Astros 3, Diamondbacks 4 - Small Ball For the Win
by snakecharmer on Sep 4, 2010 1:47 AM EDT
in Diamondbacks Game Reports
Email
PrintRecord: 56-79. Pace: 66-96. Change on last season: -5.
Hinch/Gibson W%: .392/.446
It's Not Involved In Any Postseason Race Weekend here at Chase Field, with the Astros in town to take on the Diamondbacks. The Astros recently swept the Phillies and have won 8 of their last 10, while the Diamondbacks just swept the Padres and won 6 of 7. It should make for an interesting weekend, and tonight did not disappoint.
Daniel Hudson - soon-to-be founding member of the new "Big 3" here in Arizona - pitched 6 strong innings. Though his team couldn't hold the lead for an individual win, a team win is just as important. Augie Ojeda's sacrifice fly in the 8th inning put the Diamondbacks ahead and the good version of Juan Gutierrez closed it out out with a save.
Details in the usual place....
The Diamondbacks jumped on the board early off of Brett Myers. Stephen Drew and Chris Young both got aboard and Adam LaRoche doubled to score Drew (and Young almost tried for home but was held up). With runners on 2nd and 3rd base and nobody out, the Dbacks...... utterly failed to do anything more, as three pop flies stranded both runners. "Here we go again" - one couldn't help but wonder if the wasted opportunities would come back to haunt them.
Dan Hudson handled the Astros well until the 4th inning, when he allowed back-to-back singles to open the frame, and Jeff Keppinger singled to bring in Angel Sanchez to tie the game. In the 5th inning, Gerardo Parra misplayed a ball in left to give the pitcher Myers a "double," and the Astros used fundamentals (groundout to move him over, single to score him) to take the lead 2-1.
But the Dbacks game right back in the bottom half. Parra made up for his play by tripling to lead it off. Hudson showed he's not quite as adept with the bat as his DH predecessor and K'd, but Drew walked, then Young brought in Parra and LaRoche singled in Drew, and just like that the Diamondbacks had the lead right back.
Wait, you mean teams aren't supposed to just give up once they get behind? Hey, I like this version!
Hudson was over 100 pitches after the 6th inning, so he was out, and Blaine Boyer came in for the 7th. He promptly gave up a ground rule double and a single, then got the double play - but, the two outs did NOT include one at home, so once again, Houston had tied the game. Two scoreless halves later, it was Ryan Roberts' turn to lead off with a double, and was moved over by Parra. Runner on third with one out in a tie game, another opportunity to wast-- hey! Look, it's Augie Ojeda off the bench to drive in the winning run with a sacrifice fly!! Perfect execution - "small ball" at its finest. Juan Gutierrez came in for the save and nailed down the win with very little apprehension.
Master of his Domain: A LaRoche, +18.3%
Honorable Mention: J Gutierrez, +17.6%
God-Emperor of Suck: M Montero, -19.3%
Over 500 comments is not a bad turnout for a Friday night. Apparently, 22 of us have no lives, says the man who led the thread with more than double his next nearest competitor. soco took first place, 'skins in second, and jinnah in third. All Present: BattleMoses, soco, DbacksSkins, Skii, pygalgia, kishi, Rockkstarr12, emilylovesthedbacks, jinnah, hotclaws, asteroid, snakecharmer, brian custer, NASCARbernet, Azreous, dbacks4life, Muu, Jim McLennan, Sprankton, justin1985, marionette, and Wailord.
Comment of the Day comes from a discussion of horrible beards and mustaches. (What baseball game?) After Phil posted a photo of himself, Emily decided his new nickname should be:
or
pedophil.by emilylovesthedbacks on Sep 3, 2010 9:27 PM PDT
If you want a somewhat baseball-related comment, you'll have to go for soco talking about hotdogs.
Sounds like it's radio only tomorrow, for some other sport that seems to be occupying the minds and televisions of many Americans. Except for Jim's. In the evening start, Joe Saunders goes up against Bud Norris for Wailord's first recap as an official writer!
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
All hail Jenny
For this great recap!
Small ball at its finest…Great outcome of an exciting game tonight!
"Be more concerned w/ character than reputation. Character is what you are, reputation is what people think you are." ~ John Wooden
Nice recap
Quick question. Who would be considered the “Big three”? Is it Barry Enright, Joe Saunders, and Daniel Hudson? Or would Ian Kennedy be in there instead of Joe Saunders?
Definitely Kennedy
He will be around longer.
"Robin, some people die of old age. Some people get crushed by a tank shaped like a giant Rubber Ducky. That's life."
by kishi on Sep 4, 2010 1:58 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Thanks!
Yes, Enright and Kennedy are to whom I was referring. :) Someone (kishi? ‘skins?) made a nice comparison to them and the Big 3 in Oakland’s glory days (sort of), and I like it.
