Wild And Wacky Finish In Mets 5-4 Win Over Giants

42 Comments + Add Comment

• Mr North Jersey April 21, 2012 at 4:40 pm

  1st off Thank you Scott Hairston for clipping Posey’s leg.

  Ugly win but a win is a win nonetheless. Great 8 innings by Pelfrey but if you can’t go to your closer with a 3 run lead in the 9th then you can never go to your closer so I have no problem with Collins trying to get Francisco in there for the save.

  That being said Francisco did not have it at all and I applaud Collins for pulling Francisco when he did. Some managers tend to wait until the lead is lost before doing so.

  I know Kirk is just a kid so I don’t want to rag on him too much but that popup that Rauch induced had to be caught. I understand Kirk was playing deep and he prob lost when he glanced toward Tejada but it has to be caught and I am sure he will say as much.

  On the positive side Pelfrey pitched better than many expected. 8.0/IP 6/H 1/ER 1/BB 3/K. Mr. Tejada with that double in the bottom of the 7th and 3 rbi’s. Keep it up. Rauch gets the hard luck blown save but I know he did what was asked of him as he continues to be one of the bright spots in the pen all year. I won’t be surprised to see him get a shot at the closer role in the near future.

  Mets win and now let’s see if they can go for 2 in a row.

  LGM!!!
  • Fonzie13 April 21, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    MNJ I know what you’re saying. He should be able to close out a 3 run lead but we’ve seen this story far too often over the years and it’s not just the Mets. Why take out a pitcher whose in complete control and showing no signs of faltering for an unknown commoditiy, meaning who knows just how effective Francisco or anybody else is going to be on that given day. If Pelfrey worked out of a jam in the 8th and pitched the inning under duress, then I could see bringing in the closer. he set the side down in order on 6 pitches and was in complete control the whole game. And he only threw 102 pitches. Not 122, not 112, 102. Francisco was shaky the night before. It made no sense. Let him at the very least take the mond and if he gets into trouble then you lift him. You don’t pull a pitcher who’s been giving the other team fits for 8 innings. I agree with Joe D 100% here. Complete games should not be against Collins religion.
    • Mr North Jersey April 21, 2012 at 5:56 pm

      Hi Fonzie,

      Collins could of done just as you suggested and bring Pelfrey out for the 9th and I agree he would be justified in doing so but by the same token him going to his closer for the save with a 3 run lead at home is baseball 101 as well.

      I can also make the argument that Collins was also trying to get his closer a chance to right himself there where he has struggled somewhat in his previous appearances but Collins once he recognized his closer just didn’t have it he got him out of there before the game was lost.

      The pitch count is not even a consideration to me unless I hear Collins say it was the reason he took him out. If he does say that was the case I agree with you in that at 102 pitches you have to believe Pelfrey “could” of gone out to start the 9th if asked but the decision to go to your closer for the save at home with a 3 run lead is not where I am concerned a wrong move either.
      • Fonzie13 April 21, 2012 at 9:00 pm

        MNJ I don’t know if I’d call bringing in the closer in that spot baseball 101. baseball 101 would be to stay with your starter when he’s in complete control. That’s more like modern day baseball.

        We had just lost 3 straight games and the 3rd one was a bad loss. Today wasn’t the day to get “Franky back out there” Maybe tommorows the day to get “Franky back out there” but today the most important thing was to just win the game. I’m not saying you don’t go to your closer, I’m just saying you don’t have to every time just because there’s a save situation.

        Twice last year Collins took out his starter after they both retired 17 of the last 18 hitters they faced and we went on to lose both games. One was Niese the other was Dickey. Dickey was at 100 and Niese was at 97 pitches. Niese’s may have been 16 of 17 but it was something like that. He doesn’t learn from his mistakes.
        • RickeyBobby April 21, 2012 at 9:34 pm

          yanks like to have mariano start the inning, he’s been much more effective as are many other closers that start the inning as opposed to coming in w runners on, i think that played into his decision..3 run lead, zero issue..
        • Mr North Jersey April 21, 2012 at 9:41 pm

          We will have to disagree Fonzie. In today’s game complete games are not the norm and haven’t been for quite some time. Most times a 3 run lead bottom of the 9th teams go to their closer. The outcome wasn’t what Collins wanted but the decision was a sound one in my estimation.

