Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, October 18, 2018

MLB playoffs 2018: Brewers used a fake starter, Dodgers used Clayton Kershaw - SBNation.com

This was a cheap simulation league maneuver. There is no rule against it. Maybe there should be.

Jim Furtado Posted: October 18, 2018 at 09:47 AM | 73 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: brewers, dodgers, nlcs

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.

   1. Ziggy's screen name Posted: October 18, 2018 at 09:55 AM (#5770122)
Two reactions:

(1) I love it. It's sneaky and clever and fun.

(2) The author is right, having Kershaw pitch is even better. Sadly the Brewers don't have one of those.
   2. Rally Posted: October 18, 2018 at 09:56 AM (#5770127)
Doesn't work in simulation leagues either. In my league this year one team tried this in game 1 of a best of five, using a RHP for one batter and then switching to a lefty. They lost 5-4, then lost the series 3-2.

One quirk in OOTP that even with the first starter facing only one batter and throwing 3 pitches, his fatigue rating showed as tired the next 2 days. If we had changed his position to reliever he would have been fine. They didn't use him until game 4.

Don't think that applies to the Brewers, expect to see Miley back out there next game.
   3. PreservedFish Posted: October 18, 2018 at 09:58 AM (#5770128)
I'm curious what other managers think about it. It's clever but I could see most thinking it's pretty much bullshit.
   4. Spahn Insane Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:02 AM (#5770132)
Not sure how this is a “cheap simulation league maneuver;” it’s unorthodox, but it’s not as if it’s without risk to the team doing it. Beyond aesthetics I don’t know what the objection is.
   5. Skloot Insurance Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:11 AM (#5770137)
I'm curious what other managers think about it. It's clever but I could see most thinking it's pretty much bullshit.


I think the strategy makes the most sense when one opens with a righthander then follows quickly with a lefty.

That way the opposing team will introduce its lefthanded hitters to the lineup, and probably in prime lineup positions. It's the left-on-left platoon split that managers should be chasing.

And if one's opponent wants to pinch-hit power lefthanded hitters out of the lineup, well, that's probably better for the late innings, because most power relievers and closer types are righthanded.

But even the high-leverage lefthanded relievers you might deploy will not be strict matchup types. They are more likely to be Josh Hader types who can retire batters from both sides.

As to the sim league scenario, I don't think the outcome of one game is "evidence" of anything, though the quirk about pitcher fatigue is interesting, because that's how Strat-O-Matic would handle the situation as well. At least I think the game would default to having Wade Miley fatigued for his Game 6 start.

The Brewers might have been screwed in Game 5 regardless of how Counsell managed his pitchers in the first inning. Any Brewers lead in this game would have to be protected by Jeremy Jeffress, in all likelihood, and that's not where any leading team wants to be!
   6. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:19 AM (#5770143)
I don't think it was cheap at all.
   7. Shredder Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:21 AM (#5770147)
I thought it was cool. We expect teams and players to use deception in other parts of the game. I don't have a problem extending it this far. Compare and contrast with the NFL and its injury and lineup disclosure requirements, punishable by fines. It might piss off fantasy players, and I can see a gambler being upset having based his wager to some extent on the announced starters. But then again, MLB is not a wholly owned subsidiary of the gambling industry like the NFL.
   8. puck Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:33 AM (#5770157)
Did it accomplish its goal? I assume they wanted the Dodgers to start as many righties as possible so when they went to Woodruff they would gain the platoon advantage. But Bellinger and Muncy were in there. Though did Muncy really start the game at 2nd base?
   9. PreservedFish Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:43 AM (#5770164)
Did it accomplish its goal?

It certainly did some things.

Freese got burned on a low-leverage AB vs a RHP.
Barnes (R) started instead of Grandal (S).
Pederson (L) started on the bench.
Hernandez (R) started in a game he otherwise wouldn't have.

The margins must be pretty tiny though.
   10. Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:45 AM (#5770167)
Barnes (R) started instead of Grandal (S).

