PDA

View Full Version : Narron's Slow Hook -- How Big of a Minus?



Henry Clay
04-05-2007, 12:16 AM
Tonight Narron left Arroyo in for the first two batters of the 8th. It seemed unnecessary. Narron has a slow hook. Baseball Prospectus has written about it. It has been observed on this website. There are some pluses to the slow hook (see Harang pitching really well later than it would have seemed likely on opening day, two pitchers with 200+ IP last season, avoiding a weak bullpen, etc), but many minuses (see first two batters on base in the 8th of a frigid game with bullpen rested, why starters get pulled -- getting tired and giving up hits, one too many times through the lineup, not trusting the bullpen). John Fay suggested the following tonight folowing the game:


I'm sure there will be debate about whether Arroyo should have started the eighth.

Argument for: He retired 10 of 11 going into the inning.

Argument against: The bullpen was rested and he was facing Chicago's best hitters (Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez) for the fourth time.

I don't think the Fay suggestion is an interesting debate. The debate should be about Narron's slow hook. Is his hook glacially and unnecessarily slow (read: should he have something resembling the Sparky Anderson approach?)? Or is the guy, by trusting and showing confidence in his starters, more likely to get more out of them? I tend to go with the former approach (as did the Boston Red Sox after the 2003 season when Grady Little was chased out of town despite nearly making the WS because he trusted and had confidence in one of the greatest pitchers in the last 15 years), especially with a deep and rested bullpen, which the Reds presumably have on day number 2. Still, I don't want to focus on tonight. Game-by-game, every manager is bound to be wrong or right based on outcome. The question is whether Narron's slow hook tendencies are more helpful or detrimental to the team. I have to think it is a slight negative with the current bullpen. If the bullpen proves to be solid, I think it becomes a much more significant detriment (assuming, of course, that Narron doesn't hasten his hook, which may have been slow last year because of his uncertain bullpen).

Looking longer term, the slow hook approach seems short-sighted. It saves the bullpen for the next few games, but it taxes the starter if he is left in to pitch after he begins to struggle. In doing this, the manager may be showing confidence in his tiring starter, but how much trust and confidence are the guys in the bullpen feeling? By leaving the starter in for 7+ innings on a frigid night, will the starter be as solid the next night. Moreover, is the confidence of the manager's trust more important than the confidence of a quality start, lower ERA, and win credit for the starter?

Those are my views, but I'd like to read a broader and more informed sample of viewpoints.

reds44
04-05-2007, 12:22 AM
Why do you always have to stretch it until something goes wrong? He did retire 10 of the last 11, but he was at 100 pitches, on a cold night, in his first start of the year. Does common sense not kick in?

Why did he leave him in after the leadoff single? He for sure should have been out then. We all saw it coming.

HumnHilghtFreel
04-05-2007, 12:22 AM
I didn't really mind Arroyo starting the inning. Hindsight is 20/20 though, so obviously it's going to be frowned upon. The Lee AB he was ahead IIRC and he just slapped a single, so still, it looked like he'd be okay.

I would have rather we went straight to Coffey rather than using Stanton. Other than that, I'm not too upset with it.

top6
04-05-2007, 12:24 AM
With the "offense" the Reds have assembled, Narron's slow hook won't matter at all. Neither the Reds starters nor their bullpen are nearly good enough to win many games this year. So, it's somewhat of a minus that may cause the Reds to lose - say - 90 games instead of the 86 or so they would otherwise lose.

EDIT TO ADD: Of course, there is the added downside that Harang and Arroyo's arms might fall off before the Reds are ever able to assemble a good team.

Patrick Bateman
04-05-2007, 12:27 AM
I thought Arroyo was still throwing well so I didn't mind the call by Narron.

Even the two hits in the 8th were hardly scolded. They were the usual run of the mill singles that find a hole. They were just as easily outs if hit in the right direction. The Reds had some unfortunate luck in that inning as all of the hits (including the Coffey one) simply found their way through the infield. Most days that inning goes away pretty quietly. The inning and game result were dissapointing, but I'm not sure if Narron should have really done anything differently. You can make all the right moves, but sometimes things just don't work out.