          Collins by the way said in the postgame when asked about how much an issue was Pelfrey’s pitch count said it was close but that had the Mets scored another run Pelfrey would have gone out there for the 9th so his decision to pull him did not involve pitch counts.
          • Fonzie13 April 22, 2012 at 12:30 am

            I know complete games are not the norm nowadays and the closer automatically gets the ball in the 9th inning. That doesn’t mean it’s smart. In fact that’s a dumb reason to take a pitcher out in that’s in total control. You’re supposed to remove a pitcher when he loses effectiveness not because the closer is supposed to get the ball. Opposing teams foam at the mouth when a pitcher that’s on his game is removed. You’re doing them a favor. Sorry but I can’t say removing a pitcher that’s giving the opposing team fits all day for a guy you have no idea is going to be effective a sound decision. The amount of late inning leads lost over the past 20-25 years because of this ridiculous overmanaging is mind boggling. 30 plus years ago these 8th and 9th inning comebacks rarely happened. Now they’re the norm. All because somebody decided that the closer is supposed to get the ball. Now tommorow if we need the closer, he’ll be coming in for the 3rd straight day
            • Mr North Jersey April 22, 2012 at 12:44 am

              Like I said if Collins had decided to let Pelfrey go out in the 9th there would not be nothing wrong with that. My contention is that the decision to go to his closer when he did is not wrong either.

              I have seen enough games where the manager went with his stater 1 inning too many as well and the topic after the game was why did the manager not remove the pitcher as well.

              I am not suggesting that managers should just remove a starter irregardless I am saying that in this specific situation the decision to do so is not a wrong one in my opinion. In your opinion it’s dumb and if that is what you think that is fine too. That is what great about the game. You can discuss different strategies and see things from angles you may not have considered to begin with.

              The Mets we can say in this case at least won the game. Gee is on the mound 2morrow. Let’s hope they can win the game without the craziness that surrounded this one.
              • Metsie April 22, 2012 at 12:09 pm

                Well MNJ while I agree it’s a normal baseball convention to go to your closer in the 9th regardless of the pitch count of the starter that “CONVENTION” really only applies if you have a real deal closer to go to. Who is your closer is just as important in that standard convention,

                Unfortunatly Francisco is a closer in name only.

                It’s games like the last two that got him fired as a closer elsewhere. So it’s not like this is some new development of his!

                And that trumps the convention!

                Lets face the facts here, Terry put him in to get him back on the horse he fell off the day before! And he fell off again!

                Better would have been to let Pelfrey face the first two batters and at least try to get the first out and then if he ran into trouble you could replace him with one of our previously failed closers.
  • vinnie papandrea April 22, 2012 at 1:39 pm

    Completely agree with MR North Jersey, any one who says he shouldn’t have pulled Pelfry hasn’t been watching the Mets the last 3 years. If you can’t bring your closer in ,in the easiest of save situations then he shouldn’t get paid. Great job by Terry pulling him out most guys don’t do that.
• Met Maniac April 21, 2012 at 4:54 pm

  Terry Collins did everything in his power to lose this game. This pitch count philosophy almost cost us another game and it still has prevented guys like Jenrry Mejia, Steve Matz, Herrera from avoiding TJS. What kind of a moron pulls his starter when he’s pitching so effectively and effortlessly. Pelfrey was cruising in the eighth inning. Collins is starting to look a lot like Jerry Manuel.
  • XtreemIcon April 21, 2012 at 4:56 pm

    “Collins is starting to look a lot like Jerry Manuel.”

    I don’t know about that. He wasn’t laughing during the post game.
  • Fonzie13 April 21, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    Amen Maniac. Couldn’t agree more. I feel like for some reason that we lost this game. lol. I’m still hit under the collar.
    • Fonzie13 April 21, 2012 at 5:00 pm

      hot under the collar
• XtreemIcon April 21, 2012 at 4:55 pm

  The answer to both questions is yes. No reason Pelfrey should have come out of the game. You want to have Francisco lightly tossing in the pen just in case? That’s fine. But it was a silly move to take Pelfrey out.

  Kirk was very close to being the goat, after muffing hte pop up then grounding into what should have been a 4-2-3 rally killer. Kirk at least owes Francisco an apology and Hairston a beer.
  • srt April 21, 2012 at 7:26 pm

    Actually, I’d say he owes Rauch that apology, not Francisco. It was Rauch who made that pitch which should have ended the game right there.
    • XtreemIcon April 21, 2012 at 10:04 pm

      Yes, but it’s Francisco’s ERA that suffers.
• Midwestern Met April 21, 2012 at 5:03 pm

  Some wins go down like 5-star steak, some go down like bad McDonalds. They’re both still meat, and they’re both still Ws. At least we won.
• Gary S. April 21, 2012 at 5:03 pm

  Joe D and MNJ disagree on pulling Pelfrey.I was watching and thought Pelfrey could have started the ninth but an argument could me made for either decision.Gary Cohen chided Tejada for not going back and catching the pop up.Imho that was his ball to catch.Somebody has to make that catch at the MLB level!!!Blew my mind as I watched it happen.I agree thAt it might be time to try Rauch as the closer.Even more mind blowing that Alderson tied up 12 mill in Francisco who is a journeyman closer at best in his career.I also give Collins props for giving him the quick hook.What really made this hard to watch and has not been mentioned was the bottom of the eighth.We had two on and nobody out and in the space of 3 pitches got a runner picked off and thrown out stealing.I thought I was seeing things from the 1962 Mets.Since it is our 50 year anniverssary, it was a nice attempt by the team to recreate a time machine effect back to 1962.Well done!!I give some credit for the ninth inning comeback but Bruce Bochy gets a huge assist for putting Huff at second.
• Seligman April 21, 2012 at 5:04 pm

