Perkins not until the 13th

[jimmer]

 

I feel that the manager should be able to use his gut from time to time and go against the book.  And I don't care if its the old book or the new book, I prefer a manager who is not slavishly following it.

I can agree with this for the most part, though I think there are some instances where a move is wrong no matter what.  Like batting a guy with a sub .270 OBP in the leadoff spot.

[MileHighTwinsFan]

 

That's just one outcome. Another possibility - the home team scores a walk off win off a lesser pitcher.

 

Agreed, but the one strategic advantage in an extra inning game is that you get a chance to protect a lead with the guy designated for that purpose to be available to fulfill that role.  

 

As a manager, you want people in the roles they are assigned to play.  Closers need to close, middle relief guys are asked to keep their team in the game and back in the dugout .   Graham and Duensing were asked to fulfill their roles and Perkins' his - that is how you manage over 162 games in the major leagues.  

[MileHighTwinsFan]

 

With the best hitters in the Pirate's lineup coming to the plate in the 8th inning, it would make the most sense for Perkins to be used in that situation. Despite Boyer's performance, I don't trust him to face a struggling McCutcheon.  Let Perkins shut down the heart of the Pirate's order, then bring in Boyer to mop up against lesser hitters in the 9th.  

 

Totally disagree.   Boyer has been excelling in that role. He is comfortable there and has proven his value.  So it would have been better to have Boyer close - even though this is not his role on the team?

[blairpaul715]

 

Agreed, but the one strategic advantage in an extra inning game is that you get a chance to protect a lead with the guy designated for that purpose to be available to fulfill that role.  

 

As a manager, you want people in the roles they are assigned to play.  Closers need to close, middle relief guys are asked to keep their team in the game and back in the dugout .   Graham and Duensing were asked to fulfill their roles and Perkins' his - that is how you manage over 162 games in the major leagues.  

So with that strategy, playing their assigned roles, that after you run out of relievers, do you use a position player or a starting pitcher???? For Godsakes, would hate to have someone out of their role...........now with that said, i am not advocating either way, but like someone else said earlier, i like the idea of the manager going by his gut feel.

[MileHighTwinsFan]

 

So with that strategy, playing their assigned roles, that after you run out of relievers, do you use a position player or a starting pitcher???? For Godsakes, would hate to have someone out of their role...........now with that said, i am not advocating either way, but like someone else said earlier, i like the idea of the managerre going by his gut feel.

I am pretty sure Duensing was going to go as long as they could with him, probably 3 innings.  More than 3 innings and of course they would have to go with Perkins. 

 

I think you are all missing the point - having Perkins available to close is a strategic advantage the Twins had that the Pirates didn't.  It is not about roles - it is about chess moves to win a game.  In this situation, Perkins being available to close is a strategic benefit for the team.  

 

[jimmer]

Pitchers aren't like position players.  Asking players to play out of their normal position is something I would try to avoid, especially IFs in the OF and OFs in the IF, but pitchers? They pitch.  That's what they do. They come in to get batters out.  Their approach is the same.

 

The need to have relief pitchers with definite roles is just odd to me. How about telling your relievers that no one has a role, and that they need to just be prepared to pitch whenever they are called upon? With the possible exception of guys you use as long relievers.

 

I get the flip side of the argument.  The Royals situation, but seriously, those three in the 7, 8 and closer roles are so awesome I think it's about their abilities more than it is about being comfortable in a role. If they decided Davis is the 'closer' instead of Holland, I doubt they miss a beat.

[Willihammer]

Agreed, but the one strategic advantage in an extra inning game is that you get a chance to protect a lead with the guy designated for that purpose to be available to fulfill that role.  

 

As a manager, you want people in the roles they are assigned to play.  Closers need to close, middle relief guys are asked to keep their team in the game and back in the dugout .   Graham and Duensing were asked to fulfill their roles and Perkins' his - that is how you manage over 162 games in the major leagues.

Pitching is pitching. In any other sport, would you bench your best player when the game is on the line?

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

Pitching is pitching. In any other sport, would you bench your best player when the game is on the line?

 

Since I would know that he couldn't win the game, just prevent a loss, not to mention that by using him that one time, I wouldn't be able to use him the rest of the game, yes, there is an argument to be made that you should "bench" your best player with the game on the line.

 

It would be like if LeBron James told me he could play 1 more possession in a game, so in a tie game I played him when the other team had the ball, rather than when I did.

[Willihammer]

Since I would know that he couldn't win the game, just prevent a loss, not to mention that by using him that one time, I wouldn't be able to use him the rest of the game, yes, there is an argument to be made that you should "bench" your best player with the game on the line.

 

It would be like if LeBron James told me he could play 1 more possession in a game, so in a tie game I played him when the other team had the ball, rather than when I did.

