Given it was a light-hitting shortstop, the squeeze was a smarter play than hoping for a sac fly. But I would have taken the squeeze off before it got to that play - and I'll tell you why.

Part of the squeeze working is the element of surprise. It's like calling a draw play on 3rd-and-7. It can be a great call if the defense doesn't expect it. However, if the defense knows it is coming, the draw play rarely works.

What told me that the Red Sox knew the squeeze was on were the two pitches before the failed bunt. The pitcher buzzed Aybar high and inside on the first one - about where his head would have been if he squared to bunt. The first high inside pitch might have been a coincidence but when the second pitch went to the same place, that told me the Sox were expecting a squeeze. That meant the element of surprise was gone and Willetts would be dead meat, either by pitchout (Aybar was hitting lefthanded) or putting the pitch where a bunt would likely fail, which is what happened.

I don't blame Scioscia for thinking squeeze but he should have known (as a former catcher) that those two inside pitches signaled that the Red Sox were playing for a squeeze and to call it off and try something else. Aybar hit a punch shot to win Game 3 and the best option would have been to hope he could do it again, particularly with the infield all the way in. If he didn't have confidence Aybar could do that, he probably should have opted for a pinch-hitter and taken his chances on a sac fly.

"We don't do anything easy. We're the Astros." - Craig Biggio