A Realistic View at 2021: Part I

[Bellhorn04]

Dave Roberts used the opener strategy more than once last postseason, and it nearly burned him. Fortunately for him the guys behind the lousy opener pitched great.

[Bellhorn04]

The problem some of us dinosaurs have with yanking starters too soon isn't because don't we have faith in the good relievers scheduled to follow. It's because we don't have faith in good relievers always following with good performances.

 

Let's say your starter is throwing lights-out -- we'll call him Blake Snell. You know Snell is on that night, but no one can guarantee the next arm will be (especially if that arm was used many times in the past week). And the more guys you bring in, the higher the chances that at least one of them will be ineffective.

 

This is where phrases like over-thinking, over-managing, or lately -- over-analyzing -- clash with about 100 years or so of baseball strategy. But just to show that old dawgs can learn new tricks, the three-batter minimum rule will hopefully help such some pitching-change decisions be made more logically...

 

The thing about new strategies in baseball is that if they actually work, like defensive shifts, every other team quickly follows suit.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

The thing about new strategies in baseball is that if they actually work, like defensive shifts, every other team quickly follows suit.

 

Yup -- jump on the trend wagon... which brings us back to what Bob Ryan calls "the LaRussafication of 9th inning closers" -- with everyone trying, mostly in vain, to fabricate their very own Automatic Eck.

[jad]

I'm not sure what the answer to that question is. Analytics has a lot to do with it. I think a lot of it is that owners and GMs want to protect their investments, and therefore managers are erring too far on the side of caution.

 

Also, people in general are much bigger wusses today than we were in the past.

 

Than "we" were?

[notin]

The thing about new strategies in baseball is that if they actually work, like defensive shifts, every other team quickly follows suit.

 

... much like every sport. Screw you, boring Triangle Offense!!

[notin]

Yup -- jump on the trend wagon... which brings us back to what Bob Ryan calls "the LaRussafication of 9th inning closers" -- with everyone trying, mostly in vain, to fabricate their very own Automatic Eck.

 

Thank God other sports don’t do this and I can still watch two way players in the NFL! And my quarterback can pass, kick, punt and play safety!!

[Bellhorn04]

... much like every sport. Screw you, boring Triangle Offense!!

 

I don't know, I think some sports like football allow for clever strategy and the actual element of surprise.

 

You can't really say that about defensive shifts in baseball. The big surprise would be if they weren't used.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I don't know, I think some sports like football allow for clever strategy and the actual element of surprise.

 

You can't really say that about defensive shifts in baseball. The big surprise would be if they weren't used.

 

Or if the Red Sox didn't get burned like at least once every game when they shift their D (at least it seems that way).

[mvp 78]

Or if the Red Sox didn't get burned like at least once every game when they shift their D (at least it seems that way).

 

And how many times do they get “burned” by not shifting?

[jad]

Thank God other sports don’t do this and I can still watch two way players in the NFL! And my quarterback can pass, kick, punt and play safety!!

 

I think your irony may have sailed past unnoticed! But yes: of course we like 'the way the game used to be played'. Sports are better when teams adopt different strategies--of course, successful ones will be copied. Then someone will try something else. The absolute WORST response of the leagues is to put in rules PREVENTING innovation: e.g., outlawing the shift because Bryce Harper complains he doesn't get enough hits. The 'three-batter' rule, etc. Should tennis re-institute the rule that servers must keep both feet on the court? Should the NBA outlaw zone defense? Should MLB make the infielders stand on the base? There are plenty of rule-tweaks MLB can make that don't interfere with innovation ( simply shrinking the strike zone? putting in a pitch clock? ).

[notin]

I think your irony may have sailed past unnoticed! But yes: of course we like 'the way the game used to be played'. Sports are better when teams adopt different strategies--of course, successful ones will be copied. Then someone will try something else. The absolute WORST response of the leagues is to put in rules PREVENTING innovation: e.g., outlawing the shift because Bryce Harper complains he doesn't get enough hits. The 'three-batter' rule, etc. Should tennis re-institute the rule that servers must keep both feet on the court? Should the NBA outlaw zone defense? Should MLB make the infielders stand on the base? There are plenty of rule-tweaks MLB can make that don't interfere with innovation ( simply shrinking the strike zone? putting in a pitch clock? ).

 

I agree completely.

 

I’m all for the pitch clock, which doesn’t even require a rule change since the rule already exists!!

 

But if teams want to shift, figure out how to beat it. The three batter rule is also stupid.

 

The only rule change MLB instituted that I like is minimizing September call ups. Playing for 5 months with a 25 (now 26) man roster and then allowing 40 players for the final month is just wrong and encourages the very delays MLB keeps trying to prevent...

[Bellhorn04]

But if teams want to shift, figure out how to beat it.

 

Hitters did sort of figure it out. Launch angle.

 

The end result is, roughly the same number of runs scored, but a lot less balls in play.

