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

[logan82]

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?)

I wouldn't go giving Pinella to much credit there. Marmol is young and unproven. It is easy to pass over a young guy even though he is better. I would attribute that more to luck than anything.

 

If they can find a manager who will manage without regard to the save stat I am on board.

[strawbossisevil]

You can disagree, but I'm pretty certain that the overwhelming majority would have done the same thing (and it's really not a common sense issue, like one poster says, if Wise pitches a scoreless inning, and we score a run, then a win is pretty much a certainty as we bring Cordero in to finish the game.) That isn't opposed to common sense, as you would like to indicate. It's hardly stupid reasoning, it's just different than how you would have done it, fair enough?

 

And Adam, the reason I brought up the fact that the majority of managers would have done the same thing, is to point out that even if replaced, Ned's replacement would likely handle the same exact situation in the same exact way. So you can disagree with the logic, but when it comes down to it, it is hardly a "Yost" issue. It's a Major League Baseball manager issue. So singling out an individual manager for doing just like everyone else would have done, really seems kind of pointless, unless you have a vendetta against said manager, of course http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif.

[adambr2]

Strawboss, regarding your first paragraph, it's simple mathematics, in my opinion. If Wise pitches a scoreless 10th, can we not assume that he would do the same in the 11th? Let's break it down like this. Let's say that the chances of Wise giving up a run are 40%, more than 1 run, 20%, and the chances of Cordero giving up 1 run are 15%, more than 1 run, 8%. Now, that means we have a 40% chance of losing the game in the 10th if Wise pitches the 10th in a tie game. The chances of Cordero are much lower. Then say we score 2 runs in the 11th, we don't have Cordero anymore, but we've given Wise some breathing room. If he fails, we cannot blame Yost. Why? Because if Wise gave up a run in the 11th, we can assume he would have done the same in the 10th, ending the game immediately. Now we still have a chance.

 

I wish a statitician could break this down, but I have always been very compelled by numbers and statistics, and I do believe the odds of winning the game to be better by using your best relievers early. Obviously you don't agree, but I feel like I have pretty much tried to break this down as much as I possibly can.

 

I don't have a vendetta against Yost by any means, it's not like he kicked my dog or anything that would make me dislike him personally. I don't think he is a good in-game manager. I think he generally puts good lineups out there, with a couple exceptions this season. I think he's good at motivating the guys to keep playing hard when things are going rough.

 

I think he's a poor manager at making in-game decisions. I believe he's near the bottom in MLB at doing so, and I think with our window of opportunity the next few years with this team, we can't afford a guy like that. Again, that's just my opinion, obviously there's nothing statistical that I can do to prove that Yost is among the worst in-game decision makers in baseball.

 

BTW, I see what you are saying about majority of managers doing it, and I still disagree with that assessment. To me, that's like saying that because 27 of 30 people tell me that the earth is flat, I can't criticize the one who is telling me it, because other people will say the same thing. Ned doesn't need to be guided by 26 other managers. He's a grown man and can make his own decisions. That's why my issue is with him, not the others who say the same thing. If we got rid of Yost and hired Dusty Baker, and he did the exact same thing, my issue would be with Dusty Baker.

[TooLiveBrew]

BTW, I see what you are saying about majority of managers doing it, and I still disagree with that assessment. To me, that's like saying that because 27 of 30 people tell me that the earth is flat, I can't criticize the one who is telling me it, because other people will say the same thing.

 

well-said - though to be fair to logan, his consistent point is that we can't necessarily assume that a new manager wouldn't make similar mistakes, especially given the prevalence of "conventional wisdom" throughout MLB managers

[adambr2]

BTW, I see what you are saying about majority of managers doing it, and I still disagree with that assessment. To me, that's like saying that because 27 of 30 people tell me that the earth is flat, I can't criticize the one who is telling me it, because other people will say the same thing.

 

well-said - though to be fair to logan, his consistent point is that we can't necessarily assume that a new manager wouldn't make similar mistakes, especially given the prevalence of "conventional wisdom" throughout MLB managers

Right, and I agree with that point. No reason to assume that a new manager would do it differently, but then the issue would be with that manager.

 

I just hate the rule with a passion. So many unwritten rules in baseball which I think professional managers are very scared to go against.

