The bold move we didn’t see in Game 2

On Grantland, Jonah Keri argues that John Farrell should have used Koji Uehara in the 7th inning of Game 2, rather than Craig Breslow, once the Cards had two men on with one out. I agree — but rather than take up that argument, I want to discuss the historical precedent for such a move.

There isn’t any.

 

Well, I should be more specific … Of course, there is precedent for using a relief ace in the 7th inning of a World Series game. But let’s look at Farrell’s decision within the context of the closer age, where no relief ace is accustomed to pitching more than 2 innings in a game. To call on Uehara in that spot would mean that either he’s not going to finish the game, or he’ll have to work longer than he’s used to. Uehara has never gotten 8 outs as a reliever; he hasn’t gone that long since his final start, back in June 2009. He’s faced 8 batters in relief just twice, none since June 2011. He faced 7 batters once this year. With 8 outs to get, it seems possible that he would run out of gas.

So, I wondered: Has any World Series manager in a 7th-inning jam called on a relief ace unused to pitching more than 2 innings, creating a scenario in which the relief ace might not be able to finish?

I looked at all high-leverage World Series appearances since 1970 that began in the 7th inning; there are 58 such games with an average Leverage Index of at least 1.70 (i.e., they faced at least the tying run). One by one, I eliminated those that weren’t by the relief ace, and those where the relief ace was accustomed to finishing games from the 7th. And here’s all that’s left:

  • Jay Howell, 1988, Game 4 — 2.2 innings to save a 4-3 win

Howell was L.A.’s top closer that year, with 21 saves in 65 IP, and no stint longer than 2 innings. They did have Alejandro Pena, who saved 12 and finished 31 games, but he’d gone 3 innings the night before. They also had Jesse Orosco, before he became a pure lefty specialist; Orosco saved 9 and finished 21 games in 1988, but the matchup called for a righty. Howell relieved starter Tim Belcher with 2 outs and the tying run on 2nd, and AL MVP Jose Canseco coming up. He walked Canseco, and Dave Parker reached on an E6, but Mark McGwire popped out to end the threat. With the DH in effect, Howell went on to finish the game, facing a season-high 11 batters, retiring Parker with the tying run on 1st to end it.

The other high-leverage 7th-inning appearances by relief aces were made by those accustomed to pitching more than 2 innings — Tug McGraw (1973, 1980), Dan Quisenberry (19801980), Bruce Sutter (1982), Dave Giusti (1971), even Terry Forster (1978) and Steve Howe (1981). That one game by Jay Howell is the only time I could find that a skipper essentially said in the 7th inning, I need the big guy to protect the lead right now, even if he can’t take me all the way home.

I’m a little surprised by that. Of all the great closers we’ve seen in the Series since 1970, just one was ever asked to hold a slim lead at a point in the game that cast serious doubt on his ability to finish.

Many of us question the closer concept, the insistence that the relief ace must be used for a save (which requires him to finish), rather than facing the game’s key moment. We point to past eras, when a relief ace came in to put out a fire, any time from the 6th inning on. But with few exceptions, those firemen were also finishing those games. A manager with Sutter or Goose Gossage or John Hiller in the bullpen could choose to bring him in for the 7th without worrying about who else will pitch the 9th.

None of this absolves John Farrell or any other manager from the duty to think outside the box. But it does show just how thick the walls of that box are.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

78 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

That’s a stumper.
Gwynn? No, too strong.
McGee? Too strong early and too slow late.
A 70’s Athletic? Neither Dagoberto or North would have batted 3rd.

?

bstar
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Joe Morgan maybe? He played against the A’s in ’72. Since walks were a big part of his offensive value, and he wasn’t a guy with a super high BA, maybe he slugged under .400 one year.

bstar
10 years ago
Reply to  bstar

Morgan’s out.

Sparky Anderson didn’t put Ken Griffey Sr. in between Rose and Morgan until 1976.