  When the game ended and we won I didnt even cheer, I simply exhaled and walked to the fridge for another beer. Jeesh.
• Hodges14 April 21, 2012 at 5:09 pm

  As Greg Pomes would say, same old Mets. Sorry dont mean to troll but you know it’s true!
  • Donal April 22, 2012 at 9:34 am

    Same Old Mets don’t win that game.
• Russell Zanca April 21, 2012 at 5:15 pm

  Pelf was the man of the game today! Were I Collins, I would have let him start the ninth. Yank him if he allows a base runner. Still, I can’t agree that TC is a clown for bringing in closer; that’s simply what you do.

  Francisco blew last night and he sucked today. I do like Rauch.

  We won the damn thing. For once we snag a victory from the jaws of defeat!
• LA Mets Fan April 21, 2012 at 5:21 pm

  Here is why we won:

  http://www.baycityball.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/huffsecondbase1.gif

  Lets go Mets!
• Joey D. April 21, 2012 at 6:26 pm

  Anyway, today was an ugly win and one I couldn’t jump up and down with excitement when the winning run scored. Of course, I’ll take it over a loss every time out but there were too many blunders by both teams on the bases and in the field to make the win satisfactory, especially when the Giants had to put Huff at second, who had never played second in his life and thus made Daniel Murphy appear as a thinking man’s second baseman.

  But Pelf came out the big winner in all this, even though the Giants can’t really hit.

  Tejada never got a jump on the pop-up, we can see he had lost it in the sun. Did Kirk at least call him off cause it seemed he was keeping one eye on the ball and another on his shortstop. Blame that to inexperience – it’ actually easier to make the great catch when it’s one’s own play but it takes maturity to know when to call off the other and take charge on a Texas Leaguer falling in.
  • RickeyBobby April 21, 2012 at 9:41 pm

    Its poss Nieuwenhuis missed more seasoning defensively this spring and maybe last season being injured..today was his ticket back to Buffalo for 2 to 3 months once Torres is back no questions asked, he does have promise thou will surly get 400+ ab’s next year in the bigs barrring disaster slumps..
    • Donal April 22, 2012 at 9:38 am

      Torres injured himself misplaying a ball that should have been caught but fell for a triple. And he doesn’t hit like Kirk.

      I fail to see the improvement.
• Little Nicky April 21, 2012 at 7:05 pm

  A win is a win, you all should be used to this by now. LGM!
  • Joey D. April 21, 2012 at 9:28 pm

    Nicky,

    How can we be used to these types of wins? This afternoon was the first time in a long while I can ever remember us coming out of this type of game on the winning end.
• Joey D. April 21, 2012 at 10:23 pm

  Could it be that so few starters are trained to close out a game that managers just automatically bring in the closer in a save situation? Is that why TC said with one more run (thus it not being a save situation) he would have kept Pelfrey in? Sounds counterproductive in general since who would not want to have a pitcher on the mound who is on top of his game? If we know he is in control of the hitters it’s not so much keeping him in so he can have a chance at a complete game, it’s rather keeping him in so one doesn’t then mess up a good thing going by making switches.

  However, this is nothing compared to Japan. A few years back in the seventh game of the Japan Series the starter was pitching a perfect game through eight with a 1-0 lead. The closer came in the ninth nonetheless. The manager said it would have “dishonored” the closer not to bring him in. I hope it never gets to that point here in the U.S.
  • Mr North Jersey April 21, 2012 at 11:43 pm

    Hi Joey D,

    I would say that if given the choice of bringing in the closer with runners on opposed to none on then I prefer with none on. The manager’s job is not one I envy. He has to not only win the game but he also has to do so while managing when to get his people work and when to pull them.

    If you listen to Collins he mentions wanting to get his guy work while mentioning while he has had struggled when he came in on save situations he hadn’t failed him. Suggesting possibly that if he could just get his guy in more save opportunities that could help his recent struggles out of the pen.

    He then has to deal with building the confidence of Pelfrey and remarks in his postgame how he didn’t want Pelf coming out of the game having given up a run or 2. H e wanted him to leave basically on a positive note regarding his performance.

    A hard job for a manager it’s not just the win but also finding ways to put his guys in a position where he can build their confidence if needed. Find them ample playing time and winning the game while doing so.

