THE CRANE POOL FORUM thecranepool.net (.com)


Forum Home

Master Index of Archived Threads


All Purpose Willie Randolph strategy Thread.

metirish
Jun 06 2005 01:12 PM

In yesterday's first game Willie double-switched Ishii and David Wright, Randolph inserted reliever Heath Bell in David Wright's sixth slot in the batting order (Wright made the last out in the sixth), with Chris Woodward hitting ninth and playing third. But then Bell pitched only the the seventh, with Manny Aybar entering in the eighth.

Why remove Wright if Bell was to pitch just one inning? Willie could've just pinch hit for Bell, due to hit third, in the seventh and not sacrificed Wright, one of his best hitters.

Didn't Wright's spot come up later with the Mets threatening and Kaz PH?

Rotblatt
Jun 06 2005 01:19 PM
Willie

]Didn't Wright's spot come up later with the Mets threatening and Kaz PH?


Bases loaded with two outs, in fact.

Willie's done needless double switches a couple of times this year, and it ticks me off every time.

I think he just doesn't understand double switches yet, which is kind of baffling. It's really not that hard--don't do them unless you're planning on using your pitcher for more than an inning.

Edgy DC
Jun 06 2005 01:24 PM

Yeah, that was a classick Art Howe-style blunder. Double switching is done too much in the era of one-inning relief stints.

Matsui ended up looking bad chasing ball four against Scott "The Strange, Almost Unearthly Thing" Eyre. I thought Willie might have gone with Cliff Floyd there. But he saved him for an opportunity that never came. (Had Piazza and Anderson reached in the ninth, I guess Cliff would've batted.)

Vic Sage
Jun 06 2005 01:34 PM

you'd think that, since he's been prepping for this job for about 10 years or so, WWSB would have a clue about this sort of stuff. But what can you expect from a small ball manager in a long ball era?

:?:

metirish
Jun 06 2005 01:35 PM

Yeah and he gave a classic Howe style answer when questioned..

"We still wanted to use more pitchers, so it really didn't matter," Randolph said. "Because we took [Wright] out of the game didn't mean he would've gotten a hit the next time up."

holychicken
Jun 06 2005 02:24 PM

I am no good at judging managers and I was just wondering what the overall opinion is of the members of this board. I have heard stuff from some idiots who would suggest we trade Cameron and Seo for Guardado. . . but I would like to hear the opinion of some people who, ya know. . .actually KNOW something about baseball.

Yancy Street Gang
Jun 06 2005 02:35 PM

I think Cameron has been demonstrating that he really doesn't need to be traded.

I think, with the starting pitching coming together, the Mets' biggest need is offense at first base. And, as discussed in another thread, there may be an in-house solution to that with Diaz. Or even with Woodward.

Cameron has been a big contributor. If I were inclined to deal anyone, it would be Ishii, once Trachsel comes back and proves that he's healthy.

Edgy DC
Jun 06 2005 02:39 PM

Or Daubach.

Or Brazell.

Or even Valent.

I'd put the lack of OBP at the top of the order alongside Mientkiewicz as the Mets' most pressing needs.

But if this rotation can keep firing, I'd be a happy dog.

Rotblatt
Jun 06 2005 03:25 PM
Roster

If we got enough in return, I'd move Cameron.

Maybe not until we were out of contention, though. We have some pressing needs next year between catcher & first base, and if we can fill one of them by moving a red-hot Cameron once we're out of contention, I'm all for it. Could we get a Ryan Howard for him, for example?

I'd be interested in seeing what we could put together that would appeal to the Sox. Their bullpen sucks, and without Schilling, their rotation's not in great shape. Wake & Wells have been inconsistent, and Miller's a perpetual injury risk. Rumor has it that when Schilling comes back, his velocity will be reduced, putting even more pressue on the starters. Maybe cheap bullpen help (Hernandez? Bell? Even Heilman?) + a renewed Glavine could land us Stoppach . . . I'd be thrilled to be out of his contract.

