why was lackey still in there

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from udontnojack. Show udontnojack's posts

    why was lackey still in there

    and wake the only pitcher warming up.they must have decided to save everyone for the yankess and give this one away.or ,maybe,it was just coma doing his thing.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    In Response to why was lackey still in there:
    [QUOTE]and wake the only pitcher warming up.they must have decided to save everyone for the yankess and give this one away.or ,maybe,it was just coma doing his thing.
    Posted by udontnojack[/QUOTE]

    My sentiments exactly. Francona went into this game intending to use Lackey as long as he could with Wake to relieve. If Lackey pitched well, he may use Pap to close.
    He was saving the BP for NY. No two ways about it and I'm sorry, but the worng guy got the night off for Iglesias to be starting.......... should have been Pedey.
    As soon as Lackey lost failed to retire the first two in the 7th, he should have been lifted. We were only 1 run down and still had a chance to come back.
    Pin this loss on Francona.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from the_yaz. Show the_yaz's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    also, pin this loss on THEO for signing SLACKEY.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Lindawitz1. Show Lindawitz1's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    HaH - I thought I was the only one who called him SLACKEY!  Me no likey Slackey - esp. when he yells at other players who can't catch the doubles that are hit off his lousy pitching.  He always seems to have an excuse.  Wasn't fond of the signing and I still haven't been proved wrong though I'd like to be.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from plinny. Show plinny's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    Just another example of Terri-Cloth throw in the towel again. Looking for action in the bullpen? Try waiting until the game's out of hand.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxmeister. Show soxmeister's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    YES, lackey should have been yanked, anybody who watched it all unravel knew it was going to happen, knew that for some reason Tito was not going to take Lackey out until the game was out of reach ... not fun to watch at all.   But on the other hand, the Sox did not score another run ... so, 4-3 loss, 9-3 loss,

    WHO CARES.

    Get off lackey and start blaming Youk and PD .. they are the core of this team, and have completely SUCKED.  I would bench them before I would touch a starting pitcher who can give you over 100 pitches a game.   Lackey should have been yanked after he walked the batter to load the bases, how crazy is it to blame him when he coughed it up after what, 111 or so pitches?   He could have left the game only giving up 4 runs. 

    Crawford could have caught that ball that hit the wall too.  Lackey isn't great, but a catch there changes the whole game. 

    It is about winning games, period.  A 10-9 win would have made everybody happy.  This Sox team needs Youk and PD to bust out.  AGon looks great ... at least it gives us hope ...
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from the_yaz. Show the_yaz's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    the question shouldn't be "why was SLACKEY still in there?"
    the question should be "why is SLACKEY with the SOX at all?"

    the 1st question you can blame on TITO; the other question is definitely the fault of THEO.
    now here's the million dollar question: "isn't it time for both of them to be gone?"
    i believe it is; what about you?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    m
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from allancrain. Show allancrain's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    The "Players' Manager" wanted to leave Lackey in so he could get the win if the Sox scored in the seventh.  He does this a lot.

    Theo should have never paid this prima donna Lackey that kind of money. Lackey was wanting the umpire who was excellent last night to give him pitches 6" outside the strike zone.  Lackey and Wakefield are "inning eaters".  Look at the Sox record when these two weren't pitching last year.  They were .500 and when they're not pitching it is around .600.

    Only Tito thinks that the games don't count in April or May.  They start counting in late August.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from chuchos. Show chuchos's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    Francona explained he wanted to give albers, aceves, bard proper rest, so his plan all along was to use Lackey long, and then wake.  Regardless of the circumstances it seems.