Caveat Emperor
04-05-2007, 12:32 AM
Bronson Arroyo at +105 pitches: 19.1 IP / 18K / 1.03 WHIP / 2.33 ERA

He's shown he's fine to go out there for long outings. The only question was whether THIS particular night (cold, early in the season) was the right one for him to be pitching deep into the ballgame. He hadn't really labored, other than the one inning, and looked to REALLY be throwing easy (I don't think any of his pitches topped 86 on the stadium gun -- kinda troubling, but OK if he wasn't intending them to be much faster).

I'm fine with Narron giving Arroyo and Harang the benefit of the doubt late in games. They're both likely better than anything thats going to come trotting out of the bullpen, IMO.

Kc61
04-05-2007, 12:38 AM
There was no reason to leave Arroyo out there after 7 tonight. He doesn't need more confidence. The bullpen has a lot of sound guys that Narron could have gone with. Coffey was ready, it was a good spot for him.

I like Narron generally, think he is sound, but he just consistently leaves his starters out there a few batters too long. Tonight is a good example. Regardless of pitch count, Arroyo was in a tight, intense game. He was facing the middle of the Cubs order for the fourth time through. The odds were extremely high that there would be some trouble.

Now, with big contracts for Harang and Arroyo, my concern is that Narron will never want to remove them. I'm not worried about their durability, just their effectiveness after throwing 7 tough innings.

I don't think the Reds were winning tonight anyway -- they only had three hits, one a bunt by the pitcher. And I understand letting a starter work through tough middle innings rather than using up the bullpen. But in that spot in the 8th inning, it should have been Coffey.

Henry Clay
04-05-2007, 12:40 AM
Why do you always have to stretch it until something goes wrong? He did retire 10 of the last 11, but he was at 100 pitches, on a cold night, in his first start of the year. Does common sense not kick in?

Why did he leave him in after the leadoff single? He for sure should have been out then. We all saw it coming.

I think everyone who saw the game would agree with you. It didn't seem like a wise move. It seemed like Arroyo was out there only because Ross didn't get on base to call for a pinch hitter in the bottom of the seventh (we'll leave Chad Moeller as pinch hitter for another thread).

What I'm interested in is the overall plus/minus on Narron's slow hook approach, which I was hoping was the product of last season's tired and overworked bullpen. This sentence from the BP annual spoke volumes to me regarding what I hoped a stronger bullpen would prevent for this year's team: "The Reds led the league in blown quality starts, or quality blown starts through six innings that saw the starter ultimately surrender more than four earned runs because of what happened in the seventh or beyond." Id. at 133. I was hoping that figure was the result of having an injury riddled and otherwise shoddy and unreliable bullpen last year. If tonight's game is any suggestion, last year's use of starters may be Narron's longer term tendency. To evaluate this, I went back to review Narron's only other full year as a manager before last year. Last year, Narron had 47 slow hooks contrasted with 33 quick ones. In his last full year as a manager, 2002 with the Rangers, Narron had 50 slow hooks contrasted with 30 short hooks. Raw numbers don't carry that much significance, but it does seem like Narron leaves in his starters beyond the point where it seems like they remain reliably effective.

Patrick Bateman
04-05-2007, 12:40 AM
There was no reason to leave Arroyo out there after 7 tonight. He doesn't need more confidence.

This wasn't about confidence. Whether you agree with Narron or not, Arroyo was left in because Narron thought he gave the Reds the best chance to win.

TeamBoone
04-05-2007, 12:45 AM
Now, with big contracts for Harang and Arroyo, my concern is that Narron will never want to remove them. I'm not worried about their durability, just their effectiveness after throwing 7 tough innings.

I don't think "big" contracts have anything to do with it, because more often than not, he was guilty of this last year too.


I don't think the Reds were winning tonight anyway -- they only had three hits, one a bunt by the pitcher. And I understand letting a starter work through tough middle innings rather than using up the bullpen. But in that spot in the 8th inning, it should have been Coffey.

Pulling Arroyo after the 7th may have changed the complexion of the remainder of the game. With baseball, you just never know.

reds44
04-05-2007, 12:46 AM
Sometimes, you have to look at the game beyond the game.

Let's take a look at the situation after 7 for Arroyo:
99 pitches
7 IP
9 K
2 BB
6 H
2 ER

Nothing too bad there.

