As my post above, and many others like it, was trying to convey, that is the whole point. You never know which one you are going to get on a particular day. If you have had an injury of any kind in the last 3 years you are on a leash. If not, you are free to not only throw more pitches, but give up runs almost every inning before finally getting pulled. Ryan, Bundy, and Smeltzer are allowed to give up 4 or 5 runs in 4.1 - 5 innings, but Archer, Gray, and others get pulled at a certain point no matter how well they are doing? Is that the pattern I just haven't seen?
I think the pattern is this: the team is using logic similar to what you use at the poker table. Resources are not infinite and you can't use your bullpen like it's the 7th game of the World Series, every game. So, some "hands" you bet the minimum you can (there's not quite an equivalent in baseball to folding, until you bring Nick Gordon in to pitch), and other "hands" you compete to win. Once you're down by a run or more, even early, your odds are less than 50/50 even if you pull out all the stops. If your offense explodes in the middle innings, you re-evaluate, but based on what actually happened, not on what you hope. Hope will kill you at the poker table (and I'm not enough of a player to go beyond that bit of basic insight).
You can argue against this. Baseball isn't poker for starters (no pun intended), although the gradual "reveal" as the games go forward in their respective ways have a least some parallels. But I think this is the pattern you are looking for. "Delicate" arms like Archer's you protect by using a short leash in terms of innings or pitch count; other arms you allow a longer leash and if a given game doesn't go well you still leave them in there (within some other limits) to try to save the bullpen. There's also the "third time through the batting order" factor. Et cetera. I believe the accusations that the manager is merely a robot reading some spreadsheet are groundless, but they do seem to operate from certain guiding principles which vary from pitcher to pitcher and thus seem inconsistent.
You can post now and register later.
If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.
You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Twins community on the internet.
Jose Rodriguez was the Twins Daily short-season minor-league hitter of the year. He is at the Dominican facilities for spring training now but will likely join Extended Spring Training in Fort Myers.
I really hold back what I would like to say about then payroll arguments here. The fact that people don't accept the amount taken in dictates the amount going out requires one of two things. Extreme financial ignorance or fanatical bias that prevents the acceptance of something some basic. I did not change the argument. It's the same idiocy over and over. Do you really want to be on the side that suggests revenues does not determine spending capacity?
Recommended Posts
Posted by ashbury,
I think the pattern is this: the team is using logic similar to what you use at the poker table. Resources are not infinite and you can't use your bullpen like it's the 7th game of the World Series, every game. So, some "hands" you bet the minimum you can (there's not quite an equivalent in baseball to folding, until you bring Nick Gordon in to pitch), and other "hands" you compete to win. Once you're down by a run or more, even early, your odds are less than 50/50 even if you pull out all the stops. If your offense explodes in the middle innings, you re-evaluate, but based on what actually happened, not on what you hope. Hope will kill you at the poker table (and I'm not enough of a player to go beyond that bit of basic insight).
You can argue against this. Baseball isn't poker for starters (no pun intended), although the gradual "reveal" as the games go forward in their respective ways have a least some parallels. But I think this is the pattern you are looking for. "Delicate" arms like Archer's you protect by using a short leash in terms of innings or pitch count; other arms you allow a longer leash and if a given game doesn't go well you still leave them in there (within some other limits) to try to save the bullpen. There's also the "third time through the batting order" factor. Et cetera. I believe the accusations that the manager is merely a robot reading some spreadsheet are groundless, but they do seem to operate from certain guiding principles which vary from pitcher to pitcher and thus seem inconsistent.
5 reactions
Go to this post
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.