the shrewdness of apes

here's the body of an e-mail i just sent to Aaron Gleeman in response to his defense of the managing in the 12th inning of last night's Twins/Yankees game:

"I have to disagree that the option of bringing in Romero or Crain was unpalatable. When no one was warming up in the top of the 12th, I thought to myself "Do they really think Nathan can pitch a 3rd inning after already throwing an inning yesterday?" Especially after Nathan threw 8 straight balls, you have to get him out of there. Lose with a fresh pitcher, not one struggling to find the strike zone. And don't forget that Nathan was now going through the order for a second time, so A-Rod, et. al. had already seen him once in the game. Most of the time you don't have that luxury with a reliever.

In all your zeal to point out how Rodriguez and Sheffield kill lefties (Sheff killed righties too), you neglected to point out that Romero was better against righties this year in terms of OPS against while Crain totally shut righties down. So what if he's a rookie? No one seemed to care when K-Rod was a rookie - he just went out and dominated. Crain doesn't have quite as electric stuff, but his stuff might have been good enough to get a K or a DP - Nathan's stuff obviously wasn't at that point and they may have cost themselves the series. When you've got the Yankees down, you can't let them have a breath or they'll bash your head with a shovel. I know the Twins rode Nathan all year and he delivered, but that was too much to ask of him and the Twins may very well pay the price of allowing the Yankees to squeeze out of a choke hold.

Of course, this is all just my opinion, which is colored perceptibly by my Red Sox fandom (full disclosure and all that), but I think Gardy [Ron Gardenhire] may have pulled a Grady."

oh well, at least the Sox managed to pull out another victory for a 2-0 series lead. Pedro managed to look pretty good, and i'm ready to feel confident about him again. the strike zone was tight all night for both sides, so he didn't get all the calls, but most of the hits against him were of the dinky, bloopy variety. the only really hard hit balls were Guerrero's 2-run single and Anderson's line drive double-play in the 6th. but Petey fought through a couple tough at-bats in the 7th and was bringing it in the mid-90s even after 110+ pitches. i fell asleep during the 9th inning, but fortunately nothing untoward happened as Foulke closed it out easily.

***UPDATE*** and not to keep harping on this, but another part of Gleeman's article just struck me:

Instead, the series is tied and there's a very good chance New York will take a 2-1 lead with Carlos Silva getting the call in Game 3 (yet another reason why leaving Nathan in wasn't a bad move, since it's unlikely he'd have gotten a meaningful appearance in Game 3 anyway).

what the hell is is that??? you're planning to lose Game 3? what sort of manager would think like that? i'll answer that - a very bad one. if you don't think the Twins can win Game 3 at home against Kevin Brown (who has been nothing special this year, is recovering from a broken hand and has a bad back), then i have to question your credentials as a Twins fan and a baseball writer. Silva may not pitch very well, but what if the Twins have a 9-8 lead going into the 9th? they'll certainly want to call on Nathan then, and what if he sputters? are those extra 4 batters enough to make a difference in his effectiveness 2 days later? for the Twins sake, i hope they aren't and for your sake i hope you can find a little optimism before Friday. (note: this part of the response not actually sent to Mr. Gleeman)