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

Monday, May 21, 2012

Posnanski: The Three Toughest Outs

Hurry, administer the John Sterling Cooper test! Baggypants just went out the window!

The latest talk in New York, as the city shakily tries to recover from the Mariano Rivera injury, is about David Robertson and whether he has the stuff, the guts, the pluck, the spirit, the moxie, the cojones, the courage, the bravery, the backbone, the grit, the fire, the fearlessness, the toughness, the determination, the audacity, the boldness, the spine, the mettle, the heroism and the nerve to actually get batters out in the ninth inning.

You know. The toughest three outs in all of baseball.

...Whatever the reasons for this phenomenon—and I’m sure I’m missing some reasons—I’d love to create a cliche. I’d love for this cliche to be: The toughest three outs in baseball are the first three outs. it may not sound true. And it doesn’t really fill our irresistible need for clarity and finality—after all, getting the first three ours without giving up a run doesn’t mean you’re going to win or even that your likely to win. You could get the first three outs without giving up a run and still lose the game 48-1.

Still, based on the numbers, it’s a generalization but also something close to a fact. The toughest three outs are the first three outs. Sometimes the true story isn’t as much fun or as emotional as the myth. That doesn’t make it any less true.

Repoz Posted: May 21, 2012 at 12:49 PM | 36 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: sabermetrics

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. Bob Tufts Posted: May 21, 2012 at 03:00 PM (#4136961)
In my experience, I always found that the toughest outs were the first ones when entering the game whether you were starting or relieving.

Was the "stuff" that you had warming up as good as it was in the bullpen? Could you identify quickly what pitch was your best pitch at that moment (crucial when relieving)?

And much of a pitcher's confidence in their ability is established through getting by the first batter or two without any damage.
   2. Mayor Blomberg Posted: May 21, 2012 at 03:19 PM (#4136978)
the guts, the pluck, the spirit, the moxie, the cojones, the courage, the bravery, the backbone, the grit, the fire, the fearlessness, the toughness, the determination, the audacity, the boldness, the spine, the mettle


well, he found some use for part of the JoPa biography.
   3. SOLockwood Posted: May 21, 2012 at 03:22 PM (#4136984)
Bob:

This would seem to be an indictment of the current policy of robotically pulling pitchers after they throw a scoreless inning because it's now the "Nth" inning, and that's the new guy's "role."

   4. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: May 21, 2012 at 03:24 PM (#4136986)
It always amazes me how stubborn a manager can be in not lifting a pitcher who clearly doesn't have it starting from the first hitter or two because he is the "eighth inning guy" and dammit, no one else is going to pitch the eighth inning!
   5. SoSH U at work Posted: May 21, 2012 at 03:28 PM (#4136990)
Whatever the reasons for this phenomenon—and I’m sure I’m missing some reasons—I’d love to create a cliche. I’d love for this cliche to be: The toughest three outs in baseball are the first three outs.


I'm pushing for the 5th, 12th and 19th outs.
   6. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 21, 2012 at 03:32 PM (#4136993)
I'm pushing for the 5th, 12th and 19th outs.
Get your head out of a stat book and watch the game. Everyone knows that the 12th out is the second easiest of the game.
   7. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: May 21, 2012 at 03:53 PM (#4137013)
There are respects in which the 15th, 16th and 17th outs are the toughest outs in the game for a lot of pitchers: you've been through the lineup a couple of times, you're not as fresh as you were, but it's not really time to go to the bullpen. Someone smarter than me can probably look up ERA by inning and prove me wrong, but that's always how it's felt.
   8. Dag Nabbit has the talking pillow Posted: May 21, 2012 at 03:54 PM (#4137017)
...Whatever the reasons for this phenomenon—and I’m sure I’m missing some reasons—I’d love to create a cliche. I’d love for this cliche to be: The toughest three outs in baseball are the first three outs. it may not sound true. And it doesn’t really fill our irresistible need for clarity and finality

Teams score more runs in the first inning than any other inning. Therefore, the three toughest outs to get are the first three outs.
   9. Bob Tufts Posted: May 21, 2012 at 04:04 PM (#4137030)
This would seem to be an indictment of the current policy of robotically pulling pitchers after they throw a scoreless inning because it's now the "Nth" inning, and that's the new guy's "role."


