SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
4/16-4/18 Red Sox @ Indians Series Thread
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Apr 18, 2013 14:20:51 GMT -5
The bigger problem is the one inning and out mentality. Farrell used Tazawa for two last night, which was good, and I know he's committed to not pushing Uehara for more than an inning, but for the most part these are guys who can go two, three innings... This is where pitching efficiency comes into play. Here are the Pitches/Strikes (Innings) for Uehara, Tazawa, and Bailey since April 11th:
| Uehara | Tazawa | Bailey | Thu 4/11 | 8/4 (1/3) | 17/12 (1) |
| Sat 4/13 | 9/7 (1) | 11/8 (1) | 12/7 (1) | Mon 4/15 | 12/9 (1) |
| 26/16 (1) | Wed 4/17 | 14/11 (1) | 25/17 (2) | 16/13 (1) |
What should amaze people is the point that FTHW made: Uehara and Tazawa simply don't walk anyone to speak of. That means they can strike lots of people out with their great stuff - and they do - and still have ridiculously low pitch counts. Bailey's hanging in there with them, though he can't hold a candle to Uehara, no one can except, it appears, Tazawa. And that's just a maybe. Outside of the difficulties last Thursday, and Bailey's stealing a win on Monday, these guys are just lights out, and in a hurry. It's likely the efficiency will give Farrell the opportunity to do just what you point out - use them for more than one inning when the opportunity arises. That may be limited to Tazawa at this point, given Uehara's importance and his age. And Bailey may now be seen as the "official" closer. But the opportunity is probably there. I'm sure this is something the team tracks. Probably makes them as giddy as it makes us.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Apr 18, 2013 14:47:29 GMT -5
The bigger problem is the one inning and out mentality. Farrell used Tazawa for two last night, which was good, and I know he's committed to not pushing Uehara for more than an inning, but for the most part these are guys who can go two, three innings. The best pitcher in a bullpen is needed much more in a one-run or tie game in the seventh than with a three run lead in the ninth. Pretend, for a second, that the Red Sox didn't have Tazawa and Uehara - their bullpen was Bailey, and then a dropoff to the Miller/Mortensen/Wilson types. In yesterday's game, who would've come in to get those important outs in the sixth? It certainly wouldn't have been Bailey, despite him being by far the best pitcher out there. They would've been saving him for the ninth inning. That's crazy! They'd be saving him for a situation, just in case those worse pitchers were able to get the game to him. Farrell has an advantage, in that he has three excellent relievers. Frankly, it was the same advantage LaRussa had in 1988, when he created the modern ninth-inning closer with Eckersley. The strategy worked because he had four relievers who pitched over 70 innings with a sub-3.50 ERA. But Greg Cadaret and Eric Plunk never got any of the credit for it working, because Eckersley got the saves. With all of the advances that statistical analysis has brought to the game, it honestly boggles my mind that the sub-optimal ninth inning closer usage patterns still continue to happen. If anything, bullpen usage has become more unnecessarily rigid, rather than less. I mean, teams have a "seventh inning guy." Seriously? Any of you subscribe to Joe Sheehan's newsletter? Yesterday's was all about how flawed bullpen usage is today. He's always been really on point with this. Here's an excerpt:
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Apr 18, 2013 17:00:01 GMT -5
I'd really like a better answer to why teams stick with it than, "they're all idiots." Even the "because the players need it" seems inadequate. I mean, Billy Beane really would love nothing more than to do something innovative, and he doesn't care too much about people's feelings, but the A's are pretty standard with the closer. But as bunt totals have dropped, stolen bases have waxed and waned, OBP came to dominate roster construction, so many other things yielded to statistical analysis, this remains ... why?
I wonder if a reason is in another A's/Beane maxim, "This is a game of attrition, and what's being attritted are pitchers arms." I realized a couple days ago that a huge advantage of the modern closer usage is that it would significantly cut down on the number of times you warm up another pitcher in the 9th, which would be a major inefficiency (warming guys up you never use). That seems like a valid point, altho in my mind probably inadequate to explain the overall pattern ... but, I don't know, I think there's possibly something to this. Because an awareness of the causes of damage and stress on arms has gone up at the same time the specialization has accelerated against some compelling data that it's not optimal usage in terms of actual in-game performance. Warming multiple guys up "just in case" used to be much more common practice than it is now, and if you have a rigidly set pattern of usage of arms, you'll minimize the wasted stress of warming pitchers up without using them.