[Nick]

Jimenez gained muscle during the COVID-19 pandemic. He was listed at 5-foot-11, 160 pounds in the 2020 Red Sox media guide

 

He’s listed at 5-11, 221 pounds in the 2021 media guide.

 

“A lot of workouts on the beach. Strengthening and running on the beach,” Red Sox assistant GM Eddie Romero said in December. “He’s just a natural athlete with a lot of just freak strength.”

 

 

Sounds like a good prospect, but can an elite athlete really gain 61 pounds in a year?

[notin]

The problem some of us dinosaurs have with yanking starters too soon isn't because don't we have faith in the good relievers scheduled to follow. It's because we don't have faith in good relievers always following with good performances.

 

Let's say your starter is throwing lights-out -- we'll call him Blake Snell. You know Snell is on that night, but no one can guarantee the next arm will be (especially if that arm was used many times in the past week). And the more guys you bring in, the higher the chances that at least one of them will be ineffective.

 

This is where phrases like over-thinking, over-managing, or lately -- over-analyzing -- clash with about 100 years or so of baseball strategy. But just to show that old dawgs can learn new tricks, the three-batter minimum rule will hopefully help such some pitching-change decisions be made more logically...

 

I was saying all this just the other day to Grady Little. And before that with Jimy Williams.

 

Is the problem with manager’s overanalyzing? Or with fans overanalyzing managers?

[oldtimer]

Jimenez gained muscle during the COVID-19 pandemic. He was listed at 5-foot-11, 160 pounds in the 2020 Red Sox media guide

 

He’s listed at 5-11, 221 pounds in the 2021 media guide.

 

“A lot of workouts on the beach. Strengthening and running on the beach,” Red Sox assistant GM Eddie Romero said in December. “He’s just a natural athlete with a lot of just freak strength.”

 

 

Sounds like a good prospect, but can an elite athlete really gain 61 pounds in a year?

 

He probably wasn't 160 as previously reported and may not be 221 now. I don't believe those weight numbers.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I was saying all this just the other day to Grady Little. And before that with Jimy Williams.

 

Is the problem with manager’s overanalyzing? Or with fans overanalyzing managers?

 

Maybe the only problem is people who have a problem with anything other posters say that they don't agree with. It's one thing to have discussions and debates, and another to constantly mock others who actually try to look at both sides of issues.

 

None of us are professional ballplayers as far as I know, and most probably haven't even played at any level for quite awhile. But anyone who cares enough about the game -- in all its forms -- to type about it regularly here deserves respect for offering their thoughts.

[notin]

Maybe the only problem is people who have a problem with anything other posters say that they don't agree with. It's one thing to have discussions and debates, and another to constantly mock others who actually try to look at both sides of issues.

 

None of us are professional ballplayers as far as I know, and most probably haven't even played at any level for quite awhile. But anyone who cares enough about the game -- in all its forms -- to type about it regularly here deserves respect for offering their thoughts.

 

I did start with my typical “saying just the other day” intro, but the latter part is a legitimate question. Do fans over analyze this?

 

Cash did what got him to the World Series. Ditto Grady in 2003. These exact same decisions worked out multiple times. But one time they didn’t. Sometimes, maybe it’s just that simple?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I was saying all this just the other day to Grady Little. And before that with Jimy Williams.

 

Is the problem with manager’s overanalyzing? Or with fans overanalyzing managers?

 

The next time you talk to them, do me a favor: ask Grady why a fan like me noticed Pedro tapping his heart and pointing to the heavens after the 7th in Game Seven of the '03 LCS, and ask Jimy why a fan like me wanted Derek Lowe to finish off Cleveland in Game Four of the '98 LDS... with Pedro waiting to win Game Five.

[Kimmi]

Also, chances are the second pitcher comes in facing the #5 or 6 hitter not #4 as I suggest in my example using the minimum innings needed to get to the “third time around” facing the opp’s best hitters.

 

Yeah, the chances of the first and second pitcher facing the minimum number of batters is very slim.

[Kimmi]

Long men are still usually pitchers not good enough to crack the rotation.

 

That's what I was trying to say. The long man, though he could pitch multiple innings, was typically not good enough to be a starter. Some of today's relief pitchers are as good as a starting pitcher, though only for one or two innings.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I did start with my typical “saying just the other day” intro, but the latter part is a legitimate question. Do fans over analyze this?

 

 

Is this a rhetorical question? Of course we do. That's we, as in -- those who post on a baseball forum year-round. There's no other outlet for fan addicts -- if you lived in New England, where the Red Sox supposedly reign over a "nation", you'd realize how outnumbered we are... at least, based on the sports talk shows on TV and radio that are really all about the Patriots 365 days of the year.

[Kimmi]

It's a tricky issue. You can say the same about football - new rules to protect players from head injuries, for example.

 

But when you read about all the ex-NFL players whose lives were basically ruined by head injuries, it's pretty hard not to get behind the new rules.

 

As I posted, I'm not saying the rules are bad rules. I understand and support the need to protect players from serious injury. That doesn't change my perception of today's players versus players from the past.

