PDA

View Full Version : Narron blaming fans and media for switching Coffey to closer?



CincyReds2003
06-12-2006, 01:52 PM
http://rotoworld.com/content/story.asp?sport=MLB&storyid=22388

After bringing in Esteban Yan in the seventh inning to give up a tiebreaking grand slam in Saturday’s loss to the Cubs, Reds manager Jerry Narron decided hold the media or the fans at fault. It’s hard to tell which.

''Few guys will have the success Todd Coffey had in that role, that seventh- [and] eighth-inning role with guys on base. Or even the sixth inning,'' Narron told MLB.com. ''Todd Coffey did a great job for us. I don't think people appreciated what he was doing. Everyone said, 'Just put him in the closer's role.' This shows you how huge those outs are in those middle-to-late innings.''

Then why’d you make the switch, Jerry? David Weathers had a 3.24 ERA when he was pulled from the closer’s role. He had blown four saves, but the Reds won two of those games. More importantly, Coffey was doing an absolutely brilliant job of bailing starters and relievers alike out of jams. He was the Reds’ lone reliever that Narron should have wanted entering games with men on base. Now he’s being utilized in a role in which he’ll come in with the bases empty the vast majority of the time. The whole bullpen sets up worse, and the Reds are a weaker club as a result. Nicely done.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-12-2006, 01:57 PM
http://rotoworld.com/content/story.asp?sport=MLB&storyid=22388

After bringing in Esteban Yan in the seventh inning to give up a tiebreaking grand slam in Saturday’s loss to the Cubs, Reds manager Jerry Narron decided hold the media or the fans at fault. It’s hard to tell which.

''Few guys will have the success Todd Coffey had in that role, that seventh- [and] eighth-inning role with guys on base. Or even the sixth inning,'' Narron told MLB.com. ''Todd Coffey did a great job for us. I don't think people appreciated what he was doing. Everyone said, 'Just put him in the closer's role.' This shows you how huge those outs are in those middle-to-late innings.''

Then why’d you make the switch, Jerry? David Weathers had a 3.24 ERA when he was pulled from the closer’s role. He had blown four saves, but the Reds won two of those games. More importantly, Coffey was doing an absolutely brilliant job of bailing starters and relievers alike out of jams. He was the Reds’ lone reliever that Narron should have wanted entering games with men on base. Now he’s being utilized in a role in which he’ll come in with the bases empty the vast majority of the time. The whole bullpen sets up worse, and the Reds are a weaker club as a result. Nicely done.

So insert Coffey into that role for that specific situation, Jerry.

There was no game to for Coffey close by bringing in Yan anyway.

zombie-a-go-go
06-12-2006, 02:00 PM
So insert Coffey into that role for that specific situation, Jerry.

There was no game to for Coffey close by bringing in Yan anyway.

Someday this will be common (baseball) sense. Use your best reliever in your tightest situation, no matter what "title" he's been given.

dabvu2498
06-12-2006, 02:01 PM
Let's get down to the real issue... we need more than 1 guy that can serve that (6-7-8 inning with men on base) role effectively. With Coffey closing and Weathers ailing, we don't have any.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-12-2006, 02:04 PM
Someday this will be common (baseball) sense. Use your best reliever in your tightest situation, no matter what "title" he's been given.

But that would mean manager's would have to use their own common sense and not the "safe" list of baseball's unwritten rules.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-12-2006, 02:07 PM
Let's get down to the real issue... we need more than 1 guy that can serve that (6-7-8 inning with men on base) role effectively. With Coffey closing and Weathers ailing, we don't have any.

Exactly and until the off-season we will not be able to remedy this problem. So until then, you bring in the best you got when the game is on the line.

HBP
06-12-2006, 02:07 PM
Let's get down to the real issue... we need more than 1 guy that can serve that (6-7-8 inning with men on base) role effectively. With Coffey closing and Weathers ailing, we don't have any.

Exactly. Even if Coffey is best suited for that role, he can't be relied on to do it every game. He's probably thrown too many innings to date as it is.

westofyou
06-12-2006, 02:08 PM
Someday this will be common (baseball) sense. Use your best reliever in your tightest situation, no matter what "title" he's been given.
You mean one day again... I'll argue that back in the day guys like Jim Bronson and Clay Carroll came in in that exact situation.

I blame the save stat and the Rolainds Fireman award.