I don't think that mattered - Roberts pretty much named Barnes the starter the rest of the way after how bad Grandal has been.
   11. McCoy Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:46 AM (#5770168)
If I had the say in who goes to the WS I would say it would be Dodgers vs Red Sox not because I like either team or want one of them to win but it just feels easier on the stomach for one of them to win rather than the Brewers or Astros. I think a good chunk of it has to do with childhood impressions. Home Brewers and Astros games always appeared to be poorly lit and that they played in dank and dark holes. Consequently whenever I think of either team the images in my mind get darkened by several shades. The other reason would be no other NL central team should be allowed to win the whole thing besides the Cubs.
   12. Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:55 AM (#5770185)
11 - I thought I'd prefer Brewers and Astros too, but watching the games I just find myself pulling for the Dodgers and Red Sox.
   13. Rusty Priske Posted: October 18, 2018 at 10:58 AM (#5770188)
I am pro-innovation in general... but I really want the 'Opener' trend to fail.

I know it isn't, but I want it to.
   14. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:05 AM (#5770200)
I am pro-innovation in general... but I really want the 'Opener' trend to fail.
This switcheroo is different than the Opener trend. Hypothetically, the Astros or Red Sox could pull the start'n'switch against the Dodgers (if they beat Mil) using real SPs in the World Series.
   15. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:10 AM (#5770205)
What Nate said. This is fundamentally different from using an opener, which is usually announced in advance with an obvious reliever, to set back the "third time through the order" meme.

This was awesome. Well, less so because the Brewers lost, but style points awarded.
   16. Tom Nawrocki Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:12 AM (#5770210)
This might seem like something that could only happen in this age of openers and bullpenning, but Bucky Harris did this way back in the 1924 World Series. He started righthander Curly Ogden in Game Seven, hoping John McGraw would play his lefty platoon (including rookie first baseman Bill Terry), then switched to lefty George Mogridge after two batters. The Senators ended up winning in 12 innings.

   17. Rally Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:14 AM (#5770213)
This strategy did not start with simulations, it predates the computer.

In 1924 Bucky Harris pulled it off against John McGraw's Giants, in game 7 no less.

He started Curly Ogden (RHP), who pitched to 2 batters. He then brought in lefty George Mogridge to face LHB Ross Youngs. Mogridge pitched into the 6th. McGraw made just one counter move, pinch hitting for LHB Bill Terry in the 6th inning, and Harris brought in a RHP to counter that.

The game went 12 innings with Washington winning 4-3, the pitcher choice to finish is much more well known than the start, as Walter Johnson pitched 4 scoreless innings of relief after a complete game loss 2 days earlier.
   18. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:16 AM (#5770216)
It's gimmicky. Baseball desperately needs to get back to games being focused on the players - and broadly skilled baseball players - not on the managers trying to scrape up bits of advantage by managering players with limited skill sets through a series of chess moves. Has anyone else noticed that about 80 percent of the broadcasters' chatter now revolves around how the manager will use the various relievers to get X number of outs? That's not healthy.
   19. dlf Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:21 AM (#5770225)
I'm reminded of the 1985 ALCS when, in game 7, Dick Howser started the northpaw Bret Saberhagen, winner of the CYA that year, pulled him after 3 shutout innings, then went to the Charlie Liebrant, a left handed starter who gave the Royals 5+ innings. Bobby Cox countered by flipping his lineup taking out Mulliniks and Oliver and bringing in Iorg and Johnson. The difference between that and what Counsell is doing is the 1985 Royals had a really good starting staff instead of the patch-work group that the Brewers have this season.
   20. vortex of dissipation Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:21 AM (#5770226)
and Harris brought in a RHP to counter that.


And not just any relief pitcher. It was Firpo Marberry, arguably the first of the great relief pitchers. Getting Terry out of the game was the whole idea behind the strategy. Once the pinch hitter for Terry was announced, Marberry was brought into the game.
   21. SoSH U at work Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:22 AM (#5770227)

It's gimmicky. Baseball desperately needs to get back to games being focused on the players - and broadly skilled baseball players - not on the managers trying to scrape up of advantage by managering players with limited skill sets through a series of chess moves. Has anyone else noticed that about 80 percent of the broadcasters' chatter now revolves around how the manager will use the various relievers to get X number of outs? That's not healthy.


On the other hand, we no longer have to wait five or six innings to get treated to exciting mid-inning pitching changes. Who can't love that?



   22. vortex of dissipation Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:23 AM (#5770230)
There's also the 1990 NLCS, where Pirates manager Jim Leyland started Ted Power, a righty who hadn't started a game all season, against the Reds, and then pulled him after three innings for lefty Zane Smith.
   23. Rally Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:26 AM (#5770233)
Getting Terry out of the game was the whole idea behind the strategy.


