Rays have enough depth in pitching to be able to do a bullpen game or two a series. Rays used starter when they were ahead early in relief for less than 3 outs. By waiting to use Snell, they knew the stakes better when pitching him.
It's ridiculous how much the Astros losing playoff games affects my mental state. I've been depressed for two days straight. I don't really get sad about anything. My passions are few, I live a boring and simple life. This is my one thing, one, that I get obsessive about. It can't end this way.
Did anyone actually suggest the Rays not do the bullpen game? It's part of their whole pitching strategy. The Astros felt Verlander benefits from having his normal pregame routine. The last time he was brought in as a reliever in the 2017 ALDS, he promptly gave up a 2 run HR. If they thought he wouldn't be effective regardless, then they certainly shouldn't have pitched him. But assuming they thought he wouldn't suck, then even if they only planned to use him for a couple of innings, they should have started him as it gives him the best likelihood of success and it gives the team the best likelihood of getting through a few innings without giving up runs.
We can chew on what Hinch did for the next 50 years and thats what these boards are for but in the end we had to pitch a shut out to win and we all knew that wasn't happening last night. All things considered our pitching gave us a chance last night but the bats didn't. Pretty simple, we know Cole will be on his game, the bats have to get hot Thursday. Not much more to it
I’m fairly similar but it’s really not healthy. We can’t control the outcome. Fortunately I’ve found other passions in recent years- you can too. Keep your head up bro. Life goes on and it moves fast. Much love.
All Astros pitchers not named Verlander gave up a total of zero runs so yes it may have been possible to win with only 1 run. However, that isn't the big issue. If Verlander doesn't pitch and Astros lose....Astros have Cole and Verlander for Game 5. Starting Verlander on short rest did not substantially alter Astros chances at winning Game 4, but it lowers the odds for Game 5. If Astros were going to use Verlander in Game 4, they should have waited a few innings to make sure it was worth it, and to not expect Verlander to pitch 4 innings or more. Astros may have lost either way. Verlander may have pitched either way. Astros may have only scored one run. The way the Astros played it, they guaranteed Verlander wouldn't be available in Game 5 except maybe as a desperation inning if the Rays won.
I will say yes, towards the end of the game I started to get nervous about the mental state of the team. Throughout the game you could tell they were pressing at the plate and trying to swing for the fences every pitch. However I have hope. A perfect example is Bregman. Every at bat he was trying to pull and smash every pitch. He popped up every time. However in his last at bat he seemed to correct his approach and pulled a nice double to left center. Also Gurriel had a nice at bat and basically had a RBI single if it wasn't for the shift. I think that 9th inning was a a positive sign going forward. Honestly that game we got a ton of unlucky breaks and bounces. I fully expect the law of averages to balance out in game 5. A pissed off Cole is not a good sign for the Rays.
If you really think it is likely that the Astros went 9 innings with there pen giving up 0-1 runs, I don’t know what to tell you. Is it possible? Anything is possible but not very likely. Verlander is a starting pitcher and a creature of habit. Bringing him out of the pen wasn’t very likely. The Astros will go with Cole in game 5 at home and have their top relievers ready. If they can’t get the job done, then I’m not blaming Verlander starting game 4... especially after seeing how the rotation would line up if they make the ALCS. The Astros have Cole going on full rest.