Now, look at the outside factors.
-Cold
-Windy
-1st start of the year
-Down 2-1
-Struggling to score
-Going to the 8th

Lineup due up: (stats as of end of 7)
Lee (0-3)
Ramirez (2-4, run)
Floyd (1-3, run)

Now, you want to leave him in to face Lee and go from there? Ok, I said at the time I wouldn't but it's nothing to shocking.

Then, Lee leads off the inning with a single. Now, look at your situation.

Lee on first
Ramirez up, who mind you already has 2 singles off Arroyo.
Cubs bench has Theriot and Cedeno on it, so you know there is an option to put a pinch bunter up there to play small ball if needed.
A rested Coffey in the pen.
Arroyo over 100 pitches

At this point, the decision has to be made to pull Bronson. Put a rested Coffey in, and don't let Ramirez go for hit #3.

Narron didn't, Ramirez signle, Cubs play small ball, IBB, single, game over.

In a game like this, you can't afford to try to stretch a guy out. Every run is critical.

If this was an isolated incident with Narron, oh well managers goof up sometimes. However, we see him constantly leaving his pitchers out their too long.

Kc61
04-05-2007, 12:48 AM
This wasn't about confidence. Whether you agree with Narron or not, Arroyo was left in because Narron thought he gave the Reds the best chance to win.


I don't disagree. Tonight I'm sure he did think it was the best strategic move to leave BA out there. Overall, however, a manager who has a slow hook usually feels that keeping starters out there help them in the long run -- gives them confidence, lets them learn to work through trouble, stretches them out, saves the pen. All these reasons.

I don't want to criticize the manager too much, I think he is sound in most respects. But the Cubs are like two different offensive teams -- very potent in the middle of the lineup, pretty weak at the bottom. With the middle coming up I think a rested Coffey was the right choice there.

Cyclone792
04-05-2007, 12:54 AM
From a strict pitch count/injury risk angle, Arroyo wasn't yet at a high risk for starting the 8th inning. He had thrown 99 pitches through the first seven innings, and his highest individual pitch count inning was the 1st inning with only 23 pitches. I've been critical of Narron abusing Harang and Arroyo in the past, but I won't accuse him of that tonight. Arroyo hadn't labored in any individual inning, and his total pitch count wasn't too terribly high.

However, given the weather conditions combined with the specific batters due up for the Cubs in the 8th inning, my vote would have been to bring in Coffey to start the eighth.

Arroyo pitched seven fantastic innings in harsh weather conditions, and the bullpen was fully rested with any Reds reliever available to pitch tonight. I'd have managed the 8th inning by hoping Coffey pitches a scoreless inning, then I'd have immediately pinch hit for him in the bottom half. If you tie it up or take the lead, any other Reds reliever would have been available for the 9th/subsequent innings to finish the game.

Henry Clay
04-05-2007, 12:56 AM
I don't want to criticize the manager too much, I think he is sound in most respects. But the Cubs are like two different offensive teams -- very potent in the middle of the lineup, pretty weak at the bottom. With the middle coming up I think a rested Coffey was the right choice there.

I think this says a lot about the merits of a slow hook. If the slow hook will let the starter feast on the back end of a NL lineup and the starter has been otherwise performing well and is within pitch count range, go for it. The back end of the lineup probably won't hurt you as much, at least not in the NL. It is a somewhat different matter when the pitcher is coming back into the teeth of the order for yet another pass. It is especially a different matter when a fresh pitcher can come into a cold game throwing pitches that the shivering hitters are unlikely to connect with.

paintmered
04-05-2007, 12:57 AM
Sometimes, you have to look at the game beyond the game.

Let's take a look at the situation after 7 for Arroyo:
99 pitches
7 IP
9 K
2 BB
6 H
2 ER

Nothing too bad there.

Now, look at the outside factors.
-Cold
-Windy
-1st start of the year
-Down 2-1
-Struggling to score
-Going to the 8th

Lineup due up: (stats as of end of 7)
Lee (0-3)
Ramirez (2-4, run)
Floyd (1-3, run)

Now, you want to leave him in to face Lee and go from there? Ok, I said at the time I wouldn't but it's nothing to shocking.

Then, Lee leads off the inning with a single. Now, look at your situation.

