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

[clancyphile]

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.

Unfortunately, Capellan and others (Sarfate, etc.) did not step up.

No use crying over it.

 

[logan82]

a run would be expected to score 65% of the time in that situation.

[UndraftedFA]

As much as many of us disagree with the way closers are used, why did managers change it to the way it is? If my memory is correct, the Red Sox tried changing it up a few years ago. It worked out badly, and they quickly went back to the way all teams do it.

 

I will admit I do not fully understand why managers use bullpens the way they do. At the same time, I will admit people who are much smarter than me and have been in baseball all of their life, decided the modern way was better than the ways of the past. If there wasn't some sort of sound logic to it, I don't think every manager in baseball would adhere to the current usage of the closer. I think in the end, using a closer earlier than the "rule" ends up better on paper than reality. That's just a guess though.

 

I won't say anyone is dumb for thinking otherwise, because I think that way sometimes too. I just keep asking myself though, "If it is so obvious to fans, why don't managers and GM's see it?"

[logan82]

Saves became a sexy stat. Saves became a stat that players can make money off of, much like RBIs.

 

2 more articles.

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/whither-the-closer/

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/whither-the-closer-part-two/

[biedergb]

As much as many of us disagree with the way closers are used, why did managers change it to the way it is? If my memory is correct, the Red Sox tried changing it up a few years ago. It worked out badly, and they quickly went back to the way all teams do it.

 

I will admit I do not fully understand why managers use bullpens the way they do. At the same time, I will admit people who are much smarter than me and have been in baseball all of their life, decided the modern way was better than the ways of the past. If there wasn't some sort of sound logic to it, I don't think every manager in baseball would adhere to the current usage of the closer. I think in the end, using a closer earlier than the "rule" ends up better on paper than reality. That's just a guess though.

 

I won't say anyone is dumb for thinking otherwise, because I think that way sometimes too. I just keep asking myself though, "If it is so obvious to fans, why don't managers and GM's see it?"

I think that there is something to be said about having roles and defined situations. That is maybe why closer-by-committee scenarios haven't worked out. I don't have an issue with Ned about having these roles. I have an issue with how he almost religiously adheres to these rule -- Cordero only in save situation, Turnbow in the 8th (regardless of when he was last used or if runners are on base), using middle relievers in close games late (ie Spurling) so that you're closer can come in for his save situation. Just because it's a non-save situation, doesn't mean it is not a high leverage situation.

 

[jeffy]

a run would be expected to score 65% of the time in that situation.

I assume that was in response to:

Even after the winning run was on 3rd?

If so, 65% is actually surprisingly low. But, in any case, the question is what were Cordero's chances vs. Matt Wise's with that winning run on 3rd. Since odds were the game was going to be lost, it was most likely the last inning and it no longer made any sense at all to save Cordero at that point...even if it did at the start of the inning.

[biedergb]

I think the 65% is a statistical average. But with a contact pitcher like Wise (.285 BAA, 43K in 53IP) you can assume 65% or more -- not to mention he even admits his confidence is down. If you bring in a guy like Cordero who has a good chance of striking out the batter like Lee to prevent the 1st and 3rd scenario. And if Lee still flies out, Cordero has a better chance of striking out Pence than Wise.

 

But this is just one example of not using the best player available in what is a 'must-win' situation (in terms of mentality, not that we literally have to win each game). If Ned doesn't realize these last few weeks are all 'must-win', then he just doesn't understand pennant/playoff baseball.

[strawbossisevil]

My 50% number was entering the inning, not once a guy reached third (it's obviously higher in that situation and really assuming that I was talking about that specific moment is putting words into my mouth). And like I said, we just didn't have the bullpen depth to bring in Cordero. It was Wise's inning to win or lose.

[Two Fisted Slobber]

Number of times an 82+ win team has brought in their closer in with a tied game on the road in 2007:

 

cle 0

bos 2

LAA 1

nyy 3

ari 1

nym 0

sdp 0

det 0

col 3

sea 0

 

While I would have preferred Cordero over Wise, it may have been foolish to expect ANY major league manager to actually do so.

[logan82]

While I would have preferred Cordero over Wise, it may have been foolish to expect ANY major league manager to actually do so.

 

How many of those times were extra inning games? Was he the last reliever left before going to a starting pitcher who had an off day? I agree with you that most managers would have done the same thing so it isn't like Yost is any different than an manager.

[logan82]

I assume that was in response to:

Even after the winning run was on 3rd?

If so, 65% is actually surprisingly low. But, in any case, the question is what were Cordero's chances vs. Matt Wise's with that winning run on 3rd. Since odds were the game was going to be lost, it was most likely the last inning and it no longer made any sense at all to save Cordero at that point...even if it did at the start of the inning.

 

Yes it was in response to that. The big disagreement is how much of a difference it is going from Wise to CoCo. Some say huge, some say not much. Some people think any advantage should be used. Some don't.