Moneyball and the mechanization and computerization of MLB

[notin]

I agree game plans change for some managers. But Cash assured one and all that in this game he absolutely, positively stuck to his game plan--get rid of the guy having a great game and bring in the tired arm because he dare not let Snell face the Dodgers lineup a third time.

 

So let's talk about Snell's first outing vs. this one. I get that Snell did give up those 2 runs in the 5th inning, but you seem to overlooked a much bigger fact, that Snell--beyond any possible doubt--pitched way better against the Dodgers in the second game than he did in the first. Before he was unwisely removed from game 2, he had given up 2 singles, no runs, no walks, and had struck out 9. He struck out the Dodgers top three hitters all six times he faced them.

 

And he did all that in game 2, when the Dodgers should have been able to hammer him because it was the second time they had faced him in a week.

 

Kevin Cash showed absolutely zero flexibility in this game and, in my opinion, zero awareness of what was needed to win the game. He was just going thru the motions that worked before and refused to believe that Snell was actually pitching well. He also was unaware that Anderson, not Snell was the one out of gas.

 

And what part of what you said means that Cash made all these decisions based on some computer data and not his gut? Maybe he used this strategy based on game 2, when Snell didn’t get anyone out third time up?

[Bellhorn04]

And what part of what you said means that Cash made all these decisions based on some computer data and not his gut? Maybe he used this strategy based on game 2, when Snell didn’t get anyone out third time up?

 

But if he was going strictly on most recent games, why on earth would he put in a guy who has had 6 bad games in a row?

[Maxbialystock]

And what part of what you said means that Cash made all these decisions based on some computer data and not his gut? Maybe he used this strategy based on game 2, when Snell didn’t get anyone out third time up?

 

A fair question. My impression of the entire World Series is that both managers absolutely loved bringing in a "fresh arm" because both were living every manager's dream: I'm responsible for whether we win or lose games, not the players. Kind of like an old TV show where the MC got to say, "you're fired." This approach in fact worked beautifully for Dave Roberts who used 7 pitchers to hold the Rays to 1 run in the same game 6. Of the six games, three were won by the starting pitcher--2 by Kershaw (who pitch 6 and then 5.2 innings) and Buehler. No Rays starter got a win. In his 2 starts, Snell's ERA was 2.70. In Kershaw's 2 starts, his ERA was 2.31.

 

All managers use computers a lot these days, and I do think they influenced Cash's decision to pull Snell after going thru the Dodgers lineup twice. However, in the previous game he kept his starter in for 102 pitches while facing 24 Dodger batters, so I have to agree there was some internal reasoning going on with respect to Snell in game 6.

 

Game 2 is worth a revisit. First point: game dynamics were completely different--Rays had a humoungous (for them) 5-0 lead going into the 5th. Second point: the damage done in the 5th inning was by the bottom of the Dodgers order--#8 Barnes walked and #9 Taylor homered for 2 runs. So, if Cash was using game 2 to inform him about how long to leave Snell in in game 6, he should have pulled him at the beginning of the 6th inning. Third: in game 2 Snell in fact pitched slightly better than the Rays bullpen, giving up 2 runs in 4.2 innings vs. 2 runs in 4.1 innings. Fourth: Snell was not pitching lights out in game 2 because he gave up 4 walks--3 of them before the 5th inning. Relatedly, Snell didn't strike out Betts or Seager--the top 2 hitters in the Dodgers lineup-- in game 2, but struck them out 4 times in game 6.

Another big difference from game 6 was that in game 2

 

Indeed, I would argue that in this World Series the Rays bullpen overall was mediocre and that this was obvious before Snell stepped to mound in the first inning of game 6.

 

So, yes, I can agree Cash was doing some of his own thinking in the WS and in game 6. But you cannot convince me that his situational awareness before, during, and even after game 6 was all that good.