Is that what was said at the time? I think it was to get NY to use an unfavorable lineup vs. LHP in general, not specifically about Terry. For one, he wasn't BILL TERRY, HOF 1B yet. He was a .239 hitting rookie. McGraw let him hit the first 2 trips through the order, but in the 6th pinch hit Irish Meusel with a runner on third.
   24. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:31 AM (#5770241)
The difference between that and what Counsell is doing is the 1985 Royals had a really good starting staff instead of the patch-work group that the Brewers have this season.

The other difference being that Cox could run true platoons at multiple positions because he wasn't carrying 13 pitchers, making him more vulnerable to the gambit.
   25. Jose is an Absurd Force of Nature Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:47 AM (#5770260)
As I recall Saberhagen got hit with a line drive and left because of that. Am I making stuff up?

Is Miley going to be the first person to start back to back games in the same post-season series?
   26. , Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:47 AM (#5770261)
Barnes (R) started instead of Grandal (S).

I think I see the flaw in this plan.



Does Grandal make the WS roster at this point? Do they have another catcher?
   27. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:48 AM (#5770262)
I assume this should be generally used at an NL park, so that it could potentially mess up the late-game pinch-hitting. The Dodgers only used one pinch hitter for a pitcher, so they weren't running out of position players.

The other difference being that Cox could run true platoons at multiple positions because he wasn't carrying 13 pitchers, making him more vulnerable to the gambit.
In that sense he would have been more vulnerable. Bot today's teams overall are more at risk because of their smaller bench.
   28. Batman Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:48 AM (#5770263)
There's also the 1990 NLCS, where Pirates manager Jim Leyland started Ted Power, a righty who hadn't started a game all season, against the Reds, and then pulled him after three innings for lefty Zane Smith.
There have been 25 games (so 50 games started by pitchers) in this postseason. 13 of the 50 starters haven't pitched more than Power's three innings.
   29. vortex of dissipation Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:56 AM (#5770279)
Is that what was said at the time? I think it was to get NY to use an unfavorable lineup vs. LHP in general, not specifically about Terry. For one, he wasn't BILL TERRY, HOF 1B yet. He was a .239 hitting rookie. McGraw let him hit the first 2 trips through the order, but in the 6th pinch hit Irish Meusel with a runner on third.


I'm not sure if that was said at the time. My knowledge of the incident is mostly from the article that Bill James wrote in his book on managers, and James says specifically that getting Terry out of the line-up and allowing Harris to bring in Marberry without him having to face Terry was the primary motive. What James used as his source for assessing the motive, I don't know.

"Harris was trying to get Bill Terry out of the game. Terry, a rookie, was a left-handed platoon player; he had hit .500 in the series (6 for 12), but he sat down when a lefty came in. Harris's idea was to list Ogden as the starting pitcher, get Terry in the line-up, then bring in a lefty and force him to sit down. Then, when it was time for Harris to go to his relievers (Firpo Marberry and Walter Johnson), Bill Terry would be unavailable for comment."
   30. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: October 18, 2018 at 11:58 AM (#5770283)
I love the strategy.

I never heard so many baseball fans screeching "we need a rule!"

I thought this was the site for the thinking fan.
   31. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:01 PM (#5770290)
I'm pretty sure Chuck Tanner did this at least once when he was managing the Pirates. Not sure they even had "simulation leagues" back then...
   32. SoSH U at work Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:02 PM (#5770293)
I love the strategy.


Would you love it if became widespread, where many games started with one batter, then a pitching change?


   33. , Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5770299)
Would you love it if became widespread, where many games started with one batter, then a pitching change?

If they instituted a rule that I think should've been there for a long, long time: pitching changes are made simply by sending in a pitcher. So, if you're going to do this, your guy better be warmed up and ready to go. There is no reason a pitching change needs to take several minutes.
   34. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5770300)
Would you love it if became widespread, where many games started with one batter, then a pitching change?
You weren't asking me, but I wouldn't still like it if it was widespread. But for many reasons, it won't be widespread in the regular season, so the question is irrelevant.
   35. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:11 PM (#5770303)
I never heard so many baseball fans screeching "we need a rule!"

The 2018 playoffs have convinced me even more that there needs to be a hard limit on the number of mid-inning pitching changes or an increase in the minimum number of batters each pitcher has to face during an inning. The four corners offense was a winning strategy too, but made for shtty entertainment. Rob Manfred needs to consider this before even thinking about ghost runners in extra innings to improve pace of play.
   36. SoSH U at work Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:13 PM (#5770306)
You weren't asking me, but I wouldn't still like it if it was widespread. But for many reasons, it won't be widespread in the regular season, so the question is irrelevant.