Morgan did slug under .400 for ’78-’79, mostly in the 3 hole, but by then his 40+ SB seasons were behind him.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago

This move would sensibly be preceded by stretching out the closer in the final weeks of the season… which would of course create the danger of wearing out, rather than stretching out.

The walls of the box have been reinforced for 2+ decades.
Hard to see a manager (especially in Boston) make the “wrong” move.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I’m still waiting for the specialization to extend to the beginning of the game.
Find your best reliever match-ups for the opposing teams 1-4 hitters, and use him as an “Opener”.
Play shut down defense in the first inning.
Whomever scores first gains a strategic and psych advantage.
It is so obvious that nobody sees it.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Well, the 1st is definitively the highest scoring inning in the NL, no doubt due to the automatic out in the 9-hole. The top inning tends to bounce around in the AL, though. ____ But regarding today’s discussion, if I was Matheny I would have started Carlos Martinez today, and given him the first two innings. That gives you a pinch-hit option in the 2nd inning if the situation calls for it. And makes the “starter”, Kelly, still strong into the 7th and 8th. It also gives the opposing hitters less AB’s vs the “starter”, making his chances against them… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago

Whoa Ho!
Peavy out after 4.
Betcha we see two innings out of Koji if this stays close.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

He already holds the record for most HBP in postseason with 10.

Luis Gomez
Luis Gomez
10 years ago

And now a new record…

Ed
Ed
10 years ago

John: This doesn’t meet your criteria but it’s interesting nonetheless:

In the 1972 WS, Vida Blue came on in relief of Rollie Fingers and pitched 2.1 innings of relief to pick up the save.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN197210140.shtml

This was actually Blue’s second save that postseason, giving him as many career postseason saves as regular season saves (2 each).

Not to be outdone, Catfish Hunter also has a WS save in relief of Rollie Fingers though he only had to retire one batter to get his. And like Blue, he has as many postseason saves as regular season saves (one each).

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CIN/CIN197210140.shtml

donburgh
donburgh
10 years ago

Is Willie Wilson a quiz answer?

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Tim Raines, 1990

Luis Gomez
Luis Gomez
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Is one of them Carlos Baerga?

Ed
Ed
10 years ago
Reply to  Luis Gomez

Baerga wasn’t really a speed guy (only 59 career steals).

Solace
Solace
10 years ago
Reply to  Ed

Maybe Bobby Tolan?

Ed
Ed
10 years ago
Reply to  Ed

I peeked. It is Tolan.

Luis Gomez
Luis Gomez
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I didn´t read this clue until now. Sounds like Lonnie Smith to me.

donburgh
donburgh
10 years ago

Raines is one. (Runs scored hint made PI search easy.) Don’t have anything one the WS guy, though.

Luis Gomez
Luis Gomez
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I can´t think of a more unusual way to end a baseball game, let alone a WS game.

tag
tag
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

John, Late to seeing the game-deciding play because of the time difference. Wow, what an ending. And a really poor one, I think. I have no qualms with the way the play was called. As the rule is written, Joyce obviously got it right. But I think MLB’s interpretation of the phrase “the act of fielding the ball,” which you highlighted, is waaay off. The act of fielding a ball doesn’t end when the ball goes into your glove (or not). Just think of a fielder diving and grabbing a ground ball. He still has to make his feet to… Read more »

tag
tag
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

John, Not sure how the rule as currently formulated eliminates judgment calls (as it states: “It is entirely up to the judgment of the umpire as to whether a fielder is in the act of fielding a ball.”) I think the rule in fact would have been problematic had Middlebrooks knocked down Salty’s throw. Let’s say everything happened exactly as it did, but instead of the ball rolling up the left-field line, it deflected off of Middlebrooks’s glove / arm / body and squirted only, say, several feet away from. Middlebrooks would clearly still have been in the act of… Read more »

tag
tag
10 years ago
Reply to  tag

Hi John, Thanks for your thoughtful response. I guess what I don’t like is that presumption in the runner’s favor, as you put it. I don’t think a baserunner has an inalienable right to free passage when things get sloppy like that. A baseball play is being made on him. Shit can happen and does, and the runner should have to deal with it. Middlebrooks did not dive into the dirt on purpose to impede Craig. The two got tangled up in the wake of his effort, and M. raised his legs. We can’t know why. Absent clear evil intent… Read more »

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Inerestingly, film of Game 4 in ’69 showed that Martin was running inside of the base path and obstructed Richert’s throw. There’s a game that ended on a blown call that failed to rule obstruction. (Of course, I was delighted.)

