A win clinches you a spot in the playoffs...

Quote:

---

You're tied entering the bottom of the ninth inning. You have the greatest closer of all time in the bullpen, who last pitched three days ago. You bring in some old minor league pitcher, and he gets out. Bottom of the 10th inning. You're still tied. You bring in some rookie who's struggled with injuries and has fringy stuff. He gives up the game winning home run.

You still did not touch the best closer in all of baseball.

How do managers not see the worth of using their best reliever at the most crucial times? This is why I can't give Joe Torre any consideration for manager of the year. He sucks at managing a bullpen.

---

who cares ? Dumb thread!What happens happnens,become a Baseball assitant! Change Baseball :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WATERY

I guess not. Go watch a game :)

---

So, I just watched a game, and I saw a closer come in in a situation that couldn't be farther from a save situation, and he got a strike out, a ground out, and a pop out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

who cares ? Dumb thread!What happens happnens,become a Baseball assitant! Change Baseball :rolleyes:

---

Why is it a dumb thread? This is a baseball website. I'm expressing my opinion on a baseball topic.

But I'll take note. From now on, we can never ever comment or make a thread about anything regarding baseball because "What happens happens." Gotcha.

Well it's all moot because the Yanks are in BABY!!!!!!!! :D:D:D:D:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

He's basing it on what all the announcers are talking about. the Yankees have a better season record vs. the Indians than the Angels, so they want to get the Indians in the first round of the playoffs.

---

I've actually heard the announcers say the same thing but don't believe they intend to lose it just happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WATERY

Roll your eyes, that's about all you ever do lately - and no one cares if you approve of them anyway.

---

Ouch! Can we all just get along? :p

*sigh*
It's the same three of you in every other thread, with the same tired, stupid comments about each other. And yes, I called all three of you stupid. Quit acting that way, and it won't happen again.
Shut up already, all three of you.
geez

Sorry, won't happen again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

If you're a good pitcher, the amount your team is winning or losing by is irrelevent. Yeah, there's the guys like Bob Wickman who get mad when they're brought in in non-save situations, but this doesn't mean they perform worse. I've seen nothing factual to indicate the notion that a lot of closers struggle in non-save situations.

I think that a lot of that is that closers aren't really used outside of save situations, and a screw up in a non-save situation sticks in the minds of fans (and managers) more than a blown save. A young closer blows a game that wasn't a save situation? He gets branded with the "can't pitch except in save situations" label, and it's hard to get rid of. If you're a good pitcher, the score of the game is irrelevent.

And even if Rivera struggles in non-save situations, there's no way that a struggling Rivera isn't better than Jose Veras and Jeff Karstens.

---

eric gagne of boston.


case closed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabruinss

eric gagne of boston.


case closed.

---

I already went over Gagne.

Also, even assuming Gagne does have some underlying condition that makes him struggle in non-save situations, that is not factual evidence that a lot of closers struggle in non-save situations.

OK, who wants to do the research on rivera in save and non save situations?

I've got nothing better to do, so I guess since the only way I know of is to go through his game log, I will.

Well, I did this all by hand, and apparantly I'm missing two appearances. I've got this in save situations:

32 games, 33.2 IP, 27 hits, 6 walks, 37 strikeouts, 9 runs, 2.44 ERA

In non-save situations:
32 games, 33 IP, 33 hits, 8 walks, 40 strikeouts, 12 runs, 3.27 ERA

The numbers are a bit off. I'm missing two appearances, 4 or so innings, there's two extra walks, and three extra strikeouts, and missing a run, but the numbers are close enough to show that there's basically no difference in how he pitches in different situations.

However it's enoughthat if I was the coach I might see whatthe rest of my bullpen could do. They have also found through this trial and error that Joba and Mariano make a great tandem.

And they're in the playoffs!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickD

However it's enoughthat if I was the coach I might see whatthe rest of my bullpen could do.

