On ESPN this morning Stark reported that Buck said before the game that he would use Britton in the eighth and the ninth if the situation called for it. He just screwed up by saving him for the mythical lead that never materialized.
The save statistic is simplistic and stupid
- Thread starter Smiling Joe Hesketh
- Start date
That seemed monumentally stupid to me as well. One of the greatest relief pitching seasons in history doesn't factor in an extra innings, loser- go- home game. I'm a grudging Showalter champion because he seems distantly related to Belichick and I'd love him in the dugout, but wow.
I meant to post this point a while back when it was more about saves as a statistic but one of the more idiotic things about saves and wins in general is that they used to be a major factor in determining arbitration cases. Considering the root word of arbitration is "arbitrary," you kind of have to wonder what the thinking behind that is. The process could have changed by now, rendering my point useless, but I couldn't find any specifics.
At least high leverage relievers are starting to get paid multi million dollars (a la Andrew Miller) and get wooed a lot more than even 5 years ago.
Edit: Found this article from 2013 which mentions that holds, ERA and strikeouts are also part of the determining factors.
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2013/12/30/5255660/saves-distorting-salary-arbitration
I meant to post this point a while back when it was more about saves as a statistic but one of the more idiotic things about saves and wins in general is that they used to be a major factor in determining arbitration cases. Considering the root word of arbitration is "arbitrary," you kind of have to wonder what the thinking behind that is. The process could have changed by now, rendering my point useless, but I couldn't find any specifics.
At least high leverage relievers are starting to get paid multi million dollars (a la Andrew Miller) and get wooed a lot more than even 5 years ago.
Edit: Found this article from 2013 which mentions that holds, ERA and strikeouts are also part of the determining factors.
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2013/12/30/5255660/saves-distorting-salary-arbitration
Last edited:
If the Sox can't win the series, I hope Buck goes down for this so the Sox can scoop him right up.
I'm not a Farrell fatalist, but when there's a clear upgrade on Buck's level available, you take your shot.
Even though it means I'll have to read another post by you, I really can't wait to hear what your reasoning for this statement is.
Buck played a hunch, and like a hunch I played last week (on the Pats), it lost. Sometimes people can overthink things.
The only thing in Buck's defense was that Ubaldo had been one of the O's best pitchers over the last few weeks.
The various things against Buck include that Britton had been warmed up three times prior to that (I thought managers stopped doing that since Joe Morgan); Jimenez had nine prior relief appearances in his career total (with a 7.56 ERA); Jimenez had horrible first inning stats (as of late September, his first inning ERA was over 8); Bundy had pitched out of the bullpen for the first half of the season with good results; and Jimenez was probably the natural choice to start on Thursday.
Unless he knew something that he ain't talking about. Buck had a brain fart. A really really big one with the whole world watching. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/sports/baseball/zach-britton-buck-showalter-baltimore-orioles.html?_r=0
edit: and really, shouldn't there be someone on his staff who said, "WTF you doing?"
The only thing in Buck's defense was that Ubaldo had been one of the O's best pitchers over the last few weeks.
The various things against Buck include that Britton had been warmed up three times prior to that (I thought managers stopped doing that since Joe Morgan); Jimenez had nine prior relief appearances in his career total (with a 7.56 ERA); Jimenez had horrible first inning stats (as of late September, his first inning ERA was over 8); Bundy had pitched out of the bullpen for the first half of the season with good results; and Jimenez was probably the natural choice to start on Thursday.
Unless he knew something that he ain't talking about. Buck had a brain fart. A really really big one with the whole world watching. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/sports/baseball/zach-britton-buck-showalter-baltimore-orioles.html?_r=0
edit: and really, shouldn't there be someone on his staff who said, "WTF you doing?"
But there's a day between Sunday and Tuesday, Britton only threw 20 pitches on Sunday, and Britton wouldn't have to pitch again until Thursday (maybe). I don't believe in the old Dusty Baker handling of pitcher ways and means, but this is (was) October baseball for Buck and the Orioles. Unless there was something wrong with Britton, and he said he was fine after the game, he should have been considered for two innings.
Does he strike you as one that encourages such input or would listen to it?
One need look no further than how Francona handled Foulke in 2004. It probably cost Foulke his career, but it's as clear a postseason roadmap as any regarding ideal closer usage.
Buck is a better manager than Farrell.
If Farrell isn't going to be retained, Buck is the kind of guy you don't retain him for.
All the people all year who have said fire Farrell, I'd ask who is better than him?
