That sequence last year is one that I keep in mind about Dusty’s use of the bullpen. Baker will get greedy and wait until the situation is pretty much setup to fail for his reliever coming in.

Even with a completely dominating reliever, say like Billy Wagner when he was with the Astros and could throw 100+ or say Rivera, putting them in with the bases loaded to face Pujols is going to fail probably 50/50 and with David Weathers.

If I remember right on that Pujols grand slam it was 2nd 3rd, some other reliver might have gotten 1 out and loaded the bases then Weathers came in. Dusty should have gone to the pen right after the first person reached base or even better than that started on the pen that inning. He did that a few times last year and gambled and lost. Occasionally it would work, but I know Adrian Gonzales, Manny and Fielder got us the same situation last year where you are pretty much in a Red Russian Roulette situation where you either walk in a run or face a top clean up hitter.

That one in LA, if it would have been Dibble, he would have just hit Manny. (But hey, it might have only been 1 run instead of four.):mrgreen:

BJ: Absolutely. He’s pitched a lot of good games and lost. It’s not just that they’ve hit badly for him, they’ve also played worse defense when he’s on the mound than anyone else is on the mound. I don’t know if someone else is there

Wonder if he saw that game early last season when Gonzalez wasn’t getting to those ground balls?

I am a stats geek. I know the value of stats. They can tell you some things scouts can miss watching a small sample size of games (that number being usually less than 20 games.) They can also cut through the clutter of all the ups and downs. Perhaps a player is scouted during a slump. Perhaps he’s scouted during hot streak. Scouting, however, can tell you some things the stats don’t. Take Gomes for example since it is an easy one. His UZR and is poor while his FP is good and PO is high. What does that say about him as a defender? One can correctly interpret that while he’s got a good glove and a strong arm, he has a hard time getting to the gaps. But what the stats don’t say is why. Is it speed, hussle, bad routes, or bad jumps? Scouting tells you that. Scouting can help determine if the players problems are correctable. It can tell you that a pitcher’s ERA could improve if they took a smaller stride, or if a control issue is because of a small balance problem, or if they just need to learn that final pitch to be more effective.

Believe me, I can make equally compelling arguments for stats. Stats say a whole lot about a player that scouts can miss, especially the peripherals. That’s why I like stats like BABIP and ISO. I truly believe to be an affective evaluator of talent you need both. They go hand and hand.

Since the Reds have increased their scouting budget they have faired much better in the draft and picking up players through trades and free agency. I just think talent evaluators should use all the tools at their disposal. Bill James says the debate is stupid because they say the same thing. I agree there shouldn’t be a debate, but I think it’s because you need both.