---

It's not anything. The difference is 6 hits. The reason there's a difference is because 33 innings both way is a small sample size. There's no excuse for using Jeff Karstens and Jose Veras in a tie game, and then Joba and Mo in a 12-2 game. That's just ridiculous...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

It's not anything. The difference is 6 hits. The reason there's a difference is because 33 innings both way is a small sample size. There's no excuse for using Jeff Karstens and Jose Veras in a tie game, and then Joba and Mo in a 12-2 game. That's just ridiculous...

---

you do understand that not everyone manages the game based on statistical and probability analysis, don't you?

How many threads are you going to start that are all based on the false premise that there is a "right" way to manage the game?

Some managers, for example, actually talk to human beings and do completely ridiculous stuff like ask their pitching coach who they think looks good or needs work that day. I know it's incredibly stupid to talk to your staff when all you have to do is flip through a couple printouts to see what you should do, but a shocking number of managers still adhere to the archaic notion that you can find things out about people by looking at them and talking to them.

I know it sounds crazy, but it's true.

Show me what you can find out by looking at Jose Veras and Jeff Karstens that show that they are more capable of holding a tie game than Joba Chamberlain and Mariano Rivera, and what you find out by looking at Joba and Mo that indicates it's more helpful to the team to pitch them in a 12-2 game than a tie game.

Sorry, this isn't even a close call. There is no analysis, statistical or otherwise, that would ever peg Jeff Karstens as being better for a high leverage situation than Mariano Rivera.

While there is no "right" way to manage a game as a whole, as many different managerial philosophies work, there are decisions that are clearly wrong, and decisions that are clearly right - decisions that clearly increase your chance sof winning, and decisions that clearly decrease them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Show me what you can find out by looking at Jose Veras and Jeff Karstens that show that they are more capable of holding a tie game than Joba Chamberlain and Mariano Rivera, and what you find out by looking at Joba and Mo that indicates it's more helpful to the team to pitch them in a 12-2 game than a tie game.

Sorry, this isn't even a close call. There is no analysis, statistical or otherwise, that would ever peg Jeff Karstens as being better for a high leverage situation than Mariano Rivera.

While there is no "right" way to manage a game as a whole, as many different managerial philosophies work, there are decisions that are clearly wrong, and decisions that are clearly right - decisions that clearly increase your chance sof winning, and decisions that clearly decrease them.

---

imagine these conversations:

Day 1

Torre: Get Mariano ready.
Guidry: Mo's hung over. Him and Joba got in late last night.
Torre: @#$%, who looked good in warmups?
Guidry: Veras and Karstens.

and..... scene

Day 2

Torre: Ron, tell Mo to get ready.
Guidry: Skip, it's 12-2.
Torre: I know, but he wasn't ready yesterday, so he's gonna pitch today.

and.... scene

or this scenario:

Rivera stubs his toe in the locker room before the game. The Yankees need to win one of their next 8 games to "clinch" a playoff spot. Guidry tells Torre Rivera was favoring the toe during warmups. Torre figures the Yankees don't "need" this win at all, and decides not to risk Rivera tweaking something because he's got a sore toe.

there are a million things that go on day-to-day that PRODUCE the stats that say Rivera and Chamberlain are better pitchers than Karstens and Veras. One of those things is Torre deciding when to use them.

There are also countless reasons that could explain Torre's decision in this particular instance: maybe he wants to build a guys confidence heading into the postseason, maybe he wants to look at some guys in pressure situations now so he has that info later, maybe he's thinking he might need a third "closer" at some point in the playoffs if the Yankees have several tight games in a row, maybe he just wanted to cross his bullpen up so they'd ALL be on their toes heading into October, etc. etc. etc.

just looking at a player's stat line is NEVER enough to decide what is the absolute "right" and "wrong" thing to do in a situation.

Than wouldn't you want to clinch your playoff spot as early as possible so that you have meaningless games to test all that in? Wouldn't that make sense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Than wouldn't you want to clinch your playoff spot as early as possible so that you have meaningless games to test all that in? Wouldn't that make sense?