    Personally If the closer is going to come in anyway once a batter or two gets on I would rather he come in to start the inning. Others may feel different and that doesn’t make their choice wrong either just a different choice.
    • Joey D. April 22, 2012 at 12:32 am

      Hi North,

      I know that is the norm today.

      This is more emotional on my part than objective so forgive me for talking as a pure fan but I believe any reliever, including the closer, should be able to come in to put out a fire. That’s what the great save masters of the past (i.e., Gossage, Lyle, Fingers, Eckersley, McGraw, Righetti, etc.) did all the time (not to mention pitching multiple innings). Even Mariano Riveria has been tested only a few times in his career in that manner.

      That’s why I contend the late inning guys, those who come in with inherited runners, actually play more important role with holding the game than a closer often does with saving. Yet, in some strange way, those who can come in and leave runners stranded on base are often unable to suddenly be put in a closing situation. Each reliever today is “defined” his role and I wonder if that mindset has had more an adverse effect than good. I mean, isn’t it the role of any player to be ready to enter the game at a moment’s notice?
      • Mr North Jersey April 22, 2012 at 12:55 am

        We all speak as fans so I understand. I agree today’s reliever is that of defined roles. As far as speculating if it’s had an adverse effect I will leave that for others to ponder.In time I may reconsider but I just know that right now I still enjoy the game the same as I have always.
• Stick April 21, 2012 at 11:18 pm

  Terry did his damnedest to blow it. pelf never should have been yanked for the 9th. Though I was surprised to see him violate the code of the closer, and yank Frankie mid-inning.
• Metsie April 21, 2012 at 11:53 pm

  I don’t see why everyone is outting it all on Kirk…
  Hre had to travel a mile just to get there and over ran it and Tejada had a much better chance at that ball and gave up on it way too quickly.
  • Joey D. April 22, 2012 at 12:35 am

    Agree with you 100 percent Metsi.

    What happened today was a matter of a rookie mistake and not having the poise of a seasoned pro. Unfortunately, all have to go through those moments in order to learn.
• Mike C April 22, 2012 at 1:40 pm

  I think a big question that should be asked is: how much can we trust pelf? If he keeps up hiz good start do we, and the front office, trust that he has found himself (finally) or should sandy wait for his trade value riae and get down better package than they couldve gotten in the offseason? My vote is for the latter
  • Metsie April 22, 2012 at 2:13 pm

    No the question is who do you trust MORE?

    Pelf who was obviously on his game and pitching well and efficiently….
    Or the guy who blew the game the day before and has a history of doing so which is why he has lost the closer job elsewhere?

    As far as trading Pelf first chance we get I agree but it would have been much better to have a complete game on his record than a lost win don’t you think?

    As someone else said Anyone who wanted to leave Pelf in hasn’t been watching the mets the last three years by the same token anyone who thinks Francisco is the guy to bring in obviously hasn’t been watching him the last three years either!

    The guy is the spitting image of Armando Benitez…Some days he looks awesome, other like crap and in between he puts a lot of guys on base and games in jeopardy in the proccess!

    If he was a real deal closer it might have been the right move, but Francisco is not a real deal closer! Not even close!
    At best he would be best suited as an 8th Inning guy who you can pull and send in the REAL closer on days when he doesn’t have it. or a Give a Closer Rest guy on days your closer is not available. He is not a guy you can rely on to get those three outs without a run scoring or men on base!
• Joey D. April 22, 2012 at 3:56 pm

  The fact a pitcher is on top of his game is why I don’t understand where the closer needs to come in. If there is any sign of fatigue, the starters velocity starting to change, that in the last inning batters were starting to get their timing a bit better etc. those are reasons to go to the pen. But otherwise, with starters rarely going nine, there is also the question of maintaining stamina throughout the season and including the amount of wear on an arm just by warming up, the pen might be the one tiring out quicker than the rotation if always used irregardless of how well one already on the mound is pitching.
  • Metsie April 22, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    What I think some people are not taking into account…
    If Parnell from last year was still our closer would anyone agree with puling Pelfrey in that same situation?

    I tend to doubt it!
    And right now Francisco has yet to prove he is better than that!
• Metstheory22 April 23, 2012 at 8:32 am

  I was at the game and it was very windy at the time Kirk lost the ball. I think the wind took the ball back more than he thought. Tejada thought he was going to catch the ball at first.
  Also I thought Collins should have brought in either Ramirez or Parnell to start inning. We had a three run lead, Francisco had thrown 25 pitches the night before and we should have given him a breather. I also thought he made a mistake using Hairston as runner instead of saving him to pinch hit.
• Alex68 April 23, 2012 at 8:35 am

  Frank Francisco has lost the Closer job everywhere he’s been.. you guys sound surprise about his struggles as a closer.. This aint no early on thing, this is more like his career thing.. Again, i have no idea why collins brought him in, but collins is proving to be a clueless manager by each game