Sure, he got lucky. But he would have had virtually no chance of getting lucky with a 97-98 MPH heater up in the zone. That's a nearly-certain strike out. Sometimes you have to take away an opponent's chance at getting lucky by just being better than they are.
Cora, Cora, Cora!
- Thread starter dhappy42
- Start date
You're making up imaginary outcomes to suit your narrative here. Maybe he's also gotten his timing off the first two fastballs and that's exactly what he was expecting, given his ugly-ass desperate lunge at the slider.
Garcia also has a .299 avg vs fastballs this year, compared to .219 vs breaking stuff.
Garcia also has a .299 avg vs fastballs this year, compared to .219 vs breaking stuff.
Cora is under contract through 2024. I know it's pretty rare for managers to coach their final contract year without being offered an extension -- and though I'm far from a Cora basher here, I don't see how he's earned one. Is 2024 going to be his lame duck year? What does that mean for the team?
I don't think Cora has done a particularly good job this year, but at the end of the day there's a high likelihood their win total will exceed the talent he had to work with.
Yeah I had a real problem with this. It's 3-2 against a horrible team, get a pitcher in there to hold the line and chances are extremely good you'll win the game. Instead he puts in Lamet and the game is essentially over.
A short outing by the starter put him in a bind. He could have gone to Winckowski there, but he had pitched the day prior, and using him then makes him unavailable today. Worst case, you lose yesterday and waste your good pitchers and have to use the crappy ones with a lead today. There’s no good answers, IMO.
It’s difficult to use pitchers optimally when you only have a few that you want to Sue. Made more difficult with the opener strategy, I assume either Schrieber or BB goes today which may have impacted their usage yesterday?
It’s difficult to use pitchers optimally when you only have a few that you want to Sue. Made more difficult with the opener strategy, I assume either Schrieber or BB goes today which may have impacted their usage yesterday?
I’m not entirely sure who he should have put in the game there. At this point, Cora is just rolling the dice with whatever waiver wire dreck that the front office gave him to work with this week.
True enough. No great solutions but at that point Lamet is likely the worst one.
At least the FO and manager are going to do the sensible thing with Whitlock and put him in the pen if/when he comes back. That should help, although it's probably too late to make a playoff run this season.
I'll push back on this one a bit, mostly because of what the bolded argument suggests.
Bleier was DFA'd - ergo, the field manager and his coaching staff were in communication with the front office, essentially saying, "We can't fix this guy, we need somebody else."
At the same time Lamet was not exactly lights out in Wor, but there had to have been some kind of communication with the Wor pitching staff, the FO, and the field manager as to what kind of pitcher the ML club needed and how Lamet was doing. Cora's role, in part, is to let the FO know what's going on with the pitching staff. Who is injured, or gassed, or responding to coaching, or developing a new grip/pitch, or whatnot, before it shows up in the game-data. (I'm sure this is an ongoing conversation from spring training onward.)
So there was agreement on Lamet as the best choice.
Then, once Cora has Lamet, he's just on the roster. The ML pitching staff can evaluate Lamet on their own instead of going to Wor, they can decide how best to use him (in conformity with what they asked to get in a pitcher, one supposes). This is all the handedness, splits, fly/groundball, K v. contact type stuff. It is also the "lets watch him throw and coach him" stuff. Which they're doing all the time.
So either Cora was part of a group that chose a fundamentally broken pitcher, or Cora knew he was going to be awful and decided to punt a 3-2 game, or Lamet just crapped the bed in his first ML appearance in awhile. (I'm going with #3 here, with a slight hint of #1.)
But the main reason I type all this is that the argument suggests a kind of a reflexive Cora v. Bloom false dichotomy we sometimes see here. Cora was intimately involved in the decision to release Bleier, promote Lamet, and use him in the specific game situation appeared in. Cora is not some passive victim subject to the whims of a detached front office that randomly sends him pitchers.
How do we know that Cora was “intimately involved” with the decision to release Bleier, promote Lamet, etc? That seems like total speculation. I mean, I hope it’s true and that all facets of the organization are working in lock step but I imagine there are breakdowns in communication, disagreements, etc.