That term's been bugging me for a while now even when they've been on big winning streaks and even with all the massive "stats" that have been put out there. It's the ambiguity of it that bugs me. The "stats," when you cherry pick the right ones can really paint whatever you want. I mean, there's no doubt there's a lot of impressive metrics from the batting this year. And from the pitching. And I totally have cherry picked them as well as part of the magic. There's a reason I've been using quotes around "stats," though, because I think there are deeper things to be learned from actual statistical analysis. Looking at actual distributions and trends, not just absolute numbers, relative averages, and concocted metrics. And I don't know how to do it...right now. So, I'm not saying I know what I'm going to find. I took probability and statistics four times in college before I finally passed it. Calculus I could understand but statistics really didn't sit well in my brain, and it almost failed me out of school. Eventually, I got an A the fourth time when a TA taught it instead of the crappy tenured professor, but only some concepts have stuck with me. Still, it's become clear to me that understanding proper statistics is a hell of a lot more useful than almost any other math out there. As an example, the whole run differential thing has always bugged me, because it's just a monolithic number. I get that it's a good, tested predictor of success, but it says nothing about average run diff and its standard deviation, and it certainly says nothing about the batting vs pitching contributions to run diff. Nor does it show trends over the season. I'd hypothesize, as a first volley, based just on my eye observations, that the Astros have a higher standard deviation on per game run diff than certain other great teams, and thus less consistency. It's just a hypothesis, and I need to go properly relearn statistics (and finally read How To Lie With Statistics) to feel good about tackling the issue and be honest and objective about what I find. That'll be an offseason project. Historically great offense by <insert many well-valued metrics> for sure, but I just wonder if there's an different story lying under the mathematical epidermis. I don't know. I'll post what I find if I ever attempt this.
I like your positivity and the energy behind it. I won't be at the game tomorrow, but if we ever cross paths, your shots are on me.
Someone said something like they would be more scared of Glasnow on short rest than the bullpen game. Edit. This was used to justify why Astros should have used Verlander than Urquidy. If Astros felt Verlander needed his normal routine, they should not have played him whether starting or not. Odds were good that Verlander would not be as effective as normal. I'm not sold on him as reliever except out of desperation on less than full rest as I have more faith in Astros relievers than I do Nationals relievers. I was a little surprised that the Rays got to Verlander so quickly. My biggest concern was that Astros would leave him in too long which the Astros did (IMO), but got lucky that only 1 run scored after 1st. Using Verlander or not likely didn't impact the odds of winning the game, IMO. Why use an ace if he isn't going to help when he can be used later to help? Granted, I get Astros don't concur. It looks like Astros don't trust Osuna, Harris, Pressly, James, Urquidy, Rondon, and Smith (combined ERA this series 2.67).
It's possible, but Astros aren't likely to score 0-1 runs either. What happened is Astros scored 1 run. Verlander gave up 4. No one else did. If we are going to argue based on what happened, Verlander was obviously wrong call as Astros lost and used up a Verlander start. If Astros don't want to use Verlander in relief because he's not use to it, he shouldn't have been used on short rest as a starter or reliever because he's not use to pitching on short rest.
Having saved Verlander for game 5 wouldn't of maximized his value imo. We have Cole for that. Had we gone with Urquidy/Miley combo in game 4 it would of preserved him(for very short relief in 5 or opening ALCS). But, in hindsight we scored 1 run. That just wouldn't cut it no matter who pitched... The only aspect of him pitching on short rest I didn't foresee, was Tampa hitters having his repertoire in recall and ability to pounce/adjust to his off game. May have been better to run a fresh look at them. But we took a shot.
**** happens. Now we know not to use Verlander on short rest. It was a gamble, and we are paying for it. But it was a hedged gamble because we knew we'd have Cole on normal rest. Let's hope our bats wake up, and we can talk about who should be starting for Game 1 against the Yankees.
And people need to get real. Rays offense is marginal. They've relied on pitching. We've not hit as we should
If we lose Cole I'm starting to think the Astros should use that $40-35 million on a ton of studrelief pitchers so we can copy the Rays. You won't need to lock up any for the long term either.
Cole is relatively reliable, maybe very reliable. Anyone can have an off game. Look at last night. We have a batting order with some of the highest regular season averages in baseball. The hitting has been wimpy so far. Got to give Cole run support or it is going to be a very, very long offseason. Honestly, I don't think many of us are brimming with optimism at this point. Maybe you are, but I am apprehensive. Seems like we inched by in Houston with two Hall of Fame pitching performances, and got blown out in Tampa. That is worrisome.
Ray's acquiring a guy like Anderson at the deadline was major. Wipeout stuff. Still not scared of them. Our bats need to awaken. Simple as that