[notin]

A fair question. My impression of the entire World Series is that both managers absolutely loved bringing in a "fresh arm" because both were living every manager's dream: I'm responsible for whether we win or lose games, not the players. Kind of like an old TV show where the MC got to say, "you're fired." This approach in fact worked beautifully for Dave Roberts who used 7 pitchers to hold the Rays to 1 run in the same game 6. Of the six games, three were won by the starting pitcher--2 by Kershaw (who pitch 6 and then 5.2 innings) and Buehler. No Rays starter got a win. In his 2 starts, Snell's ERA was 2.70. In Kershaw's 2 starts, his ERA was 2.31.

 

All managers use computers a lot these days, and I do think they influenced Cash's decision to pull Snell after going thru the Dodgers lineup twice. However, in the previous game he kept his starter in for 102 pitches while facing 24 Dodger batters, so I have to agree there was some internal reasoning going on with respect to Snell in game 6.

 

Game 2 is worth a revisit. First point: game dynamics were completely different--Rays had a humoungous (for them) 5-0 lead going into the 5th. Second point: the damage done in the 5th inning was by the bottom of the Dodgers order--#8 Barnes walked and #9 Taylor homered for 2 runs. So, if Cash was using game 2 to inform him about how long to leave Snell in in game 6, he should have pulled him at the beginning of the 6th inning. Third: in game 2 Snell in fact pitched slightly better than the Rays bullpen, giving up 2 runs in 4.2 innings vs. 2 runs in 4.1 innings. Fourth: Snell was not pitching lights out in game 2 because he gave up 4 walks--3 of them before the 5th inning. Relatedly, Snell didn't strike out Betts or Seager--the top 2 hitters in the Dodgers lineup-- in game 2, but struck them out 4 times in game 6.

Another big difference from game 6 was that in game 2

 

Indeed, I would argue that in this World Series the Rays bullpen overall was mediocre and that this was obvious before Snell stepped to mound in the first inning of game 6.

 

So, yes, I can agree Cash was doing some of his own thinking in the WS and in game 6. But you cannot convince me that his situational awareness before, during, and even after game 6 was all that good.

 

Your original premise was thw it was all based on the computer.

 

From your OP:

 

What did matter is that the computer told him that the third time through the batting order is fraught with peril--indeed, hopeless--no matter how well the starter is pitching. The computer also did not care that Anderson, the guy who came in, was tired and had an ERA of over 7 (which became 9) in this WS. And, if the computer didn't care, Kevin Cash didn't either. And neither does the Rays hierarchy. What was it Humphrey Bogart said near the end of the movie, The African Queen? "The Germans have their systems and they sticks to 'em."

 

Also - the title of the thread.

 

Situational awareness aside, do you think Cash lived and died by what his computer said? Or did he just make bad calls based on the previous outcomes and how he managed all season long?

[Maxbialystock]

Your original premise was thw it was all based on the computer.

 

From your OP:

 

What did matter is that the computer told him that the third time through the batting order is fraught with peril--indeed, hopeless--no matter how well the starter is pitching. The computer also did not care that Anderson, the guy who came in, was tired and had an ERA of over 7 (which became 9) in this WS. And, if the computer didn't care, Kevin Cash didn't either. And neither does the Rays hierarchy. What was it Humphrey Bogart said near the end of the movie, The African Queen? "The Germans have their systems and they sticks to 'em."

 

Also - the title of the thread.

 

Situational awareness aside, do you think Cash lived and died by what his computer said? Or did he just make bad calls based on the previous outcomes and how he managed all season long?

 

I just said in my lengthy prior post that yes, I do think Cash was doing some thinking on his own. That said, it is clear to me that he believed far more in his bullpen--largely because they had been so good in the regular season and he got in the habit of relying on them--than they deserved in this World Series. Snell was far and away his best pitcher in the WS, had won the Cy Young Award two years earlier, and was pitching superbly, with no sign of tiring (he'd only thrown 73 pitches), when Cash pulled him. And, after the game, Cash explained why he did so. He had decided before the game started that Snell would not pitch against the Dodger lineup a third time. You claim that was only a tentative plan, subject to change, but Cash himself disagreed with you in the post game interviews.