---

sure, but not at the expense of long-term goals, like winning the WS.

For example, if I'm confident my team is going to clinch whatever we do, but I want to see certain pitchers in tight situations, I have to take those situations as they come - there's no guarantee the Yankees will play another close game all year, so if my plan is to look at Karstens and Veras in tight situations before the playoffs, I have to recognize the game in question could be my only chance to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ltt

sure, but not at the expense of long-term goals, like winning the WS.

For example, if I'm confident my team is going to clinch whatever we do, but I want to see certain pitchers in tight situations, I have to take those situations as they come - there's no guarantee the Yankees will play another close game all year, so if my plan is to look at Karstens and Veras in tight situations before the playoffs, I have to recognize the game in question could be my only chance to do so.

---

Very true & teams "have to make" choices WHO will be on the post season roster too...;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Than wouldn't you want to clinch your playoff spot as early as possible so that you have meaningless games to test all that in? Wouldn't that make sense?

---

MMK
First of all, any major league pitcher on his best day is quite better than mariano on his worst day. Believe it or not, humans have good days a bad days.


The 6 hit thing wasn't even the way to go about judging riverain non save vs save. A better method would be good appearance vs bad ones. I thought that would have been common sense - Im sorry for not clarifying it.

You're testing for the playoffs, wouldnt a meaningful game make more sense in testing? A meaningless game wouldnt really fit the bill for testing whos ready for the playoffs, now is it?

Im sure theres more, but blah, spending time with my son.

Wow, this is actually turning into a decent thread now.
:)

(except for the last post that was just prior to this one, which I split into a different thread)

Yanks are winning by the way.....currently up by 2 with a lousy bullpen!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickD

Yanks are winning by the way.....currently up by 2 with a lousy bullpen!

---

YES but the pen is not LOUSY,they have 4 above average guys to count on...plus the Karstens/Ohlendorfs & Veras's of this world...

Well never mind they lost when Rivera blew a save!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickD

Well never mind they lost when Rivera blew a save!

---

Well now they are guaranteed Cleveland....more trouble is this Clemens rehabs in Texas not with team - better drugs at home ? (* joke * or maybe not)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WATERY

The 6 hit thing wasn't even the way to go about judging riverain non save vs save. A better method would be good appearance vs bad ones. I thought that would have been common sense - Im sorry for not clarifying it.

---

??? Overall performance in a small sample size is a worse way to judge performance than an even more miniscule sample size of select appearances? In 32 non-save situations, Rivera gave up runs in 7 of them. 3 of those he gave up just one run, one he gave up 2, one he gave up 3, and one he gave up 4.

Quote:

---

You're testing for the playoffs, wouldnt a meaningful game make more sense in testing? A meaningless game wouldnt really fit the bill for testing whos ready for the playoffs, now is it?

---

It'd be better than risking not making the playoffs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

YES but the pen is not LOUSY,they have 4 above average guys to count on...plus the Karstens/Ohlendorfs & Veras's of this world...

---

Who are these 4 above average guys?



And listen, I understand that in the specific situation the Yankees were in, this really is pretty inconsequential. However, I created the thread because this is just one symptom of the larger problem - this happens all year round. When managers continually employ relievers in such backwards methods, it does take away wins overall in a season. This isn't the only time Torre's done such a thing. It just so happens that I was watching this game and I found the choices completely crazy (and I think they were made even more crazy by using the best relievers in a complete blowout the next day), and so I posted my opinion on it.

As you saidit happens all the time so maybe it's not so crazy afterall. Torre does these things a lot but with his proven track record and having not missed the playoffs in forever I think he obviously knows what he is doing. If he did these things and missed the playoffs yes I might question his choices.

Remember they were 14 games out before the all-star break and the best record afterwards. He obviously is making some right choices. Secondly HGM I believe you stated in a different thread that managers don't affect the game on a day to day basis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickD

As you saidit happens all the time so maybe it's not so crazy afterall. Torre does these things a lot but with his proven track record and having not missed the playoffs in forever I think he obviously knows what he is doing. If he did these things and missed the playoffs yes I might question his choices.