RedsBaron
06-12-2006, 02:10 PM
Someday this will be common (baseball) sense. Use your best reliever in your tightest situation, no matter what "title" he's been given.
That is how ace relievers were used until the last couple of decades. In the 1970s guys such as Goose Gossage and Rollie Fingers were not always "saved" for the ninth inning; they were used at the critical part of the game, and if the critical part was the seventh inning, in they came.

dabvu2498
06-12-2006, 02:11 PM
I blame the save stat and the Rolainds Fireman award.
Blame big salaries too.

CTA513
06-12-2006, 02:13 PM
So Narron is making decisions based on what the media and fans say?


:bang:

smith288
06-12-2006, 02:17 PM
Coffey is busy eating bannaise sandwiches until the 9th...couldnt be reached in the bullpen. :P

Danny Serafini
06-12-2006, 02:21 PM
The way that tidbit was written is a joke. I'm not going to argue against using your best reliever in spots other than the 9th, I think that's the right thing to do and closers are misused today. But to suggest that Narron was blaming fans and the media or that they were the reason for the switch is absurd. That's taking a quote and stretching it badly just to try and create a story where there isn't one. Rotten case of supposed journalism.

Roy Tucker
06-12-2006, 02:58 PM
Someday this will be common (baseball) sense. Use your best reliever in your tightest situation, no matter what "title" he's been given.
You'll see good managers do this in the playoffs. They realize when the turning point of the game occurs you need to bring your biggest gun to bear, be it the 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th.

But like others have said, they can't bring Coffey and Weathers into every tight situation. I think this was Yan's test to see how he'd do. He flunked test #1 spectacularly. It will be interesting to see if he gets more chances.

Chip R
06-12-2006, 02:58 PM
Someday this will be common (baseball) sense. Use your best reliever in your tightest situation, no matter what "title" he's been given.

So what happens when you have more than one tight situation? Put your best reliever in RF until he's needed again?

reds44
06-12-2006, 02:59 PM
Wow Jerry. :bang:

CTA513
06-12-2006, 03:01 PM
I wonder who told Narron to let McCracken be the first guy to pinch hit in a game?

:ughmamoru

flyer85
06-12-2006, 03:05 PM
I think this was Yan's test to see how he'd do. He flunked test #1 spectacularly. It will be interesting to see if he gets more chances.His track record as a marginal 11th/12th pitcher is well established. He should be kept as far away from high leverage innings as possible. Bringing him in to pitch in those situations is simply playing with matches.

RedsBaron
06-12-2006, 03:08 PM
So what happens when you have more than one tight situation? Put your best reliever in RF until he's needed again?
No, and you can't necessarily use your best reliever in every game, regardless of the situation, unless you want his arm to fall off. A manager has to guess as to when the crucial part of the game is, and take into account how much work his ace reliever has already had. Automatically "saving" your closer for the ninth inning, regardless of the situation in the 6th, 7th or 8th inning, is mindless decision-making by a manager.

Chip R
06-12-2006, 03:10 PM
His track record as a marginal 11th/12th pitcher is well established. He should be kept as far away from high leverage innings as possible. Bringing him in to pitch in those situations is simply playing with matches.

So you pick your poison. Yan or White or Weathers. If Narron would have brought White in and he gave up a hit, people would have been crying for Yan who pitched well in every appearance before that one. He could have gone with Weathers but he's been pretty unreliable as of late and has been fighting a case of tendinitis. I'm not saying Yan is the second coming of Rob Dibble but there weren't/aren't a lot of options in that pen.

dabvu2498
06-12-2006, 03:11 PM
His track record as a marginal 11th/12th pitcher is well established. He should be kept as far away from high leverage innings as possible. Bringing him in to pitch in those situations is simply playing with matches.
So is bringing in ________, ________, and/or _________. (Insert Reds bullpen member here.)

Chip R
06-12-2006, 03:17 PM
No, and you can't necessarily use your best reliever in every game, regardless of the situation, unless you want his arm to fall off. A manager has to guess as to when the crucial part of the game is, and take into account how much work his ace reliever has already had. Automatically "saving" your closer for the ninth inning, regardless of the situation in the 6th, 7th or 8th inning, is mindless decision-making by a manager.

Most managers aren't psychics. They don't know when a more crucial situation could arise. Let's take Saturday's game for example. You bring Coffey in that bases loaded situation instead of Yan. Let's say he gets out of it and the Reds score a run later on. Bottom of the 9th comes around and you no longer have Coffey available. Same situation comes up. Bases loaded, 2 outs and you have the 3 Stooges available to close it out. I don't know about you but I think nursing a 1 run lead in the 9th is a lot more crucial than a scoreless tie in the 6th. Even if you give up runs in the 6th, you still have 4 innings to come back. If you give up runs in the 9th you only have one shot and none if you are on the road.

