[OT] ALCS: Red Sox vs Yankees

[Erica]

I am so tired of hearing all day about how it's all Little's fault. While I do believe that maybe he should have taken Pedro out, you have to look at all the angles.
1) It is not a certainty that the Red Sox would have won had the relievers come in. True, they had been pretty much lights-out, but that doesn't mean the Yankees wouldn't have rallied against them either. If that had happened, Little would be castigated for not staying with Pedro I'm sure.
2) You have to remember how many times Pedro had been taken out of games earlier in the season only to take a shower and find out his bullpen had blown his win. Grady had been "saving" Pedro's arm all season for this moment. Why would he take him out? Pedro at his worst is still better than a lot at their best.  Many managers, when faced with a heat-of-the-moment decision, will stick with his "sure" thing. Torre has done it before and lost. Doesn't make him a bad manager. He took a gamble and lost. Get over it.
3) The Red Sox had many opportunities to put the game out of reach. Remember when Mussina came in in the fourth inning with first and third and no outs? They could have blown it wide open. I guess you should credit Torre for that managerial decision.

Bottom line is they had seven chances to win four games. They didn't and the better team won. It makes no more sense to blame the whole thing on Grady than it does to blame the Cubs' loss on the fan. Please. Give proper credit where it is due and accept defeat in grace.


Since we're so hot to make accusations, why hasn't anybody been blaming Schafer for being out-coached in the Final Four? I'm sure he could have done things differently. Ooops, I forgot, that was the ref's fault.
::rolleyes::



Post Edited (10-17-03 17:45)

[Keith K \'93]

Do you believe for an instant that Pedro would be willing to be a setup man?  That's at least three steps down on the ladder of pitching hierarchy.  Besides, as great as Mo is, a great starting pitcher is overall more valuable.  That's why they make bigger money in general.  Notice that John Smoltz thinks that he can best help the Braves by moving back into the rotation next year and this after a stellar year as a closer.  I think he's right.

[Keith K \'93]

I have to agree with Erica and disagree with you Avash.  There's no guarantee that the Red Sox win if Timlin or Embree starts the inning.  Or even if one of them came on to pitch to Matsui or Posada.  And all of this discussion would be moot if the pitch to Posada had been an inch in either direction on the bat- then he either flies out to Damon or Garciaparra/Walker.  If that happens, he may well get out of the inning.

Little is in a tough spot because the Yankees managed to win.  They could have won against the relievers or Pedro could have made the pitch to get Matsui or Pedro.  I like to believe (in my less rational moments) that the Red Sox would've lost whatever Little did.  Because that's what always happens.  :-D

As for next year, the Red Sox most certainly do not need another bat (assuming they keep their current players).  After all, the lineup scored 900+ runs and set records for sluggins percentage and extra base hits.  They do need a deeper rotation and probably still a better bullpen.  And a better slogan and haircuts :-)

I fully expect the Sox to be one of the best teams in the AL in 2004 (they were #2 IMO this year), giving the Yankees a run for their money.

[ugarte]

Erica wrote:

I am so tired of hearing all day about how it's all Little's fault. While I do believe that maybe he should have taken Pedro out, you have to look at all the angles.
1) It is not a certainty that the Red Sox would have won had the relievers come in. True, they had been pretty much lights-out, but that doesn't mean the Yankees wouldn't have rallied against them either. If that had happened, Little would be castigated for not staying with Pedro I'm sure. [/q]
Well the point isn't to make all decisions that work.  It is to make decisions that give you the best chance of winning.  By the 8th inning - and there were signs in the 7th - Pedro was done.  His history screams "100 pitch pitcher," and Little spent the whole season respecting that only to forget it at the worst possible time.

[q]2) You have to remember how many times Pedro had been taken out of games earlier in the season only to take a shower and find out his bullpen had blown his win. Grady had been "saving" Pedro's arm all season for this moment. Why would he take him out? Pedro at his worst is still better than a lot at their best.  Many managers, when faced with a heat-of-the-moment decision, will stick with his "sure" thing. Torre has done it before and lost. Doesn't make him a bad manager. He took a gamble and lost. Get over it.[/q]
The bullpen at the end of the year isn't all that much like the bullpen was in June.  Little didn't save Pedro's arm for this moment, he saved Pedro's arm because on a game to game basis he is greatgreatgreatgreat[100th pitch]horrible.  Only two people in the entire world thought Pedro should pitch the eigth - especially after the Jeter and Williams at-bats - Little and Pedro. They were wrong.

[q]3) The Red Sox had many opportunities to put the game out of reach. Remember when Mussina came in in the fourth inning with first and third and no outs? They could have blown it wide open. I guess you should credit Torre for that managerial decision. [/q]
You credit Mussina for getting the outs, but yes, absolutely you credit Torre for the managerial decision.   He walked out to the mound and asked for the ball from a first ballot hall of famer in what might have been his last game in the 4th inning of Game 7 of the ALCS. Why? Because he just didn't have it yesterday. That is GREAT managing, whether or not Mussina comes through for him.