[danzig6767]

You can disagree, but I'm pretty certain that the overwhelming majority would have done the same thing (and it's really not a common sense issue, like one poster says, if Wise pitches a scoreless inning, and we score a run, then a win is pretty much a certainty as we bring Cordero in to finish the game.) That isn't opposed to common sense, as you would like to indicate. It's hardly stupid reasoning, it's just different than how you would have done it, fair enough?

 

And Adam, the reason I brought up the fact that the majority of managers would have done the same thing, is to point out that even if replaced, Ned's replacement would likely handle the same exact situation in the same exact way. So you can disagree with the logic, but when it comes down to it, it is hardly a "Yost" issue. It's a Major League Baseball manager issue. So singling out an individual manager for doing just like everyone else would have done, really seems kind of pointless, unless you have a vendetta against said manager, of course http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif.

 

You keep repeating and assuming every manager in baseball would have sat on Cordero until a "save situation" came about,i just reject your assumption as being anywhere near a fact.There were 13-14 games left in the season at the time in a tie race and knowing the Cubs had just one,i don't buy all managers would have sat there like a sheep and used a guy who has been brutal to face Berkman/Lee/Pence,while his best pitcher sat in the bullpen eating sunflower seeds.

I'll grant you that i'm sure a certain percentage of them still would be unable to think outside their handbook shell,but given the importance of that game,my assumption would be closer to 50% and maybe less.Now if we were talking about a game in May or if Cordero had pitched the day before,then the percentage i'd guess would rise quite a bit.

As for if we hired a new manager next season and he'd automatically be like a robot and manage like Ned,i don't buy that either.If Melvin has issues with how Ned manages,i can't believe in the interview process that he wouldn't ask questions to the applicant about how they would go about things or study how a former manager did things.

 

[TooLiveBrew]

what's kind of tricky is that the players are involved. Whether anyone thinks it's stupid or not, saves are - quite literally - very valuable to relievers. Even though the stat can be overblown, it's one that's used to measure them against other RP peers, and affects any potential payday (for closers). I'm sure it comes into play in arbitration, and also in the general negotiation process, so it's not like there's just some unwritten rule dictating the choice. Though the 10th inning in Houston is likely to be a situation where Cordero wouldn't care, he probably relishes any chance to pitch in the 9th with a 3-run lead - since it's the easiest way to rack up saves, and help himself to a bigger payday.

[giffted1]

Strawboss, regarding your first paragraph, it's simple mathematics, in my opinion. If Wise pitches a scoreless 10th, can we not assume that he would do the same in the 11th? Let's break it down like this. Let's say that the chances of Wise giving up a run are 40%, more than 1 run, 20%, and the chances of Cordero giving up 1 run are 15%, more than 1 run, 8%. Now, that means we have a 40% chance of losing the game in the 10th if Wise pitches the 10th in a tie game. The chances of Cordero are much lower. Then say we score 2 runs in the 11th, we don't have Cordero anymore, but we've given Wise some breathing room. If he fails, we cannot blame Yost. Why? Because if Wise gave up a run in the 11th, we can assume he would have done the same in the 10th, ending the game immediately. Now we still have a chance.

 

I wish a statitician could break this down, but I have always been very compelled by numbers and statistics, and I do believe the odds of winning the game to be better by using your best relievers early. Obviously you don't agree, but I feel like I have pretty much tried to break this down as much as I possibly can.

I don't have a vendetta against Yost by any means, it's not like he kicked my dog or anything that would make me dislike him personally. I don't think he is a good in-game manager. I think he generally puts good lineups out there, with a couple exceptions this season. I think he's good at motivating the guys to keep playing hard when things are going rough.

 

I think he's a poor manager at making in-game decisions. I believe he's near the bottom in MLB at doing so, and I think with our window of opportunity the next few years with this team, we can't afford a guy like that. Again, that's just my opinion, obviously there's nothing statistical that I can do to prove that Yost is among the worst in-game decision makers in baseball.