 

Looking back, I think the best defense of Kevin Cash is that the other team was simply better. They have better hitting, better fielding, better base running, and better pitching (even though the Rays took game 4 by a score of 8 to 7). Indeed, game 6, which was so very close because of the brilliant pitching by Snell, was a stunning display of what a great bullpen can do. Gonsolin started and gave up the 1 Rays run, and six Dodger relievers held the Rays scoreless for 7.1 innings. I think that reality preyed on Cash's mind during the game and that he yearned to show what his bullpen could do, regardless of how brilliantly Snell was pitching.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Joe Kelly, as told to Rob Bradford, re. Gm 6, 6th inning:

 

“I stood up on the top of the fence and was taking my hat off to give him a tip of the cap, a thank you, because the only way we were winning that game is if that happened,” the former Red Sox and current Dodgers reliever said. “So I was taking my hat off and screaming at the top of my lungs. We were all ecstatic. Every single person in that stadium knew. Kevin Cash got a standing ovation from the whole stadium.”

 

“One hundred percent,” said Kelly when asked if the Dodgers felt they were on their way to victory after the pitching change. “That’s what everyone thought, that was the only way we were winning. And he got taken out and it turns into instant, ‘Oh, there is no way we lose now. They just did it for us’ type thing.”

[Maxbialystock]

Your original premise was thw it was all based on the computer.

 

From your OP:

 

What did matter is that the computer told him that the third time through the batting order is fraught with peril--indeed, hopeless--no matter how well the starter is pitching. The computer also did not care that Anderson, the guy who came in, was tired and had an ERA of over 7 (which became 9) in this WS. And, if the computer didn't care, Kevin Cash didn't either. And neither does the Rays hierarchy. What was it Humphrey Bogart said near the end of the movie, The African Queen? "The Germans have their systems and they sticks to 'em."

 

Also - the title of the thread.

 

Situational awareness aside, do you think Cash lived and died by what his computer said? Or did he just make bad calls based on the previous outcomes and how he managed all season long?

 

Definitely an overstatement by me (for dramatic effect). Yes, absolutely, the Rays have a system, maybe the best system in MLB for acquiring, developing, and fielding winning teams on a small budget. And, yes, Cash uses computer data. But I agree that now and then Cash does seem to be thinking.

 

Nevertheless, I am not persuaded by anything said so far that his decision to pull Snell and bring Anderson out was anything other than terrible. Snell was not tired; Anderson was (and said so after the game). Snell was pitching the game of a lifetime against a tough Dodgers lineup; and the Rays bullpen in this WS was nowhere near as good as it had been in the regular season.

 

And, as I have now said countless times, the key piece of evidence about Cash's thinking in the 6th inning was what he said after the game: he had decided before the game that he would not let Snell face the Dodgers lineup a third time.

[Bellhorn04]

BTW, there is a narrative out there that Cash didn't even make this decision - that is made for him before the game by his higher-ups and analytics people.

[notin]

BTW, there is a narrative out there that Cash didn't even make this decision - that is made for him before the game by his higher-ups and analytics people.

 

So why even have a manager? Scapegoat reasons?

[Bellhorn04]

So why even have a manager? Scapegoat reasons?

 

Yankee fans have been saying the same thing about Boone - that it's Cashman and the analytics people making calls before the games start - as with Game 2 vs. the Rays.

[notin]

Yankee fans have been saying the same thing about Boone - that it's Cashman and the analytics people making calls before the games start - as with Game 2 vs. the Rays.

 

Ah great. The Illuminati Conspiracy Theories come to baseball.

 

While teams do use and, in some cases, overuse analytics, to think they have become the sole decision making tactic and that teams are paying millions of dollars to managers to act as figureheads is just silly. But this is how many people lash out against strategies they don’t understand and are therefore skeptical of...

[mvp 78]

So why even have a manager? Scapegoat reasons?

 

Baseball is getting lame.

[Bellhorn04]

While teams do use and, in some cases, overuse analytics, to think they have become the sole decision making tactic and that teams are paying millions of dollars to managers to act as figureheads is just silly.

 

It's not really all that silly when you look at a guy like Boone. Whatever the Yankees are paying him is a tiny fraction of their expenditures.

