Chapman and Broxton not available tomorrow?

[757690]

Yep. I understood using Broxton to get through the heart of the lineup. But using Chapman to get 7-8-9 with a 3 run lead... I wonder if there are any other examples of a stupid, contrived statistic dictating player usage in any other sport.

Seriously, just think how differently (better) pitchers would be used if you only got a save for protecting a two run or less lead?

[Kc61]

I don't know how true it is, but I was in the car earlier and one of the Reds postgame radio guys mentioned that Broxton and Chapman would not be available tomorrow against the Cardinals. But if that were the case, you knew going into today that if you used them today, they wouldn't be available tomorrow. Wouldn't it make more sense to use two other guys with a 3 run lead today?

Dusty doesn't usually announce pitcher unavailability 24 hours in advance. I am pretty confident it was an assumption on the part of the announcer.

If the game is real close tomorrow, I'd expect Chapman to work. Brox not so much, he seems to need more rest.

I posted surprise on the game thread that Brox pitched today, I thought Lecure would pitch the 8th. Dusty decided to use his top guys, I don't mind it.

The Nats manhandled the Reds last year, I'm sure Dusty really wanted this series and wasn't playing around at the end of this game. There's an off day Thursday, he'll get the bullpen straightened out.

[bigredmechanism]

If Chapman and Broxton are out, I'm okay with LeCure-Marshall being our 8th-9th guys tomorrow. You could do a lot worse than that with some rosters.

[Kc61]

Seriously, just think how differently (better) pitchers would be used if you only got a save for protecting a two run or less lead?

Redszone popular theme of 2013: it's supposedly dumb to use your top relievers three runs ahead. It came up in the Chapman debate about 100 times.

The answer, as usual, is that it depends.

Today's game was against a top notch opponent which is perfectly capable of scoring three runs late. Reds had trouble last year with the Nats.

If Dusty wanted to use Marshall, Brox, and Chapman to protect a three run lead to win the series against this opponent, it's fine with me.

If he did this to pin down a win against the Astros in a meaningless game in late September, I'd have a different view.

[PuffyPig]

Winning is not a bad thing, and giving yourself a better chance to beat a tough opponent is equally good.

Let's say that Baker uses Lecure to save the game, and the Nats get 2 guys on base in the 9th. Everyone would be screaming for Chapman, which means he would have had to be warming up anyway if there was some chance he had to use him.

[kaldaniels]

Managers are risk adverse. And I understand it.

If Dusty lets LeCure or Brox go 2 innings and they cough up the league, the fallout on Dusty is much worse than if he goes by the book and the lead is lost.

If you are going to be unconventional, most managers need to be darn sure (in their heads) it will work. I wish it wasn't that way, and I wish somehow Brox or Chapman were saved today, but I totally get why it went down.

[ervinsm84]

Winning isn't a bad thing, and giving yourself a better chance to beat a tough opponent is equally good.

Let's say that Baker uses Lecure to save the game, and the Nats get 2 guys on base in the 9th. Everyone would be screaming for Chapman, which means he would have had to be warming up anyway if there was some chance he had to use him.

Who said winning was bad? Also the issue isn't if bringing in brox and Chapman increases WP. The issue is comparing imo, the minute WP edge gained by using both in comparison to other alternatives because the given WP state of that game was already very High

Correct Process > Short Term Results OrientedI

More importantly just because some people would incorrectly rip Dusty for a correct decision that didn't work in that one specific example doesn't have any bearing on the validity of the decision.

Doug is obv right on this. Lucky for us Reds fans it doesnt matter much in the grand scheme of things, and it's also not like other teams are close to managing optimally froma strategy standpoint so at least we are not being exploited

[Vottomatic]

Another infamous "unwritten rule of baseball" mess which is use of closers only in 9th inning saves (which Dusty is a card carrying member of)...is silly. Why Broxton can't finish up the 9th inning today and let Chapman take a rest is more silliness.

It might not matter tomorrow, but why burn all of our guys on a 3 run lead? Marshall can't toss but an inning as well?

Dusty trying to get Chapman his saves. Bugs the crap out of me that a reliever here or there can't go more than 1 lousy inning, especially when they took'em done 3 in a row.

Broxton should have gone 2 innings and finished the darn thing, to save Chapman for the Cards.

[PuffyPig]

Broxton should have gone 2 innings and finished the darn thing, to save Chapman for the Cards.

Well that's different, when many though that Broxton shouldn't even have pitched in this game.

IMO, if you had tried to push Brixton into the 9th, you likely would have needed Chapman to come in and rescue him.

[Roy Tucker]

As they used to say, you don't get fired for buying IBM.

You don't get fired for making a safe decision. It may not be bold, it may be short-sighted, but it is safe.

[Vottomatic]

Well that's different, when many though that Broxton shouldn't even have pitched in this game.

IMO, if you had tried to push Brixton into the 9th, you likely would have needed Chapman to come in and rescue him.

"Likely"?

You don't know that. That statement assumes alot. And you know what happens when you assume.

Bring a guy in the 8th and see if he can go 2 innings and finish it up. If he gets in trouble THEN bring in Chapman. Absolutely no reason Dusty can't do that.

Also, I was hoping that having both Chapman and Broxton might save us from the dreaded "shoulder fatigue" Chapman seems to experience every season. There is no reason Chapman can't get the bulk of the save opportunities and Broxton can't get a few. Great opportunity to not overuse these guys and Dusty already is not taking advantage of it.

[ervinsm84]

As they used to say, you don't get fired for buying IBM.

You don't get fired for making a safe decision. It may not be bold, it may be short-sighted, but it is safe.

That's definitely the rationale. Doesn't make it correct decision making though. Baseball is definitely poor in these spots but at least they make on average better decisions than what we see in the NFL

[Brutus]

Yep. I understood using Broxton to get through the heart of the lineup. But using Chapman to get 7-8-9 with a 3 run lead... I wonder if there are any other examples of a stupid, contrived statistic dictating player usage in any other sport.

Or it could just be that Dusty didn't do it because of the statistic but because he trusts Chapman the most to close it out.

[Edskin]

Control what you can control... Obviously managers in MLB need to "plan ahead" more so than coaches in other sports due to the 162 game season, but in general, I like the idea of controlling the moment the best you can and then seeing what the next moment has to offer.

It's why I hate constructing a lineup with the idea of alternating sides of the plate so that teams can't bring in guys situationally late in games.

You don't know what is going to happen in the 7th and 8th inning; you DO know what is going to happen to start the game. Just put your best lineup out there and don't over think future possibilities.

Don't sit Chapman when he can help you win today just so that MAYBE he can help you tomorrow.

[VR]

Baker and Price have more than earned my trust with how they handle the roster and pitching staff.