Would you rather have lost 10-1?

[bobmc]

Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology. We have the capability to make the world's first bionic man.

Or as weams might suggest, just plant eyes in the bleachers to relay signals instantaneously to his robotic "brain".

Back to the OP, would we be happier with a "three and out" real playoff loss? :scratchchinhmm: I guess so, since we would have at least one game at home. :2yay-thumb:

[Todd-O]

I can't believe this is actually a question.

Answer: HECK NO

The O's were in that game until the bitter end. Manny's ball falls in the outfield or Borne makes a miracle catch in the corner and the O's might have been up by one going into the 9th.

It was exciting...it was reachable...couldn't ask for more in a loss.

[utvolzac]

Yes, I would have preferred a blow out. Either way it sucks to lose. But losing the way we lost with being the butt of the joke across national media on top of it was just salt on the wound.

[Can_of_corn]

I'd rather the idiocy of saving the closer for a lead that never comes be exposed. That doesn't happen in a blowout.

[bobmc]

I'd rather the idiocy of saving the closer for a lead that never comes be exposed. That doesn't happen in a blowout.

Hopefully you are not suggesting that the "idiocy" is representative of any member of the Orioles organization, for we do not permit that here! :slytf:

[Orioles4Life21]

I can't believe this is actually a question.

Answer: HECK NO

The O's were in that game until the bitter end. Manny's ball falls in the outfield or Borne makes a miracle catch in the corner and the O's might have been up by one going into the 9th.

It was exciting...it was reachable...couldn't ask for more in a loss.

It would not have been a "miracle catch." It was nearly routine. If he just fully extended his arm he would have caught it.

[Redskins Rick]

I'd rather the idiocy of saving the closer for a lead that never comes be exposed. That doesn't happen in a blowout.

Only a idiocy because its a strong opinion of yours, that is not shared by all of us.

[Can_of_corn]

Only a idiocy because its a strong opinion of yours, that is not shared by all of us.

You think Buck should have kept Britton in the pen?

You are in a distinct minority.

There can be some debate over when was the best time to use him but I think we can pretty much universally say it was before Ubaldo got to face Encarnacion.

[weams]

You think Buck should have kept Britton in the pen?

You are in a distinct minority.

There can be some debate over when was the best time to use him but I think we can pretty much universally say it was before Ubaldo got to face Encarnacion.

I think Buck should have used Britton in the 11th inning. In hind sight. At the time, it appeared to be a second starter situation for both teams. Albeit sudden death on one side.

[Can_of_corn]

I think Buck should have used Britton in the 11th inning. In hind sight. At the time, it appeared to be a second starter situation for both teams. Albeit sudden death on one side.

Is it still a second starter situation after a couple baserunners get on?

[Redskins Rick]

You think Buck should have kept Britton in the pen?

You are in a distinct minority.

There can be some debate over when was the best time to use him but I think we can pretty much universally say it was before Ubaldo got to face Encarnacion.

CoC, you are taking one moment in time.

Of course, hind sight, lends us to believe he should have done otherwise.

But, I thought your statement was more abstract, and we all know of your strong opinion on the role of closer.

[Can_of_corn]

CoC, you are taking one moment in time.

Of course, hind sight, lends us to believe he should have done otherwise.

But, I thought your statement was more abstract, and we all know of your strong opinion on the role of closer.

I would have used him earlier.

But even if you agree with letting Ublado start the inning what is the excuse for keeping him in there with two runners on? At that point you need a K or a GB and you have the best weapon ever at getting one of those two results.

And you don't use him.

[bobmc]

I would have used him earlier.

But even if you agree with letting Ublado start the inning what is the excuse for keeping him in there with two runners on? At that point you need a K or a GB and you have the best weapon ever at getting one of those two results.

And you don't use him.

I would say, "Shortsightedness"! :laughlol:

[O's84]

I would have used him earlier.

But even if you agree with letting Ublado start the inning what is the excuse for keeping him in there with two runners on? At that point you need a K or a GB and you have the best weapon ever at getting one of those two results.

And you don't use him.

Plus by then it was obvious that Ubaldo was throwing meatballs up in the zone. Buck is great in a lot of things and I'd much rather have him as a manager than the majority of options out there but that was one of the dumbest (maybe even the dumbest) thing I've seen in post season history.

[weams]

Is it still a second starter situation after a couple baserunners get on?

i guess so. At least Gibbons thought so.