Timlin for a 2nd IP? Really? Seriously?
I’ve been racking my brain trying to figure out what the purpose of having Mike Timlin pitch 2 IP last night in a tie game was. I can understand if Tito thinks that Timlin has been pitching better and that he is a good choice in a tie game, especially when you’ve got 4 IP to fill. But what I don’t get is why he thought there was any way Timlin would be effective for a 2nd inning. Since his arrival with the Red Sox, one thing has been pretty consistent about Timlin: he can pitch well for 1 IP but not for more than that.
Now, one might say that trailing by one run on the road, you’re probably going to lose, so it’s pretty much garbage time. I don’t agree with that, but let’s assume that this is how Tito is thinking. Then it might make sense to try to get a couple IP out of Timlin, regardless of results, and save our bullets for another day. But Tito’s actions after Timlin allowed the HR go completely against this line of thinking. He took Timlin out, thus preventing him from soaking up innings. And he brought in Delcarmen, which means he either thought it was still a close game or he thinks Delcarmen is mop-up material. He, of course, allows Delcarmen to go only 2/3 of an inning.
It’s really amazing to me that Tito has been extremely reluctant to allow most of his relievers to go more than 1 IP, doesn’t have the same reluctance with Timiln. Timlin leads the bullpen in IP/appearance, while Delcarmen, who averaged ~1.5 IP/game in AAA, is rarely used this way. Papelbon, who was going to be a starter and threw multiple innings regularly this spring, and who has plenty of rest between appearances, is also relegated to 1 IP/g.
I know it may sound predictable, but all the good feelings I got from Tito’s usage of the pen early in the season have gone away. It still looks like he doesn’t really know how to use his extremely effective pen.
Darren
Posted: August 04, 2007 at 03:05 PM |
20 comment(s)
Related News:
Boston
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
That's a hell of a closing line.
I think you have to go to sonsofsamhorn.net now.
It may not have been the right choice, but I see the logic.
I also think that we have a pretty categorical disagreement over how one measures good management of a bullpen. I think that looking at a micro level of who pitches two innings and who doesn't is a quite minor concern. Whether pitchers pitch at or above their usual level of effectiveness, and whether the best pitchers have the most important roles, are much more important. The effectiveness of hte bullpen, to me, is the most significant evidence of good usage.
The only possible excuse I can see is that Tito felt he was shorthanded in the 'pen: Tavarez is the guy he would have preferred to stretch out in that situation, but Tavarez had started Wednesday and probably was only available in an emergency situation. Plus they may want to keep Tavarez shadowing Schilling as insurance until they see the old man makes the start on Monday and gets through it in reasonable shape. And Snyder, the other option for a multiple inning middle relief appearance, had gone 1 2/3 on Thursday.
I figure Tito planned to get as many innings as he could out of his #4-5 relievers - that's Timlin and Manny D. Timlin blew it, which sucks. But if you bring in Manny D early, then you've got to either go to a bad reliever, or hang some more innings on your aces, which I'd be loath to do at this point.
You can argue that the top relievers should throw fewer innings in games with larger leads, etc, but (a) that's not an argument in regard to Fri, because the usage was already set and (b) then we're having a larger, theoretical debate about leverage and relief roles, which, well, we've all had a million times as it is.
Based on the # of pitches splits, Timlin has been pretty bad after 15 pitches in 07 and over the past several years. 8.38 ERA in 07 now (not sure how much of that came yesterday). It's also a pretty small sample and as mentioned above, he's coming back with a sore shoulder after not pitching for 11 days.
And Delcarmen has been used for more than 1 IP 3 times this year, and he's given up no runs. He was well-rested but not rusty.
Even if we assume that you can't use all 3 of your top relievers there, you could still go to MDC and the two closers for 1.1 each. Or do something completely crazy like use MDC for 2 IP! I know, it's insanity! Also, if he was trying to get as many innings as he could out of his #4 and #5 pitchers, why did he use MDC for only 2/3?
Actually, I buy MCA's theory. But if they're going to pitch any of the short relievers in that pen to the point of burnout with multi-inning stints, Timlin is the right candidate.
From what I can tell going through the 2007 game logs, his DIPS ERA in 2007 is 4.87 on PA's that resolved on pitches 1-15, and 5.90 for 16+. Those numbers were 4.95 for 1-15 and 5.15 for 16+ before the other day vs. Seattle. Given both sample sizes, the difference in performance was statistically insignificant for 2007 prior to that game. Also, at the time Timlin hadn't allowed a walk or HR in about a month. The last 14 batters who'd faced him after pitch 15 went 1-for-14 with 0 BB and 4 K.
For his career, BB-Ref has him at a 698 OPS on pitches 1-25, vs. 693 overall, meaning his performance on 26+ pitches was better than on 1-25. That's his whole career, though; other than 2001 and 2005 his recent years have generally been worse on 26+ pitches. I suppose, though, that I'd be hard-pressed to find a worthwhile number of relievers for whom that measure is favorable. Delcarmen, for example, has an OPS for 26+ pitches that's nearly 200 points higher than for 1-25 pitches. His 2007 is no different.
Using your best 3 pitchers for multi-inning outings each, two of them with mid-inning entry, isn't a very appealing option to me. On another day, sure, but on the road against a good home team in another division while we have a one-week lead on the nearest division rival, meh. Maybe I just don't get as worked up about it as I should.
Timlin's game log appears to support this reading - when he sucked early in the season, he had several 20 pitch, 1 IP outings where he gave up a bunch of runs. He also has several 20+ pitch, multiple IP outings where he gave up no runs.
If the issue is whether a pitcher can throw a second inning, his splits in his second inning of work are more useful than his pitch count splits, becuase of the selection bias issue.
Timlin isn't being Proctored, if he were Proctored we'd be a .500 ballclub right now.
OKAJIMA is the one being Proctored, he basically comes out EVERYTIME we have a lead.
Boy, that's what I get for listening to Wok
That's not what you were going for, was it?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main