Showalter would be an answer that fits that.
I'm pretty sure Farrell would have brought in Britton last night, especially after Jimenez gave up two hits (if not before).
I wonder how much Showalter is still haunted by his management of the 1995 ALDS.
Game 4, up 2-1 in the series and tied 6-6 in the bottom of the 8th, he puts in his closer (Wetteland) who promptly coughs up 5 runs without recording an out (on an Edgar Martinez grand slam and Buhner solo homer), and the Yankees go on to lose 11-8.
Game 5, after the Yankees score a go-ahead run in the top of the 11th, Showalter leaves Jack McDowell in instead of going to Wetteland again. Cora bunts a single, Griffey singles to center, and Edgar Martinez doubles them home for a Seattle walk-off series win and Yankees loss.
Game 4, up 2-1 in the series and tied 6-6 in the bottom of the 8th, he puts in his closer (Wetteland) who promptly coughs up 5 runs without recording an out (on an Edgar Martinez grand slam and Buhner solo homer), and the Yankees go on to lose 11-8.
Game 5, after the Yankees score a go-ahead run in the top of the 11th, Showalter leaves Jack McDowell in instead of going to Wetteland again. Cora bunts a single, Griffey singles to center, and Edgar Martinez doubles them home for a Seattle walk-off series win and Yankees loss.
Your argument could be used in a high school English textbook to exemplify the literal meaning of "begging the question".
You do understand there's an entire thread on this board about firing Farrell right?
Is yours?
Dude, there is an entire thread about firing Farrell.
I'm fine with Farrell.
But if those people get what they want, this would be how they should go about it.
This really isn't that hard. I don't know why you're trying to make it that way.
Yup. Just as I understand that "Showalter is a better option" isn't a compelling reasoning for firing Farrell and bringing in Showalter, seeing as that's the very premise of your original proposition.
I think we need a new rule of management that I will call the "Showalter Rule": all managers (or people in similar position) ought have at least one person on their staff who can prevent the manager from doing something as dumb as Buck Showalter.
I'm not trying to nitpick you, but I don't think this accurately captures what happened. The Grady analogy is a good one because, like Grady, Buck didn't make *a* brain fart. He made the same bad decision over and over again starting around the 9th inning, and it kept getting worse.
Going with Brach and then O'Day isn't smart, but you can see it. Going to Duensing was dumb. Then going to Jimenez was criminally stupid. Then leaving Jimenez in, against the heart of the Jays lineup--when he was giving up laser shots--was unfathomable. He had chance after chance to course-correct and get Britton in there for multiple innings and he missed it repeatedly.
I think that's part of what's made this such a big deal in the aftermath. That was a feature-length movie chokejob, not just a bad call in the heat of the moment.
Honestly, I can't even see going to O'Day. The Jays had one out, two men on base and a run ends the game. You gotta go with Britton there, since he can either get a strike out or a double play to end the inning. I know Martin and Tulowitzki aren't Donaldson and Encarnacion, but O'Day has given up his share of homers this season and has a 34.2 GB%. It ended up working out great, but how do you gamble like that in a position where a bloop single can finish your season?
I wonder if Buck today is asking his wife "do you think I screwed up? What do you think?" In a George Costanza voice.
I had this discussion with a friend of mine, and after reading some of the quotes from Buck, I have to believe that he got it in his mind that the Os were going to go ahead and Britton was going to be used for the save. He made a decision, got it stuck in his head, and couldn't get rid of it. Or maybe he made a decision not to use Britton in the 8th and 9th and figured that if he put Britton in the 11th, he would be going against himself. Who knows?
So maybe you are correct and this isn't a "brain fart" but it shows how someone can outsmart themselves.
I completely agree, and put it like I did more to show that even with generous benefit of the doubt it was a huge fuck up. But yeah, O'Day was a real stretch there for sure.
Absolutely. Shows the value of flexible thinking--the only explanation is, as you say here--he got it in his head he was going to play it one way and became inert when his plan started going to shit.
Buck was deceived by SSS. Ubaldo has been maddeningly inconsistent since 2010. Had a great September, but that was as a SP'er, his SSS record as a RP'er is not comforting.
Ubaldo should have been used as a last resort only. Frankly, would you rather see him pitch with a lead against a different part of the order or against the heart of the Jays order where 1 run means game over.