TylerScottDavis
06-12-2006, 03:20 PM
Can't we just make up a stat, like say a "Stop" for when a guy comes in anytime after the 5th inning with the tying or winning run left in scoring position by the previous pitcher and proceeds to get out of the inning (regardless of the number of outs it takes) without allowing any runs scored? And then can't we just make that stat more valuable than a "Save" and start paying our "stoppers" as such?

zombie-a-go-go
06-12-2006, 03:24 PM
Most managers aren't psychics. They don't know when a more crucial situation could arise. Let's take Saturday's game for example. You bring Coffey in that bases loaded situation instead of Yan. Let's say he gets out of it and the Reds score a run later on. Bottom of the 9th comes around and you no longer have Coffey available. Same situation comes up. Bases loaded, 2 outs and you have the 3 Stooges available to close it out. I don't know about you but I think nursing a 1 run lead in the 9th is a lot more crucial than a scoreless tie in the 6th. Even if you give up runs in the 6th, you still have 4 innings to come back. If you give up runs in the 9th you only have one shot and none if you are on the road.

Yes, but if Yan gives up a hit or two you're not going to get that save opp in the 9th anyway. Your nails-closer will rust away if the relief corps can't carry a lead into the 9th, and he becomes a sunk cost.

traderumor
06-12-2006, 03:24 PM
You mean one day again... I'll argue that back in the day guys like Jim Bronson and Clay Carroll came in in that exact situation.

I blame the save stat and the Rolainds Fireman award.

Wayne Granger, Phil Regan, Cecil Upshaw, Sparky Lyle, early Rich Gossage, Ted Abernathy, Ron Perranoski, Eddie Watt, Wilbur Wood, Jim Brewer, Jim Hughes, Dick Radatz, etc.

Our interim pitching coach was even one of those guys who came in early in close games and pitched 2-3 innings if needed.

With relievers' contracts getting larger even in the setup role, such as Bob Howry who just blew threw town, a team who turns a Todd Coffey into a 60s-70s type reliever cannot be far away. But it takes some guts since the minute you go against the grain (Red Sox closer by committee was constantly getting "I told you so-ed" in the media) the scrutiny begins at the first failure.

BTW, with respect to the title of this thread, I think Narron was simply pointing out that he is really thinking that the "closer" idea may not be the best game plan for a bullpen as thin as his.

blumj
06-12-2006, 03:26 PM
A manager has to guess as to when the crucial part of the game is, and take into account how much work his ace reliever has already had. Automatically "saving" your closer for the ninth inning, regardless of the situation in the 6th, 7th or 8th inning, is mindless decision-making by a manager.
How is a manager supposed to be able to guess when that situation will be in time to warm the guy up? That's why you only see it in the playoffs, and often only in elimination games. You can't be warming pitchers up and not using them and getting them up again later repeatedly, that causes damage, too. They could do it years ago because they had starters pitching complete or nearly complete games almost routinely. And, frankly, no one really cared all that much if they wrecked a pitcher's arm from overuse. It just isn't enough to have a relief ace, you really need 2.

traderumor
06-12-2006, 03:28 PM
Yes, but if Yan gives up a hit or two you're not going to get that save opp in the 9th anyway. Your nails-closer will rust away if the relief corps can't carry a lead into the 9th, and he becomes a sunk cost.I've been singing that song ever since our bullpen got thin in the post Sullivan, Williamson, Graves (before he blew up), 1st time Gabe White era. Keep on holding back that closer and he sits for days, or you put him in a blowout game "to get work." I can't wait to see the first manager defy the conventional "wisdom." I'm still waiting, though.

Roy Tucker
06-12-2006, 03:38 PM
I don't think this was Narron's intention, but I've heard about other managers that deliberately put incendiary relievers in to prove a point to the GM, i.e. "this is an example of the meatheads you've given me, please give me better players".

flyer85
06-12-2006, 03:55 PM
I'm not saying Yan is the second coming of Rob Dibble but there weren't/aren't a lot of options in that pen.which should be a clue to the FO that something needs to be done. Simply recycling other teams waste products is not going to solve the problem. You either have to try a solution form within or pay to get one elsewhere.

NewEraReds
06-12-2006, 04:08 PM
which should be a clue to the FO that something needs to be done. Simply recycling other teams waste products is not going to solve the problem. You either have to try a solution form within or pay to get one elsewhere.
i agree flyer86, but, its one thing to have a problem, its another to be able to solve it. im sure the fo knows the bullpen stinks. but who is out there that they can get right now that is any better than what they have already? i dont know, i just have to think few if any.

flyer85
06-12-2006, 04:15 PM
its one thing to have a problem, its another to be able to solve it. ... but who is out there that they can get right now that is any better than what they have already? i dont know, i just have to think few if any.It all depends what one is willing to pay. A trade for a guy, bringing up a Shafer and giving Belisle a more important role could possibly go a long way to making things better.