    What is defines proper rest when they have a day off today?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    I don't put this on Francona.  This was a night in which the BP needed rest if at all possible.  So, you hand the ball to your 18 million dollar man, your annointed #2 starter, and put the team on his sloped, flabby shoulders.  Only problem is its John lackey.  Look, before the 7th, Lackey had knuckled down and actually got through a couple sort-of-almost-clean innings.  You gotta give the 'professional' 'battler' 'innings eater' the ball for the seventh given the two solid innings prior.  Probably should have pulled him a couple batters earlier, but you gotta give the guy the chance to earn his ridiculous pay.  He didn't again.  You can question Francona's saving of the pen and how long he left lackey in.  No doubt.  But it isn't black and white. And, in my view, thats all on Lackey.  A front of the rotation starter has to give the club a shot to win.  He didn't.  Again.  Give me Dice-K any day of the week.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from splendidsplinterteddyballgame. Show splendidsplinterteddyballgame's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    Oki Doki couldn't come in to get the LH hitting Cooper out?  Why have him on the team then?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    In Response to Re: why was lackey still in there:
    [QUOTE]I don't put this on Francona.  This was a night in which the BP needed rest if at all possible.  So, you hand the ball to your 18 million dollar man, your annointed #2 starter, and put the team on his sloped, flabby shoulders.  Only problem is its John lackey.  Look, before the 7th, Lackey had knuckled down and actually got through a couple sort-of-almost-clean innings.  You gotta give the 'professional' 'battler' 'innings eater' the ball for the seventh given the two solid innings prior.  Probably should have pulled him a couple batters earlier, but you gotta give the guy the chance to earn his ridiculous pay.  He didn't again.  You can question Francona's saving of the pen and how long he left lackey in.  No doubt.  But it isn't black and white. And, in my view, thats all on Lackey.  A front of the rotation starter has to give the club a shot to win.  He didn't.  Again.  Give me Dice-K any day of the week.
    Posted by SpacemanEephus[/QUOTE]

    Good post. There was a domino effect involved, going back to Tuesday's game.

    Had one of these things been different, the game doesn't go into extra innings and the bullpen wouldn't have been burned like it was:

    Lester been better;
    Youk not gone 0-for-5;
    The Sox get one more clutch it with runners on (16 hits just six runs);
    Or even a sacrfice fly or ground out that drives in a run;
    Bard doesn't give up the home run.

    Had the Sox been able to win in regulation, the bullpen would have been fresher Wednesday. So when Lackey got in trouble in the sixth, they would have had a fresh arm to come in earlier. Lackey allowed two hits then got two outs, so that was fine. After he walked to load the bases, he should have been pulled.

    Had the previous game not gone long, Aceves likely would have been available and brought in. So maybe then Lackey's line might have been 6 2/3 innings, 4 runs and the story is how he battled to keep the Sox in the game.

    That's why this is a team problem. Posters are too ready to throw one or two players under the bus when the fingers can be pointed at a lot of places.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    m
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from eggplants. Show eggplants's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

                              There's only one place the finger can be pointed, the manager of on field operations,"TF".He's responsible for everything going on on field except the ground crew and the umpires and whoever sings The National Anthem. Just about everything else is on "T". This is a manager screaming for help. Last night wasn't unusual. At 4-3,2-out,2-on, Lackey  should have been gone. He already exceeded his pitch total for any game he pitched this year. At 5-3, still a winable game with 2 innings left, Lackey's still in there. Here "T's" thinking; the Sox could come back from 2 down and I'd be forced to use my precious BP. Leaves Lackey in to pitch to the light hitting McDonald, surely Lackey will get him, eeeeeeeeh wrong again "T". At 7-3 "T" throws Lackey a life-jacket knowing that it's over now. Wake comes in to mop up, the BP's been saved, and "T" skates away into another loss. The starting pitcher gets the hammer from just about everybody and "T", well "T" just goes his merry way, talking in measured tones looking for answers.For "T" these are comfortable losses. I'll make a prediction, if the sox miss the post season this year it won't be because our BP was over extended.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: why was lackey still in there

    In Response to Re: why was lackey still in there:
    [QUOTE]I don't put this on Francona.  This was a night in which the BP needed rest if at all possible.  So, you hand the ball to your 18 million dollar man, your annointed #2 starter, and put the team on his sloped, flabby shoulders.  Only problem is its John lackey.  Look, before the 7th, Lackey had knuckled down and actually got through a couple sort-of-almost-clean innings.  You gotta give the 'professional' 'battler' 'innings eater' the ball for the seventh given the two solid innings prior.  Probably should have pulled him a couple batters earlier, but you gotta give the guy the chance to earn his ridiculous pay.  He didn't again.  You can question Francona's saving of the pen and how long he left lackey in.  No doubt.  But it isn't black and white. And, in my view, thats all on Lackey.  A front of the rotation starter has to give the club a shot to win.  He didn't.  Again.  Give me Dice-K any day of the week.
    Posted by SpacemanEephus[/QUOTE]

    Sorry Space. But I'm not buying into this at all. The pen wasn't in dire need of a 'rest'. Today's an off-day. And the money Lackey makes should have absolutely nothing to do with when he's removed from a game.

    To thread author: Instead of starting threads like this, it could have been discussed on a thread dedicated to discussing the key, game-altering plays. It's called the ALTERNATIVE TO THE GAME THREADS and it's purpose is to minimize the number of threads on the same subject matter. These threads only allow for more fuel for the "bumpers".
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share