Why not? The Rays have already gotten us most of the way there. Starting pitchers have throw days. What's the harm in letting them throw the first out or two of the game on their throw days?

If they instituted a rule that I think should've been there for a long, long time: pitching changes are made simply by sending in a pitcher. So, if you're going to do this, your guy better be warmed up and ready to go. There is no reason a pitching change needs to take several minutes.


I agree. That's an obvious change that needs to be implemented.
   37. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:13 PM (#5770307)
The 2018 playoffs have convinced me even more that there needs to be a hard limit on the number of mid-inning pitching changes or an increase in the minimum number of batters each pitcher has to face during an inning. Rob Manfred needs to consider this before even thinking about ghost runners in extra innings to improve pace of play.
If they instituted a rule that I think should've been there for a long, long time: pitching changes are made simply by sending in a pitcher
1. Manfred grows a pair...
   38. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:14 PM (#5770309)
I'm torn on this one. On the one hand, as noted through this thread, there's a long history of this sort of gamesmanship. On the other hand, I think having this happen too often becomes, to quote #18, "gimmicky" and, as #32 notes, such a strategy would be a lot less "fun" "if [it] became widespread".

At the risk of sounding like a cranky old man - but, dammit, those kids won't stay off my lawn! - I don't get how people can actually like "bullpenning". I completely get the strategic advantages it brings, but precisely because of that, I think ultimately, MLB's going to have to make rule changes to rein it in. I think I would lean toward a rule that any pitcher who is pulled in the middle of an inning has to go onto the 10-man disabled list. And yes, I'm comfortable that such a proposal has pushed me dangerously close to "there are too many states, please eliminate three; I am not a crackpot".
   39. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:16 PM (#5770310)
Why not? The Rays have already gotten us most of the way there. Starting pitchers have throw days. What's the harm in letting them throw the first out or two of the game on their throw days?
Oh, I thought you meant the lefty/righty switcheroo trick, not just in general.

(and for the record, how many games did the Rays have their opener only pitch to one batter?)
   40. Kiko Sakata Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:18 PM (#5770311)
Oh, I thought you meant the lefty/righty switcheroo trick, not just in general.


Wasn't part of the advantage the Rays were gaining from their openers a platoon advantage - use a lefty "opener" and then bring in a righty (or vice versa)? The Brewers used this exact same strategy in a game against the Cardinals in the last week of the season. Matt Carpenter was the leadoff hitter and only lefty in the Cardinals' lineup, so they opened with a lefty to face Carpenter and then went to their right-handed "starter".
   41. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:37 PM (#5770328)
Wasn't part of the advantage the Rays were gaining from their openers a platoon advantage - use a lefty "opener" and then bring in a righty (or vice versa)?
They sometimes got platoon advantages out of it, but not in the same way as what the Brewers were attempting. I don't think opposing managers were platooning much because Romo or Stanek was going to pitch to the first 3-6 batters.
   42. Spahn Insane Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:42 PM (#5770330)
Manfred grows a pair

A long shot, but nonetheless under consideration.
   43. BDC Posted: October 18, 2018 at 12:43 PM (#5770332)
Not really to argue any point about the 1924 Series, but Bill Terry had batted .377 in the American Association the year before (Al Simmons was AA batting champ that year with .398). He came into the league with some credentials established, though as noted he hadn't hit much in the '24 regular season.

I actually knew this without looking it up because a few weeks ago I was looking up the career of a guy named Ivy Griffin, who was terrible in the majors but a considerable player in the high minors, and a contemporary of Terry's.
   44. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: October 18, 2018 at 01:02 PM (#5770347)
If they instituted a rule that I think should've been there for a long, long time: pitching changes are made simply by sending in a pitcher. So, if you're going to do this, your guy better be warmed up and ready to go. There is no reason a pitching change needs to take several minutes.


This is long overdue. Warmup pitches should happen in the bullpen. The 3 point specialist off the bench doesn't get to shoot 8 three pointers to warm up when he comes into the game.