---

Torre isn't the only manager to make stupid reliever decisions. In fact, most do. There isn't really any team that truly effectively leverages their relievers. I guess you could say the Indians this year are the closest, because they're best relievers aren't "proven closers" so they have their best relievers pitching in the highest leverage situations.

While I believe Torre is a good manager, mostly for his off-the-field/clubhouse presence as I believe he's a poor bullpen manager (for this leverage reason as well as other reasons which are more than talked about in the media), it's not really hard to win when you're continually handed a roster of superstars.

Quote:

---

Remember they were 14 games out before the all-star break and the best record afterwards. He obviously is making some right choices.

---

His team of super stars all got relatively healthy. Also, they were underperforming their run differential in the first half, and a good majority of the time, those things even out.

Quote:

---

HGM I believe you stated in a different thread that managers don't affect the game on a day to day basis.

---

I don't believe I've ever stated that.

Ok maybe not my bad....

I just want to make it doubly clear that I think Torre is the perfect manager for the Yankees, and back when people were calling for his firing, I found it absolutely ridiculous. Just as I feel that people give too much credit to managers for their teams winning, I likewise feel that people can also put too much blame on managers for their teams losing. In some cases, like with Ned Yost in Milwaukee recently and John McLaren in Seattle, it's warranted. However, when people were calling for Torre's head, I was thinking to myself, "So, it's his fault that the Yankees aging starters are all getting injured, and they're forced to go with tons of rookies? And somehow, a new manager is going to remedy that?" I think that Torre is one of the best clubhouse managers in the game and he really knows how to manage a mixture of veterans and rookies (something that say, Grady Little, can't do at all). He deals with the media well. He's highly respected, very well-liked, and great in all the human aspects. I feel that his only major flaw is his bad bullpen management. He tends to pick "favorite" relievers and ride their arms into the ground - a tendency that greatly influenced the "Joba rules". He, as well as other managers, doesn't leverage relievers well. I think that, when it comes to the bullpen, he's basically clueless. However, elsewhere, he's one of the best managers in the game, and his inability to manage a bullpen, while it may result in a win or two less over a full season, isn't going enough to make him a bad manager.

It's interesting here, because what your actually arguing for HGM is a return to the way reliever use (basically) used to be. It used to be that teams didn't have a "closer", they actually had a "Fireman". Basically, each team selected (usually one) ace reliever, who would come into the game to "put out fires"; hence the term "fireman". Very retro viewpoint, really.
:)

I'm actually surprised that you didn't receive more supportive posts on this one. Starting out making it more personally about Torre and the Yanks probably didn't help much, but it's still somewhat surprising. Returning to the "fireman" style of reliever use is a much more traditionalist viewpoint... although, that seems to be changing quickly. There's a chapter in Baseball Behind the Numbers which, while not actually advocating it, is supportive of it. I hear that Bill James and Co. (the Boston scouting team, more or less) has been pushing for it as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

It's interesting here, because what your actually arguing for HGM is a return to the way reliever use (basically) used to be. It used to be that teams didn't have a "closer", they actually had a "Fireman". Basically, each team selected (usually one) ace reliever, who would come into the game to "put out fires"; hence the term "fireman". Very retro viewpoint, really.
:)

---

Yes but,as you know,the 2 situations are totally different - in the past (& it was argued quite expansively in another thread ;) ) the SPs pitched deeper (& more often) & thus the "fireman's" role was largely different as he would come in & pitch "multiple innings" (close the game) but on a rarer basis .Today there are far less CG's pitched by SP's & in general the Average innings pitched by a SP is down by 1 or 2 innings from the period you are "quoting".
Not to say I am for or against a return to a more traditional approach,but for it to be a viable solution the SPs have to also return to a "deeper" innings count.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

I'm actually surprised that you didn't receive more supportive posts on this one. Starting out making it more personally about Torre and the Yanks probably didn't help much, but it's still somewhat surprising.