 

BTW, I see what you are saying about majority of managers doing it, and I still disagree with that assessment. To me, that's like saying that because 27 of 30 people tell me that the earth is flat, I can't criticize the one who is telling me it, because other people will say the same thing. Ned doesn't need to be guided by 26 other managers. He's a grown man and can make his own decisions. That's why my issue is with him, not the others who say the same thing. If we got rid of Yost and hired Dusty Baker, and he did the exact same thing, my issue would be with Dusty Baker.

This pretty much says that closers are best used in the last inning with a one run lead on the road. You can used them earlier, but they have more impact late in a close game.

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

[DSFastball55]

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.

 

I agree, it's getting pretty lame. Even the local sports talk show here is the same, even though they have no idea what they're talking about. The team has MANY chances to win or lose on any given night, picking out one decision made by the manager is total nitpicking and is using the benefit of hindsight. If Cordero comes in and gives up a run in the eighth you guy would criticize him for not using Wise. I think he did what pretty much any MLB manager would have done considering our limited bullpen options.

[clancyphile]

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.

Except it was pretty much set in stone that Cordero would have to pitch at least one inning if the Brewers had a lead of one or two runs after the top of the tenth.

[JohnBriggs12]

Ned's explanation shows how stupid he is. He is just regurgitating what is a stupid baseball "rule".

 

The game is much more at risk tied with a lesser pitcher on the mound, than it would be later (hitters tend to tire as innings pile up) with a lead and a lesser pitcher on the mound.

[paulmolitor4]

Ned's explanation shows how stupid he is. He is just regurgitating what is a stupid baseball "rule".

 

The game is much more at risk tied with a lesser pitcher on the mound, than it would be later (hitters tend to tire as innings pile up) with a lead and a lesser pitcher on the mound.

First time poster here-- Long-time Brewer fan (since 1982)

Did you really just say "hitters tend to tire as innings pile up"? We're not talking about bar league softball here; where fat, out of shape men slam a 12-pack over the course of the game and can barely stand up in the batter's box by the end of the game. If you are a professional baseball player (non-pitcher of course) who tires as the game progresses you have some serious problems.

[sheethead]

It was Wise's inning to win or lose.

 

This should never have been the case with 12 games to go and tied for first place. Matt Wise is terrible, and we all know that.

The Brewer's bullpen had been pretty much emptied.

 

Not true. Believe it or not, there were 3 better options (Cappy, Cordero, and yes - Greg Aquino <-- mostly because Matt Wise is just brutal)

You throw Cordero midway through that inning, and if the game goes more than an inning or two longer, you are in rough shape.

 

Not with Cappy in the bullpen.

 

Especially, if we are purposely not throwing Cappy so he would be available to pitch for Sheets.

 

The division leaders are throwing out a 4-man rotation for the stretch run, why can't we?

 

My point is/has been since this debacle = Matt Wise should have pitched in the 7-1 game the night before, and Turnbow would have been rested and ready to START the 8th inning on Wed. This should be academic, but unfortunately the majority of fans are left with frustration and doubt. Honestly, I don't see how anyone could protect Ned Yost at this point.

[sheethead]

You can disagree, but I'm pretty certain that the overwhelming majority would have done the same thing (and it's really not a common sense issue, like one poster says, if Wise pitches a scoreless inning, and we score a run, then a win is pretty much a certainty as we bring Cordero in to finish the game.) That isn't opposed to common sense, as you would like to indicate. It's hardly stupid reasoning, it's just different than how you would have done it, fair enough?

 

If you are an MLB manager in the pennant race, and you are betting on Matt Wise to pitch a scoreless inning (and Ned was banking on 2 with the double switch), common sense is not being applied. Even if Matt Wise should have been allowed to start the 10th - and I argue he shouldn't have even sniffed this game - there is no way on my green earth he should have been allowed to continue once he put 2 runners on with less than 2 out. I would say letting Matt Wise lose that game in the 10th with better options available in the bullpen is stupid. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion I guess, even if that opinion concludes this was the Brewers best option to win an extremely important game. However, I would argue this one to my grave and know the whole time my thinking and reasoning is better than anyone arguing against me (and I can't say that about most of my arguments http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/wink.gif).

[Phenomenal Smith]

The whole notion of a "closer" is silly to begin with. Relief roles have become too specialized these days.

[jeffy]

Except it was pretty much set in stone that Cordero would have to pitch at least one inning if the Brewers had a lead of one or two runs after the top of the tenth.