   45. TomH Posted: October 18, 2018 at 01:26 PM (#5770372)
I agree with the sentiment, but beware side effects. If there is an injury, you need warmup time. So you might have more "injuries". I guess you could make a rule that an injured pitcher gets x games on the DL.
   46. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: October 18, 2018 at 01:32 PM (#5770381)
I agree with the sentiment, but beware side effects. If there is an injury, you need warmup time. So you might have more "injuries".

Or in the case of unscrupastrosulous teams, grooming the slope of the bullpen mounds to be different than the playing field.
   47. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: October 18, 2018 at 01:36 PM (#5770390)
If they instituted a rule that I think should've been there for a long, long time: pitching changes are made simply by sending in a pitcher. So, if you're going to do this, your guy better be warmed up and ready to go. There is no reason a pitching change needs to take several minutes.


The MLBPA will let the entire enterprise of professional baseball burn to the ground before they will allow this to happen.
   48. Ziggy's screen name Posted: October 18, 2018 at 01:47 PM (#5770404)
A variation on this theme:

Publicly announce a starter in advance (or not, it doesn't really matter). Have a righty and a lefty warming up in the bullpen before the game. And then put whatever name on the lineup card that you want (regardless of what you told reporters earlier about who would be starting). Eventually teams will just start running out their best-on-average lineups - since they won't know how to stack them to get platoon advantage - and at that point you can pick your starter based on which guy is more likely to do well against the best-on-average lineup.

Don't do this with every pitcher. When its Kershaw's turn, let the man pitch. But you could do it with the dregs of the rotation.

This version doesn't involve any first-inning pitching changes, and doesn't even tire Wade Miley out for his next Strat start!
   49. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 01:54 PM (#5770407)
Eventually teams will just start running out their best-on-average lineups - since they won't know how to stack them to get platoon advantage
Uh, a lot of the time they'll guess it's the guy on 4-days rest rather than the guy on 3-days rest...
   50. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:01 PM (#5770414)
The MLBPA will let the entire enterprise of professional baseball burn to the ground before they will allow this to happen.
1. Manfred grows a pair...
   51. Ziggy's screen name Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:19 PM (#5770429)
One thing I was thinking is that as bullpenning becomes more common, we're going to see less and less of the traditional rotation. If your starter is pitching max five innings, maybe he doesn't need full rest. If he's pitching two or three innings (like a Rays opener) he really doesn't need full rest. This will necessitate lots of pitchers, but teams are already making frequent use of the AAA shuttle.
   52. . Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:21 PM (#5770432)
It's gimmicky. Baseball desperately needs to get back to games being focused on the players - and broadly skilled baseball players - not on the managers trying to scrape up bits of advantage by managering players with limited skill sets through a series of chess moves. Has anyone else noticed that about 80 percent of the broadcasters' chatter now revolves around how the manager will use the various relievers to get X number of outs? That's not healthy.


It's just amazing how unappealing baseball is now.(*) If this was a startup product in the marketplace, it would have no chance. It's persisting on the fumes of its brand equity and history and the fact that it happens to generate somewhat interesting data to churn and compare against said history. Even in relative hotbeds like Boston, the early-season Patriots game last Sunday trounced the Red Sox Final Four game.

(*) Oh, and Machado half-assed loafed again. And a big umpiring call in a massive playoff game was left to a 66-year-old overofficious tub of lard who had to run a long way to be in position to make the call and could only make it a few steps.
   53. . Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:25 PM (#5770439)
I thought this was the site for the thinking fan.


It is.
   54. perros Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:32 PM (#5770446)
   55. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:35 PM (#5770449)
I like to se teams do everything within the rules to try to win. Unwritten rules are BS and I don't have a problem with gimmicks if they win, in fact if they win they are a legit strategy and not really a gimmick at all.

So yeah I say teams should go for it and do whatever they want to try to win. Teams shouldn't really care about the "product" but rather about winning. MLB cares about the "product" and can layer in rules as needed.
   56. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:47 PM (#5770457)
I don't have a problem with gimmicks if they win, in fact if they win they are a legit strategy and not really a gimmick at all.
Objection, begging the question.

MLB cares about the "product" and can layer in rules as needed.
That'd be nice, wouldn't it? 1. Manfred grows a pair...
   57. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:48 PM (#5770460)
ll all you aging middle-aged white guys do with no baseball?
Go to Billy Joel concerts?
   58. Skloot Insurance Posted: October 18, 2018 at 02:59 PM (#5770466)
The 2018 playoffs have convinced me even more that there needs to be a hard limit on the number of mid-inning pitching changes or an increase in the minimum number of batters each pitcher has to face during an inning.