Lee on first
Ramirez up, who mind you already has 2 singles off Arroyo.
Cubs bench has Theriot and Cedeno on it, so you know there is an option to put a pinch bunter up there to play small ball if needed.
A rested Coffey in the pen.
Arroyo over 100 pitches

At this point, the decision has to be made to pull Bronson. Put a rested Coffey in, and don't let Ramirez go for hit #3.

Narron didn't, Ramirez signle, Cubs play small ball, IBB, single, game over.

In a game like this, you can't afford to try to stretch a guy out. Every run is critical.

If this was an isolated incident with Narron, oh well managers goof up sometimes. However, we see him constantly leaving his pitchers out their too long.

Well stated and I agree. I was fine with Narron leaving in Harang to face the 8-9-1 hitters at the 100 pitch mark. I am not fine with leaving Bronson in there to face the meat of the lineup at the 100 pitch mark.

I think the matchups should dictate the decision more than anything.

Razor Shines
04-05-2007, 01:32 AM
I think everyone who saw the game would agree with you. It didn't seem like a wise move. It seemed like Arroyo was out there only because Ross didn't get on base to call for a pinch hitter in the bottom of the seventh (we'll leave Chad Moeller as pinch hitter for another thread).

.
I don't agree. I didn't mind seeing Arroyo out there in the 8th. I am actually probably going to go completely opposite of everyone else and say that I think he should have stayed in the game after the first two hits. I think if Arroyo stays in the game the Cubs don't score. Both Lee and Ramirez hit very good pitches that moved pretty well. I think he'd have blown right threw the next three hitters.

Basically I'd have been happy if he brought Coffey out to start the 8th, but if he was going to let Arroyo start it he should have atleast seen what he did with Floyd. He gave up singles to two of the best hitters in the NL, I think Narron should have let him try to get three straight outs.

M2
04-05-2007, 01:58 AM
I didn't have a problem sticking with Harang in the opener because he was working so smoothly. I did have problem bringing out Arroyo for the 8th tonight. Seemed like he'd given all he was going to give.

WMR
04-05-2007, 04:17 AM
Bad decision by Jerry. With the weather tonight, what happens if Arroyo gets hurt? Our season is all but destroyed. Trotting him out for the 8th was dumb.

mth123
04-05-2007, 07:25 AM
Here is my take:

Facts

1. An off day the previous day.
2. 3 Relievers that money was spent on (Weathers, Stanton, Cormier) rested and ready.
3. 1 Reliever acquired in trade (Saarloos) rested and ready.
4. The best holdover from last year (Coffey) rested and ready.
5. The 3 most effective guys in spring (Burton, Coutlangus, and Santos) rested and ready.
6. 7 Innings already logged so little risk of wearing the entire group out.
7. Freezing temps in the starting pitchers first start of the season.
8. 1 Starter for tomorrow whom a fairly valued prospect was utilized to acquire and a decent amount of money tendered to keep.

Given the facts above, this situation suggests a move should be made regardless of the names of the guys involved. The lack of a move suggests...

Conclusions

1. Doesn't seem to be much confidence in the pen that has been assembled (lending some credence to many of the criticisms).
2. or, no confidence in Lohse and the feeling that pen needs to be "saved."
3. or, simply poor in game decision making.

To answer the original post. I think the slow hook is a demonstrated trend that is a flaw in the team's decision making. I believe that much of this is a result of having a rotten bullpen in 2006. I'm not sure if Narron feels that this year's version is just as bad (I do, but the young guys give me some hope) or its just a case of old habits being hard to break. But Narron did it all of last year. Why can this board see it coming and it not be evident to the field staff? Last year many theorized that the tragic loss of Vern Ruhle and the inexperience of Tom Hume contributed to the problem. This year Dick Pole (a very experience pitching coach) is in place and it suggests that the problem lies with Narron.

I have stated this on many occasions but this is a good place to repeat. Narron seems to be a good leader of men and has the respect of the players, but he needs to evolve into more of a football style head coach and less of a traditional baseball manager. In game (and maybe line-up) decisions need to be delegated to his pitching coach (defensive coordinator) or his bench coach (offensive coordinator) while Narron provides the leadership, the face and the voice for the team. Narron, of course, will have lots of input from a directional perspective (general instructions like: Coffey is my guy for the 8th, Coutlangus is my guy to get a lefty, etc.) but once the game starts the individual decisions need to be left to the trusted coaches.

I think its the right way to run any business.