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I’m afraid I don’t, John. And searching my memory more carefully, I’m not sure whether I’m recalling film or a still photo that shows Martin inside the line when the ball hit him. Here’s a link to a photo:

http://www.grandstandsports.com/pages/4210.htm

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

John: Try again, I found it on Youtube.

Doug
Doug
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Not a surprise that it’s a first for post-season walk-off obstruction. Apparently, hasn’t happened in the regular season since 2004. You have to feel for Middlebrooks. Not much he could do in that situation. Yet, when the play that occurs is the very one cited in the rule book as the example of when obstruction must be called, tough to argue the umpire’s decision. I credit the umpire with making the right call, and making it immediately. Not easy to do in the 9th inning of a tied WS game, with a play as unusual as that one. The decision… Read more »

Doug
Doug
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I remember it well. The Red Sox beef was (a) that Fisk was contacted; and (b) that Armbrister appeared to stop after initially breaking towards first, with the implication that the resulting contact was accidentally on purpose.

Armbrister did, in fact, stop (or slow virtually to a stop) and I have no idea why. But, he is not required to run out the grounder. And, I really can’t imagine a player, in a fraction of a second, coming up with the idea of stopping so that he might interfere with the catcher’s throw.

e pluribus munu
e pluribus munu
10 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Yeah, I remember that very well too. I didn’t understand why the umps ruled as they did. But here’s the applicable rule interpretation now, which supports them – I don’t know how 7.09(j) read or was interpreted in ’75: Rule 7.09(j) Comment: When a catcher and batter-runner going to first base have contact when the catcher is fielding the ball, there is generally no violation and nothing should be called. The runner interference sections do have some points at which intent makes a difference. Looking at the video, it seems to me that Armbrister stopped because he was trying to… Read more »

Doug
Doug
10 years ago

The other thing to consider was that the contact occurred AFTER Fisk had fielded a batted ball. Normally, fielders are protected from runner interference only when fielding a batted ball, NOT afterwards. For example, a hard slide into second base to break about up a double play bid is perfectly legal even though that very intentional act “interferes with” a fielder’s ability to make a throw.

Doug
Doug
10 years ago
Reply to  Doug

I stand corrected. Memory is a funny thing; I had this picture in my mind of Fisk’s arm brushing against Armbrister as he made his throw. But, it was nothing of the sort. I can see why the Red Sox were mad, but I also see the umpire’s point. The ball hit hard off the “concrete” Astroturf so that even though Fisk was momentarily impeded, he really couldn’t have gotten to the ball any sooner; he had to wait for it to come down. Clearly, Armbrister had no influence on the throw (not that that is particularly germane when you… Read more »

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
10 years ago
Reply to  Doug

I viewed that video by continually double-clicking on the start arrow in the lower left hand corner of the screen to provide a stop-action sequence. I think it’s really hard to determine that there was actually contact prior to Fisk’s fielding the ball. The reason for Armbrister’s hesitation seems to be that he was trying to avoid getting hit by his own batted ball. His eyes were continually on the ball and was not concerned about contact with Fisk.

Doug
Doug
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

How about pitching to Molina in the 7th, down two runs, and with a runner on third and one out. Even more curious considering the Red Sox had walked Molina with first base open in the 5th (albeit with two out).

It worked out for Boston, but that decision was a real surprise to me. If the choice is pitching to Molina and Freese, or to Freese and John Jay, well it wouldn’t take me much time to decide to go for the latter option.

