Maxbialystock

You absolutely believe that? If you do, please tell me why MLB teams pay a whole lot more for some pitchers than for others. Because they are stupid and don't realize one pitcher is just as good as another and that the difference between pitchers is "incredibly small?"

I see nothing wrong with managers running thru scenarios before a game and tentatively deciding what they might do. Cash did that with Snell. But, as you say, Cash's problem was that he apparently didn't watch the game and especially Snell closely enough. Moreover, I think he was unaware that his bullpen was no longer as reliable as it had been. Maybe he even yearned to do what Dave Roberts was doing, sending out six relievers and holding the Rays to 0 runs. Surely you can't believe that "the difference between staying with one pitcher over another is not very significant." Dave Roberts actually did that, and it worked well, but Cash should have realized his bullpen wasn't nearly as good.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Take another look at the box score. Snell gave up 2 runs in 4.2 innings, and the bullpen gave up 2 runs in 4.1 innings.

And I disagree with you because at the moment Snell was pulled off the mound and Anderson was brought in, the Rays were leading, 1-0, and Snell was not tired and was pitching brilliantly. Snell was the Rays best hope of winning that game. Bringing Anderson in, as we now know, guaranteed the Rays would lose.

Then why did you bring up the top of win probability if it was not pertinent to this discussion? Of course we don't know what Snell would have done, but we do know that, right up until the moment Cash jerked him out of the game, he was feeling great with excellent command and stuff and was pitching the game of a lifetime. To me that's sufficient evidence to say Snell--who had already struck Mookie and the next two Dodger hitters twice apiece--was a much better choice than Anderson, who said after the game he was tired and did have his good stuff, which is why he gave up the double, the wild pitch, and the groundout that brought Betts home with the go ahead run. But let's ignore all that and just focus on the simple fact that after the game Kevin Cash told reporters that he decided before the first pitch that Snell would not be allowed to face any Dodgers hitter a third time.

I don't have to think. As I've already said several times, after the game was over, Kevin Cash told the known baseball world that he decided before the game that he would pull Snell after he had faced every Dodger batter twice. However, since you ask, I will say I strongly believe he would have pulled Snell when Mookie came to bat, even with 2 outs, no one on, and Snell pitching the game of his life. Cash would not care one whit that Snell had struck Betts out twice already--as well as the next two batters due up. What would have mattered most to Cash was that this would be the third time facing Mookie, that Mookie has hit Snell fairly well in the past, and that the Dodgers in this WS had been very good at scoring runs with two outs. Heck, I think Kevin Cash would have loved to jerk Snell off that mound with two outs and no one on base in the bottom of the 6th. What a dramatic move by the brilliant manager and the real source--not the players who don't get paid much anyway--of Rays wins this year. My guess is that by the 4th inning Cash was already fidgeting in the dugout because he was way behind Dave Roberts in the arms race. By the 4th inning, Roberts had already brought in two fresh arms to none by Cash.

Hold it, there pardner. I didn't say Cash decided before the game to pull Snell after 18 Dodger batters--twice through the lineup. Kevin Cash said that after the game. That's right. Cash told the known baseball world that he decided before the first pitch that Snell was not good enough to go thru thru Dodgers lineup 3 times, not even if he was having a great night, which he certainly was. Interestingly, in the previous game his starter Glasnow faced 24 Dodger hitters, threw 102 pitches, and gave up 4 runs in a game the Rays lost. So maybe Cash decided he simply couldn't trust any starter, not even his Cy Young Award winner from 2 years ago.