KronoRed
06-12-2006, 04:26 PM
Get rid of the save stat, just give all the relievers that Hold one :D

Jpup
06-12-2006, 04:32 PM
blame DanO.:)

NewEraReds
06-12-2006, 04:36 PM
It all depends what one is willing to pay. A trade for a guy, bringing up a Shafer and giving Belisle a more important role could possibly go a long way to making things better.
i agree, i just havent heard of any good relievers being available and i am iffy on bringing up schaefer. i dont want to rush. i get the feeling neither does krivsky. he brings up guys when they are completely ready. i agree on belisle though. id have him pitching over a lot of what we have ;)

GOREDSGO32
06-12-2006, 05:19 PM
What happened to the days of having relievers work more than *gasp* .. 1 inning?? Or ... OMG .. even not putting in a pitcher every other out for a batting matchup? What I don't understand is why managers put in pitchers that are crap .. and even with matchup advantages they aren't better than good pitchers in a matchup disadvantage situation.

blumj
06-12-2006, 06:43 PM
What happened to the days of having relievers work more than *gasp* .. 1 inning?? Or ... OMG .. even not putting in a pitcher every other out for a batting matchup? What I don't understand is why managers put in pitchers that are crap .. and even with matchup advantages they aren't better than good pitchers in a matchup disadvantage situation.
Because all they have for middle relief is crap with certain platoon split advantages. Otherwise, for the most part, those pitchers would be starters or closers. I guess you see more multi-inning relief stints in the AL, but the pitcher has to be good enough to keep getting guys out over multiple innings consistently, so they usually wind up as starters or closers, too.

blugrssblood
06-12-2006, 06:52 PM
Narron could also eliminate these problems if he would quit trying to push his starters to the point where they need help to get out of a jam. As soon as it is clear to everyone else that a starter is starting to lose it, Narron has to go 2 or 3 more batters until he decides to make a move. He also does this with relievers, I recall one game where it was clear Belisle gave us 3 stellar innings, but Narron wanted 4. And sure enough, there was a meltdown. I remember wondering if Narron was pushing Belisle a bit because he planned on starting him, but nope, it was just Narron being Narron.

MrCinatit
06-12-2006, 07:43 PM
IMO, if Narron is basing his decisions on what the media and fans are telling him to do, then he is the wrong man for a management job.

Chip R
06-12-2006, 07:58 PM
What happened to the days of having relievers work more than *gasp* .. 1 inning?? Or ... OMG .. even not putting in a pitcher every other out for a batting matchup? What I don't understand is why managers put in pitchers that are crap .. and even with matchup advantages they aren't better than good pitchers in a matchup disadvantage situation.

We had a thread on here last week about people being worried that Coffey was on pace to pitch 100 innings. So it looks like people want him to pitch more than 1 inning and not pitch too much. If we put Coffey in every game when we needed him, his arm would fall off by August.

I agree the solution is to get better options than Yan and White. Hopefully the return of Belisle can bridge the gap between the starters and Coffey. But he cannot pitch every game either.

I do not think that using a guy for just the 9th inning is the best situation either but whether you use Coffey in the 6th, 7th, 8th or 9th inning, someone else is going to have to pitch the other innings. And I do not like the current choices we have now.

Willy
06-12-2006, 09:08 PM
This is exactly why that 1990 team was so special. No one can predict when you are going to need your best reliever, so you need more than ONE reliable reliever.
Charlton, Dibble, and Myers this club has Coffey and ???

This will be the 2006 Reds achilles heel until they can find some more arms for that bullpen.
Could you imgine if Narron would have put Coffey in 7th, and they had blown the lead in the 9th.

puca
06-13-2006, 12:14 PM
You mean one day again... I'll argue that back in the day guys like Jim Bronson and Clay Carroll came in in that exact situation.

I blame the save stat and the Rolainds Fireman award.

The save stat and arbitration...a deadly mix.

smith288
06-13-2006, 02:24 PM
His track record as a marginal 11th/12th pitcher is well established. He should be kept as far away from high leverage innings as possible. Bringing him in to pitch in those situations is simply playing with matches.
actually...I can easily control a match that has been lit a-flame. I think putting Yan in is akin to an afternoon stroll in Sadr City, Iraq with a "God Bless America" shirt... But that's just me. :D