I assumed Lamet was called up because they needed someone to go a few innings if Kutter didnt, and also, he’s expendable when Sale comes back. I’m not so sure that he was called up because he was the pitcher best able to help the Sox win games, necessarily.
I assumed Lamet was called up because they needed someone to go a few innings if Kutter didnt, and also, he’s expendable when Sale comes back. I’m not so sure that he was called up because he was the pitcher best able to help the Sox win games, necessarily.
Think it through.
Are you really arguing that Cora woke up one morning to a text message from Bloom reading, "Bleier DFA'd, Lamet up."
And then thought, "Man, that Bloom guy is so rando, I had no idea this was coming and no idea who Lamet is. And bummer, because Bush just worked out Bleier's pitch-tipping issue, but we never get a chance to communicate that kind of thing unless Bloom stops into the dugout for a free gatorade. Maybe Lamet is a LOOGY knuckleballer? I guess I just won't know until I randomly put him on the mound as my random middle reliever of the week."
Unfortunately I do think that winning becomes a habit, for lack of a better term, and bringing in a human white flag in a close game against a lousy opponent does in fact send a message to the team that the management, whether it be Bloom or Cora, doesn't think much of their quality this year.
All moves should be made with an eye towards winning more games. Had it been 7-1 in the 9th, sure, bring in Lamet, and save your real pitchers for tomorrow. But in a 3-2 game, keeping him in made little sense. Leaving him in there to turn it into a 6-2 game made less sense, especially since Cora had already stolen one scoreless inning out of Lamet.
Our offense didn't do squat against a 5 ERA guy on the Royals for 6.2 innings. They didn't do squat the night before outside of a career performance by Reyes. This offense is not playing like one that's going reward you for burning your good pitchers while behind.
Singer had a 3.32 ERA over his last 12 starts so he's better than his season-long figures, but again this is supposed to be a playoff caliber team. They can't muster anything against the 38 win Royals?
Had Cora been able to keep the score 3-2, I would have felt good about the offense's chances against the Royals' bullpen, which stinks. But Cora decided to allow a 3-2 game to get out of control by allowing Lamet to blow it open.
This 100%. The offense has been the real issue, and throwing a clearly not ready Story into the #3 spot didn't help. I understand Monday's performance - I was at the game and Ragans had electric stuff. But there's no excuse for not pummeling a slopballing right hander like Singer.
Singer has a 3.53 ERA over his last 13 starts with a 3/1 K/BB ratio and allowing only a .674 OPS and went 5-4 for a horrible team. He's been pitching very well.
Again, the issue is that Cora left Lamet in there once it was a 3-2 game. There was a curious lack of urgency in regards to trying to win the game.
That's the problem. Schreiber turned into a pumpkin and Cora inexplicably turned Winckowski into a one inning (or one out) reliever despite his earlier success as middle relief. If your MR choices now are Lamet, Robertson, and Llovera, then you've already lost.
My impression is that over his career Cora has been very predictable this way. If the team is trailing, he goes to the "B" squad of pitchers. If the team's ahead, he use one of his trusted pitchers. You don't normally see him try to "steal" a trailing game like yesterday's. But if there was ever a game to try to steal, it would have been in this exact situation - low offense opponent with a bad bullpen. And if there was ever a time to attempt to add marginal wins, it's now.*
(*Personally, I think a good manager should be doing that from day one. But there comes a point where you fall out of contention, or have to play at an historically epic pace to remain in contention, after which you can try to add marginal wins all you want - but the season is going to run out on you. So in a sense, Cora really failed by not nailing the games against the As earlier this year, etc.)
I'm with you 100% here. He never ever seems to pursue marginal wins when they matter.
A one run game, even if you're trailing, is no reason to use the B squad.
Yeah the 6.7 and 10 ERA guys they threw out there do stink and we absolutely pummeled th... Oh wait 0 hits 4 Ks.