Oh, and I'm totally on the "our pen is fine" bandwagon. Better than fine, in fact. Hernandez & Bell have been solid all year, and Loopy's looking good lately. Heilman should probably be starting, but he's definitely an assett out of the pen. I keep equating him to Arroyo in my head . . . That's four solid relief pitchers, which is better than most teams have. Aybar's been okay, and DeJean's been fine for the last man out of the pen. We could use a lefty, but Koo was alright before getting injured and we'll see how Ring does. There's always Colyer in the wings if we need another lefty. Not to mention Padilla (0.73 WHIP, 0.95 ERA, 9.47 K/9, 1.18 BB/9, 8.0 K/BB), who's line is so staggeringly good, it's kind of a shock that we're trotting DeJean out there instead of him.

If we stay healthy (knock on wood), we'll be in the unique position of being able to make moves for the long-run without hurting ourselves too much in the short run. We've got depth in the pen (all of the above), the rotation (Heilman, Seo & Trachs on the way), and on the field (Cairo & Diaz). A smart GM could make a killing with all that at around the deadline and still leave us in shape to compete.

Nymr83
Jun 06 2005 04:08 PM

]Randolph said. "Because we took [Wright] out of the game didn't mean he would've gotten a hit the next time up."


No, but his chances are certainly better than Matsui's.

gnatman
Jun 16 2005 08:07 AM
Batting Order

Somebody please help me out. I am at a loss to understand why Willie continues to bat D-Wright as low as 7th with some clearly inferior hitters ahead of him in the line up. Isn't there a basic logic in seeking to maximize the number of at bats for your team's best hitters? I understand there are other considerations to composing a lineup, such as L/R balance and speed/OBP at the top, but c'mon - there is no good reason for D-Wright to be batting any lower than 5th with the present roster of Mets.

Edgy DC
Jun 16 2005 08:47 AM

Well, a particularly proud manager would be stuck on "Well, if I switch now, I'll be tacitly admitting that I was wrong all along."

Let's hope Randolph isn't that far gone.

And I don't think he is. I think he's just overemphatic on alternating lefties and righties. But a singles hitter like Anderson in front of him gives me little more hope than a struggling hitter like Mientkiewicz.

Here's a solution good for all parties. Put a lefty in between him and Piazza, but with him fourth and Piazza sixth. Unless you're as afraid of Piazza as Howe seemed to be.

Johnny Dickshot
Jun 16 2005 08:51 AM

I'm just astonished that Anderson is our DH, much less batting ahead of Wright. I know, we got injuries. Expect to see Daubach today in a DH or 1B role, no?

duan
Jun 16 2005 09:10 AM

seemingly Daubach was only going to arrive about 40 mins before the game was going to start, not necessarily ideal preparation.

Tonight's a big game, very important to arrive home above .500 - if we don't win tonight we have to sweep seattle to do so.

Frayed Knot
Jun 16 2005 09:32 AM

Wright's spot in the batting order has quickly become the rallying point for Met fans as the way to "fix" the offense but, in reality, whether he bats 5th (where he has hit a handful of times) rather than his usual 6th/7th is about reason number 432 why we're not scoring runs.
It'll make minimal if any difference.

Centerfield
Jun 16 2005 10:18 AM

Agreed about the Wright move. I'd like to see him moved up but I'm not about to rip my hair out if he isn't. For me, the head scratcher was why WWSB would allow Ring to start the 9th with 3 RH hitters coming up. Leadoff walk eventually came around to score...I don't see the logic in that one.

Johnny Dickshot
Jun 16 2005 10:20 AM

Yabbut... Anderson popped out with 2 on the end the 6th and Wright doubled to lead off the 7th. Perhaps it only shifts the 2 runs we scored in the 7th to the 6th, but I dunno.

One esoteric argument: Wright usually battles to long counts and can wear out a guy, as we saw last night. Who knows, maybe a turn or two higher in the order hastens the exit of a starter or three over the course of the year. We certainly need to get to starters sooner than we have, which seems to me to be 2.5 times through the lineup these days.

I know it's low on the list but its easily correctable and doesn't seem to cost much to try when you're averaging (minus the 2 12-run games) ~2 runs a game over the last 3 weeks.

gnatman
Jun 16 2005 10:22 AM

Facing a righty tonight, with Cammy still out, my line up would be

Reyes ss
Daubach dh
Wright 3b
Floyd lf
Beltran cf
Piazza c
Mint-cave-itch 1b
Matsui 2b
Anderson rf

Vic Sage
Jun 16 2005 10:33 AM

swapping Reyes and Cammy 1-2 in the lineup is meaningless.