 

It was pretty much set in stone that the Astros were going to win with a runner on third and no outs. What was Yost saving Cordero for at that point? Even if you start the inning with Wise, it is inexcusable at this point in the season to let the game end without the best reliever throwing a pitch.

[MJLiverock]

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.

 

Danzig I think you sum it up perfectly here. Why not go down using your best rather than saving your best for a hypothetical situation that may or may not occur. I would much rather see Wise go into a game with a cusion of a run and facing the bottom of the lineup rather than pitch in a game against Houstons' best hitters with zero margin for error. This was horrible bullpen use and I can't find anyway to defend it.

 

I thought about in another context as well. It is like sending your pitcher to the plate with 2 outs and a runner on third knowing you need a run to win or continue with Prince on the bench available to pinch hit and hoping the pitcher squeaks out a hit so that you can use Prince in extra innings to win the game later. No sane manager would do it, so why send out anything less than your best option when the game is on the line and you absolutely have to hold the oposing team?

 

The more I think about it the more confused / mad I become. How can a manager not trust a guy (Wise or any other option in the bullpen)to hold a one or more run lead later in the game (claims he has no one to close the game if uses CoCo early and they get a lead) but trusts the same guy (Wise) to shut down a team in a tie game? It doesn't make sense.

[pitchleague]

I wonder what Cordero would say off the record regarding not being used on Wednesday.

 

I'm sure to a reporter he would say on the record that it is Yost's call and he'll do whatever he is asked. But what about off the record to his friends, family, teammates, etc.? Love to be a fly on the bullpen wall sometime.

[logan82]

I thought this thread was about closer usage.

[sheethead]

I thought this thread was about closer usage.

 

Oops, my bad. I think it went off topic when Capuano was discussed as an option on 9/19.

[1992casey]

I've moved the 4-man rotation discussion to this thread:

 

Suggestion: Pitch Sheets on 3 days rest (also: Cubs 4-man rotation)

 

Carry on with the closer discussion. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[strawbossisevil]

However, I would argue this one to my grave and know the whole time my thinking and reasoning is better than anyone arguing against me (and I can't say that about most of my arguments http://static.yuku.com//domainskins/bypass/img/smileys/wink.gif).

Wow, just wow. Don't let any of us unintelligent folk get in the way of your "better" thinking and reasoning. I would argue that it isn't better, it's different.

 

Baseball prospectus points out that on the road, closers are best used with a one run lead. Those guys have some pretty good thinking and reasoning behind them too.

Here's the thing. Even Matt Wise had about a 50% chance of getting out of that inning unscored upon. It wasn't some automatic thing, that he'd come in an bring in a run. And for those who are talking about options and including Aquino, seriously, how hypocritical is that (after just complaining so much about him blowing one this past week). It was clear, Capuano wasn't going to pitch unless they went deep into extras, Aquino probably not at all, and Cordero was being saved for the situation that Baseball Prospectus points out that he'd be most useful. So who does that leave, Matt Wise. After burning through all of his good options (and some of his bad ones too), Wise was the guy who had to get us through that inning.

You can argue until your bones turn to dust, and belittle people who disagree with you all you want. It won't change the fact that some won't agree with you (and yes, they have their reasons too).

 

And danzig, I honestly believe that the majority of managers would have done the same thing, you can disagree with that assessment, but its your opinion against mine, so there really is no way to prove who is right in either direction (other than what history has shown us about what managers have typically done in that situation - which favors my opinion). I won't say you are wrong, I have no proof, because there is no way to stick every manager in the ML in that exact situation to actually see what they do. We can just agree to disagree on it.

[jeffy]

Here's the thing. Even Matt Wise had about a 50% chance of getting out of that inning unscored upon.

Even after the winning run was on 3rd?

[logan82]

The ideal situation for our bulpen this year, or any year, would have been for one of our younger RP to develop. This year that would have been Capellan or Sarfate.

 

Next year I would have to think the best would be for Turnbow to be named closer. That way we can put Shouse and a stud righty in the pen and use them in the highest leverage situations.

[sheethead]

I'm sorry if I somehow offended you strawboss, but 50% sounds extremely made up.