Not the point. It's about maximizing chances to win. You do that better in a 3-2 game than a 6-2 game.
Who else do you suggest he brings in? Bernardino had already pitched. Wink threw last night and is showing signs of overuse. Murphy threw 62 pitches two days ago. Llovera, Robertson, and Lamet are all an equal roll of the dice. You really want to use Schreiber in the 5th? I've certainly been critical of Cora's bullpen usage in the past, but this isn't one of those times.
If you only have 3-4 relievers you trust, it’s really difficult to use them in the 5th inning of games you are losing. It’s not sustainable. You can’t have half your bullpen comprised of guys you only use when losing by a lot.
No, I wanted Schreiber in the 6th. Lamet had already beaten the odds by throwing a scoreless inning in the 5th. He stinks, has stunk all year long. Why bring him back out there, or worse, leave him out there to allow the game to get out of control?
This is what I mean about lack of urgency. The lack of a move to get him out of the game after stealing an inning, compounded by the lack of a move to get him out of there when he's getting smacked around and letting the game get away.
I get that a lot of the options aren't great, but the manager is not a helpless bystander either.
In April such indolence is defensible, it's a long season after all. In August? In a life and death battle for a playoff slot? It's befuddling.
(Note: I have zero problem with his bringing in and leaving Robertson at that point, Robertson is the human white flag and the game was essentially over).
The game happened and you can look to see the result right now. The Red Sox only scored 3 runs. You'd need the bullpen to be perfect and assume they would have scored more in extra innings. The issue is the offense. I know nobody wants to hear when the players that they like suck and think that any loss can be pinned on bad management, but right now the team isn't scoring enough runs. Being managed by the love child of Casey Stengel and Terry Francona isn't going to change a thing.
Schreiber has had one really bad outing since he's been back. He's still a very good option in a close game.
So if they're having trouble scoring runs, it's probably of vital importance to keep the game as close as possible for as long as possible, right?
A manager's job is to maximize his team's chances of winning games. Last night IMO Cora did not do that. Perhaps if he did they'd still lose, but again IMO he allowed the game to get out of control before his team had a chance to come back.
Part of the issue is developing guys you can trust, or at least trust in specific situations. Dave Bush has a very mixed bag in terms of results - generally more good than bad, I'd guess, and certainly when auditioning arms like Robles, Bernardino, etc.
But this year he couldn't help Bleier or Kluber, and Rodriguez, Pivetta, Houck, and Whitlock have had very up and down seasons at points. Brasier has been lights out for LA after changing his pitch mix.
Brandon Walter is starting again in Pawtucket. I'm not sure why he's not up.
Lamet retired the side on 13 pitches in the 5th. The first run he allowed in the 6th was a walk, a steal, and a ground out. Not exactly "smacked around". Then he allowed a single and a home run. When do you bring in Schreiber? After the walk? After the single?No, once he gets two outs in the inning, you have to ride it out until he gets that third out. The fact is that when any team is down in the middle innings, the ass end of the bullpen is going to pitch. How that ass end does is a gamble.
But they didn't come back. Because they're not scoring runs. You can't run out your best relievers when the starter can't get out of the 4th and expect to have them available for games you're winning.
It's hilarious: Braiser's ERA is SIX RUNS LOWER in LA than it was in Boston. Really. Over the same number of games too.
Speaks poorly of Bush's coaching.
I disagree here. Who made these rules? The manager is allowed to do anything he wants.
You don't bring out Lamet for his second inning given that he stinks and you've already stolen an inning with him. At worst, you get him out of there after the walk.
If you allow lousy pitchers to throw more innings, they are going to allow runs. Cora was already playing with fire using Lamet at all, but got lucky when he didn't allow a run in the 5th and the Sox cut the lead to 3-2 going into the 6th. At that point the complexion of the game had changed and was no longer an appropriate time to use their worst or second-worst pitcher.
But if you burn your good relievers in a game you're already losing, what happens when you need them in a game where you're tied or have a small lead? Today's game starts 0-0, and I'd much rather have Schreiber than Lamet available.
