How would you suggest we do that?
You can look at it from a few different angles.
1. If you're to correlate with the personnel, we generally start getting our shit together around the time the second shift clocks in. Paix in for Walters. Taupau for Carrigan. Etc.
2. Although we're usually behind on the board around the time Billy and Pat are replaced, it's invariably our attack that's been failing to click.
3. The fact that we've ended up winning might suggest we're doing something right overall. Or it might suggest we're doing something better with the bench players. It's easy to scapegoat Billy, but what about Patty?
4. An alternate theory to us starting badly, might be we wear them out in the first thirty minutes, and then go in for the kill when they're buggered.
It's a bit of a glass half full paradox that only falls apart when we lose.