What's your definition of "high leverage" because in a baseball game that incident occurs almost every inning (according to Thom Brennaman it's even more often)Originally Posted by Raisor
What's your definition of "high leverage" because in a baseball game that incident occurs almost every inning (according to Thom Brennaman it's even more often)
7th, 8th, 9th innings. Someone gets on base and you have Ryan Braun coming up
Could have 0 1 or 2 outs in the inning.
Now you can keep whomever is in there in there and keep Chapman to come in clean later, or you can bring in Chapman now.
Has there ever been any analysis done on how often high leverage situations in the 7th inning, for example, actually become low leverage situations an inning later? Last week Cincy was up 3-1 in the 7th and put a 5 spot up in the bottom of the inning turning a higher leverage 7th into a lower leverage 8th and 9th. Is that a game we want to see Aroldis pitching and how will that go if he is unavailable if he throws too many games like that?
It's a crapshoot, I know, but waiting for the 9th means you can pretty much lock up the leverageness of his appearance.
It's not necessarily the seventh inning, although that seems to be the danger zone. There are caveats; heck, Chapman can create high-leverage situations himself on occasion. But I'm predicting that in upcoming years, the concept will take hold to bring in your shutdown guy when there's something to shut down.
Let's take the sixth. It seems weird to bring in a Chapman then, right? But why not? Your Arroyo- or Leake-type starter is gassed, tying and go-ahead runners on, two outs, so bring in the guy who can shut it down. Bring in your decent middle relievers like LeCure and Hoover to pitch the peaceful bridge innings. Bring in your Sean Marshall to keep the ninth out of trouble.
One benefit of this is that if one of your later relievers gets in trouble, you have relievers behind him who could finish that inning and take care of the next, like the notorious last out of the eighth and all of the ninth dilemma. If you can't use your shutdown guy there because he's a maximum-effort one-inning guy, put the maximum effort where you need it most.
I might be wrong about this part, but if you find that you're using your closer way too often in this scenario, then what it probably means is that before, your save situations weren't making it to the ninth. You're not using the guys more often, you're just using them at different times in the game. Your "save opportunities" now come in an earlier inning.
Fair enough, but something tells me this feels like a "be careful what you wish for" situation.
If Chapman is used in the 8th and then Broxton, Ondrusek or Simon is used in the 9th because Chapman has already been used, I fear the reactions of people here on Redszone if that happens. If I've learned anything from RZ, it's that what people think the 'right' method is to managing is usually the opposite of whatever the manager actually does.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
Tony Cloninger (06-03-2013)
I'm fine with our use of Chapman, he's still been used more than any other reliever in our bullpen. I think there's something to players liking a role they can get used to.
When another guy screws up it doesn't have to mean that Chapman should have been pitching. It just means another pitcher screwed up.
The question begs... do you have Chapman warming up everytime a hitter of Braun's magnitude in an inning in case he becomes the tying run?
Remember, it takes multiple batters to warm up Chapman, and you don't want to warm him up multiple times in a game.
There is a reason there are set roles for guys. It is mostly to do with routine and keeping a pitcher's arm healthy. Saving Chapman for the 9th inning guarantees he will be used in a decent leverage situation for multiple batters. It may not be the highest leverage situation of the game, but it is very difficult to do that without running risk of taking a pitchr out of their normal routine. What analysis has been performed on that piece to indicate there isn't a serious risk of pitcher's health in doing that?
Which should have no baring on what Dusty does.
The whole premise of this conversation is that he should be doing it because it's the 'right' way. But it wouldn't matter because then Dusty will be 'wrong' if he does it.
There's really not even anything that definitively says there's a right way or wrong way. It's just what each individual opines.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
I wouldn't expect Dusty or any other current manager to try something like this. It'll be a goofy LaRussa type or somebody with a specific need. If it succeeds, it'll be the next big thing.
Really??
Can't see how the manager continuing to warm up guys doesn't play into how one views the managers usage patterns
My comment was in regards to Dusty being criticized.
I'm not even suggesting MLB managers do this.
All I ask is if it's as simple as it has been recently, when the game reaches the 8th inning in a save situation and the 2-3-4 batters are due up, why not use Chapman there and let somebody else pitch the 9th? No unnecessary warm-ups needed...
That's fair.
But at the same time, in the grand scheme of things, it's probably not material enough to get whipped up about.
When you add all the thing that in the Grand scheme of things that don't matter they start to matter
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote