The "save your closer in extras on the road" rule (Mergers: Baseball Prospectus article; Yost defends himself for not using Cordero)

[DougJones43]

So basically, what he's saying is that he's going to base his entire gameplan around a "save situation." A save situtation that may or may not happen, and a save situation whose chances of ever actually happening are completey reliant on not letting the other team score right then, in the current inning.

 

This makes no sense to me, and never will. Ned Yost makes no sense to me, and probably never will. I think this is going to be my last post about Ned for the rest of the year. I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall by trying to illustrate just how wrong I think these things are, and just how bad of a manager I think he is. He's one of the worst I've ever seen. I hope Ned Yost is not the manager of the Milwaukee Brewers beyond this season.

[rluzinski]

So when you do score a run, you don't have to throw out pitchers like Wise and McClung to get a save because there's no one left in the pen.

 

The point is, you have to pitch them anyway, then! Either you can use Coco right away and hope the Brewers score more than 1 run or you wait until maybe the Brewers score or don't use him at all. There's nothing magical about save opportunities.

[jlau20]

It order to have a chance to win the game, you need to get an at-bat to score runs. It was clear the game was on the line and Wise wasn't the guy to have out there. I'm convinced Cordero needs to be used to atleast give us a shot to win the game. Without him pitching in extra innings with guys on base and no outs, we basically have no shot. Bottom line, IMO, is Cordero needed to be out there in the 9th, and at the very least the 10th. I have no doubt if Cordero comes in we get to bat in the 11th.

[AJAY]

So when you do score a run, you don't have to throw out pitchers like Wise and McClung to get a save because there's no one left in the pen.

 

I hope you understand that there is no save situation once you lose and the game is over.

[bacon06]

The point is, you have to pitch them anyway, then! Either you can use Coco right away and hope the Brewers score more than 1 run or you wait until maybe the Brewers score or don't use him at all. There's nothing magical about save opportunities.

 

I understand what you mean by using Cordero right away to make sure the other team doesn't score and hope the Brewers score. But to me, that's like playing for a tie and hoping to get a win. Where as if you get the lead without using Cordero, it betters the chance of winning. If the Brewers had more than 2 or 3 reliable arms in the bullpen, this is a non issue.

[logan82]

Is Ned Yost a bad manager or is bulpen usage a problem league wide? That is the whole problem I have with criticizing Yost for not using Cordero. To me it is like seeing Corey Hart go 0-4 in a game and saying he sucks. I know he doesn't because we can look at his stats and compare them to other players. We have almost no basis for comparison like this in the case of managers. I think it would be a safe bet that Yost's use of Cordero, or lack of, would be consistent with most managers throughout the league. Does that make it right, no. Does that make Ned a bad manager, maybe. If that is the case, most managers in the league are bad as well.

[giffted1]

I did some hunting and found an old BP article on closers. It questions the use of a closer in the ninth with a 3 run lead, but does support the play for a tie at home, play for a win on the road strategy.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=648

[AJAY]

I understand what you mean by using Cordero right away to make sure the other team doesn't score and hope the Brewers score. But to me, that's like playing for a tie and hoping to get a win. Where as if you get the lead without using Cordero, it betters the chance of winning. If the Brewers had more than 2 or 3 reliable arms in the bullpen, this is a non issue.

 

But we don't have 2 or 3 reliable arms in the bullpen. So you have to manage accordingly.

 

And yes, we would be playing for a tie and hoping to win later. But that is MUCH BETTER than playing to lose by leaving Matt Wise in there. EVERYONE knew he was going to blow the game. And if the manager had any sense, he would have known it too.

[danzig6767]

Like I have said before, I will not argue that the misuse of CoCo, I am just disputing that another manager wouldn't make the same choice with his closer.

 

Both interesting articles by the way.

 

Then that other or other managers might be in over there head also.There are alot of tough call choices a manager has to make in games where he shouldn't be faulted regardless of the end result.This one along with others lately haven't fit in that tough call area and very well COULD HAVE cost us a few games.

It's one thing if the Brewers were 14 games back,but when your team is in a tight race with limited games left and the manager is missing what seem to be fairly obvious moves to put the team in the best situation to win,i think it's fair to question if he's the guy you want to lead the team after this season.

 

The scary thing for me is,hearing his rational after some of these boneheaded moves.It makes me believe he's not learning at all from his mistakes and i don't trust he won't do the same logic defying things again next year if the Brewers are again in another tight playoff race.The fact he still doesn't see in retrospect the common sense of why using Cordero in the 10th yesterday was the right thing to do,makes me think he's simply to set in some of his Yost manager handbook ways and he can't allow himself to question if they make sense in the first place.

[TooLiveBrew]

The scary thing for me is,hearing his rational after some of these boneheaded moves.It makes me believe he's not learning at all from his mistakes and i don't trust he won't do the same logic defying things again next year if the Brewers are again in another tight playoff race.The fact he still doesn't see in retrospect the common sense of why using Cordero in the 10th yesterday was the right thing to do,makes me think he's simply to set in some of his Yost manager handbook ways and he can't allow himself to question if they make sense in the first place.

 

Precisely. He isn't even willing to admit that (or understand how) some of his worst moves are mistakes. He counters with an argumentative tone right off the bat (a tell-tale sign of someone knowing they messed up), and just sticks to his 'handbook' - I really like that way of phrasing it.

[logan82]

Then that other or other managers might be in over there head also.

 

That is the problem though. I beleive that most if not all managers would have done the same thing.

[thablingster]

For some reason that whole "I didn't say I was going to be stupid" comment rubbed me the wrong way. I would say some of the things Yost has done this season have been stupid.

 

I have no statistics to back this up, but it is purely my own opinion. I'd think it would be easier for a borderline guy (eg: Spurling, Aquino, McClung, etc.) to pitch with a lead late in a game than to pitch when the game is tied and they might feel like they have to be "perfect" to not lose the game. It might not make that much of a difference in the way they pitch, but it has to add a little bit of pressure on the home team, knowing they would be down to their last 3 outs.

 

Also, as far as confidence goes, by using your best reliever first you are giving your offense a chance and telling them you believe in them by virtually saying "we're going to hold this game, now get us the lead." Obviously every situation doesn't call for using your closer before a save situation, but I think facing the heart of the Astros order is a situation that would definitely call for it.

[bacon06]

And yes, we would be playing for a tie and hoping to win later. But that is MUCH BETTER than playing to lose by leaving Matt Wise in there. EVERYONE knew he was going to blow the game. And if the manager had any sense, he would have known it too.

Wise could have stepped up and pitched a 1-2-3 inning too. Just cause he's not thrown well lately doesn't mean that he will always throw poorly. Players can turn it around. I can't speak for Yost, but I'm pretty sure that if he would have known that Wise was going to give up a run, he wouldn't have put him in.

[Team Canada]

There is still some misunderstanding (by Yost and others) about the motivation. Why do you want your closer to face the *bottom* of the order? Wouldn't it make more sense to use your best pitcher against the best hitters?

 

As has been stated, everyone's going to pitch anyway, you might as well manage things so that the worse pitchers face the worse batters. To do otherwise make no sense.

[AJAY]

Wise could have stepped up and pitched a 1-2-3 inning too. Just cause he's not thrown well lately doesn't mean that he will always throw poorly. Players can turn it around. I can't speak for Yost, but I'm pretty sure that if he would have known that Wise was going to give up a run, he wouldn't have put him in.

 

I agree with your point, but a good manager would have sensed in advance that Wise was going to blow the game. That's what makes some managers better than others.

 

Just to be clear, I am personally not complaining about Wise being put into the game. I am upset that he wasn't taken out of the game once things got messy. As a manager, you have to be able to sense a potential problem in advance. You are being paid to be the expert, and it's a shame when you can't see things that are about to happen. Ned is very poor at recognizing red flags and warning signs. He just never seems to figure out when a guy is about to fail.

 

It's really amazing that most fans can see things faster than the manager.

[strawbossisevil]

It was Wise's inning to win or lose. The Brewer's bullpen had been pretty much emptied. You throw Cordero midway through that inning, and if the game goes more than an inning or two longer, you are in rough shape. Especially, if we are purposely not throwing Cappy so he would be available to pitch for Sheets.

 

I agree with the play for the win on the road, play for the tie at home line of thinking. I don't think it was so horrible that Yost followed that in the game. He didn't have a crystal ball that Wise would fail out there. And I really don't see too many managers doing anything different.

 

So really, next season if we do have a new manager, expect the same. I'll keep the venting thread warm for ya.

[kgbaseball]

The point is you're supposed to use your best relievers when you're in a division race with 12 games left in the season. Throw out the stupid saves stat at that point, it doesn't matter one bit. Ned's job is to win and lose with the best players he can put out there, and he did not do that last night. Wise had been atrocious since that Cincy series, so it made 0 sense to put him in in a tie game. You'd like to think Ned is smart enough to put a reliable reliever out there at that point in the game.

[Weirdos19]

Yost confuses me. He said a few weeks ago that he was going to use Cordero for more than one inning if the situation called for it. Pretty sure it screamed for it on Wednesday.

 

Coco had warmed up earlier. He should at least have walked Pence to load the bases and bring in your slider pitcher (Cordero) or your strikeout pitcher (Cordero). But he let Wise pitch to Pence, who already had 2 hits. Wise has never, ever been a ground ball pitcher. So why set up for the double play?

 

I think even Ned knows he wasn't at his best Wednesday. It's like trying to have faith in Bush.

[AJAY]

He didn't have a crystal ball that Wise would fail out there.

 

BINGO !!

 

That's exactly my biggest criticism of Ned Yost. Good managers actually do have that crystal ball in their brain. You just have to know the situation and you have to know what your players can and can't do. There are just some managers who are much better at it than others.

[logan82]

So really, next season if we do have a new manager, expect the same.

That is sort of my take on the whole thing. I doubt there will be as many upset people since the manager will be different though. A new manager would get at least a one year grace period.

[strawbossisevil]

Good managers have crystal balls in their brains? It seems to me that every night half the teams in the MLB lose. All those mangers must have their crystal balls turned off on those nights. This is pretty much a joke, everyone knows you play for the tie on the road in extra innings. Every manger, save one or two, does it. Why Yost is criticized for putting his only other option (Wise) into that situation is beyond me. If his relievers hadn't tanked it earlier in the game, he would have had a better option for that inning. But he didn't.

 

And think of it this way, if Yost knew that Wise would give up a run, and still brought him in to get the "save", our team would be back at square one, just without any good options as far as pitching.

 

I've always stood by the play for the tie on the road rule, and I'll stick by it here. Anyone who uses it to criticize Yost has to realize that they are criticizing every single other manager in baseball too (if you disagree with the practice of playing for the tie on the road, that is).

 

People want to explain every single loss as if it is somehow Yost's fault. It's gotten to the point of being completely ridiculous in my opinion, which is just that, my opinion.

 

Instead of enjoying the playoff chase, so many are spending all their time about our manager's "insufficiencies", sounds like fun to me.

[bacon06]

Instead of enjoying the playoff chase, so many are spending all their time about our manager's "insufficiencies", sounds like fun to me.

 

Totally agree. Just blame the team for losing and move on to tomorrow's game. I was talking with my brother during the game last night and while in between pitches he said something about not liking all this tension. And I said that I loved it cause I actually felt like a Brewer game had great importance and that we've been waiting our whole lives for this, so why not enjoy it?

[adambr2]

Not trying to be condesending, but I think some people really need to fall out of love with the idea of a "save". It's the most brainwashing stat in baseball, and unfortunately, so many people just eat it right up, hook, line and sinker.

 

A save is nothing other than happening to get the last outs of the game in a close game. There's absolutely nothing special about it. Some people seems to gasp and go "Oh my God!" at the thought of having to put a different pitcher than a closer coming in to protect a lead, but are fine with the same reliever coming into the game to protect a tie in which we lose if the other team scores ANYTHING, which is obviously a higher leverage situation.

 

And Yost's snippiness just makes me want him out of town even more. "I didn't say I was going to be stupid". Sorry Ned, if you can't see how going against baseball logic here with your season on the line is the right move, I'm afraid you're not the smart one here.