[q]Bottom line is they had seven chances to win four games. They didn't and the better team won.[/q]
I'm a Yankee fan, and I don't think this is true.  You'll see next year.

[ugarte]

Keith K '93 wrote:

Do you believe for an instant that Pedro would be willing to be a setup man?  That's at least three steps down on the ladder of pitching hierarchy.  Besides, as great as Mo is, a great starting pitcher is overall more valuable.  That's why they make bigger money in general.  Notice that John Smoltz thinks that he can best help the Braves by moving back into the rotation next year and this after a stellar year as a closer.  I think he's right.

Smoltz is wrong.  He was moved to the pen because he stopped being all that effective on a 7-innings-at-a-time basis.  He should take the Eckersley route to the Hall of Fame that the Braves are offering him.

And Pedro is still one of the five best starting pitchers in baseball, even if he can't throw complete games. (How many pitchers do these days?)  Thinking that he should be a Yankee setup man may well be the most insulting suggestions I have ever heard.

[Al DeFlorio]

big red apple wrote:
[Everything he said.]

Bravo.  Well said--and absolutely right--on all counts.



Post Edited (10-17-03 18:31)

[Janos]

Erica wrote:
Bottom line is they had seven chances to win four games. They didn't and the better team won.

in this case, "better" is defined as having 1 1/2 times the payroll?  ::rolleyes::

[Section A]

There are many Yankee fans that I like and respect; I'm friends with many of them. However....

I truly am sorry to say something like this, but you're the kind that makes me angry, the type that refuses to realize that New York didn't win last night because of their mystique or their aura or whatever the hell you people call it, but because Boston's manager made an unwise and truly idiotic decision (Pedro, can you throw him to the ground as well?). And I'm sick of hearing this "Oh well who's to say that New York wouldn't have rallied against Timlin or Embree?" Please. Timlin starts the 8th, and the game is over, and if you'd prefer not to admit it, fine, but you know it's true.

I suppose none of this matters anymore, and so this'll be the last time I post about this game (unless provoked :-P ). After all, Yankee fans, your team is in the World Series....yet again (though Mariano's behavior last night was as if it were his first time). No need to go around saying things like "We deserved it" and "The better team won." They're cliches, not necessarily true, and they make lots of other Yankee fans look bad.

As for your analogy to the Frozen Four, Erica, it WAS the ref's fault ;-)
(kidding, of course...).

[rhovorka]

Janos wrote:
in this case, "better" is defined as having 1 1/2 times the payroll?  ::rolleyes::

Or that the Sox had 2x the payroll of the A's?  Oh wait, that must be different.  ::rolleyes::

Edit: I actually got curious.  Yes, the published "payrolls" of the Sox and Yanks are well known.  But take into account that there are players on both team's payrolls that aren't on the postseason rosters or even on the teams anymore (Hitchcock and Mondesi for example).  Using the USAToday 2003 salary database (link below) I totalled the raw salaries for the 25-man rosters of the Yanks and Sox in the ALCS.  Certainly, some money is being handled by other teams, and backloaded contracts skew the "avg. contract value" for some of the higher-priced players, but for raw 2003 salaries, I came up with the following (using the league minimum of $300,000 when no salary info was available (Arroyo, McCarty for BOS and Juan Rivera, Almonte for NYY):

NY Yankess 25-man ALCS roster:  $127.6 Mill.
Bos Red Sox 25-man ALCS roster: $102.2 Mill.
http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/default.aspx

A 25% difference.  Significant, but not enough for Boston fans to claim poverty.  And as everyone said after Oakland GM Billy Beane surprisingly played the "salary card" after the ALDS, it's not the money that plays the game.

Expect the overalll Yankee payroll to drop significantly in 2004 (unless George can't resist Vlad), as they'll drop the contracts of Clemens, Hitchcock, Mondesi, and possibly Wells or Pettitte.   And if the Sox are looking to add an extra arm as well as bringing back Walker AND worrying about the contracts of Nomar, Varitek, Pedro, and Lowe who will all be in the last year of their contracts in 2004, I don't see the Sox payroll staying where it is.
Pretty good analysis of the Sox situation here: http://www.sportspages.com/content/blog.php?p=1324&more=1



Post Edited (10-17-03 23:45)

[ugarte]

Avash '05 wrote:(Pedro, can you throw him to the ground as well?).[/q]
The way Little came trucking out of the dugout after the Williams single, I was positive that that this was about to happen.