Things ’Skins has in common with foulpole for 400, please. -- soco
I've never
been happier to root for a team on pace for 96 losses. Although, this is not good for the draft slot…
Leads/ties blown by the Diamondbacks bullpen in '10: 37
Naw
Draft slots are for people who operate strictly on logic.
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=343580&title=spoiler-alert-human-centipede - Warning: NSFW... sorta
by Dan Strittmatter on Sep 4, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay, let's go with that,
Show me a franchise that consistently wins pennants and world series rings that also gets the top draft slots whose draftees perform at the highest level during the franchise’s success years.
It is NOT logical for a team to become a major winning franchise on draftees. Teams win consistently with proven talented experienced ballplayers, and not on talented, unproven, inexperienced ballplayers.
The Great and Mighty....
So
the Braves and Yankees in the 90’s don’t count?
All Cubs fans are drunken assholes, but not all drunken assholes are Cubs fans.
-Dbacksskins
Um, I think, Justin
the vast bulk of their success was built on veterans. I could be wrong, but I think they made plenty of moves that strengthened themselves outside of home grown draft picks.
The Great and Mighty....
The early 2000's A's?
Mulder, Hudson, Zito all draft picks, along with Giambi, Tejada, and Chavez – all of whom were drafted or signed as overseas free agents and came up through the Athletics minor-league system? From 1993-99, they were last in the division more often than not, but used the draft picks to rebuild the system, and enjoyed four straight post-season appearances.
Or look at the Twins. Last year, they had four position players with WAR of three or better, in Mauer, Span, Kubel and Mourneau, all of them Twins draft picks. Their two best starters, Baker and Blackburn, were similarly chosen. Mourneau and Mauer are helping them to the post-season again this season.
2008 Rays, that won the American League pennant? Three of the top four position players by WAR (Upton, Longoria and Crawford) were draft picks, and their best starter, James Shields. And this year, as they head towards the playoffs again, all FOUR of their best position players – the three mentioned and John Jason – were draft picks, with another draft pick, David Price, their best pitcher.
I trust I have made my point. Meanwhile the Cubs, Dodgers and Mets are doing so well with their “proven talented experienced ballplayers” [translated: overpaid and underperforming] ballplayers,
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
There are no guarantees, laddie
sorry that the Cubs, Dodgers and Mets have idiotic ownership and management. Kenrick and company can thank their lucky stars that Gibson and Dipoto know what the hell their doing.
The Great and Mighty....
Yes, if by "know what you're doing"
You mean building a team based on young players and draftees, rather than "proven talented experienced ballplayers".
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
And how many did the Yankees with in 2001-2008?
Despite spending almost $1.4 billion on “proven talented experienced ballplayers”?
QED.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
I looked up all the World Series that the 2000s As
won. I had to actually look because I couldn’t remember them winning any. Well, even after looking, they still didn’t win any. For some of us, winning it all is a high goal than ‘just being there.’
On a more positive note, and this is something’ I’m actually serious about, I really didn’t think this Diamondback club back in June was a quality team with talent. The last six weeks or so is proving me wrong, and I’m quite happy for it, too.
The Great and Mighty....
What tree can i
finds these “proven veterans” growing on? I mean, they gotta come from somewhere, right?
Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Sep 4, 2010 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Its called let the weaker franchises draft them
and pick up the quality players from those teams.
The Great and Mighty....
and that is called setting
yourself up for failure in the future.
Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Sep 5, 2010 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Someone (willing to pay money) finds these guys
that Gibson and Dipoto have changed the quality of this franchise using JB?Hinch’s players is nothing short of amazing. But the ‘Backs need another quality starter next season (Lopez isn’t the answer), and another strong arm in the pen.
The Great and Mighty....
that Gibson and Dipoto have changed the quality of this franchise using JB?Hinch’s players is nothing short of amazing.
Did you really write this? Have I fallen into the sarchasm?
Yeah, we actually traded for Daniel Hudson at the start of the year and were just keeping him a secret from everyone [rolls eyes]. And you might want to check and see who the GM and manager were when Enright got called-up…
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
I don't any relationship with those guys, Jim
I’m sure they’re nice, but come on, hiring a 30 something to manage a major league ballclub with ZERO coaching, let alone managing experience is, in the words of our British cousins, DAFT.
The pitch coaching was in shambles before Gibson took over.
The Great and Mighty....
What, and brought up Jordan Norberto?
[Snigger]
Yeah, that proved what an “amazing” manager he is.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
There is no point in arguing this.
