I just get frustrated when a pitcher with the hot hand gets pulled due to an inning change. See Lecure Saturday, and Hoover yesterday.
It seems to me the options are:
Currently, bring in your third best reliever to pitch the highest-leverage situation -- starter out, runners on base, heart of the order, game on the line -- then bring in a better reliever to pitch an empty eighth and your best reliever to pitch an empty ninth.
Or, bring in your best reliever to pitch the highest-leverage situation, the third best to be setup or "bridge" in the empty eighth, and the second-best to handle the empty ninth.
So, this situation only occurs in the 7th inning? The problem is that the game is on the line several times a game, at some point, someone on the bump has to get somebody out at several key points in any game. The best strategy for any bullpen is when the starter takes you deep into the game and the "high leverage" situations are minimimized and you get to maximize the opportunities for your best relievers to bring it on home. In any MLB game, part of the trick to winning a game is to get to the back end of the bullpen in some fashion. If you are successful in that endeavor, it often won't matter what inning your best reliever pitches in, because the back end will need to be used and cough it up at some point. Or, you'll have your primary arms worn out by the All-Star Break (see Pirates).
"Rounding 3rd and heading for home, good night everybody"
Chip R (06-04-2013)
Does anyone realize that Chapman has the second-most innings among all closers in baseball right now?
I get the high-leverage arguments. Not completely in disagreement. But people are acting like Chapman is being woefully underutilized.
"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
Last edited by Raisor; 06-03-2013 at 06:20 PM.
If it's an anomaly in comparison to the rest of the league what is the actual discrepancy?
If it's an anomaly to the way the game was played 20 -30 years ago then it's expected.
What's Kimbrell's number of mid inning appearances? (zero) What about Mariano's? (one)
Neither has pitched more than 1 inning in a game
The point is he's already being used a fair amount without bringing him in for even more innings. Would you rather have him for more appearances or more batters in the games he pitches?
Me personally, I'd rather he pitch in more games.
If you start bringing him in the 8th inning more often, he's not going to be available as frequently.
"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'm more interested in using him in higher leverage situations. You can limit his load by having others start the 9th with a lead, especially when there is more than a one run lead
I would not confuse what's popular with what's smart. One could easily make the argument that all closers (or at least the ones that are highly effective) could be better utilized in a fireman/ace reliever role and are thus currently under-utilized.
Being among the least worst is hardly something to brag about.
Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.
Patterns are very important in MLB, you can pretend that other teams don't chart patterns for their team and the ones they face, you can pretend that the cost of arms doesn't limit innings or the way a pitcher is managed, but they do.
There is a reason roster balance is weighed to a big BP these days and it's essentially to limit the thing you keep assuming all the people in baseball are missing and that's bigger named pitchers pitch less than they did back in the day... when they cost $24,000 a year.
My point has nothing to do with whether it's popular a strategy or not. It's just if you start pitching multiple innings in a game, you're not going to be available 2-3 days in a row like he currently is.
Would you rather he come in with runners already on base, where one hit is going to score a run regardless of who the pitcher is, or save him for the 9th and know you might have him to pitch in 2-3 straight games?
Personally, I would rather he impact more games rather than give the minimal advantage with runners already on base in a specific game.
If you're talking about the playoffs, I'd agree with your point completely. But this isn't the playoffs. It's about maximizing the number of wins over the course of a season. In the case of Chapman, I'd rather he be available for 75 games and pitch 75 innings than maybe pitch 85 innings over the course of 65 games.
"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'm not even advocating using Chapman multiple innings. As far as I know there is no there isn't anything in his contract that demands he finish all games where there is a save situation
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. |