Moosie52
04-05-2007, 08:37 AM
Arroyo is just so smooth it's hard to tell when he's tiring. I thought he was doing fine and was only mildly surprised Narron left him out to start the eighth.

membengal
04-05-2007, 08:53 AM
Fantasy owners of Harang and Arroyo I am sure get beyond irritated with Narron for this. He leads the baseball world in running those two out and ruining quality efforts by asking them to go a pinch longer than reason would suggest. I know Harang got murdered in terms of ERA last year with cheap runs against him late when he shouldn't have been in.

At this point, I just roll my eyes and hope for the best. Yes, a screw-up from Narron last night. No question. And nothing remotely new from him when it comes to his just-one-more-inning fetish.

redsmetz
04-05-2007, 09:37 AM
I didn't really mind Arroyo starting the inning. Hindsight is 20/20 though, so obviously it's going to be frowned upon. The Lee AB he was ahead IIRC and he just slapped a single, so still, it looked like he'd be okay.

I would have rather we went straight to Coffey rather than using Stanton. Other than that, I'm not too upset with it.

The truth is, even without those two extra runs, we lose that game. They still had a run on us and we didn't do anything offensively. One game, I'm not too worried about it.

Always Red
04-05-2007, 09:52 AM
Arroyo had Derrek Lee's number all night, until Lee's last at bat. He had him so off balance, Lee was looking like a minor leaguer.

I had no problem running Arroyo out there for the 8th, especially against Lee. Ramirez had some hacks against him, but Aramis does that to everyone.

After the Lee hit, I'd have pulled him. So, if it's me, I take Bronson out only one batter before Narron did. I can't fault either of them, Narron or Arroyo.

Harang, Arroyo and Dunn are the backbones of this team. I totally agree with placing the outcomes of the games directly in their hands.

GAC
04-05-2007, 09:54 AM
If it's about preventing further damage, he brought Coffey in and on his first pitch he gave up as many runs as BA did in 7 innings. Yes, I know the runs were charged to Arroyo; but Coffey certainly didn't do the job. And we won't even discuss what Burton did the following inning.

When Arroyo is on, and he was for the most part, then I have no problem whatsoever with him having a pitch count of around 100. What does he end up averaging for the year? That is what counts.

This game wasn't lost by Narron. It was lost by those players on the field.

Joseph
04-05-2007, 10:54 AM
Dear modern day pichers,

You are too coddled. In my day, we completed 30+ games a year.

-Cy Young.

PuffyPig
04-05-2007, 11:00 AM
Arroyo is a better pitcher than Coffey. He was our best chance to win the game.

Sure he gave up 2 singles to start the 8th, but that's the BABIP factor in baseball. You can make good pitches, you can have them hit balls on thre ground, but you can't guarantee the outs.

If Coffey's first pitch ends up a DP instead of a 2 run single (each was just as likely) no one would be saying anything.

Arroyo pitched very well, but the breaks didn't go his way.

The Reds had 3-4 balls which may well have been HR's on a warmer night; the Cubs had none of those. We lost, but that happens in baseball all the time, where the ball does bounce that well for you.

That's one thing Narron doesn't have control over.

I know one thing. If Narron had taken Arroyo out, and Coffey had come in and given up the exact same type of hits, most here would be saying that Arroyo should have been left in.

Puffy
04-05-2007, 11:18 AM
Well, I made my position very clear when Harang was left in.

I don't mind pitchers like Arroyo or Harang throwing between 110-120 pitches in May or June. I do mind them doing it right out of spring training.

What people seem to be forgetting is these guys haven't thrown this many pitches yet and thats taxing on an arm. Either way the Reds were coming out of this 1-1. They would have won the first game even if Harang pitches only 6 innings and they would have lost yesterday's game even if Arroyo was removed before pitching to Lee.

I'm more worried about a couple of weeks down the line when all these pitches out of the blue possibly catch up to the two of them.

dfs
04-05-2007, 11:39 AM
Here is my take:
snip
To answer the original post. I think the slow hook is a demonstrated trend that is a flaw in the team's decision making.
snip
Narron seems to be a good leader of men and has the respect of the players, but he needs to evolve into more of a football style head coach and less of a traditional baseball manager.
snip
once the game starts the individual decisions need to be left to the trusted coaches.