You’re not going to change your stance. I know your opinion on Gibson, and I completely, and respectfully disagree with you. I don’t really understand why you guys post the % comparison of both managers, because you yourself have said that it’s impossible to compare the two, and obviously reject any argument that is made that suggest Gibson is at all any contributor to the success of the team. So, even though we see the winning % higher than Hinch, it’s because the “pitching is better, the offense is better, and the players are different than when Hinch was managing.” Yet, when Gibson had a lower %, all there was were posts saying how the team is worse under Gibson and the % backs it up.
And to be honest, I have adapted to just skip the posts about Gibson, because they are nothing but negative jabs at the man not giving him any credit. I appreciate your work, as this is the place I can read about dbacks news, and your knowledge of the team is beyond appreciated, it’s hard to read your writings about Gibson because of your personal opinion towards the man.
So if there's no point
…Then why the manifesto about not arguing about it, arguing about it?
/divide by 0
Bad doormat! No stock options!
Maybe
Because it needed to be called out? I used to argue back and forth about this debate with Jim and others, and I realized well, nothing is going to change. Granted, this was then their winning % was about the same. If we are going to sit here and post the % comparison of the managers for every game, and sit here and watch the % increase in Gibsons favor, and then completely dismiss the idea of Gibson>Hinch, then don’t post the comparison. Except, it is a great argument when Gibson’s % is less than Hinch’s. So I figured that if Gibson’s % is higher than it was a month ago when I made an argument that Gibson is better for this team, than the overall opinion of him had to have changed. Yet, I see the same people throw in these quick jabs, such as the Norberto one above, and continue to post their negative opinions.
Maybe I will wait to the end of the season. I posted a question that if we finished this season with the same or better record than last year, and Jim said he would be more inclined to accept the fact the Gibson should be our manager as opposed to interim. So I will wait. I mean, it’s only a 5 game difference, according to the comparison you guys put on this year and last year.
negative jabs and not giving credit
are two completely separate issues.
nobody on this site dislikes gibson, or thinks he can’t manage a baseball club. we just don’t think any manager makes a substantial amount of difference.
if gibson were given our AAA roster, do you think he could coax more than 50 wins out of that team? on the flip side, give gibson Tampa Bay’s roster, and do you think he WOULDN’T have Tampa Bay’s current record, give or take 3 games? the point we are all trying to make, is that it’s very shortsighted to blame/praise the manager for the deeds of the team
meanwhile, i suggest you actually read posts about gibson more closely. sometimes, people (like me) who think gibson only has a marginal effect on the team will still give credit to gibson when he makes a good move (that other managers might not have made). case in point, a week ago, gibson didn’t intentionally walk a guy when many other managers would have. i applauded him for this. even then, that good decision only has a marginal effect on the game (increase our probability of winning by less than 5%). that’s the point we’re making. doesn’t matter who’s on that bench. gibson, hinch, melvin, torre, la russa, w/e……they are all pretty much easily replaceable in my mind
by blue bulldog on Sep 4, 2010 10:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Well.
meanwhile, i suggest you actually read posts about gibson more closely.
Thanks for the suggestion, but I read these posts quite often, and I know your name and I do not correlate your posts with the pessimistic view on Gibson. Look, I understand your post. And appreciate your response. If the dbacks were to either get Tony La Russa or Hinch as their managers, you are telling me you would say, “I don’t care” or “Hinch” as your responses? If you think that managers aren’t important, than you wouldn’t mind a coach that isn’t well equipped for the position. I know I would choose La Russa.
But I guess this question is for Jim. I dont know, however long ago, I asked to everyone if we finished with last years record or better, if their opinion would change. Jim said he would definitely consider it. Except, the points he’s making it right now is that Reynolds still strikes out, base running errors still, etc, and the success is highly reliant on 2 young pitchers. Well, whatever the case may be, they are still winnings games right now, and IF they do get to last years record with Reynolds stirking out the same, base running errors, whatever i listed about, is still happening, I think it would be hard to justify you saying you would change your opinion about Gibson? This made sense in my head, sorry if it came out…ridiculously unintelligent.
I believe in credit where credit's due
If player X performed better under Gibson than Hinch, then it seems credible to give Gibson the credit for that. But if player X performs better under Gibson than player Y did under Hinch – I just don’t see why Gibson deserves credit for that.
I hear all the talk about the clubhouse – but I previously heard talk, earlier in the season, about how Hinch had won the respect of the players. It’s very rare anyone talks smack about the current management. Instead of relying on gossip and third-hand hearsay, I’d rather look at objective measurements – and there is little or no evidence that the presence of Gibson has made the team any better than they were under Hinch. If you have data to show otherwise, I’d be very interested to hear it.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
by Jim McLennan on Sep 4, 2010 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I have no opinion of the man
Never met him. But what I do object to is you and others giving him credit for things like the trade that brought Hudson to the team, or the sterling work of Enright, who was promoted by Hinch. That is what has had a positive impact on the team.