This was a far worse decision than Grady Little leaving Pedro in. Pedro was the man, even if he was tiring, and the worst that happened was they tied the game. Losing with Ubaldo over Britton, oy
All managers become insane after a certain amount of time on the job. Buck has joined the insane club. I doubt he gets fired, but maybe he gets a promotion to the FO
Ubaldo should have been used as a last resort only. Frankly, would you rather see him pitch with a lead against a different part of the order or against the heart of the Jays order where 1 run means game over.
This was a far worse decision than Grady Little leaving Pedro in. Pedro was the man, even if he was tiring, and the worst that happened was they tied the game. Losing with Ubaldo over Britton, oy
All managers become insane after a certain amount of time on the job. Buck has joined the insane club. I doubt he gets fired, but maybe he gets a promotion to the FO
I'll put myself up against you on anything baseball.
But go ahead and tell me how Torey is a better option than Buck now.
I see you put as much thought into this post as you have your previous ones. Trying to prove your point by offering your opinion never works. Evidence does.
you mean something like this?
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/13186480/who-mlb-best-manager-survey-says
It's because your posts offer no substance of any sort. And even when you are providing "proof" it is just a link with no information at all. You're only making it easier on the mods.
Maybe the mistake was having Ubaldo on the roster to begin with particularly since (1) he was rumoured to be starting on TRS if they won and (2) they could have put Vance Worley on the roster.
I wish some intrepid reporter had asked him or Duke why Ubaldo was on the roster in the first place. I guess we'll never find out.
Just show your work. Thinking Showalter is a better manager than Farrell is perfectly acceptable, as long as you justify your opinion. When the best argument you can come up with is an ESPN article containing zero analysis, it's not enough to even start a conversation.
The only one talking about a comparison is you. The rest of us are talking about how Buck is a terrible manager.
You have a different opinion, which is fine. But your assertion is not a fact.
I think Jimenez was a fine option as someone you use AFTER Britton when you've basically used your best bullpen bullets and now you know you may have to hunker down for 3-4 innings with one guy who is reliable.
Having him begin to warm during Britton's last inning - whichever that may have been - may have been the best bet so he could get his appropriate "starting pitcher" warm-up time.
Having him begin to warm during Britton's last inning - whichever that may have been - may have been the best bet so he could get his appropriate "starting pitcher" warm-up time.
Maybe if Broda repeats the same thing for a fifth time, that's what'll finally convince everyone.
Not after Tuesday night. Showalter is now more likely to be a MLB Network anchor than manage another baseball team.
As someone else said, that was just criminally stupid. Over and over again. Perhaps worse than Grady Little, who will always have the bad but plausible excuse that he simply had to much faith in one of the greatest pitchers who ever lived. Buck used Ubaldo fucking Jiminez instead of a plausible Cy Young candidate. Grady's decision was inexcusable, this was worse than that.
Maybe he was the choice to make the start if Tillman came up lame in the warmups, which was a not insignificant probability.
I would suggest reading these 2 articles and then doing some math and see what you can figure out. You see this is basic scientific method here, you have a hypothesis, now get some data and either prove your point (Buck>>>>>Farrell) or refine your hypothesis.
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/3/17/5504652/manager-pythagorean-wins
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2012/3/28/2908044/manager-wins-above-expectancy
from todays article:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-craziest-part-of-showalters-crazy-decision/
"Encarnacion came up to the plate with runners at first and third, with only one out, so the season-ending run was 90 feet away. Any reasonably deep fly ball would score Devon Travis, giving the Blue Jays the win. At that point, the Orioles badly needed one of two outcomes: preferably a strikeout, but if not a strikeout, then definitely a ground ball."
"Now, here’s the crazy part: no team in baseball history has ever had a better option for this specific situation than the 2016 Orioles."
Think about that for a little while before arguing Buck didn't out-Grady Grady on this one. Your season ending run is 90 feet away and you have the best option IN THE HISTORY OF BASEBALL available to you...and you don't take it.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-craziest-part-of-showalters-crazy-decision/
"Encarnacion came up to the plate with runners at first and third, with only one out, so the season-ending run was 90 feet away. Any reasonably deep fly ball would score Devon Travis, giving the Blue Jays the win. At that point, the Orioles badly needed one of two outcomes: preferably a strikeout, but if not a strikeout, then definitely a ground ball."
"Now, here’s the crazy part: no team in baseball history has ever had a better option for this specific situation than the 2016 Orioles."
Think about that for a little while before arguing Buck didn't out-Grady Grady on this one. Your season ending run is 90 feet away and you have the best option IN THE HISTORY OF BASEBALL available to you...and you don't take it.