[q]And I'm sick of hearing this "Oh well who's to say that New York wouldn't have rallied against Timlin or Embree?" Please. Timlin starts the 8th, and the game is over, and if you'd prefer not to admit it, fine, but you know it's true.[/q]
That isn't very good sportsmanship either, Avash.  The Sox would have been better off, but the success of the Boston bullpen against the Yankees was shocking because they were pitching above their heads all series.  It was a bad decision by Little, but he wasn't about to bring in Gagne or the ghost of Hoyt Wilhelm.

[Dave \'02]

Why does everyone insist on playing the salary card?  I am really sick of hearing about this.  Yes, the Yankees have more money to spend than every other team, but if those teams had the means, I find it hard to believe that they would not increase their payrolls.  Why should the Yankees be punished for being successful?  Also, as was mentioned earlier, simply spending a lot does not ensure vicotry (see Rangers, Orioles, Dodgers, etc.)  The Braves spend a lot of money and have been extremely successful over the past decade or so but you don't hear people complaining about them because they routinely fail in the postseason.  If you look at other leagues, the Mavericks spend loads and loads of money and they haven't won anything.  The NY Rangers spend a lot and they haven't won in quite a few years.  The bottom line is that while the Yankees spend a fortune, they also spend it wisely (well, more often than not) and nobody would care if they weren't extremely successful over the past few years.  

As far as Sox fans go, it is definitely an inferiority complex.  How else do you explain Bostonians chanting "Yankees Suck" at the Patriots Superbowl celebration?  New Yorkers didn't do that when the Giants won the Superbowl.

[RichS]

I agree by and large with the assessment of Grady's moves, or lack thereof.  There are no sure things but given their recent performance, you would think that Embree and Timlen gave them a better chance to win than a tiring Pedro.  Where was Williamson in extra innings?

This "better team" thing always fascinates me.  By definition, the better team won.  It's as simple as recognizing that when the chips were down, the Yankees performed better.  

In the end, Rivera was magnificent for 3 innings, a distance he had not gone in several years, and Boone jumped all over Wakefield's "mistake".  Doesn't that tell you that the Yankees were the better team on that night?  And isn't that what counts?   No game is ever replayed, last year's Super Bowl, for example,  just because the underdog pulled an upset, so the only tangible measure we ever have of who's better is what actually took place?

I've been a Yankee fan all my life and if the Marlins pull an upset this series, I'll tip my hat to them and acknowledge that they were the better team...perhaps not on paper but we all know where the games AREN'T played.

[Greg Berge]

I'd say the "better team" is by definition the team with better winning percentage (in situations like this where teams face like competition).  There is definitely such a thing as an upset.  Sacred Heart was not a "better team" than Cornell -- they just were better (luckier, whatever) when it counted.

The Marlins are interesting, though -- best record in MLB after McKeon, and arguably that was such a big shift that for them maybe it's the only timeframe that should be considered.

I really think the whole criticism of Little is ridiculous.  If he had lifted Pedro and Embree had been shelled, then the cry babies would be screaming for him to be fired over that.  Sport has uncertainty.  Get over it.

[Rob \'98]

Greg Berge '85 wrote:

I really think the whole criticism of Little is ridiculous.  If he had lifted Pedro and Embree had been shelled, then the cry babies would be screaming for him to be fired over that.  Sport has uncertainty.  Get over it.

But just because "cry babies" are saying it, does it make it wrong? Even an idiot can be right. Doesn't make them smart, just right. The same thing applies to managing. You can make a bad decision that works out or a good one that doesn't. This was a bad one that didn't.
As I was watching the game I was wondering why Grady Little didn't pull Pedro the entire time. Pedro is at this point a 100 pitch pitcher. Its been well documented. He was obviously laboring and the yankees were getting good contact on him.  Do the Red Sox win if they take out Pedro? Nobody knows. But the odds were certainly more favorable taking him out, then leaving him in.

Here is some in depth analysis:

http://premium.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2415

As for the world series, even though I am a yankee fan, I would love to see McKeon win BUT as a baseball fan, I can't stomach the thought of Loria winning a championship.

[DeltaOne81]

As a baseball fan, I can't stand to see the Yankees win #5 in 8 years... 6 AL titles in 8 years is disgusting enough. Just personal opinion.

As for Little, I think Rob said it very well. This isn't just 20/20 hindsight. I was watching the game with two other people pulling for the Sox, and we all wanted him out, as soon as Jeter hit that double (if not before). True, you can do a bad thing that works out (Pedro could have gotten ot of it), or a good thing that doesn't (the bullpen coulda crashed).

But think about the situation. Your star starter just barely got out of a jam the last inning, he just let up 3 straight hits and didn't look good doing it, and he's pitched around 120 pitches. It's time, it's just time. ESPECIALLY with a bull pen that has a 1.33 ERA (I think - not sure if that was for the playoffs or the series). The manager has to be strong enough to stand up to an all-star who says he can do it. Of course a guy like Pedro will want to stay in, but the prudent move is to say "you did a great job, but you're tired, take a seat."

And for the record... Let's Go Mets ;-).