Ed
Ed
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Last pitcher to bat in the 9th inning of a World Series game was Sparky Lyle in game one of the 1977 WS. Lyle led off the bottom of the 9th and struck out. He batted again in the 11th and again struck out, this time with a runner on first and one out. Overall the decision to let Lyle bat worked out, as he pitched 3.2 innings, allowing only one baserunner and picking up the victory.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYA/NYA197710110.shtml

CursedClevelander
CursedClevelander
10 years ago

The notion of using your closer in the 7th….I can see how the “box” is just too thick. Too many years of reinforcing the 1 inning closer role. But Farrell, the likely MOTY, made an inexcusable move tonight. You let a reliever hit in the 9th inning of a tie-game in the WS?!?!? And not even your relief ace! If he let Uehara bat to get him another inning, that’s one thing. Letting Workman bat with Napoli on the bench/Uehara in the pen…if an Indians manager did this, somebody else would have to type this post, because I’d either be… Read more »

Ed
Ed
10 years ago

It appears that Workman hasn’t batted in a live game since high school! His baseball reference page shows him with no PAs in the majors and the minors. The Baseball Cube shows his stats with the University of Texas. Again, no PAs. His highlight’s page on the University of Texas website says he was a pitcher/shortstop in high school though it gives no indication of how well (or poorly he hit). A seriously bizarre decision by John Farrell.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

JA,

I didnt read the link you just provided,
but letting a rookie pitcher bat,
so that he can pitch in a walk-off situation,
instead of using the most dominant reliever currently on the planet,

is preposterous.

Grady let the best starter we’ve ever seen (IMO)
in for two batters too long, and gave up a sawed-off ducksnort flare.

birtelcom
Editor
10 years ago

Prior to Craig’s double last night, the most recent double in the bottom of the ninth of a tied World Series game was by Rusty Staub for the Mets in Game 3 of the 1973 Series. That one came with two outs, and John Milner failed to bring Rusty home. The Mets lost the game in the 11th on a walk, a passed ball and a single. Craig’s was the first extra-base hit by a pinch-hitter in the bottom of the 9th of a tied World Series game, and only the second hit by a pinch-hitter in that scenario. In… Read more »

Mike L
Mike L
10 years ago

Joyce’s ruling is correct. There are a couple of key points. First, the rule doesn’t require intent, so what Middlebrooks was thinking when he lifted his legs was irrelevant. If Craig hadn’t tripped over those raised legs, he would have been safe at home. That brings you back to whether Middlebrooks was still “in the act of fielding the ball” and, given the fact that it’s well past him and he should be able to see the outfielder headed to pick it up, the only argument you can make that he’s still “fielding the ball” is that he wants to… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  Mike L

There’s so much that is subjective about the very concept of the “baseline.” A runner is out of the baseline if he runs inside the line on the way to first, even though the bag is inside the line. Why not add a 2nd bag, like we do in beer-league softball? _____ As for the Craig play, why is Craig not considered out of the baseline for heading to home three feet to the inside of the bag? Say he didnt trip over Middlebrooks, and he ran three feet inside the line all the way home, and he was hit… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

JIM JOYCE: He was right on the baseline. He was right on the chalk. And so that never played into any decision, at all, because he was ‑‑ he had slid, stood up, and he was literally right on the chalk.

JOHN HIRSCHBECK: Don’t forget, the runner establishes his own baseline. If he’s on second on a base hit and rounds third wide, that baseline is from where he is, way outside the line, back to third and to home plate, it’s almost a triangle. So the runner establishes his own baseline.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
10 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Jim Joyce was probably hoping to get through the rest of his career without any controversy.

Wonder if he watched the replay before stating that Craig was ” right on the chalk ” .

comment image

kingcrab
kingcrab
10 years ago
Reply to  Mike L

did craig ever touch home plate? after the obstruction call, does he have to or is he just given the extra base?

birtelcom
Editor
10 years ago

B-Ref’s Play Index lists 70 World Series “blown save” appearances that lasted two innings pitched or less. Of those appearances, only five also generated positive Win Probability Added by the pitcher with the blown save. Two of the five were in last night’s game, both by Cardinal pitchers.