Craig smoked the ball, but unfortunately it found Chase Utley.

Garcia was starting to break down a bit in the sixth inning. There were definitely some signs that his pitches were beginning to flatten out.

I laugh when people rave about Molina's defense. He's got a hell of an arm, but he is still not what he should be at blocking balls. Sometimes he just doesn't make the play and then other times he's just lazily stabbing at the ball. It can be really frustrating.

Garcia: In the 6th, he started missing his location at the bottom of the strike zone and began racking up balls on pitches that were obviously too low . . . no swings and misses on those.  Suddenly it moved all over the plate, inside pitches were way inside, outside pitches were way outside, high pitchers were way high.  He got through the 6th, but the warning signs were there.  Given a chance to score some runs in a 0-0 tie, I was kind of surprised La Russa didn't pinch hit for him.  Then he started the 7th with three straight balls, that's no swings and misses, of course.  This from a guy who had been aces through 5.  That AB ended badly with a lead-off single into shallow center. 

I totally don't buy into this idea that Garcia is made of cheap Mexican glue, however.  He got us through six in fine fashion in a very tense game when Hamels looked vulnerable but the Cardinal bats were not getting runs.  But where I am in total agreement with TK is that La Russa seemed to be managing this as if it were a game in July.  He was absolutely leaving his bullets on the bench, starting by leaving a pinch hitter on the bench on the 6th. 

Craig is a much tougher call.  Not sure what to do.  He smoked two groundballs, but BOTH would have been DPs if fair.  The infield was playing deep, defending against two runs, and getting any groundball through was going to be difficult.  Something should have been stamped on Craig's forehead: "don't hit a groundball!" and yet both times he made contact that's where it went.  He was asked to bunt earlier in September--we all remember him going down 0-2 and then jacking a home run.  Yes a suicide squeeze was risky, but we had speedy runners at third and second, and even a force play at home, leaving us with two outs and Pujols at the plate was WAY better than a DP.  The problem I have, is, as I posted seconds before it happened, the threat of a DP was hanging like a certainty at that moment, and it seemed even more certain after that first groundball that went just foul on the third base side.

"He was asked to bunt earlier in September--we all remember him going down 0-2 and then jacking a home run."

So his only effort to bunt resulted in failure, and somehow that supports the idea of asking him to bunt with the bases loaded?

Also Max, if you're intent is to get Pujols to bat with runners in scoring position, the squeeze virtually ensures that DOES NOT happen.  If Craig is successful, the run scores, the other runners move up to 2nd and 3rd with 2 out.  You think Philly pitches to Pujols with 1st base open?

A successful squeeze likely takes the bat out of Pujols' hands.

You let Craig bat, hope like hell he doesn't hit into a double play and slam your cap when he does.  But you can't bunt in that situation.

"people were clamoring for Larussa's head."

I've subsequently read criticism of letting Garcia hit with two outs and two on in the bottom of the sixth. Again, Garcia had given up three hits (I think) and no runs at that point. The bullpen has been mostly shite this year.
If he yanks Garcia with two outs in the top of the seventh and the reliever gives up a hit, I'd suggest many of the same people who are calling in to radio stations about leaving Garcia in there would be criticizing LaRussa for taking him out when his pitch count was low and he hadn't been scored upon.
I still think if LaRussa erred in that game, it was walking Ruiz, and you can make an argument for that decision because Ruiz already had a hit in the game and after Pence he had the highest batting average on the team during the regular season.
But Ruiz hit righties better than lefties this year, and he was 0-for-8 in the first two games of the series and 1-for-his-last-21. The only reason you walk Ruiz is to force Manuel to make a decision about Hamels, and with his high pitch count, he wasn't going to hit.

"A successful squeeze likely takes the bat out of Pujols' hands."

Since he was already 3-for-4 in the game, I think you can safely remove the "likely" qualifier.

TK, I agree there's a valid argument for pinch-hitting for Garcia in the sixth. What I'm suggesting is the anti-LaRussa crowd that's criticizing him for letting him hit would be criticizing him if he took Garcia out and the bullpen imploded.

Last edited by artie_fufkin (10/05/2011 12:44 pm)

Again, the only thing I might have done differently is not walking Ruiz. I hate the idea of walking the eighth-place hitter to pitch to a right-handed pinch-hitter in that situation.
Unless LaRussa didn't expect Manuel to send up a right-handed pinch-hitter. Then he ought to be managing a flower shop.

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

TK, I agree there's a valid argument for pinch-hitting for Garcia in the sixth. What I'm suggesting is the anti-LaRussa crowd that's criticizing him for letting him hit would be criticizing him if he took Garcia out and the bullpen imploded.

THAT's true.  But fortunately, we don't have any die hard anti-LaRussians among us, do we?

Not since Mags stopped posting.