I agree. I fear that the closer gets to throw the 9th only because management stupidly overpaid for their services and actually believe that one inning saves are a valid statistic.
   10. Athletic Supporter gangnam style Posted: May 21, 2012 at 04:09 PM (#4137036)
I agree. I fear that the closer gets to throw the 9th only because management stupidly overpaid for their services and actually believe that one inning saves are a valid statistic.


I think the causation might be the other way sort of. The closer demands to throw the 9th because he knows that getting saves will get him more money in the future. Management doesn't want to piss him off, so they let him do it.
   11. Nasty Nate Posted: May 21, 2012 at 04:26 PM (#4137049)
I think the causation might be the other way sort of. The closer demands to throw the 9th because he knows that getting saves will get him more money in the future. Management doesn't want to piss him off, so they let him do it.


Getting 45 saves versus 5 (or less) definitely helps a reliever get more money, but I don't think teams would necessarily value a closer with 45 saves more than a closer who only got 35 saves because he was brought in to more tie games.
   12. JE (Jason Epstein) Posted: May 21, 2012 at 04:30 PM (#4137052)
FTFA:
Before I get into this, though -- and, yes, we are going to go pretty deep into this -- I would like to say a few words about how baseball’s immenseness and complications seem to lead people to just say stuff that sounds right in their minds. I thought I might have mentioned this a couple of weeks ago, but maybe I didn’t: I was watching a game on television and Yankees second baseman Robinson Cano struck out looking. Tim McCarver was doing the game, and he immediately said something like: “We just saw an extremely rare thing. Robinson Cano almost never strikes out looking.”

I thought: How could he possibly know that? Did McCarver happen to have a list of batters who rarely strike out looking right in front of him? Did one of his fine statisticians happen to scan that list the second it happened and whisper it in his ear? Did he recall the statistic from some previous conversation? Not impossible, I suppose. But not likely. I think it’s much more likely that McCarver simply deduced that Cano probably doesn’t strike out looking much. He probably could not remember seeing him strike out looking. And, hey, it does SOUND right. Cano doesn’t strike out all that much looking OR swinging (he’s never whiffed 100 times in a year) and he’s a hacker so it just figures that he probably wouldn’t strike out looking very often.

But the point is not whether he was right or wrong.* The point is, I’m guessing McCarver had absolutely no idea if it was true beyond what his gut was telling him. I’m sure it just SOUNDED right. So he said it.

*It took a while, but I did look it up: Cano does not strike out very often looking, but it’s not exactly a Royal wedding kind of occurrence. Last year, he struck out looking 2.2% of the time, which is a fairly low percentage but wasn’t in the Top 25 among hitters with 400-plus at-bats. The year before that it was 1.3% of the time, which did put him in the Top 10, but still well behind guys like Miguel Tejada and Jason Kendall. The year before that it was 1.6% which put him about 20th. Like I say, he doesn’t strike out looking a lot, but it’s hardly noteworthy. Vlad Guerrero now THERE’S a guy who hardly ever strikes out looking.


This is no great crime, of course. I think this tendency for people to say what just sort of sounds right to them -- without actually checking to see if it is true -- is an immutable part of the human psyche. I would guess we all fall for it. I would also guess that in the last three days at least one person, and probably more than one -- from an array of friends, relatives, neighbors, co-workers -- has told you something directly in your field of expertise or line of interest that is undeniably and unquestionably wrong. But it SOUNDS right, at least to them, so they say it. And say it. And say it. And, often, they say it with conviction. I can only imagine how many times someone went up to Albert Einstein to tell him some right-sounding point about the theory of relativity.
   13. Dan Posted: May 21, 2012 at 05:12 PM (#4137072)
Getting 45 saves versus 5 (or less) definitely helps a reliever get more money, but I don't think teams would necessarily value a closer with 45 saves more than a closer who only got 35 saves because he was brought in to more tie games.


