Cole Hamels Availability

by **Bill McNeal** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:12:29

The real question is, what is whole camels availability.

by **lowcountry** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:15:03

mozartpc27 wrote:Aren't the ads already sold at this point? And isn't the nature of the television contract such that MLB already has its flat-rate fee from FOX? So what do they care if FOX has to take a bath on some of the advertising money anyway? I know there is the next contract to think about, but doesn't MLB do worse when it has situations like this or the All-Star game where they continue to prove what a piss-poor operation they run? I mean, this was a total embarassment last night. Total embarassment.

You = preacher. Us = choir.

But understand that if they were willing to start last night's game, they'll get G5 in tomorrow or Wednesday.

What I think REALLY happened: Selig knew there would be no way to play a full game last night. Or tonight. Or maybe even tomorrow. So he hatched his plan to play this motherfarker in spurts. He'd get as many in last night as possible, pull out the best-interests clause and then finish that sucker in a two- or three-hour window today or tomorrow.

Only flaw in his logic was the shitstorm that would erupt if the game was a 1-run game or tied. A chance he was willing to take, though.

by **lowcountry** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:16:51

Bill McNeal wrote:The real question is, what is whole camels availability.

Tonight: None
Wednesday: None
Thursday: None
Friday: Said he'd be willing to go on the local TV broadcast, according to someone who posted last night. But would you rather send him out on 3-days, which he has NEVER done, or take your chances with Blanton -- who was pretty damn effective Sunday?

by **Grotewold** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:18:55

lowcountry wrote:
Bill McNeal wrote:The real question is, what is whole camels availability.

Tonight: None
Wednesday: None
Thursday: None
Friday: Said he'd be willing to go on the local TV broadcast, according to someone who posted last night. But would you rather send him out on 3-days, which he has NEVER done, or take your chances with Blanton -- who was pretty damn effective Sunday?

I personally would use Blanton in Game 6, but I know they won't diss Myers.

by **lowcountry** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:19:44

ek wrote:he really didn't say he'd go on 3 days rest. he danced around the question and said he believes in Jamie Moyer

Oh, sorry. Im pretty far away, so I was just going by what somebody posted. My bad.

by **lowcountry** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:20:59

Grotewold wrote:
lowcountry wrote:
Bill McNeal wrote:The real question is, what is whole camels availability.

Tonight: None
Wednesday: None
Thursday: None
Friday: Said he'd be willing to go on the local TV broadcast, according to someone who posted last night. But would you rather send him out on 3-days, which he has NEVER done, or take your chances with Blanton -- who was pretty damn effective Sunday?

I personally would use Blanton in Game 6, but I know they won't diss Myers.

That would also be either 2- or 3-days rest.

by **Bucky** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:21:01

Grotewold wrote:
lowcountry wrote:
Bill McNeal wrote:The real question is, what is whole camels availability.

Tonight: None
Wednesday: None
Thursday: None
Friday: Said he'd be willing to go on the local TV broadcast, according to someone who posted last night. But would you rather send him out on 3-days, which he has NEVER done, or take your chances with Blanton -- who was pretty damn effective Sunday?

I personally would use Blanton in Game 6, but I know they won't diss Myers.

on two days rest :shock:

Website · by **Wolfgang622** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:23:08

Oh well. Nothing to be done now, I guess, except hit the shit out of the ball when the sixth inning resumes.

by **lowcountry** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:24:05

The rotaton:

Thu: Myers
Sat: Moyer
Sun: Blanton
Mon: Hamels

Tue: Game 5 finish?: Myers would be on 4
Wed: G5 finish or Game 6: Myers would be on 5, Moyer would be on 3
Thu: Game 6 or Game 7: Moyer would be on 4, Blanton would be on 3
Fri: Game 7: Blanton would be on 4, Hamels would be on 3

by **lowcountry** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:26:03

What I think I might be hoping for (if no runs in the bottom of the 6th):

Tue: No finish
Wed: Start Myers
Thu: Start Moyer
Fri: Start Blanton

Folks last night were worried about Myers' slow starts. Coming into G5 might actually help that, as he'd "begin the game" facing 6-7-8 instead of 1-2-3.

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:28:33

I really, really don't get the fascination of pitching one of our starters for the last three innings of this game.

by **Grotewold** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:30:30

jerseyhoya wrote:I really, really don't get the fascination of pitching one of our starters for the last three innings of this game.

Me neither. Relievers are accustomed to having to pitch a scoreless shut-down inning, and our bullpen is better than Myers.

by **The Dude** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:30:54

I don't either, why not treat it how you normally would

by **Wizlah** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:32:55

jerseyhoya wrote:I really, really don't get the fascination of pitching one of our starters for the last three innings of this game.

I think you can still make the argument for most effective pitcher in the most highly levereged situation, but I'm not comfortable with the risk involved. *especially* given myers ability to give up runs early in his showing. logically, you can say that if he pitches effectively (whenev), we don't need to worry about him in game 6, but it scares me.

by **FTN** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:37:55

I don't want to pitch Madson more than an inning. The Top of the 7th is the weakest part of Tampa's order, thats where you use Durbin and Romero/Eyre. Then use Madson in the 8th

by **lowcountry** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:42:34

Wizlah wrote:I think you can still make the argument for most effective pitcher in the most highly levereged situation, but I'm not comfortable with the risk involved. *especially* given myers ability to give up runs early in his showing. logically, you can say that if he pitches effectively (whenev), we don't need to worry about him in game 6, but it scares me.

That's actually the best reason to use him in Game 5. Maybe the only reason, admittedly.

In game 6, he'll begin the game facing Iwamura-Crawford-Upton. If he enters Game 5, he gets Navarro-Baldelli-Bartlett before he ever has to worry about the big hitters. He'd have a chance to settle into a groove before facing their big guns.

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:50:04

Do you guys really think they shouldn't have played last night? I think people would be plenty pissed if they just packed it in at 7 o clock or so.

by **Grotewold** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:51:18

Houshphandzadeh wrote:Do you guys really think they shouldn't have played last night? I think people would be plenty pissed if they just packed it in at 7 o clock or so.

I would have been temporarily annoyed but then real glad to get a full normal game out of Hamels.

by **lowcountry** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:52:51

Houshphandzadeh wrote:Do you guys really think they shouldn't have played last night? I think people would be plenty pissed if they just packed it in at 7 o clock or so.

I suspect they'd have gotten over it.

by **The Dude** » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:53:22

Yeah, I mean, they knew it was definitely raining the whole time, they were just guessing at how much would accumulate. I think only using accumulation as a factor is pretty idiotic

Archived

Cole Hamels Availability