I'd argue the pitcher is more like a goalie in hockey, they have an outsized impact on defense. Certainly more than a guard or forward who is just one cog in a defensive scheme.

[jimmer]

 

I'd argue the pitcher is more like a goalie in hockey

yep, they both get team accomplishments put on their individual stat lines :-)

[Halsey Hall]

Perkins has been nail biting his last few appearance, so holding him was the correct move IMO.  And Neil Allen probably had a lot to say about the use of the pen.  That's why Mollie's got him and Mollie listens. 

[jokin]

 

 

I like his modesty, don't you? Oh, and who called him a Savant? Must've missed that.

 

Uhh, you did?

 

 

"I'm glad he looked up from the spreadsheets long enough to use his considerable intuitive capacity."

 

[jimmer]

If we call Mollie a savant, wouldn't the proper way to say it be something like Savantie? :-)

[h2oface]

It worked. It doesn't affect the future or the past. Molitor was a genius last night. 

Great to see Graham pitch so well, too. And watch a fastball from a Twin hit 98.

[DaveW]

 

I am pretty sure Duensing was going to go as long as they could with him, probably 3 innings.  More than 3 innings and of course they would have to go with Perkins. 

 

I think you are all missing the point - having Perkins available to close is a strategic advantage the Twins had that the Pirates didn't.  It is not about roles - it is about chess moves to win a game.  In this situation, Perkins being available to close is a strategic benefit for the team.  

Duensing would have given up a run long before he managed to throw 3 straight scoreless innings.

[spinowner]

 

Pitching is pitching.

I respectfully disagree. That's a bit like saying running is running. Sprinters are not marathoners and marathoners are not sprinters. Some pitchers are best suited to a particular role, and the major leagues are replete with pitchers who struggled in one role only to excel in another, our current all-star closer being a prime example. Another great example in Twins history is LaTroy Hawkins. His long career is proof that he's a very good pitcher, but he struggled as a starter and then struggled as a closer. It was in 2002 when Gardenhire and Anderson put him in a setup role that he thrived. He tried closing again after leaving the Twins and again had little success. That doesn't mean slavishly doing things only one way, and a manager has to be aware of who is ready and feeling good at a given point in time. It's like one of TK's mantras: put your players in a position in which they are most likely to succeed. If your bullpen is having success doing things a certain way then don't change. If it's not broken don't break it.

[Willihammer]

I respectfully disagree. That's a bit like saying running is running. Sprinters are not marathoners and marathoners are not sprinters. Some pitchers are best suited to a particular role, and the major leagues are replete with pitchers who struggled in one role only to excel in another, our current all-star closer being a prime example. Another great example in Twins history is LaTroy Hawkins. His long career is proof that he's a very good pitcher, but he struggled as a starter and then struggled as a closer. It was in 2002 when Gardenhire and Anderson put him in a setup role that he thrived. He tried closing again after leaving the Twins and again had little success. That doesn't mean slavishly doing things only one way, and a manager has to be aware of who is ready and feeling good at a given point in time. It's like one of TK's mantras: put your players in a position in which they are most likely to succeed. If your bullpen is having success doing things a certain way then don't change. If it's not broken don't break it.

Another poor analogy. If anything sprinting is to marathoning what relieving is to starting. And nobody is suggesting Perkins take a turn in the rotation or even throw 3 innings as Graham did. Pitching 1-2 innings of relief with a tie should be no different than pitching in a save situation.

[spinowner]

 

I respectfully disagree. That's a bit like saying running is running. Sprinters are not marathoners and marathoners are not sprinters. Some pitchers are best suited to a particular role, and the major leagues are replete with pitchers who struggled in one role only to excel in another, our current all-star closer being a prime example. Another great example in Twins history is LaTroy Hawkins. His long career is proof that he's a very good pitcher, but he struggled as a starter and then struggled as a closer. It was in 2002 when Gardenhire and Anderson put him in a setup role that he thrived. He tried closing again after leaving the Twins and again had little success. That doesn't mean slavishly doing things only one way, and a manager has to be aware of who is ready and feeling good at a given point in time. It's like one of TK's mantras: put your players in a position in which they are most likely to succeed. If your bullpen is having success doing things a certain way then don't change. If it's not broken don't break it.

 

 

Another poor analogy. If anything sprinting is to marathoning what relieving is to starting. And nobody is suggesting Perkins take a turn in the rotation or even throw 3 innings as Graham did. Pitching 1-2 innings of relief with a tie should be no different than pitching in a save situation.

OK then. In track there's the 100, the 200, the 400, the 800, the 1500, etc.etc.etc. In the same way that some runners do better in one event and some do better in another, some pitchers do better in one relief role, some do better in another. Like LaTroy Hawkins. The Twins bullpen seems to have had fairly good success, other than a couple blowouts where it didn't seem to matter who pitched. I don't see any reason for Molitor to change what he's been doing.