This is probably true today, but 5-10 years ago it very well may not have been. And I imagine you still see saves used in arbitration hearings.
   14. stanmvp48 Posted: May 21, 2012 at 06:25 PM (#4137135)
I have heard, true or not, that some relief pitchers have it in their contract that they can only be used in save situations or only a limited # of times in non save situations.
   15. Nasty Nate Posted: May 21, 2012 at 06:45 PM (#4137156)
I have heard, true or not, that some relief pitchers have it in their contract that they can only be used in save situations or only a limited # of times in non save situations.


Really? I've never heard this.
   16. dlf Posted: May 21, 2012 at 06:59 PM (#4137166)
I have heard, true or not, that some relief pitchers have it in their contract that they can only be used in save situations or only a limited # of times in non save situations.


You heard incorrectly. Such provision is not permissible and would not be approved by the league. What may have led the speaker(s) astray is that some pitchers have performance awards based on number of games finished (not necessarily saved), and there is an implied requirement of good faith that a team can't not use a player just to avoid an award. However, there is clear arbitration authority that gives great deference to a team in deciding what is reasonably justifiable. If the team can state any reason that is not on its face obsurd the arbitrator will not force a team to use a player in a way to reach a performance award.
   17. dlf Posted: May 21, 2012 at 07:05 PM (#4137173)
In my experience, I always found that the toughest outs were the first ones when entering the game whether you were starting or relieving.


Obviously that experience is utterly useless. How dare you, a mere former major league pitcher, suggest that you have any thoughts on the matter that would contradict the learned wisdom as passed down from Buck, Sterling, et al. Tisk, tisk.

Seriously though, I really do appreciate how often you are posting here providing insight in the workings between the lines, in the clubhouses, and in the life after the game. Your presence here is a part of what makes the community as interesting as it is.
   18. Johnny Slick Posted: May 21, 2012 at 07:40 PM (#4137219)
I'm almost positive that even games finished are out of bounds for teams to offer as incentive bonuses. IIRC it's PAs, games played, and innings pitched, and that's pretty much it. They tend to be used in a "if you don't get hurt we'll pay you X" manner rather than a "if you reach these milestones we'll pay you Y". There's just a lot of potential bad blood that could be created when an Eric Wedge tells his guy to bunt when he's trying to reach a 30 HR bonus. I mean, above and beyond the bad blood created when Eric Wedge tells people who never should be bunting to bunt.
   19. Nasty Nate Posted: May 21, 2012 at 07:45 PM (#4137224)
Frankie Rodriguez had a games finished clause.
   20. The Long Arm of Rudy Law Posted: May 21, 2012 at 08:05 PM (#4137265)
Rodriguez and Kameron Loe both have games finished bonuse clauses for the Brewers, according to Cots.
   21. Jolly Old St. Nick Done Jumped The Ship Posted: May 21, 2012 at 08:59 PM (#4137325)
...Whatever the reasons for this phenomenon—and I’m sure I’m missing some reasons—I’d love to create a cliche. I’d love for this cliche to be: The toughest three outs in baseball are the first three outs. it may not sound true. And it doesn’t really fill our irresistible need for clarity and finality


Teams score more runs in the first inning than any other inning. Therefore, the three toughest outs to get are the first three outs.

How dare you confirm a boring truth! You should have asked Brad Lidge's psychiatrist first before posting something like that.

Well, at least it's true for the Yankees. They've allowed more runs in the first inning than any other, 141% more runs on a pro-rated basis in the first inning than in the ninth, and 162% more runs in the first three innings than in innings 7 - 9. At least with the Yanks, I'd say that Joe is definitely on the right track.
   22. Walt Davis Posted: May 21, 2012 at 09:31 PM (#4137371)
C'mon, I want one of you to go total nerd on this. Of the 27 outs, which has more batters between the previous out and this one?
   23. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: May 21, 2012 at 09:53 PM (#4137394)
The longest game in MLB history went 26 innings. Therefore, the toughest out to get is the 79th. It's literally never been done.
   24. Cuban X Senators Posted: May 22, 2012 at 12:02 AM (#4137489)
the toughest out to get is the 79th. It's literally never been done.