 

Why would Cashman hire a guy with no experience? It seems to me a reasonable explanation is that he wanted a guy who would do what he was told to do by Cashman and the analytics people. Which is not to say that Boone doesn't have a lot of input and doesn't do things on his own. I'm sure he does, within the parameters that are set out for him.

 

I don't find this far-fetched at all.

[notin]

Baseball is getting lame.

 

These teams are certainly taking them time to phone in the "due diligence" when hiring and signing a manager when all they really need is a warm body to put on a uniform and walk to the mound to make pre-determined pitching changes?

 

Why not just save the cash and go back to having player-managers? One less salary on the books for a guy who has no impact anyway...

[notin]

It's not really all that silly when you look at a guy like Boone. Whatever the Yankees are paying him is a tiny fraction of their expenditures.

 

Why would Cashman hire a guy with no experience? It seems to me a reasonable explanation is that he wanted a guy who would do what he was told to do by Cashman and the analytics people. Which is not to say that Boone doesn't have a lot of input and doesn't do things on his own. I'm sure he does, within the parameters that are set out for him.

 

I don't find this far-fetched at all.

 

The only thing it explains is why Boone has not been fired.

 

But I also think the analytics are becoming a convenient scapegoat for people who are resistant to changes in the way the game is measured. Not played, just measured.

 

Even on this board, there are plenty of people who think the analytics rule the day, rather than acting as guides to decision making.

[Bellhorn04]

The only thing it explains is why Boone has not been fired.

 

But I also think the analytics are becoming a convenient scapegoat for people who are resistant to changes in the way the game is measured. Not played, just measured.

 

Even on this board, there are plenty of people who think the analytics rule the day, rather than acting as guides to decision making.

 

Analytics are clearly having a massive effect on how the game is played and managed. And personally I'm moving into the camp that the total impact is not good for the entertainment quality of the game.

[Bellhorn04]

That play a couple of years ago when Mookie made a catch and then pulled out his cheat sheet and waved it because he was perfectly positioned. Some people thought that was great. But it made me kind of sick to my stomach.

[notin]

That play a couple of years ago when Mookie made a catch and then pulled out his cheat sheet and waved it because he was perfectly positioned. Some people thought that was great. But it made me kind of sick to my stomach.

 

Why?

 

That's like getting mad at NFL head coaches because they wear headsets...

[Bellhorn04]

Why?

 

That's like getting mad at NFL head coaches because they wear headsets...

 

I expect NFL football to be a highly technological game. It has been for a long time.

 

I don't like it so much with baseball. And I know a lot of other people feel the same. It's not about being right or wrong, there's no such thing.

 

What ultimately matters is whether it has a major impact on fan interest or not.

[mvp 78]

These teams are certainly taking them time to phone in the "due diligence" when hiring and signing a manager when all they really need is a warm body to put on a uniform and walk to the mound to make pre-determined pitching changes?

 

Why not just save the cash and go back to having player-managers? One less salary on the books for a guy who has no impact anyway...

 

Pedey should be player/manager this year. 100%.

[mvp 78]

That play a couple of years ago when Mookie made a catch and then pulled out his cheat sheet and waved it because he was perfectly positioned. Some people thought that was great. But it made me kind of sick to my stomach.

 

I'm fine with that stuff. I think we're headed towards an iceberg though. Don't lose sight of what is happening in front of you just because you developed a strategy 3 hours earlier.

[dgalehouse]

That play a couple of years ago when Mookie made a catch and then pulled out his cheat sheet and waved it because he was perfectly positioned. Some people thought that was great. But it made me kind of sick to my stomach.

 

I think that should not be allowed. Let the players and coaches do their homework instead of playing video games , cribbage or social media. No more cheat notes.

[notin]

Pedey should be player/manager this year. 100%.

 

But he can’t play!!!

[notin]

I expect NFL football to be a highly technological game. It has been for a long time.

 

I don't like it so much with baseball. And I know a lot of other people feel the same. It's not about being right or wrong, there's no such thing.

 

What ultimately matters is whether it has a major impact on fan interest or not.