Dunno, I'm literally making this up as I go (and it seems like there'd be more talk of this if this was truly a major factor), but it's the only answer I've come up with that makes any sense at all.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2013 17:42:58 GMT -5
I'd really like a better answer to why teams stick with it than, "they're all idiots." Even the "because the players need it" seems inadequate. I mean, Billy Beane really would love nothing more than to do something innovative, and he doesn't care too much about people's feelings, but the A's are pretty standard with the closer. But as bunt totals have dropped, stolen bases have waxed and waned, OBP came to dominate roster construction, so many other things yielded to statistical analysis, this remains ... why? The same reason football coaches, who by all accounts are highly intelligent and analytical, punt on nearly every fourth down when you shouldn't punt on almost any of them: people don't get fired for losing games in the conventional mannor. People do get fired when they lose games in an unconventional manner. Going with the closer model may not not be optimal, but no one is ever criticized for it, because it's simply the accepted wisdom.
|
|
atzar
Veteran
Posts: 1,817
|
Post by atzar on Apr 18, 2013 19:14:04 GMT -5
The random tangents for Jerry and Don are frequently pretty funny, but this whole mustard thing has gotten pretty old.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Apr 18, 2013 19:38:49 GMT -5
Ellsbury + Victorino can be so filthy when they're both playing well. Combine that with Pedroia and your top 3 is potentially an on-base machine that should set up the middle of the order to have monster years
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,827
|
Post by wcp3 on Apr 18, 2013 19:43:15 GMT -5
It's too bad Napoli is so UNCLUTCH!!!!
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 18, 2013 19:45:28 GMT -5
Carp should have been in tonight's lineup, if Bradley wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by mredsox89 on Apr 18, 2013 20:23:06 GMT -5
Napoli with a 3/4 swing on a waste 0-2 fastball up and away and puts it into RF to drive in Ells. When things are going well, that's what happens. 3rd in the AL in RBI
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2013 20:28:31 GMT -5
Napoli with a 3/4 swing on a waste 0-2 fastball up and away and puts it into RF to drive in Ells. when that happens, things go well. 3rd in the AL in RBI FTFY.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Apr 18, 2013 20:36:37 GMT -5
Not only did Lester set us up for the win but he saved the bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 18, 2013 20:36:46 GMT -5
So, how 'bout this starting pitching?
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 18, 2013 20:42:57 GMT -5
Carp needs to get a chance to start versus RHP. He has upside that needs to be explored.
|
|
atzar
Veteran
Posts: 1,817
|
Post by atzar on Apr 18, 2013 20:43:11 GMT -5
Good outing for Lester. I was worried about his pitch count early on, but he got more efficient as the game went on.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2013 21:26:00 GMT -5
Alright Francona, it's been real. Enjoy Cleveland:
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Apr 18, 2013 22:11:48 GMT -5
11-4 with a 10gm homestand coming up! Can you believe it?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 18, 2013 22:58:50 GMT -5
11-4 with a 10gm homestand coming up! Can you believe it? Not really. But the wins are banked, so whooo-hooo.
|
|
|
Post by marrcus on Apr 18, 2013 23:39:46 GMT -5
The club really isn't hitting yet even with the good run production.
WMB and ice cold Gomes, Drew would really put things in high gear if they could produce. And of course vintage '11 Ortiz would be nice. So there's really another level to get too and hopefully it will arrive quickly to keep the nice start advancing forward.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 19, 2013 8:12:05 GMT -5
The club really isn't hitting yet even with the good run production. WMB and ice cold Gomes, Drew would really put things in high gear if they could produce. And of course vintage '11 Ortiz would be nice. So there's really another level to get too and hopefully it will arrive quickly to keep the nice start advancing forward. The hope are the bats wake up in time to makeup for the dip in pitching production.
|
|
|