Stupid Things Baseball Managers Do

[andyfox]

I'll get the ball rolling (pun intended): not bringing their closers in in a tie game, especially on the road.

Yesterday, the Dodgers were given a break when Manny Ramirez jeopardized his chances for a Gold Glove (his own facetious comment) by failing to catch a game-ending pop fly. So now the game's 1-1 going to the bottom of the 9th. Time for Gagne to keep it tied, right? No, Gagne doesn't come in because he'd have to pitch two innings for the Dodgers to win.

So what? He can pitch two innings. He used to be a starter, plus he doesn't just throw fast balls. It's the critical time in the game, bring in your best.

Then today, he comes in with the Dodgers leading 14-5 in the 9th in a situation so critical that the Red Sox had just put their left fielder in to pitch in the top of the inning. He came in to "get some work." He could have gotten some work last night and maybe his team would then have won the game.

[John Cole]

Andy,

Please. Don't remind me. Leave Pedro in!

[Oski]

I agree with you here, but consider another view:

In extra innings, on the road, you have the chance to score first. If you do, you bring in your closer to shut it down.

The home team, however, never can be sure when the closer is "closing." Therefore, the home team should bring their closer in at the first opportunity.

Knowing this, the visitors, may try to work an advantage by getting by the closer and into the rest of the bullpen. If this can be accomplished, the visiting team has a lot going for it, as the closer is still in reserve, while his team is trying to score.

With that being said, I do agree that in yesterday's game, Gagne should have come in. The Dodger's were just given a gift run, and they had a chance to capitalize and gain momentum. A shut down inning might have done the trick. Furthermore, the Dodgers have a deep bullpen, so they would not have been giving away too much if the game kept going.

[youtalkfunny]

Good point about extra innings for the road team, Oski.

Unfortunately, it has absolutely nothing to do with when a manager decides to bring in a closer.

Because the manager DOESN'T decide when to bring in the closer. The closer decides on his own when to warm up, and when to enter the game. And he doesn't want to pitch, unless there is a "save" to be earned.

You think I'm kidding? Watch a game sometime. Tied up, bottom of the 8th. Home team pushes the go-ahead run across. Everybody is giving high-fives to the guy who just scored:

--Watch the dugout. The manager doesn't go to the phone, nor give any signal to the bullpen;

--Watch the bullpen. The closer hops up out of his chair, and quickly begins to get loose.

It's even worse when the home team is blowing a big lead in the final inning:

--ten run lead: closer sits
--eight run lead: still sitting
--six run lead: still sitting
--four run lead: hops up out of his chair! It's a "save situation now!

Playoffs? Different story. A manager's primary responsibility in the playoffs is to WIN GAMES.

In the regular season, the goal of winning games is superceded by another goal: GET THE CLOSER HIS PRECIOUS SAVE.

It turns my stomach to see a manager go to his closer night after night, even if he hasn't gotten anybody out in a week (if you haven't noticed, most closers are NOT Mariano Rivera).

Even more sickening: a closer getting just HAMMERED, knocked from pillar to post, and yet there's NO ACTIVITY IN THE BULLPEN. Again, this guy can't get anybody out, but leaving him in there to get his save, is MORE IMPORTANT than winning the game!

[The Dude]

I watched Bob Melvin do this awhile ago: Mariners are down by 3 runs in the bottom of the 8th, with runners on 1st and 2nd and nobody out. He has the team's 3rd leading hitter bunt?!?!? Down by THREE runs!!!

[Chris Daddy Cool]

This also has to do with the needless obsession with the "save." Quite honestly, I never understood it.

Tied ball game in the 8th inning with the go ahead run on first. Then the manager decides to bring in his "set up man", the second best pitcher in his bullpen rather than his closer. Then of course he gives up a game breaking double and the ace of the bullpen doesnt' get to pitch the game anymore. Yet, he's going to pitch with a 3 run lead in the 9th inning against the opposing team's 6-7-8 hitters rather than a bases loaded jam with the heart of the lineup in the 8th? Makes no sense.

The "closer" or the ace of the bullpen should pitch when the game is on the line, not when the team is already ahead.

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]


Because the manager DOESN'T decide when to bring in the closer. The closer decides on his own when to warm up, and when to enter the game. And he doesn't want to pitch, unless there is a "save" to be earned.

You think I'm kidding? Watch a game sometime. Tied up, bottom of the 8th. Home team pushes the go-ahead run across. Everybody is giving high-fives to the guy who just scored:

--Watch the dugout. The manager doesn't go to the phone, nor give any signal to the bullpen;

--Watch the bullpen. The closer hops up out of his chair, and quickly begins to get loose.

It's even worse when the home team is blowing a big lead in the final inning:

--ten run lead: closer sits
--eight run lead: still sitting
--six run lead: still sitting
--four run lead: hops up out of his chair! It's a "save situation now!




[/ QUOTE ]

Good observations, but none of your scenarios involve an extra-inning game. I thought that was what the OP was talking about!

In a normal game, sure, I can see that the closer will get up when he knows the manager wants him. Its not too difficult to have a set protocol with your closer...of course, the manager may decide ahead of time that he will not pitch the closer that day and then the protocol is ignored.

[JTrout]

I'm not a follower of baseball. So this is most likely a stupid idea, so:

A Stupid Thing a Manager Never Does:

Replace the pitcher, but leave him in the game with the option to pitch again.

Example scenerio:
Your Ace pitcher is having a solid outing, and is ahead 2-1 in the 6th. Runner on first.
Joe Hero is up to bat, and he has a great history against Ace. He owns him.
Bring in "Nuckles", your set up man, to pitch to Joe Hero.
Joe Hero is batting .050 against Nuckles.
Send Ace to right field (or wherever) for the at-bat against Joe Hero. Then back to the mound for next batter.

Sure there are drawbacks. But it seems that on occasion this would be the right move.

OK! I'll stay out of the baseball posts from now on! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

JTrout

[Nick B.]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not a follower of baseball. So this is most likely a stupid idea, so:

A Stupid Thing a Manager Never Does:

Replace the pitcher, but leave him in the game with the option to pitch again.

Example scenerio:
Your Ace pitcher is having a solid outing, and is ahead 2-1 in the 6th. Runner on first.
Joe Hero is up to bat, and he has a great history against Ace. He owns him.
Bring in "Nuckles", your set up man, to pitch to Joe Hero.
Joe Hero is batting .050 against Nuckles.
Send Ace to right field (or wherever) for the at-bat against Joe Hero. Then back to the mound for next batter.

Sure there are drawbacks. But it seems that on occasion this would be the right move.

OK! I'll stay out of the baseball posts from now on!

JTrout

[/ QUOTE ]

I am pretty sure that is against the rules, but I might be mistaken.

[JTrout]

I am pretty sure that is against the rules, ....

That would explain why they don't do it, and why it was a stupid idea! [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

It was ok in Little League (cough,cough) 30 years ago!

Cheers,
JTrout