I'm not really one to second guess the manager...

[scottbbfm]

This decision doesn't bother me. At that point in the game, you just have to play for one run. What kills me is that Luke Scott couldn't get one lousy single.

He didn't even need a single - just a lousy sac fly.

[Sports Guy]

No this is a dumb post. It was a good call. As if it is a certainty that between Scott and Reimold, you can't get a base hit, a BB, or a FB.:rolleyestf:

Not with the way Wiggy is hitting.

Its a terrible call.

[bluedog]

Not with the way Wiggy is hitting.

Its a terrible call.

I agree. You are taking the bat out of the hands of Wigginton (1.157 OPS) and Tejada (.856 OPS) to put it into Scott's (.638 OPS).

Although it might be a reasonable call when you have three guys who are all performing similarly, you are giving up the 4th hottest hitter in baseball to bunt, letting the opposing team walk the 3rd hottest hitter on your team to get to a guy who's hitting .187, striking out once every 4 at bats and who's looked lost at the plate all year.

This is what I've disliked about Trembley for years. He doesn't seem to think that how a player has performed recently (whether they are hot or cold) should be factored into any decisions about how to use them. I don't get that at all.

[Pedro Cerrano]

No this is a dumb post. It was a good call. As if it is a certainty that between Scott and Reimold, you can't get a base hit, a BB, or a FB.:rolleyestf:

Not really. Once Scott is out, Reimold has to get a hit or at least a walk to continue the inning.

It was a terrible decision.

[flashjordnk]

I agree. You are taking the bat out of the hands of Wigginton (1.157 OPS) and Tejada (.856 OPS) to put it into Scott's (.638 OPS).

Although it might be a reasonable call when you have three guys who are all performing similarly, you are giving up the 4th hottest hitter in baseball to bunt, letting the opposing team walk the 3rd hottest hitter on your team to get to a guy who's hitting .187, striking out once every 4 at bats and who's looked lost at the plate all year.

This is what I've disliked about Trembley for years. He doesn't seem to think that how a player has performed recently (whether they are hot or cold) should be factored into any decisions about how to use them. I don't get that at all.

Will Ohman disagrees.

I think it's easy to say he shouldn't have done this. Especially with Wigginton smacking the ball in the 10th, but all in all this wasn't a horrible decision.

I disagree with earlier posters that Luke Scott worked a good at bat. I don't remember the exact sequence but when Bard was not near the plate Luke didn't swing, but when he did he looked horrible. Granted the fastball was 100 mph, but Markakis and Jones didn't seem to have any problems with it.

Loading the bases puts a lot more pressure on a pitcher than a guy on first and second. Bard stepped up to the pressure. But I like the fact that Dave put his guy in a position where he was going to get a strike to hit because the sacks were full. If you go back and look at OPS and averages for players with the bases loaded they are all pretty good. I think that's something we aren't considering.

Also Luke did hit a home run last night and if he's as streaky as people on here think he is (and I agree) then maybe DT thought he was about to go on one of those patented Luke Scott tears.

[wildcard]

That's an interesting interpretation of this quote.

"I'm going to do what I think I've got to do to win the game. In both situations, I did what I thought I had to do to win the game because that's the only thought right there, win the game," Trembley said.

"I thought the best opportunity to win the game was to bunt Wigginton first and second. I knew they'd walk (Miguel) Tejada. When you play in extra innings and you've got a guy on second base, I'm going to play to win the game there. I'm going to let three, four and five hit."

I looked at the presser again. Maybe he doesn't know it was a bonehanded move in the 8th. Making one of your hottest hitters bunt (Wiggy), so they can walk your clean up hitter (Miggi)who had a walk off hit to the win the game earlier in the series, so you can get to a guy in a slump (Scott) makes not sense to me.

[glorydays]

I agree. You are taking the bat out of the hands of Wigginton (1.157 OPS) and Tejada (.856 OPS) to put it into Scott's (.638 OPS).

Although it might be a reasonable call when you have three guys who are all performing similarly, you are giving up the 4th hottest hitter in baseball to bunt, letting the opposing team walk the 3rd hottest hitter on your team to get to a guy who's hitting .187, striking out once every 4 at bats and who's looked lost at the plate all year.

This is what I've disliked about Trembley for years. He doesn't seem to think that how a player has performed recently (whether they are hot or cold) should be factored into any decisions about how to use them. I don't get that at all.

Was the decision where he left our best bullpen reliever and left handed specialist Will Ohman out there to face right handed hitter Adrian Beltre with one on and two outs in the eigth inning good or bad?

[ShaneDawg85]

I didn't really have a problem with the decision to bunt with Wigginton at the plate. It certainly would have looked better if Scott or Reimold had come through, especially if Reimold had gotten the bat off his shoulders. I get the sentiment that Wigginton is one of your two hottest hitters so why not let him hit, but the play actually worked. It just ended up being wasted because the next guys up didn't make it happen.