[Willihammer]

OK then. In track there's the 100, the 200, the 400, the 800, the 1500, etc.etc.etc. In the same way that some runners do better in one event and some do better in another, some pitchers do better in one relief role, some do better in another. Like LaTroy Hawkins. The Twins bullpen seems to have had fairly good success, other than a couple blowouts where it didn't seem to matter who pitched. I don't see any reason for Molitor to change what he's been doing.

You're still trying to equate a difference in workload to a difference in the scoreboard and its still not working.

[spinowner]

 

You're still trying to equate a difference in workload to a difference in the scoreboard and its still not working.

OK, so let's try again with another track analogy. Look at a relay team. 4 runners, each one running the same distance. Yet if you ask any track coach you'll hear that having the right runner in place for each leg makes a difference. Likewise, some pitchers pitch better in middle innings and some pitchers pitch better as closers. It doesn't mean that middle relievers can't close and it doesn't mean closers can't pitch middle relief. It's just that you want pitchers to pitch in situations that will maximize their performances.

[Craig Arko]

How much did we lose this game by?

[twinssporto]

First time poster here but life long Twins fan!  

 

I thought it was a brilliant move.  My sons were asking the same question in the 9th/10th "why not bring in Perk"?  The way both teams were hitting it seemed like moving Perk in right away would be a waste.  When you have one of the best offensive teams in the AL (I can't believe I'm actually writing that) wait until you score a run or two.  I know, if the Bucs score the game is over but it was a calculated gamble and a good one when you have the offense the Twins do.  Go Twins!

[diehardtwinsfan]

I'm sorry, but I don't think this is about gut feel or saving a pitcher. It's about going with the hot hand. That's especially true with relievers, and Graham had the hot hand. No reason to leave him out when he was filthy and getting the job done. Let him have those innings. That's one thing that really bothered me about Gardy. He'd bring in some guy and that guy would chew threw an inning throwing 10 pitches and being unhittable and he was out the next inning. Then when the extra inning game happened, there were suddenly no pitchers... See 2004 ALCS.

 

Go with the hot hand. Let that guy go more than an inning. I'm quite fine with that.

[DaveW]

I'm sorry, but I don't think this is about gut feel or saving a pitcher. It's about going with the hot hand. That's especially true with relievers, and Graham had the hot hand. No reason to leave him out when he was filthy and getting the job done. Let him have those innings. That's one thing that really bothered me about Gardy. He'd bring in some guy and that guy would chew threw an inning throwing 10 pitches and being unhittable and he was out the next inning. Then when the extra inning game happened, there were suddenly no pitchers... See 2004 ALCS.

 

Go with the hot hand. Let that guy go more than an inning. I'm quite fine with that.

Graham looked great no doubt, but bringing in Duensing prior to Perkins had disaster written all over it IMHO.

[Squirrel]

So did bringing in just about anyone not named Glen Perkins, imo. I think it was a crap shoot no matter what decision Molitor made.

[MileHighTwinsFan]

Duensing would have given up a run long before he managed to throw 3 straight scoreless innings.

But he didn't and Perkins got his save. Why people are questioning a strategic move that worked to perfection is beyond me.

[DaveW]

So did bringing in just about anyone not named Glen Perkins, imo. I think it was a crap shoot no matter what decision Molitor made.

That's why you bring in the guy named Glen Perkins there!

[DaveW]

But he didn't and Perkins got his save. Why people are questioning a strategic move that worked to perfection is beyond me.

People are questioning it because the exact same "strategic" move led to a loss a week ago (extra inning game where Perkins threw 0 pitches)

[twinsnorth49]

So did bringing in just about anyone not named Glen Perkins, imo. I think it was a crap shoot no matter what decision Molitor made.

I think that pretty much sums up the bullpen most nights.

[stringer bell]

Closers are specialists and (usually) the best bullpen arm.  A tie game going into the bottom of the ninth means that the home team won't be able to use the closer in the specialist role, but the visiting team may get that opportunity.  Molitor could have gone to Perkins if the situation was dire (winning run in scoring position, nobody out and winning run on third with less than two outs), it didn't come to that. 

 

I have no problem with using the best arm in a high leverage situation, but the down side exists--1)  Using a non-closer to finish a game and 2) overuse of the best relievers to answer every leveraged situation.  It makes some sense to stick to roles, but they shouldn't be adhered to rigidly.  Not every save situation needs "the closer".

 

Maybe I worry too much about overusing certain pitchers.  I wonder if Boyer wasn't sharp yesterday in part because he got five outs the previous day against the same team.  I wonder if Thompson might also being used too much.  Somebody else needs to step up to take some pressure off those guys.