Frustrating way to lose a game given how many chances we had late. When your situational hitting is that poor you deserve to lose. Still, winning 3 of 4 is always a good result.
Yes... you're basically relegating Rasmus to be a defensive replacement player. Tucker has done a fine job thus far... but he's been scuffling as of late (as most rookies are prone to), and not coming through in that situation could further any potential slump. On the flip side, Rasmus hasn't been playing a lot lately as they've been facing a ton of lefties (didn't play at all in the CWS series). They're still going to need to get his bat going at some point, especially to off-set Marisnick's perpetual slump. And, in the end, Rasmus had a quality AB... sure, he didn't get a chance to drive in a run, but didn't make an out either... the guys who're expected to get runs home didn't come through.
Sure it is.. esp. when the Orioles likely end up better than their record shows thus far. They had lost 5 in a row going into today's game... not going to lose sleep about dropping the finale.
Agreed, But I'm glad people are talking about the Stros again instead of TV contracts- Crane's cheap- no FA's want to play for the Stros- Luhnow stinks etc....
Uh, no it's not. A third of a season isn't a small sample of a season no matter how many times you repeat it. The Orioles may get better or they may get worse but right now they're in fourth place in the worst division in baseball so it's a well earned fourth place.
And the Astros just won 3 out of 4 against them. Does their current record mean that they weren't allowed to lose ANY games at all? And you know that the past 3 years of results can't simply be dismissed completely when you're dealing with a very similar team. That's an even bigger sample size than just a third of the season. Just like why some will cautiously watch the Astros for signs of regression (albeit they have made several key improvements that can explain this result).
No, Im not. Rasmus is a very good defensive player and a below average hitter. Overall, he fits in nicely as a starter because of what he brings on the defensive side, as well as some pop in his bat for the bonus runs. As a pinch hitter with a runner on 3rd, Rasmus is not a good option because he strikes out 40% of the time he steps up to the plate. Now, you're right, he didnt K and worked a walk...but you need contact in that situation, as a walk does nothing but create a force at the bags, bringing up the next guy to the plate who likes to strike out a ton as well. Contact is key in those situations and Rasmus isnt the guy for that job. I have no issues having Rasmus as a starter because of his overall game, but not in the situation we put him in yesterday. On the flip side, Tucker has been excellent as a PH. Just didnt make much sense to go with Rasmus in that situation.
Go back and look at the pitch sequence. The 2 strikes he was thrown, the two he swung at, were both rising high and inside fastballs. Those are designed to get swing and misses or if you make contact, popups. You're not going to get on top of those and get the ball on the ground. Once he had 2 strikes on him, he did a great job laying off of pitchers' pitches on the last 2 balls. O'Dowd wasn't giving him anything he could hit, as a walk there doesn't hurt the O's at all, actually helps as it set up a potential double play. It was a great job of pitching by a very good pitcher. He had to come after Springer in the zone after that, and did make 1 bad mistake the got fouled off. Them's the breaks.
Right, but Tucker has a higher unqualified OPS and strikes out half as much. Rasmus only makes contact with the ball about 50% of the time that he steps up the plate, while Tucker makes contact about 68% of the time. Huge difference between the two when it comes down to that one at-bat with a runner on 3rd with less than 2 outs. Also, I mentioned Rasmus has pop in his bat...and along with his defense, I have no issues with him as a starter. My issue is that situationally speaking, that was a poor decision by Hinch. Just like if Howard is chosen to shoot technicals for the Rockets...after all, Dwight Howard, on a per game basis makes more FT than anyone not named Harden on the team...but that doesnt mean anything. It's all about percentages and odds.
It's also about keeping guys you're going to rely on sharp/focused, keeping confidence up, and looking at past matchup history. Has Rasmus faced that pitcher before? Has he had success against him? Perhaps that's exactly how he pitched him before. Do you specifically know Rasmus batting average in the 7th inning or later with RISP and less than 2 outs? Also, it's pretty meaningless to use nothing but percentages to evaluate Tucker. He's still in the midst of "getting it" and is likely going through an expected slump as most rookies do. Rasmus also needs some consistent AB's. As I said earlier, he hasn't played very much recently due to the plethora of lefty starters. Hinch also knows your percentages along with countless other situations that you don't know when it comes to making that decision. And in the end, Rasmus took what he was given and didn't make an out, and was going to be needed to play CF as is. You keep spouting off the K%, yet if the exact same thing happens with Tucker (a walk) you'd be praising his eye instead of ignoring what Rasmus was able to do with what he was given. This wasn't like putting in Villar to both PH and play CF. Rasmus is more than capable of both, and frankly is getting paid to do both.
We're talking about 1 at-bat here, Nick...one at-bat. It literally will have nothing to do with keeping Rasmus's confidence up and getting him consistent at-bats. And Rasmus hasnt played much because Tucker has been tough to keep out of the lineup. Hinch said just as much.
Hinch also stated he had planned for Tucker to have a full day of rest yesterday. again, that's pretty important for a rookie who's been pressing some over the last week (was swinging and missing badly at very hittable pitches). Hinch has done a pretty good job of both keeping guys fresh and sharp in the bullpen, utilizing his bench/speed and making sure guys who are pressing get some time off... And playing matchups by the percentages (Tucker/Rasmus in a lefty-right platoon right now, which is the primary reason for why Tucker has had this many consecutive starts).
Nor does pinch hitting a struggling rookie who had a scheduled day off. But keeping guys fresh does... And he got a walk. Maybe all that "rest" allowed him to work on things like don't strike out in key scoring situations.
One would think that the Astros won the game as a result of Rasmus pinch hitting, with the way you're defending that decision. A walk added nothing to the situation. Great, Rasmus didnt K...but he also didnt make contact, which was needed. And I love how you keep pointing to the rookie who's struggling by calling out his last 5 games...as if a 5 game stretch in baseball is anything worthy of judgement. For someone who is such a stickler for calling out small sample sizes, its funny that you'd call a 5 game stretch, where Preston gets 4 hits, as "struggling".
Tucker needed to be the guy to PH there. You had a really good chance to win the game with just a sac fly, you could have put Rasmus in CF... I am ok with essentially burning one of the bench bats when you have a chance to put it away.