[tennOsfan]

I don't disagree with the decision at all. In fact, I think considering all the circumstances, Trembley would have been making the wrong call otherwise. With no one out, if they can sacrifice those guys over, chances are somebody comes home. Since you're in the bottom of the eighth with the game tied, that's a no-brainer.

The only way I'd disagree with that is if you have a superior hitter who simply can't bunt.

[Tony-OH]

Because in his career Wigginton has batted 688 times with a man on first and less than two outs, and he's grounded into 93 double plays. Once every seven plate appearances.

It's arguable either way, certainly not something you can come out and proclaim a stupid move. It's a judgment call, and this time it didn't work out. One more ball to Scott and the go-ahead run walks home, and it would have been great.

Please read the above for 100 percent correct answer to this situation.

Jon, cracking out the VOR (No, that's not a stat, it's the Voice of Reason). Maybe we can make that into a poster stat. Drungo has 12 VOR this week while Frobby led the week with 14.

[The Wedge]

I didn't really have a problem with the decision to bunt with Wigginton at the plate. It certainly would have looked better if Scott or Reimold had come through, especially if Reimold had gotten the bat off his shoulders. I get the sentiment that Wigginton is one of your two hottest hitters so why not let him hit, but the play actually worked. It just ended up being wasted because the next guys up didn't make it happen.

That's part of my problem with the decision. When somebody refers to it like you just did, then you just made a low percentage play (having someone who normally never sacrifices, can't even remember the last time he did, try and lay one down), one which anybody watching was going to lead to an even more low percentage chance when they inevitably IBB'ed Tejada to get to Scott. Like I said it's not just the fact that he had Wiggy bunt when he's our best hitter right now. It's that by doing so, he took the bat out of both his AND Tejada's hands, because it's almost a no-brainer to walk Tejada and make Scott and (possibly) Reimold beat you right now.

And I know everyone says "hindsight" but I was immediately peeved when the play was on. While I'm glad "it worked" because Wiggy could have easily botched the bunt, etc, and really stymied the momentum, I knew what the next move would be, and I couldn't believe Trembley would think the best chance to win the game was to put the bat in to Scott's hands instead of Wiggy and Tejada.

[Old#5fan]

I don't disagree with the decision at all. In fact, I think considering all the circumstances, Trembley would have been making the wrong call otherwise. With no one out, if they can sacrifice those guys over, chances are somebody comes home. Since you're in the bottom of the eighth with the game tied, that's a no-brainer.

The only way I'd disagree with that is if you have a superior hitter who simply can't bunt.

This was a NO BRAINER that DT MADE THE RIGHT CALL even though it didn't work out. Wiggi made a nice bunt and they walked Tejada. It made the pitcher have to throw strikes (walk or even WP would score runner from third) and all Scott needed to do was hit a fly ball.

This was indeed the right call. You pitch to Wiggi and you run the high risk of him hitting into a DP as he is not a fast runner at all.

[bobmc]

Please read the above for 100 percent correct answer to this situation.

Jon, cracking out the VOR (No, that's not a stat, it's the Voice of Reason). Maybe we can make that into a poster stat. Drungo has 12 VOR this week while Frobby led the week with 14.

Good one Tony! And SG can tally the VOI's (voices of idiocy).

[bluedog]

Let's not turn Wiggy & Tejada into Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth. You needed a hit against a very tough righty there if you don't bunt. You just need a productive out from Scott. It didn't work. I don't think it was a bad move. I can see the other side of the argument but to call it boneheaded and a no brainer is boneheaded and a no brainer. Wiggy wound up hitting a hanging slider or splitter against Papelbon. Good for him. He had a great AB. That doesn't make him a good bet to get a hit off of Bard in that spot.

I will say this. In order to bolster my argument, I checked out Bard's splits. Last year he was much stronger against RHB's(.541) than LHB's (.859). This year, he's just the opposite in a much smaller sampling. LHB (.291) RHB (.961)

In no way did I suggest Wiggy & Miggy are the greatest hitters of all time. But they ARE hot right now while Scott is as cold as any regular I've ever seen with the O's not named Aubrey Huff.

And if you are going to use historical stats to bolster your argument, why in the world wouldn't you use recent performance stats as well? I don't care what the historical splits are right now, I don't want to face Robinson Cano at all, regardless of who's pitching or what the situation is. If Girardi asked Cano to give himself up by bunting, we'd all breathe a huge sigh of relief.

Well Wiggy is just as hot as Cano right now. When someone is that hot, you don't take the bat out of their hand IMHO.

[bobmc]

This was a NO BRAINER that DT MADE THE RIGHT CALL even though it didn't work out. Wiggi made a nice bunt and they walked Tejada. It made the pitcher have to throw strikes (walk or even WP would score runner from third) and all Scott needed to do was hit a fly ball.

This was indeed the right call. You pitch to Wiggi and you run the high risk of him hitting into a DP as he is not a fast runner at all.

OF5 with 1 VOR for the week (but is it reduced by the number of VOI's?). :scratchchinhmm::laughlol:

j/k OF5!

And what about the folks like me who never state their case - do they earn VOW's (voices of weakness)?