I like the idea of allowing pitching changes *only* after the pitcher has allowed a baserunner or the inning ends. This would not apply to the starter but only to successive pitchers.
   59. Ithaca2323 Posted: October 18, 2018 at 04:29 PM (#5770526)
In general, I find it almost bizarre that we as fans are increasingly told that we're out of touch if we don't think like managers/coaches/GMs, and root for the "right" decision. Whether it's multi-year tanking, service time games, shifting, bullpenning, opening, or whatever else.

I don't watch games because I always want to see the most statistically optimal decision being made.
   60. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 18, 2018 at 04:37 PM (#5770530)
In general, I find it almost bizarre that we as fans are increasingly told that we're out of touch if we don't think like managers/coaches/GMs, and root for the "right" decision. Whether it's multi-year tanking, service time games, shifting, bullpenning, opening, or whatever else.

I don't watch games because I always want to see the most statistically optimal decision being made.


Fans can and should care about whatever they want. Teams should care about winning - full stop. MLB has to care about the product, which means the fans and other customers (for example TV networks) want to purchase it.

The motivations don't always align. That is just a fact of life. Wanting managers or players t care about the subjective fan experience is dumb. They might mouth platitudes about it, but they are primarily compensated by their teams to win games so that is what they prioritize.

Personally I want my team to try to win. My team playing boring baseball and winning is much better than my team losing often. As a Twins fan I am very familiar with my team losing. If other fans care more about the aesthetics then great. And I get why fans without a specific interest really care about aesthetics. And MLB should care about those fans. But individual teams shouldn't at all.
   61. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 04:41 PM (#5770531)
In general, I find it almost bizarre that we as fans are increasingly told that we're out of touch if we don't think like managers/coaches/GMs, and root for the "right" decision.
Who tells you that?
   62. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: October 18, 2018 at 04:44 PM (#5770535)
In general, I find it almost bizarre that we as fans are increasingly told that we're out of touch if we don't think like managers/coaches/GMs, and root for the "right" decision.


Yet most fans think they know how to manage, coach, or GM better than the guys their team employs.
   63. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 18, 2018 at 05:01 PM (#5770550)
And I get why fans without a specific interest really care about aesthetics. And MLB should care about those fans.
You'd think, right?
   64. BDC Posted: October 18, 2018 at 05:25 PM (#5770561)
I tend to agree with Mouse, though I'd say that competitive sports are usually pretty interesting. The exception comes when both opponents can take advantage of the rules in order that both start playing not to lose, rather than playing to win. This has frequently been a problem in clock sports (soccer, basketball, hockey) and rules have changed accordingly.

You can't stall in order not to lose in baseball, but we've certainly reached a point where both teams can stall because they think it improves their chances of winning. Except that it's still a zero sum and one W, one L is all that's ever awarded per game. So it just gets slower for the same overall payoff. Eventually rules will have to be changed. This may not help baseball's popularity, but I can't imagine games creeping toward five hours so that the pitcher can recite the Gettysburg Address between deliveries to maintain his concentration.

Of course that's what Bill James said 25 years ago, as we noted in some other thread.
   65. . Posted: October 18, 2018 at 05:36 PM (#5770566)
Who tells you that?


Seriously?
   66. Nasty Nate Posted: October 18, 2018 at 05:38 PM (#5770568)
This year I've really noticed the longer postseason between-innings commercial breaks, both at the park and on TV.
   67. . Posted: October 18, 2018 at 05:38 PM (#5770569)
This may not help baseball's popularity


Why wouldn't it? Baseball has been bleeding actual popularity over time, irrespective of its ability to Band Aid the problem with mallparks and merchandise sales. Again, imagine baseball in Pittsburgh at Three Rivers Stadium in 2018, with 1990 levels of revenue sharing. (*) Functional enterprise? Hard to imagine that it is. Oakland and Tampa Bay tell us otherwise.

(*) And even with the shining jewel mallpark, Pirate attendance declined by almost 25%, nearly 500K fans, just between 2017 and this year. 1.465 million is dipping down into fugly territory. The team drew 400,000 more fans to Three Rivers in 1988.