I think its the right way to run any business.
Quoted for truth. Narron does a LOT right, but there are a couple of things that are just maddening. Before last nights game, he was quoted as saying that too many pitches in cold weather was bad for a starter. There was no reason to risk Arroyo under those circumstances. None. If Bronson goes down for 10 starts now, the reds are pretty much done anyway. You give your bullpen the reigns and let them earn their roster spots while saving your starters for innings that mean something.

M2
04-05-2007, 12:11 PM
I thought that Soriano and Jones got some good cuts at Arroyo at the end of the end of the 7th. It being the first game of the year and the Reds having seven guys sitting out in the pen, I'd have yanked him.

Oddly, it might have been the seven-man pen that kept the team from pulling Arroyo. Narron's got a short bench, particularly in terms of pinch hitters. Look at what his PH options were:

Hatteberg
Moeller
Valentin
Castro
Hamilton

With a lefty on the mound there really isn't a good option in the bunch. Down one run, bottom of the 7th against a pitcher who's approaching 100 pitches is the time to pinch hit for your 7 and 8 hitters. You get to the pitcher there and those slots may not even come up again.

The problem is the Reds have such a long bullpen and such a short bench that there isn't a better option than Gonzalez and Ross available. Hatteberg's there to hit for the pitcher in that situation, but the 6-7-8 hitters were so ineffectual that the pitcher's slot never came up. So, lacking bats to get him to Arroyo's slot, Narron didn't have cause to pull his pitcher for a PH that inning, leaving him with the temptation to try to get a few more outs with Arroyo.

BRM
04-05-2007, 12:14 PM
Sure would be nice to have a decent right-handed bat off the bench instead of a 12th pitcher or 3rd catcher.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-05-2007, 12:30 PM
Someone tell me. Why are we keeping three catchers again?

Highlifeman21
04-05-2007, 12:31 PM
At least Narron waited until the 2nd game of the year for his 1st bad decision.

Someone should start a Narron bad decision thread, so we can easily see at the end of the year how his decisions cost our beloved Reds.

BRM
04-05-2007, 12:37 PM
Someone tell me. Why are we keeping three catchers again?

Narron likes to have plenty of options behind the plate. :dunno:

BuckeyeRedleg
04-05-2007, 12:38 PM
Wasn't Moeller on-deck to hit for Arroyo in the 7th when Ross made the final out of the inning? That could have been crappy decision #2 of the year. Actually, just Moeller being on the roster was a crappy decision, but probably not Jerry's.

BRM
04-05-2007, 12:40 PM
Wasn't Moeller on-deck to hit for Arroyo in the 7th when Ross made the final out of the inning? That could have been crappy decision #2 of the year. Actually, just Moeller being on the roster was a crappy decision, but probably not Jerry's.

I'd bet Jerry had a big say in keeping Moeller on the roster.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-05-2007, 12:41 PM
I'd bet Jerry had a big say in keeping Moeller on the roster.

Scary.

BRM
04-05-2007, 12:42 PM
Scary.

But not suprising.

coachw513
04-05-2007, 12:44 PM
Tonight Narron left Arroyo in for the first two batters of the 8th. It seemed unnecessary. Narron has a slow hook. Baseball Prospectus has written about it. It has been observed on this website. There are some pluses to the slow hook (see Harang pitching really well later than it would have seemed likely on opening day, two pitchers with 200+ IP last season, avoiding a weak bullpen, etc), but many minuses (see first two batters on base in the 8th of a frigid game with bullpen rested, why starters get pulled -- getting tired and giving up hits, one too many times through the lineup, not trusting the bullpen). John Fay suggested the following tonight folowing the game:



I don't think the Fay suggestion is an interesting debate. The debate should be about Narron's slow hook. Is his hook glacially and unnecessarily slow (read: should he have something resembling the Sparky Anderson approach?)? Or is the guy, by trusting and showing confidence in his starters, more likely to get more out of them? I tend to go with the former approach (as did the Boston Red Sox after the 2003 season when Grady Little was chased out of town despite nearly making the WS because he trusted and had confidence in one of the greatest pitchers in the last 15 years), especially with a deep and rested bullpen, which the Reds presumably have on day number 2. Still, I don't want to focus on tonight. Game-by-game, every manager is bound to be wrong or right based on outcome. The question is whether Narron's slow hook tendencies are more helpful or detrimental to the team. I have to think it is a slight negative with the current bullpen. If the bullpen proves to be solid, I think it becomes a much more significant detriment (assuming, of course, that Narron doesn't hasten his hook, which may have been slow last year because of his uncertain bullpen).