I have no doubt that Anderson was very good at some point this season, but we now know beyond any question that he was not good in this WS and certainly was not good in game 6. He said so himself after the game. So Cash absolutely was not going to his team's strength. Indeed, to any viewer with half a brain (about all I can claim to have), the guy at the top of his game, who was not tired (having thrown just 73 pitches), who had mowed down Dodger hitter after Dodger hitter, and who won the Cy Young Award just 2 years ago, was already on the mound. And what do you mean by "have any chance at all?" When Snell was pulled in the 6th--and I know this will come as a shock to you--the Rays were leading, 1-0. Yes, the Dodgers had an excellent lineup. But not against Snell Tuesday night when Snell struck out their top of the order both times he faced them. In a tight ball game, Snell, not Anderson, was by far their best option. But not to Cash. He decided before the first pitch that Snell would only face 18 Dodger batters.

What in the wide, wide world of sports is "win expectancy?" Are you saying that, when Kevin Cash pulled Snell in the 6th inning, the game was already a lost cause because the Rays had only score 1 run? Or that Anderson was just the victim of bad luck when Mookie doubled and Anderson threw the wild pitch? If that is not your point, then what is? My point is that Snell was having a great night, Cash took him out, and brought in Anderson who was predictably lousy enough to guarantee the Dodgers two runs thanks to the double and the wild pitch--oh, and the rbi groundout for the go ahead run. The one point I will certainly agree to is that the Dodgers had the better team. But guess what? Somewhere, no doubt in some old, unread newspaper, I read that you gotta play the games. Moreover, once Snell went to the mound, it became very apparent that the Rays had a real shot--granted, against a better team--because last night Snell dominated the Dodgers. For 5.1 innings, 73 pitches, 9 K's, 0 walks, 0 runs, and 2 singles, anyway.

That's about right. Woe betide any manager today that's doesn't use all the amazing stats and other data computers generate.

If Anderson doesn't have that WP???????!!!!!!! To me the wild pitch is one more strong piece of evidence that Anderson wasn't ready to pitch, didn't have good stuff, didn't have good command, etc. Guess how many Snell had in 73 pitches. That's right, none. I mean, seriously, how could any pitcher in the post game interview say, "I was doing great except for the double and wild pitch that turned that inning into a disaster. If they ain't hitting it out of the park, I'm doing my job.

To me the fact that the Rays only scored one run only reinforces the notion that you stay with Snell because he was their best means of winning a low scoring game. Or have you never heard of a pitching duel? Have you even heard of Johnny Podres who shut out the Yankees in game 7 of the 1955 WS?

If Cash really said that, he is a raving idiot. As I just pointed out to Notin, how come Cash didn't follow that plan in the previous game when his starter Glasnow went five innings, gave up 4 runs, and faced--wait for it--24 batters. Cash and the Rays had a great season, especially given their payroll. But that doesn't mean Cash never makes mistakes.

Yeah, that's why Mookie broke into a grin when he saw Cash pull Snell--and why his manager smiled back at him--because Anderson in that situation was going to be much tougher than Snell. I have no doubt that the game plan was to pull Snell after he had pitched to the Dodgers lineup twice, but that's my point. Cash had zero situation awareness and did not care that: Snell was having a career night and had struck out the next three batters all six times he faced them; Anderson was tired; Anderson was not effective against the Dodgers in this World Series; Snell had only thrown 73 pitches. And while we're on the topic of Kevin Cash's genius and superior situational awareness, please explain to me how in the previous game (when the Dodgers won 4-2 and went up 3 games to 2) Cash decided to leave Glasnow in for 5 innings, 103 pitches, and 4 cotton picking runs, including 2 dingers? And what happened to the "don't let him pitch to the Dodgers lineup a third time" rule? I ask because by my count Glasnow faced 24 Dodger batters (15 outs, 6 hits, and 3 walks). Snell, having a spectacular game, was jerked after facing 18 batters.

Are you joking? Are you really saying that, short of giving up back to back dingers, Anderson was doing fine out there? He gave up a hard hit double to the same guy Snell had struck out twice in the game and then made a wild pitch. He himself said after the game he did not have good command or good stuff.