Joel Finch & Jim Umbarger say "hi".
   25. McCoy Wilfong for Money Posted: May 22, 2012 at 12:13 AM (#4137494)
At least with the Yanks, I'd say that Joe is definitely on the right track.

Well, that is only because of Mo.
   26. Sunday silence Posted: May 22, 2012 at 12:56 AM (#4137517)
Teams score more runs in the first inning than any other inning...


this would have to have a large home field bias, right?



Therefore, the toughest out to get is the 79th. It's literally never been done.



by that reasoning, the 80th would be tougher still.
   27. The Long Arm of Rudy Law Posted: May 22, 2012 at 01:01 AM (#4137519)
Hawk Harrelson frequently talks about the dangers of giving a team 79 outs. Actually, he was probably talking about golf or Yaz.
   28. Voros McCracken of Pinkus Posted: May 22, 2012 at 01:14 AM (#4137521)
Or the magnets in his shoes.
   29. bobm Posted: May 22, 2012 at 01:16 AM (#4137522)
[22]
C'mon, I want one of you to go total nerd on this. Of the 27 outs, which has more batters between the previous out and this one?


For 2011, OBP by (starting) inning / out state:

Top 3
Inning Out  OBP
1      1   .337 
6      1   .334
3      2   .331


Bottom 4
Inning Out  OBP
2      2   .288
9      0   .289 
2      1   .307
8      0   .307


IMO it's an interesting reflection of the late inning use/expectation of relievers, i.e., bringing relievers in at the start of an inning, that 2 of the easiest 4 outs to get were leading off the 9th inning and the 8th inning.

Source: B-R PI
   30. Bitter Calculus Instructor Posted: May 22, 2012 at 02:01 AM (#4137527)
[29] I think you'd have to adjust for who is hitting. I.e. the first out of the first inning will see the leadoff man (who should have good OBP) and if he reaches then you can get into the heart of the order.
   31. Russ Posted: May 22, 2012 at 06:11 AM (#4137547)
IMO it's an interesting reflection of the late inning use/expectation of relievers, i.e., bringing relievers in at the start of an inning, that 2 of the easiest 4 outs to get were leading off the 9th inning and the 8th inning.


You possibly have a bit of reverse causation going on here. You're looking at the OBP by out/state, but that assumes that the pitchers have nothing to do with the result in that at bat. Which is silly if teams are using their better pitchers to start innings or if bringing in a fresh pitcher gives the advantage (temporarily) to the pitcher, both of which I think are probably true.

However, it's also possible that the 8th and 9th inning leadoff numbers are due to the fact that you're more likely to let the pitcher (or a poor hitter/good fielder) lead off an inning in the 8th or 9th, because there's no one on base.

It would be interesting to split it out by league, as you should see less variation in the most difficult and least difficult spots.

   32. bobm Posted: May 22, 2012 at 09:36 AM (#4137598)
It would be interesting to split it out by league, as you should see less variation in the most difficult and least difficult spots.


2011, 9th inning, 0 outs:

AL: .285 OBP, 2475 PA
NL: .292 OBP, 2870 PA


2011, 1st inning, 1 out:

AL: .342 OBP, 3329 PA
NL: .333 OBP, 3755 PA
   33. bobm Posted: May 22, 2012 at 09:58 AM (#4137610)
[30] I think you'd have to adjust for who is hitting.

[31] However, it's also possible that the 8th and 9th inning leadoff numbers are due to the fact that you're more likely to let the pitcher (or a poor hitter/good fielder) lead off an inning in the 8th or 9th, because there's no one on base.