Swapping Reyes with WRIGHT in the lineup (with cammy 1, wright 2) would increase Wright's ABs and make a more significant impact than wright going from 7th to 5th.

Johnny Dickshot
Jun 16 2005 10:47 AM

btw, to-nite's game is to-day. I think I'll go start a slumpbuster IGT.

Edgy DC
Jun 19 2005 10:51 PM

Tomorrow's an off day. I see no reason that Randolph responded to his team's comeback by going to the last (or next to last, depending on how you feel about Danny Graves) option in his pen. I would've gone to Hernandez there.

metirish
Jun 19 2005 11:32 PM

I would have left Heilman in, he was pitching great and only threw 20 pitches, Mike DeJean just doesn't have it, and hitting Wright below Daubach boggles the mind, if Willie is going to hit him second then fine leave him hitting second.

metsmarathon
Jun 20 2005 12:55 AM

willie's got me scratching my head, and rather frustrated lately... that said, i'm not sure that i agree with those calling him a bad manager, a mistake, and a major problem with the team.

and, yeah, dejean in for heilman, are ya friggen kidding me?

Nymr83
Jun 20 2005 04:11 AM

Willie is a likeable guy, and i don't think any manager's in-game decisions can really cost a team more than half a dozen games a year even if he's realy bad.
that being said, willie has been very bad so far. his bullpen use is atrocious, his double-switching boggles the mind, and his refusal to bat his best hitter higher than 7th is the most frustrating thing i've ever witnessed as a mets fan.
I'm not going to call for his head or anything, he deserves the full year to figure things out...but if i still see Dejean entering 1-run games and Wright being removed in double switches in which the pitcher doesn't even stay in for a 2nd inning in September then i'm gonna hope he gets struck by lightning and is not the Mets manager next year.

Sandgnat
Jun 27 2005 10:45 AM

Can somebody please explain why Willie didn't have Wright guarding the line against the double in the bottom of the ninth last night?

Edgy DC
Jun 27 2005 11:47 AM

Wow, he didn't?

Basic stuff, no?

Sandgnat
Jun 27 2005 12:10 PM

You would think so, and I don't mean to suggest that Wright would have come up with GayRods double, but he wasn't even in a position to make an attempt. Everyone is talking about the leadoff walk, but I thought the poor defensive positioning during the next at bat was just as critical.

Frayed Knot
Jun 27 2005 12:13 PM

I'm not all that sure that guarding the line should be a universal thing in late innings. You might cut down on doubles but, at the same time, you increase the chances of getting singles and with no outs I'm not so sure that isn't almost as bad (plus A-Rod's hit was right on the line and may not have been grabbed even if Wright was shaded that way). Morgan was making a big deal of it but when you start an inning: walk, hit, walk, hit, it isn't going to matter much where you play your guys.

Edgy DC
Jun 27 2005 12:21 PM

Well, of course, Looper got nobody. But if Wright plays the line and gets it, the inning should start BB-DP.

With no outs and the tying run on first, I think it should be in effect.

Whaddoo I know; I was watching Gameday.

Frayed Knot
Jun 27 2005 01:50 PM

]Well, of course, Looper got nobody. But if Wright plays the line and gets it, the inning should start BB-DP.


First of all, maybe; Wright would have had to be playing virtually ON the line to do that.
But mainly, even by moving towards the line you decrease the odds of starting BB-DP. The 3rd sacker gets to fewer balls by guarding the line, not more, in order to prevent the well-placed double.

Edgy DC
Jun 27 2005 02:41 PM

No doubt.

Anonymous
Sep 08 2005 12:19 PM

heard this gem from Willie on last night's pregame chat with Coleman:

"I am not a big fan of statistics, I don't really like to look at them, but i did see one the other day, I am not sure where, that said our 1st and second place hitters are last in the league in on base percentage. Hmm, when you have speed, you have to get on base, so we have to do a better job there"

Wow, I am glad he realized this before it gets too late in the season ...

Elster88
Sep 08 2005 12:20 PM

Hey! I didn't know guests could post!
_____________________________
This post had the designation 160) Kaz Matsui