   68. BDC Posted: October 18, 2018 at 05:41 PM (#5770570)
Why wouldn't it?


Because pace of play, much as we are focused on it, is only one factor.
   69. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: October 18, 2018 at 05:49 PM (#5770574)
I can't imagine games creeping toward five hours so that the pitcher can recite the Gettysburg Address between deliveries to maintain his concentration.
Come on, the Gettysburg Address was only 272 words long. You could say it five times before Jeffress is ready to pitch.
   70. . Posted: October 18, 2018 at 05:51 PM (#5770575)
Because pace of play, much as we are focused on it, is only one factor.


It's a massive one. Number of balls in play, a related problem, is another massive factor. There's no market medium/long term for a product where you sit for hours on end to watch a guy wave a cylindrical wooden object at a moving ball and every five or six minutes, hit it.

There's a reason the PGA Tour has only one match play event per year .... And why after one golfer hits a shot on TV, they essentially immediately cut to another golfer hitting another shot.
   71. Jim Furtado Posted: October 19, 2018 at 02:59 PM (#5771325)
Doesn't work in simulation leagues either. In my league this year one team tried this in game 1 of a best of five, using a RHP for one batter and then switching to a lefty. They lost 5-4, then lost the series 3-2.

One quirk in OOTP that even with the first starter facing only one batter and throwing 3 pitches, his fatigue rating showed as tired the next 2 days. If we had changed his position to reliever he would have been fine. They didn't use him until game 4.

Don't think that applies to the Brewers, expect to see Miley back out there next game.

One of OOTP's devs said they will be implementing a fix to this for the next version.

I like the idea of getting rid of warm up throws. I'm not big on the idea of starting a reliever to thwart platooning. The game needs more offense right now, not less. Of course, I'm more in favor of a limit of 10 or 11 pitchers on the roster. If that happened the strategy would be less attraction.
   72. Rally Posted: October 19, 2018 at 04:09 PM (#5771378)
One of OOTP's devs said they will be implementing a fix to this for the next version.


Good to know. I love the attention to detail they put into the game. They added a separate readiness rating for 2 way players so they could pitch one day and not be completely worn out to hit the next. Presumably in anticipation of Ohtani, even though when they made the change they had no way of knowing how Ohtani's season would go.
   73. base ball chick Posted: October 19, 2018 at 10:02 PM (#5771478)
Jim Furtado Posted: October 19, 2018 at 02:59 PM (#5771325)


I like the idea of getting rid of warm up throws. I'm not big on the idea of starting a reliever to thwart platooning. The game needs more offense right now, not less. Of course, I'm more in favor of a limit of 10 or 11 pitchers on the roster. If that happened the strategy would be less attraction


- yes YES YESSSSSSSSSSSS

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
BarrysLazyBoy
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogRed Sox owe $12 million in luxury tax, showing why they'd want to shed payroll
(9 - 4:18am, Dec 17)
Last: Scott Ross

NewsblogWhy gambling used to scare baseball and why it doesn’t anymore
(60 - 2:56am, Dec 17)
Last: yest

NewsblogMLB: Mets to sign catcher Wilson Ramos
(16 - 12:51am, Dec 17)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (December 2018)
(629 - 12:36am, Dec 17)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogTHE HALL OF FAME VALUE STANDARD (Bill James rank 25 worst players in HOF & 25 best not in the HOF)
(95 - 11:34pm, Dec 16)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogNY Post: Lenny Dykstra reveals his new life as an amateur Torah scholar
(4 - 11:25pm, Dec 16)
Last: Sunday silence

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(354 - 9:53pm, Dec 16)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (The Berhalter Thread?)
(206 - 9:46pm, Dec 16)
Last: Mefisto

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot
(16 - 9:34pm, Dec 16)
Last: Kiko Sakata

NewsblogJeurys Familia finalizes 3-year deal to return as likely setup man
(17 - 9:32pm, Dec 16)
Last: Russlan thinks deGrom is da bomb

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(3709 - 9:20pm, Dec 16)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogThibs' Hall of Fame Tracker
(502 - 7:18pm, Dec 16)
Last: SoSH U at work

Newsblog2019 BBWAA HALL OF FAME BALLOT
(130 - 2:19pm, Dec 16)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogCardinals prospect Griffin Roberts suspended 50 games for a drug of abuse
(20 - 1:57pm, Dec 16)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogCampaign to make Negro League bobbleheads
(4 - 1:31pm, Dec 16)
Last: Sunday silence

Page rendered in 0.5285 seconds
46 querie(s) executed