2011, 9th inning, 0 outs, NL:
OrderPos. PA
     6th 363
     7th 352
     8th 343
     5th 328
     4th 322
     1st 305
     3rd 298
     2nd 290
     9th 269


If the 9th inning is heavily weighted towards the bottom of the order (but not the 9th spot in the order), that's a structural factor due to the progression through the order during the game that should make the 9th inning easier for the reliever. But it is real.
   34. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: May 22, 2012 at 10:34 AM (#4137639)
It shouldn't be any surprise that the first three outs are the toughest -- you have the Tufts effect plus the other teams' best hitters hit.(*)

It's stupid and inefficient to use too many relievers; it's like making yourself fight through first tee nerves and curiosity four or five times instead of one or two. Taking a guy out who "has it" and has worked up a nice lather and has acclimated himself to the conditions and the game in favor of another guy who might not have it, just because it's a certain inning, is flat out dumb.

(*) Without knowing whether the numbers back it up, a timeworn maxim is that good/great starters are more vulnerable in the first inning.

   35. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: May 22, 2012 at 11:09 AM (#4137673)
Getting 45 saves versus 5 (or less) definitely helps a reliever get more money, but I don't think teams would necessarily value a closer with 45 saves more than a closer who only got 35 saves because he was brought in to more tie games.


Case in point: Jon Papelbon averaged 36 saves a year in his time in Boston. Didn't seem to hurt his prospects at all on the free agent market.

Now, of course, he's being used in a more conventional manner.
   36. Karl from NY Posted: May 22, 2012 at 11:55 AM (#4137706)
I agree. I fear that the closer gets to throw the 9th only because management stupidly overpaid for their services and actually believe that one inning saves are a valid statistic.

One inning saves ARE a valid statistic in the media. You give up runs in the 2nd or 4th inning and go on to lose, nobody cares, that's just baseball. You lose a game in the ninth inning, and the headlines are all OMG MELTDOWN APOCALYPTIC EXPLOSION!!! Like it or not, every single ninth inning lead is now YOU BETTER WIN THIS with no margin for error. Not even Mariano Rivera was immune to this.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Sponsor

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogPosnanski: Jeff Francoeur and ANT
(37 - 6:00pm, May 21)
Last: CFBF Hates Hyphens

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, May 2013
(1045 - 5:58pm, May 21)
Last: I am going to be Frank

Newsblog[OTP-May] Politico: Congressional baseball game, May 1, 1926
(3791 - 5:57pm, May 21)
Last: Rickey Fredonia Fudge Duckery Precious Twiddle

NewsblogWhite Sox Ace Chris Sale Eats and Eats and Eats Without Gaining Any Weight
(58 - 5:56pm, May 21)
Last: Fernigal McGunnigle has become a merry hat

NewsblogJM Catellier: Is Pedro Martinez a First Ballot Hall of Famer?
(106 - 5:50pm, May 21)
Last: Tom Nawrocki

NewsblogSB Nation: Five lost scouting reports
(9 - 5:45pm, May 21)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against Elroy Face?

NewsblogWaPo | Ryan Mattheus breaks throwing hand punching a locker, adds to bullpen disarray
(11 - 5:43pm, May 21)
Last: Steve Treder

NewsblogLiving up to expectorations: The Alex Sanabia spitball clip
(6 - 5:42pm, May 21)
Last: Perry

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 5-21-2013
(17 - 5:16pm, May 21)
Last: Morty Causa

NewsblogRare Feat Not Done Since Pete Rose
(4 - 4:53pm, May 21)
Last: Dewey, Steven Wright Wannabe and Soupuss

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for MAY 21, 2013
(11 - 4:42pm, May 21)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogDollar Sign on the Glistening Muscle: Scouting Ballplayers in 1980s Playgirl
(19 - 4:39pm, May 21)
Last: The District Attorney

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread - May 2013
(1011 - 4:36pm, May 21)
Last: NJ in NY

NewsblogBarry Bonds: Detroit Tigers' Miguel Cabrera 'the best' ... but not better than me
(48 - 4:14pm, May 21)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogSherman: Mets' roster of rubbish makes it impossible to evaluate Collins
(46 - 3:47pm, May 21)
Last: if nature called, ladodger34 would listen

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets.

For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out!

Baseball Autograph Signings
Baseball Card Supplies
Baseball Memorabilia
Baseball Collectibles
Baseball Equipment
Baseball Protective Gear

Page rendered in 0.2493 seconds
50 querie(s) executed