 

 

But baseball has always been a data-driven sports. Even if you ignore that it has more statistics than any other sport, you at least have to acknowledge they have always used advanced scouts to get data. Is it more disturbing when teams learn how to defend a hitter using analytics as opposed to from a scout?

 

The whole notion that players “just go out there and play” has probably been dead a lot longer than you think...

[mvp 78]

But he can’t play!!!

 

I was told he could play on one leg.

[notin]

I was told he could play on one leg.

 

Were they talking about baseball or hopscotch?

[mvp 78]

Were they talking about baseball or hopscotch?

 

The bold fonted one was talking about beisbol

[Bellhorn04]

But baseball has always been a data-driven sports. Even if you ignore that it has more statistics than any other sport, you at least have to acknowledge they have always used advanced scouts to get data. Is it more disturbing when teams learn how to defend a hitter using analytics as opposed to from a scout?

 

The whole notion that players “just go out there and play” has probably been dead a lot longer than you think...

 

The effect on the actual game is much more noticeable now.

 

-Defensive shifts.

-Hitters trying to launch the ball, producing more home runs and strikeouts.

-Bullpen games.

-Starters being pulled early so they don't face hitters a third time.

 

As I say, it'll be the fans who ultimately judge whether the game is better or worse as a result.

[notin]

The effect on the actual game is much more noticeable now.

 

-Defensive shifts.

-Hitters trying to launch the ball, producing more home runs and strikeouts.

-Bullpen games.

-Starters being pulled early so they don't face hitters a third time.

 

As I say, it'll be the fans who ultimately judge whether the game is better or worse as a result.

 

Well, don't forget, there have been other "noticeable" changes that you didn't notice.

 

Like dedicated bullpens, dedicated ninth inning specialists aka "closers", LOOGY's? 5 man rotations? Or even 4 man rotations?

 

How about in the 80's, when every player who got to first just automatically ran tried to steal second? And every team pitched out once per inning? That was the Golden Era of the Stolen Base. Ty Cobb's record of 96 stolen bases lasted from 1915 to 1962 and Maury Wills. At the start of the 1980 season, Cobb had sole possession of third place on the Single Season Stolen Base leaderboard. By the end of 1980, he was tied for fifth.

 

So you don't like everyone hitting home runs? What about when no one did? And players like Franklin Baker lead the league with NINE? And his nickname was "Home Run"!! Then that Ruth guy came along and smashed an unheard of 29 home runs for the 1919 Red Sox (a team that collectively hit 32 home runs).

 

What about stuff like Astroturf? If Ty Cobb got to play on it, think Pete Rose is the all time leader in hits?

 

There have been so may changes. Guys holding notecards doesn't bother me and never will...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Well, don't forget, there have been other "noticeable" changes that you didn't notice.

 

Like dedicated bullpens, dedicated ninth inning specialists aka "closers", LOOGY's? 5 man rotations? Or even 4 man rotations?

 

How about in the 80's, when every player who got to first just automatically ran tried to steal second? And every team pitched out once per inning? That was the Golden Era of the Stolen Base. Ty Cobb's record of 96 stolen bases lasted from 1915 to 1962 and Maury Wills. At the start of the 1980 season, Cobb had sole possession of third place on the Single Season Stolen Base leaderboard. By the end of 1980, he was tied for fifth.

 

So you don't like everyone hitting home runs? What about when no one did? And players like Franklin Baker lead the league with NINE? And his nickname was "Home Run"!! Then that Ruth guy came along and smashed an unheard of 29 home runs for the 1919 Red Sox (a team that collectively hit 32 home runs).

 

What about stuff like Astroturf? If Ty Cobb got to play on it, think Pete Rose is the all time leader in hits?

 

There have been so may changes. Guys holding notecards doesn't bother me and never will...

 

But according to pitchers, the biggest problem is guys holding superballs disguised as baseballs, and then throwing them to batters who consistently hit them way further than other mere mortals with similar strength and skills ever have, since the beginning of recorded history (I think that would be 1870 or so, when sox were still called stockings).

 

And, I know, the balls were wound about as tight as a rolled up pair of stockings...