And if you allow good pitchers to throw when a team is behind, they'll be unavailable for when the team is ahead.
I don't think there's much of a competitive difference in games where you have a small deficit or you have a small lead. Certainly, you want to nail down leads when you get them so emotionally I understand that, but a 3-2 deficit at home in the 6th against the second worst team in baseball isn't really all that much difference from a new game beginning 0-0.
And the KC bullpen stinks.
I get it, sometimes a manager can do everything right and his team still loses. I completely understand that. Last night was not, IMO, an example of that.
See above.
As RR alluded to, there are a lot of advantages on the margins that are not being exploited. This is a larger meta-issue as well, I thikn too many managers, even good ones, are not aggressive enough in pursuing wins.
Going into the season, it looked like the bullpen was going to be the strength of the team. The Sox added Jansen, Martin, who have been as advertised. Joely (injured most of the year), Wyatt Mills (season ending surgery) have not factored in much.
There was also my favorite type of offseason discussion - "We have too many starters!" Not saying that this was the Phillies of the 2000's that had Hamels, Lee, and Halladay, however there were a lot of guys to fit in that mix.
As usually happens, injuries and ineffectiveness took their toll. We went from 7-8 starting pitchers to 2 healthy starters within a few months. We can call it what it is. Houck and Whitlock have not proven that they can be middle to back end of the rotation guys, and the Sox have been bouncing those guys back and forth in their roles to see what fits.
Kluber has been a disaster, and I think we know in our hearts that this was a distinct possibility going in. Sale and Paxton are injury risks, and Pivetta is again back in the rotation because of lack of starting pitching options.
What I am driving at is this: This was a team that desperately lacked reliable MLB starting pitchers to fill out a rotation. The bullpen games and short, ineffective starts have exposed the fact that the Red Sox simply did have enough big league talent in the rotation or in that "bulk" reliever role.
I may try and put myself in Cora's shoes. Anytime another pitcher strolls in from Worcester, he may be thinking "Lets see what we have here, maybe we can catch lighting in a bottle". It must be a sinking feeling to roll out the Bleiers and Orts of the world, knowing that the margin for error is razor thin. When you get a new guy, who the opposition probably has not seen, I can see why he may lean that direction. Bernadino is a good example.
I certainly do not agree with a lot of Cora's in game decisions. As I scale back to a 30,000 foot view, there are just too many innings to go around and they simply have not had the talent available to compete in every game. Every night its a "Sophies Choice" when he picks up that bullpen phone. It is incredibly frustrating watching these games get out of control in a matter of minutes.
There was also my favorite type of offseason discussion - "We have too many starters!" Not saying that this was the Phillies of the 2000's that had Hamels, Lee, and Halladay, however there were a lot of guys to fit in that mix.
As usually happens, injuries and ineffectiveness took their toll. We went from 7-8 starting pitchers to 2 healthy starters within a few months. We can call it what it is. Houck and Whitlock have not proven that they can be middle to back end of the rotation guys, and the Sox have been bouncing those guys back and forth in their roles to see what fits.
Kluber has been a disaster, and I think we know in our hearts that this was a distinct possibility going in. Sale and Paxton are injury risks, and Pivetta is again back in the rotation because of lack of starting pitching options.
What I am driving at is this: This was a team that desperately lacked reliable MLB starting pitchers to fill out a rotation. The bullpen games and short, ineffective starts have exposed the fact that the Red Sox simply did have enough big league talent in the rotation or in that "bulk" reliever role.
I may try and put myself in Cora's shoes. Anytime another pitcher strolls in from Worcester, he may be thinking "Lets see what we have here, maybe we can catch lighting in a bottle". It must be a sinking feeling to roll out the Bleiers and Orts of the world, knowing that the margin for error is razor thin. When you get a new guy, who the opposition probably has not seen, I can see why he may lean that direction. Bernadino is a good example.
I certainly do not agree with a lot of Cora's in game decisions. As I scale back to a 30,000 foot view, there are just too many innings to go around and they simply have not had the talent available to compete in every game. Every night its a "Sophies Choice" when he picks up that bullpen phone. It is incredibly frustrating watching these games get out of control in a matter of minutes.