Has Lopez pitched better since Hinch took over? No. Has Mark Reynolds struck out less? No. Has our baserunning improved? No.
I have adapted to just skip the posts about Gibson, because they are nothing but negative jabs at the man not giving him any credit.
Here’s the deal then – you are welcome to ignore those posts as long as you also promise to stop making posts containing nothing but unfounded BS, such as “That Gibson and Dipoto have changed the quality of this franchise using JB?Hinch’s players is nothing short of amazing.” While you continue to post nonsense like that, I’m going to continue pointing out their idiocy.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
Different posters
The comment you’re quoting is by Nascar, not ZonaBacks.
"Robin, some people die of old age. Some people get crushed by a tank shaped like a giant Rubber Ducky. That's life."
My bad on that
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
All of this is fine and dandy, Jim...
Has Lopez pitched better since Hinch took over? No. Has Mark Reynolds struck out less? No. Has our baserunning improved? No.
Okay. So would you take all of that, with the losses that were happening before, or would you take all of that with the wins that have been happening now? I don’t get the nitpicking here. Obviously, SOMETHING has changed. Players don’t just turn on a switch in the middle of the season and decide they are going to play better. I truly believe the direction of Gibson has pushed these players to their limits.
Let's do the math
Going into tonight’s game: 56 games under Gibson, 25 wins. At Hinch’s .392 W%, 56 wins = 22 wins. So, we have only three “more” wins under Gibson. Let’s discount the fact Gibson has had an easier schedule.
According to BR.com, Hudson alone has a WAR of 2.0. Enright is 2.6, with all but one his starts under Gibson. 19 starts, 4.6 WAR. That is what has changed. They basically replaced Haren and Kennedy, who in 41 starts combined, managed only 1.7 WAR combined. That’s your three wins, right there.
Now, may be we habe a new attitude in the locker-room. Who can say? Neither you nor I can. But there is little or no evidence any such attitude adjustment has resulted in any more wins. The arrival of Enright and Hudson, on the other hand, definitely has.
"It's not the despair, Laura. I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand." -- Brian Stimpson
You cannot sit here and compare two pitchers under one coach, with 2 different pitchers from a different coach, and translate them in any way shape or form. You can gather all these stats, bold them up, and present them in a well structured paragraph, and I still don’t agree with you. I don’t need stats to judge how the attitude on the team has changed. I get my opinions based on what I watch, what I hear from the people around the clubhouse who say all the time that they notice a clear distinction. Yeah, you’re right, I’m not in the dugout, or I don’t have communicate with any of the players, and I do not analyze stats to make my judgements of the players attitudes. I can see it. And I think it’s a shame to discredit the manager in the way that you do.
To be fair
It’s two different pitchers, yes, but under the same (arguably awful) pitching coach. In fact, if you think about it, the net change of our staff was Hinch out, Joel Youngblood in.
It’s logical to put laurels on Hudson, Enright, Saunders etc, considering that we were AWFUL in July, all of which was under Gibson, then had a winning August with all these guys now in the fold.
I’m of the opinion that the manager doesn’t really do a whole lot other than fill out lineup cards and yell at umpires, the onus is on the players first and foremost.
It’s easy to talk about nebulous things about “attitudes”. But it comes down to this: If you’re playing better and winning for whatever reason OF COURSE you’re going to have a better attitude, one that will vanish at the first sign of losing.
Course, whatever is working now, don’t change it. If we finish strong, hell yeah keep Gibby in. You don’t mess with anything that works.
But the glory and the shame, rightfully, comes down to the players, and some new ones that have recently come up have done their jobs, and it would be equally bad to just discount their stats and performance and throw out things like attitude.
I guess my whole opinion on this is “Who the f*** cares if Jim doesn’t think that Gibson is the main reason for the recent success?”
Bad doormat! No stock options!
by Clefo on Sep 5, 2010 1:06 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
You know
…Before players become “talented experienced ballplayers” someone had to draft them, and nurture them in the system and, given enough PT, skill, and luck, they become talented and experienced, they don’t just reverse rapture themselves into being.
My point is you draft and bring up players so that they become, eventually, a good experienced team. You just have to wait.
Bad doormat! No stock options!
and they won't be winners for long
if they really believe that.
Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin.
by unnamedDBacksfan on Sep 4, 2010 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Does Billy Beane’s contract extension signal an optimistic dawn for Oakland fans?
- Ask Alex: Will Alex Avila be an All-Star again?
- Create-a-Caption: Matt Cain’s great pair of golf pants
- Kim Kardashian, Kris Humphries autographed ball being auctioned by Twins
- George Brett lawsuit claims his company falsely advertises ion necklaces’ health benefits
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