[Kimmi]

The problem some of us dinosaurs have with yanking starters too soon isn't because don't we have faith in the good relievers scheduled to follow. It's because we don't have faith in good relievers always following with good performances.

 

Let's say your starter is throwing lights-out -- we'll call him Blake Snell. You know Snell is on that night, but no one can guarantee the next arm will be (especially if that arm was used many times in the past week). And the more guys you bring in, the higher the chances that at least one of them will be ineffective.

 

This is where phrases like over-thinking, over-managing, or lately -- over-analyzing -- clash with about 100 years or so of baseball strategy. But just to show that old dawgs can learn new tricks, the three-batter minimum rule will hopefully help such some pitching-change decisions be made more logically...

 

The numbers strongly support pulling a starting pitcher after facing the line up twice, even if that pitcher was cruising. I can fully defend the decision to pull Snell.

 

On a similar note, however, I would like to see a relief pitcher who cruised through his inning of relief be kept in the game for another inning.

[Kimmi]

Than "we" were?

 

Are you calling me a wuss? If you are, I can't really argue with you. LOL

[dgalehouse]

Today's athletes are bigger , stronger , faster and better conditioned than those of the past . But not tougher or more durable. Some of it could be due to today's much higher salaries plus a general change in attitudes.

[notin]

Is this a rhetorical question? Of course we do. That's we, as in -- those who post on a baseball forum year-round. There's no other outlet for fan addicts -- if you lived in New England, where the Red Sox supposedly reign over a "nation", you'd realize how outnumbered we are... at least, based on the sports talk shows on TV and radio that are really all about the Patriots 365 days of the year.

 

But I would think there is a difference between saying “this is a bad strategy” and “this is a bad strategy because it failed one time.”

 

Even Lowe over Gordon? Flash was unit table that year. I had no problem with that call...

[a700hitter]

I really liked the days when we had those lineups that would work the counts and just wear the starting pitcher down. There is no longer much reward to being able to get a starter's pitch count up and knock him out of the game early.

 

On the other side, the days of a pitcher pitching a complete game are almost all but history.

Also, when I buy tickets to see a game, I am thrilled if our ace ss on te mound and not so thrilled if someone like Vaughn Eshelman gets the start. I have seen many great pitching matchups - at the top of the list would be Pedro vs. Clemens at YS on a Sunday night in May. Watching 2 openers would just not be the same.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

But I would think there is a difference between saying “this is a bad strategy” and “this is a bad strategy because it failed one time.”

 

Even Lowe over Gordon? Flash was unit table that year. I had no problem with that call...

 

I did, while it was happening. On that particular night, Lowe was the one who was literally unhittable, retiring Manny, Fryman, Thome, Sexton and SAlomar in that order. After those guys, I would have taken my chances and let him finish off Joey Cora, Lofton and Vizquel. Pedro was waiting to win Game Five; it was his first year in Boston and he had won 20 games, including Game One. In '98, the Sox still hadn't won a World Series in my lifetime (or for 70 years), and he was our best chance. The Yankees were great, but who knows in a short series; Cleveland had a 2-1 lead in the LCS after three games...

 

My issue with the way relief pitchers have been used for about 40 years is that certain guys who are lights-out -- like Lowe that night in '98 -- get replaced before even going one time through the order. If he rips through the toughest four or five hitters in a line-up, why not let him blow away the weaker links?

[notin]

I did, while it was happening. On that particular night, Lowe was the one who was literally unhittable, retiring Manny, Fryman, Thome, Sexton and SAlomar in that order. After those guys, I would have taken my chances and let him finish off Joey Cora, Lofton and Vizquel. Pedro was waiting to win Game Five; it was his first year in Boston and he had won 20 games, including Game One. In '98, the Sox still hadn't won a World Series in my lifetime (or for 70 years), and he was our best chance. The Yankees were great, but who knows in a short series; Cleveland had a 2-1 lead in the LCS after three games...

 

My issue with the way relief pitchers have been used for about 40 years is that certain guys who are lights-out -- like Lowe that night in '98 -- get replaced before even going one time through the order. If he rips through the toughest four or five hitters in a line-up, why not let him blow away the weaker links?

 

So Lowe for 4 innings that night? He hasn’t thrown 4 IP in a game since June.

 

I can understand Jimy going to Gordon for two reasons.

 

1) It worked all year. Gordon had only one blown save that entire season.

And 2) unlike me, Jimy was able to talk to Lowe and see how he felt...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

So Lowe for 4 innings that night? He hasn’t thrown 4 IP in a game since June.

 

I can understand Jimy going to Gordon for two reasons.

 

1) It worked all year. Gordon had only one blown save that entire season.

And 2) unlike me, Jimy was able to talk to Lowe and see how he felt...

 

If Jimy let Lowe get three outs in the 9th, it would've been 2 2/3 IP. Derek was 6'5, 230 and may just have had enough energy and adrenaline to finish. It could've changed history, but it's all hindsight. It's what we do.