You've hit it on the head: describing a hypothetical in which a decision in made very specifically to the unique context, rather than more broadly/automatically/as a matter of form. Cora tends to do the latter and not so much the former. He certainly isn't Grady or Jimy dumb, but feels kinda middlin'. I think they could do better and at the time of his rehire was hoping for Lovullo or Kapler.
Then again, he HAS had to deal with what the FO has given him, which is quite a few scrap heap arms.
I'll gently disagree with this. There was volatility there, sure, but also volume: https://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/2023-starting-rotation.38396/
Our starting depth was (the numbers being a bit arbitrary):
1. Sale (good then injured)
2. Paxton (injured then good)
3. Pivetta (fell off a cliff, but found hanging by his fingertips)
4. Bello (Bello)
5. Kluber (fell off a cliff, not even a mild bounce at the bottom)
6. Whitlock (promising but then injured)
7. Houck (developing but then freakishly injured)
8. Crawford (relied upon for depth and delivered)
9. Winckowski (blasted his way into middle relief)
11. Mata (injured)
12. Walter (moderately effective middle relief)
13. Murphy (effective middle relief)
13. Murphy (effective middle relief)
Basically, we got one excellent pitcher out of Sale/Paxton, a second out of Bello, and a third acceptable/promising starter out of Crawford. Houck, absent freak injury, would have made that four.
It really took a bunch of things to go very wrong for Kluber, Pivetta, and Whitlock to all miss, when only one needed to hit to get us to 5 starters. And Pivetta kind of has, recently.
Meanwhile the AAA crew of Winckowski, Walter, Murphy (and arguably Crawford) has contributed admirably out of the bullpen.
I suspect that Cora had relatively a lot more to say about the Bleier DFA than the Lamet recall. I suspect that he and Bloom had a general conversation about "another reliever? a guy who can start?" but he probably doesn't have a ton of input on the particular pitcher (unless Cora has recall about a guy from ST or earlier in the season). As for last night, I think Castig might have said something along the lines of "they jujst dont have enough good pitchers to win with only 3 starters when one goes 3 innings."
I suspect that Cora was influenced a bit by Lamet getting through the 5th without much trouble. I'm not sure how else he gets 12 outs without using *someone* who really might suck.
I have no idea as to how familiar Cora is with Lamet, given that he was only recently acquired by the organization after a career in the NL West, I’m guessing it’s probably “not much”. He will probably be DFA’d within the week, I’m just not sure calling him up was some highly thought out collaborative action. They needed an expendable pitcher to throw a few innings in case the starter didn’t go long, and that’s exactly what happened. I imagine that the idea was that if Crawford got in trouble mid inning, they’d go to a reliever to get out of the inning and then start the next inning with Lamet. Which is exactly how it went.
This seems like a reasonable take. The point I was trying to make upthread is that the coaching staff has more data than we do - and not just game-data. They get to work with these guys and see what they're doing, and they know the roles that will potentially need to be filled - as opposed to "find us a good arm, we'll use him any which way."
I'd also think that Cora/Bloom have had talks about injuries, returning pitchers, strategy in the meantime, how to use the staff, etc. Meaning, I doubt Cora's simply looking at the next 3 games, with no consideration whatsoever of what might be happening in game 4, 5, 6, 7. You can't look too far out, obviously, but I'm pretty sure that if they know Sale is starting on Friday, that he'll have a pitch count, and they'll need to fill in some middle innings. So they're going to loosely plan towards that in terms of call-ups, roles, and actual game use.
Your argument seems to actually boil down not to "A manger's job is to maximize his team's chances of winning games" but instead to "A manager's job is to maximize his team's chances of winning *this particular* game." Given the current makeup of the bullpen, I think it's clear that in Cora's mind, his bullpen usage last night was with an eye toward maximizing his team's chances of winning games. It may or may not have maximized the team's chances of winning that particular game.