---

Well,the post was & is a specific "post" not a general post about bullpen usage at a VERY specific time.That is to say,when Torre is "deciding" who will make the POST SEASON pitching/bullpen roster & he was/is "testing" the "rookies" under pressure (similar to playoffs) situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

Returning to the "fireman" style of reliever use is a much more traditionalist viewpoint... although, that seems to be changing quickly. There's a chapter in Baseball Behind the Numbers which, while not actually advocating it, is supportive of it. I hear that Bill James and Co. (the Boston scouting team, more or less) has been pushing for it as well.

---

There is a certain logic - best pitcher's used most often has been advocated for both by traditionalists & certain sabermetrician BUT as said above (& in the PITCH COUNT thread) this approach is only viable,today,if SP's pitch deeper than today or a 6 man rotation or whatever "system" which means RP's come into the game LESS often but are able to pitch further(or a return to 80's level).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

It's interesting here, because what your actually arguing for HGM is a return to the way reliever use (basically) used to be. It used to be that teams didn't have a "closer", they actually had a "Fireman". Basically, each team selected (usually one) ace reliever, who would come into the game to "put out fires"; hence the term "fireman". Very retro viewpoint, really.
:)

I'm actually surprised that you didn't receive more supportive posts on this one. Starting out making it more personally about Torre and the Yanks probably didn't help much, but it's still somewhat surprising. Returning to the "fireman" style of reliever use is a much more traditionalist viewpoint... although, that seems to be changing quickly. There's a chapter in Baseball Behind the Numbers which, while not actually advocating it, is supportive of it. I hear that Bill James and Co. (the Boston scouting team, more or less) has been pushing for it as well.

---

Well I run my reliever as HGM suggests Torre should have (Use my best resources when the game is close and worse when I concede the game or I have a big lead) - but that is just a sim with numbers. Perfect numerical strategy doesn't always lead to the best results in the real world. "The best laid plans"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

Yes but,as you know,the 2 situations are totally different - in the past (& it was argued quite expansively in another thread ;) ) the SPs pitched deeper (& more often) & thus the "fireman's" role was largely different as he would come in & pitch "multiple innings" (close the game) but on a rarer basis

---

Not really a rarer basis. Look at Bruce Sutter. He routinely threw 60-70 games, which is about normal for a modern day closer, but just had more innings in those games.

Quote:

---

Today there are far less CG's pitched by SP's & in general the Average innings pitched by a SP is down by 1 or 2 innings from the period you are "quoting".
Not to say I am for or against a return to a more traditional approach,but for it to be a viable solution the SPs have to also return to a "deeper" innings count.

There is a certain logic - best pitcher's used most often has been advocated for both by traditionalists & certain sabermetrician BUT as said above (& in the PITCH COUNT thread) this approach is only viable,today,if SP's pitch deeper than today or a 6 man rotation or whatever "system" which means RP's come into the game LESS often but are able to pitch further(or a return to 80's level).

---

You don't need to have your starters go further to more effectively use your relievers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WATERY

Well I run my reliever as HGM suggests Torre should have (Use my best resources when the game is close and worse when I concede the game or I have a big lead) - but that is just a sim with numbers. Perfect numerical strategy doesn't always lead to the best results in the real world. "The best laid plans"...

---

Tell me how in the world would throwing bad pitchers in tight situations in good pitchers in give-in situations would at all lead to the best results, over a large sample size like a season.

who suggested over a season it would be better? Please reference and quote for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WATERY

who suggested over a season it would be better? Please reference and quote for me.

---

Well, that's what I've been talking about. I've made it clear a few times that while I made this thread because of one incident, it was because I feel that there is a much larger problem, with both Joe Torre and other managers, in that, over the course of a season, they fail to properly leverage their relievers.

all I'm saying is that it's not even mathematically sound to claim that managers should use pitchers differently than they do.

It is precisely the way Torre uses Rivera that produces the stats that are then used to insist he should use him otherwise.