A fair point, but, based on the responses so far, I'd have to say no one on talksox (so far) is arguing to go with the computer no matter what. And that's my quarrel. Computers are here to stay, but last night Kevin Cash reminded me of the Scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz: "I haven't got a brain." Even worse, I'm betting the Rays President of Baseball Operations (or whatever they call him) is fine with a brainless manager as long as he does what the computer tells him to do. They Rays have their systems, and they sticks to 'em. I am of course exaggerating because I certainly don't think Kevin Cash is brainless. Nevertheless, I thought he at least implied last night that he would make the same decision again because computers know better.

German officers have/had a term--fingerspitzengefuhl--that means "finger tip feel" and refers to a commander's situational awareness of what is happening on the battlefield. I think the best football coaches, even the ones who rely heavily on computers and game plans, assistants in the press boxes, etc, have that situational awareness and that it helps them make what are often spur of the moment decisions on who to play and what formation/play should be used. Baseball used to be that way. Remember Grady Little's decision to keep Pedro Martinez on the mound in the 2003 ALCS game which allowed the Yankees to come back? Grady had lousy situational awareness and was correctly fired after that season. But to my way of thinking those kinds of human errors are the essence of sports and baseball and should be celebrated (unless your a huge Sox fan, which I am). These days MLB managers rely less and less on understanding what is happening on the field and more and more on what the computer says. Last night Kevin Cash displayed that phenomenon perfectly. And, by the way, substituting computer sense for situational awareness has worked wonderfully for the Rays. They have a codified system for acquiring players (on a very low payroll), developing them, and now orchestrating how they are positioned on the field, when and how pitching changes are made, etc. Cash confirmed this last part last night. It mattered not a whit to him that Snell was pitching the game of a lifetime (5.1 innings, 73 pitches, 9 K's, 0 walks, 0 runs, 9 K's) or that Snell had struck out the next three batters (Betts, Seager, Turner) he would have faced six out of six plate appearance. 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." Let me hasten to add that all managers use computers today all the time: before games, during games, after games. So it's clearly too late to put that genie back in the bottle. Indeed, I suspect that Dave Roberts relied heavily on computer information to make six pitching changes last night (he used 7 pitchers). It's remotely possible that Kevin Cash was resentful that he couldn't pull Snell out sooner because these days that's how managers show how smart they are--they bring in a new pitcher. Only dumb managers rely on players (more than computers) to win the games. Speaking of situational awareness, I thought the Dodgers displayed far more of it than the Rays, who in one game had men on 2d and 3d and no outs when the batter hit a grounder to the third baseman. That resulted in both runners being thrown out and the batter ending up on 1B. On the other hand, whenever Mookie Betts was on base, it usually spelled trouble because he knew when to gamble, plus the Rays players routinely made the wrong defensive play under pressure.

Kevin Cash seems to think players don't win ball games; managers do. Plus he loves nothing more that to march out, get rid of the guy on the mound, and bring in a "fresh arm." What a crock. Kevin Cash lacks fingerspitzengefuhl. And the notion that the Rays lineup are the real culprits is just baloney. Bringing in Anderson was monumentally dumb because he promptly gave Mookie (the same guy Snell struck out twice) a double and then threw a wild pitch, which brought home the tying run and put the go ahead run on 3B win just one out. Rotten pitching, dumb manager, simple as that.

Gotcha. Grady little was an idiot for leaving Pedro in, and Kevin Cash was an idiot for pulling Snell--who pitched better tonight against the Dodgers than any Rays pitcher has. Also: Snell had only thrown 73 pitches; the Rays bullpen has not been all that reliable; and Snell had already struck Mookie out twice. Kevin Cash lacks fingerspitzengefuhl and seems to think that players don't win ball games; managers do. He was probably outraged that Snell was going to win game 6 for the Rays when that honor belonged to the manager.

Snell looked really tired to me. He could barely make it back to the dugout. Plus it's obvious now he threw way too many fastballs. Somewhere Grady Little is smiling.

I hated losing Iglesias too, not because I thought the Sox needed him, but because he was such great fun to watch at SS.