made Guerrier look pretty good last night.
frightwig replied on April 19, 2007 at 4:07:52 pm
Btw, if Felix has a serious elbow injury this season, I'll be holding ubelmann responsible for the jinx.
ubelmann replied on April 19, 2007 at 5:22:16 pm
Dude, that's not a jinx, that's a call.
ubelmann replied on April 19, 2007 at 5:29:03 pm
I should also explain too that I have this weird feeling that there's a certain upper limit to how well a starting pitcher can pitch before his body is bound to fail on him. One of the reasons I get this feeling is that there's such a clear distinction between how well starting pitchers can pitch and how well relief pitchers can pitch. Relief pitchers are better at pretty much everything you could want them to be good at, despite management almost universally choosing to keep the most talented pitchers as starters.
Relief pitchers are able to crank it up a notch (or eleven) because they're only out there for an inning or so. If starting pitchers crank it up that way, it's only a matter of time before their body just revolts from the extreme levels of stress being forced upon it.
I'm not saying that's necessarily what happened to Felix here, and I'm fully willing to admit that this could be wrong, but it's the impression that I get.
frightwig replied on April 19, 2007 at 6:35:26 pm
Or maybe he (and Liriano, as well as other precious young phenoms) just really shouldn't be throwing the slider much, or at all.
brink replied on April 19, 2007 at 4:37:24 pm
Yeah, sending Beltre was the right call in my opinion. Lotsa X factors had to line up and Cuddyer had already screwed the pooch on the play to begin with. Doubt there are any numbers on it, but I suspect that plays where fielders have to recover from errors, misplays, or close plays have a greater likelihood of failing. A good example might be Cuddyer's "double" where he laced the ball just beyond the reach of Sexson and wound up on 2nd base... all Broussard has to do is cleanly field that ball and Mike's probably a dead duck. But Broussard had the disadvantage of a close play failing to put Cuddyer out and so all of a sudden he's behind the eight ball. Compound that with the pressure of the tying run trucking home and you can see where Cuddyer/Castillo/Redmond all had to be real sharp to pull off that play. It definitely wasn't an "Ullger Moment" like I thought it was at first blush.
Other thoughts:
The commentators for Seattle (I'm watching the FSN Northwest feed I guess) seem awfully loose on their facts... several references to "Mark Redmond" catching for the Twins, also "Centerfielder" Jason Kubel. The gravelly-voiced guy was the one making all the mistakes but his partner never corrected him.
Finally, as soon as Felix made that motion, I immediately thought of Liriano's injury. Everyone, from the Seattle guys to Dick and Bert seemed slow to grasp the possibility that this might be similar to what Liriano went through last year... perhaps because nobody wants to believe it's possible...
ubelmann replied on April 19, 2007 at 5:23:27 pm
A good example might be Cuddyer’s “double†where he laced the ball just beyond the reach of Sexson and wound up on 2nd base...
I loved Sexson's face plant on that play. Even for a man his height, he is not graceful.