[adambr2]

Good managers have crystal balls in their brains? It seems to me that every night half the teams in the MLB lose. All those mangers must have their crystal balls turned off on those nights. This is pretty much a joke, everyone knows you play for the tie on the road in extra innings. Every manger, save one or two, does it. Why Yost is criticized for putting his only other option (Wise) into that situation is beyond me. If his relievers hadn't tanked it earlier in the game, he would have had a better option for that inning. But he didn't.

 

And think of it this way, if Yost knew that Wise would give up a run, and still brought him in to get the "save", our team would be back at square one, just without any good options as far as pitching.

 

I've always stood by the play for the tie on the road rule, and I'll stick by it here. Anyone who uses it to criticize Yost has to realize that they are criticizing every single other manager in baseball too (if you disagree with the practice of playing for the tie on the road, that is).

 

People want to explain every single loss as if it is somehow Yost's fault. It's gotten to the point of being completely ridiculous in my opinion, which is just that, my opinion.

 

Instead of enjoying the playoff chase, so many are spending all their time about our manager's "insufficiencies", sounds like fun to me.

Here's the thing: I don't really care what 27 other managers would do, and I don't think any of us should, including Yost. That's half the problem. It becomes harder to go "against the grain" once unwritten rules get established that managers refuse to violate. The A's don't play that way, and the Cubs don't play that way, and I think that's about it. (think it's a coincidence that the Cubs bullpen has been lights out in the 2nd half, despite them not using Marmol as their closer?)

 

The problem with other managers doing the wrong thing allows for our own to do the same thing and simply excuse himself by saying others would do the same. I don't understand why we need our best reliever to protect a 3 run lead in the 9th inning, because it's a save situation, but we can't bring in the same reliever with the score tied on the road in a sudden death situation. I just will never believe that makes any sense at all.

[danzig6767]

Good managers have crystal balls in their brains? It seems to me that every night half the teams in the MLB lose. All those mangers must have their crystal balls turned off on those nights. This is pretty much a joke, everyone knows you play for the tie on the road in extra innings. Every manger, save one or two, does it. Why Yost is criticized for putting his only other option (Wise) into that situation is beyond me. If his relievers hadn't tanked it earlier in the game, he would have had a better option for that inning. But he didn't.

 

And think of it this way, if Yost knew that Wise would give up a run, and still brought him in to get the "save", our team would be back at square one, just without any good options as far as pitching.

 

I've always stood by the play for the tie on the road rule, and I'll stick by it here. Anyone who uses it to criticize Yost has to realize that they are criticizing every single other manager in baseball too (if you disagree with the practice of playing for the tie on the road, that is).

 

At that point in the 10th inning there was Wise/King/Capuano/Aquino/Cordero available in the bullpen,Capuano likely only in case he was last resort and had to go multiple innings.So you actually think using Wise there made sense over

1.Using Cordero to face the heart of the Astros order in the 10th.If he gets them out,the Brewers bat in the 11th and keep in mind the Astros had already used both Qualls/Lidge,their two best relief pitchers.

2.So lets say we score in the 11th,Cordero gets to close out the game in the 11th vs the bottom of their order.

3.Lets say we scored in the 11th,but in an unlikely case Cordero threw to many pitches in the 10th,he shouldn't go another inning.Now any of those other three guys get to come in with some cushion of a lead,not a tie along with not having to face Berkman/Lee/Pence.

 

4.Let's say Cordero pitched the 10th and we didn't score in the 11th inning,but he still can go one more inning.If he gets out of the 11th and we score in the 12th,one of the three left relief pitchers comes in for the save with a lead for a cushion,not a tie game where one run ends it.

If it reaches a 13th inning,then i couldn't find a single fault with anyone Yost would use,likely it's Capuano until a team wins.At that point he would have given the team it's best chance to win,the offense blew it and now the game is almost completely out of his hands.I just have a hard time seeing how using Wise to start the 10th inning vs the heart of their order makes more common sense than the above,screw manager handbooks,they aren't official and only exist in their own minds.

BTW,i also don't agree with you that every manager would have sat on Cordero.No doubt some out there would also have allowed their dumb unwritten rules to not be bent by the common sense of the situation,but i do think a fair amount would have wisely used Cordero.