Looking longer term, the slow hook approach seems short-sighted. It saves the bullpen for the next few games, but it taxes the starter if he is left in to pitch after he begins to struggle. In doing this, the manager may be showing confidence in his tiring starter, but how much trust and confidence are the guys in the bullpen feeling? By leaving the starter in for 7+ innings on a frigid night, will the starter be as solid the next night. Moreover, is the confidence of the manager's trust more important than the confidence of a quality start, lower ERA, and win credit for the starter?

Those are my views, but I'd like to read a broader and more informed sample of viewpoints.

First, great post!!! :thumbup:

There are shades of grey...I love the fact he wants his starters to get deep in games and understands the need to show he's committed to that guy every 5 days...I also want him to show committment to his bullpen...establish roles, let them go and don't get panicked by a poor performance or 2...(so yes, I'm advocating seeing Burton again asap in a similar role)...

In general I think Narron's philisophical thought process is sound, but his impulse "gut" level response sometimes isn't accurate...but in general I can live with him going a bit longer with his #1 and #2, but I am very hopeful he will NOT allow the dregs of the rotation to do the same...

PuffyPig
04-05-2007, 12:49 PM
At least Narron waited until the 2nd game of the year for his 1st bad decision.

Someone should start a Narron bad decision thread, so we can easily see at the end of the year how his decisions cost our beloved Reds.

Are we also going to keep track of how many of his "bad descisions" may have won us the game.

Leaving harang in may be considered a bad descision by many, but it worked out and may have won us the game. Who knows how a releiver would have faired?

And taking Arroyo likely didn't cost us the game. No one really knows how it would have turned out.

Edskin
04-05-2007, 03:34 PM
I think Narron MUST ride Arroyo and Harang as long as he can in each game. The bullpen is simply too iffy. Both of those two have proven to be durable and reliable. If Belisle hits 100 pitches in the 7th inning, I think THAT is when Narron needs to have a quicker hook. But with Harang and Arroyo I am 100% fine with him riding them longer.

Cedric
04-05-2007, 03:43 PM
But not suprising.

So it's official? Three posts guessing and we have a conclusion.

Sweet.

It's fun randomly blaming even roster decisions on Jerry.

BuckeyeRedleg
04-05-2007, 03:45 PM
I think Narron MUST ride Arroyo and Harang as long as he can in each game. The bullpen is simply too iffy. Both of those two have proven to be durable and reliable. If Belisle hits 100 pitches in the 7th inning, I think THAT is when Narron needs to have a quicker hook. But with Harang and Arroyo I am 100% fine with him riding them longer.

In April? When it's 20 degrees and your co-ace has just made his first start of the year and already thrown 100 pitches?

If it's August and we are in the race, I see your point. I just think a meaningless game in early April is the wrong time to push your pitcher, especially one that you have invested so much money in.

dfs
04-05-2007, 03:49 PM
I agree BukeyRedleg. Pitching is precious and there is no need to squander it on long outings in April. If you don't have enough confidence in your bullpen to use them when you are a run down, you need to recycle the guys you have and get new pitchers. Not risk injury to an organizational asset signed to a long term contract.

BRM
04-05-2007, 04:24 PM
So it's official? Three posts guessing and we have a conclusion.

Sweet.

It's fun randomly blaming even roster decisions on Jerry.

I have no conclusions. Only my humble opinions. Or my humble guess. However you want to look at it.

Highlifeman21
04-05-2007, 04:57 PM
Are we also going to keep track of how many of his "bad descisions" may have won us the game.

Leaving harang in may be considered a bad descision by many, but it worked out and may have won us the game. Who knows how a releiver would have faired?

And taking Arroyo likely didn't cost us the game. No one really knows how it would have turned out.

He left Harang in to face the bottom of the lineup.

He left Arroyo in to face the meat of the lineup.

Worlds of difference.

M2
04-05-2007, 05:07 PM
He left Harang in to face the bottom of the lineup.

He left Arroyo in to face the meat of the lineup.

Worlds of difference.

Good point. Harang was also working with less effort.