2016 Postseason Thread

Absolutely was bc I certainly did a double take the first time Miller was brought in in the 5th inning.
 
rawwr said:
It might just be me, but it seemed like there was significantly more conversation about leverage and reliever usage during the playoffs this year than ever before. The Royals' WS win already had people paying more attention to the bullpen, so I could see teams putting more thought into the way they use relievers. As you say, during the regular season in-game strategy will probably still take a backseat to workload management, but I think we might see teams start changing the way they construct their bullpens.
Click to expand...

Relievers seem easier to pick up at the deadline than other types of players. Even very good ones like Chapman and Wilson. The recent post-season success of teams like the Royals, Indians and Cubs will likely lead to more of an interest on the part of contending teams to pick up bullpen help at the deadline. Also I think more teams will start to stretch out their best relievers at the end of the regular season for possible multi-inning duty in the post-season.
 
about the relievers... you think?

had this trend been in place a few years back, maybe fredi uses kimbrel appropriately and the braves ultimately would have been world series champs. oh what could have been.

on another note, how was fredi not fired after that? forget about the greatest collapse in baseball history, i guess that didn't do it. can you imagine joe madden holding chapman back for the ninth and a lead this entire series? unreal.
 
rawwr said:
It might just be me, but it seemed like there was significantly more conversation about leverage and reliever usage during the playoffs this year than ever before. The Royals' WS win already had people paying more attention to the bullpen, so I could see teams putting more thought into the way they use relievers. As you say, during the regular season in-game strategy will probably still take a backseat to workload management, but I think we might see teams start changing the way they construct their bullpens.
Click to expand...

I think with the Royals it was different because Yost pretty much used everyone in a similar role to the regular season (Herrera, Davis, Holland in 2014 and Herrera, Madson, Davis in 2015). Some multiple inning appearances for those guys, but it was all pretty much late game.

Early use of the closer/set-up man has been advocated by the deep stat community for a long time and some are now subscribing to it. It has its strengths and weaknesses, but in a series of close games, you're always going to have to roll the dice at some point. I think the use of Miller and Chapman with five run leads borders on the ridiculous and that showed last night when they both showed signs of being worn down. I don't know what Rodon did to Maddon's dog to make room for himself in the doghouse. Cubs' acquisition of Montgomery hasn't been talked about enough as a key move at the deadline. Really helped the Cubs a lot. Cleveland could have used a proven LOOGY in their pen for the earlier high-leverage situations and preserved Miller. I think we are going to see a run on second-tier relievers at next year's deadline. Just my take.

As for Theo, very good GM and he took the long view with the Cubs. They were terrible early in his tenure, but he drafted well and made some solid international signings. He didn't make any stupid FA signings to look like was competing before the team was ready to compete. But while money isn't everything in the building of a team (although I don't know where the Cubs are without Lester), it's huge in maintaining a team. There will be some big bills coming due shortly and having financial resources at his disposal will help keep the core of this club together.
 
chipchildress said:
about the relievers... you think?

had this trend been in place a few years back, maybe fredi uses kimbrel appropriately and the braves ultimately would have been world series champs. oh what could have been.

on another note, how was fredi not fired after that? forget about the greatest collapse in baseball history, i guess that didn't do it. can you imagine joe madden holding chapman back for the ninth and a lead this entire series? unreal.
Click to expand...

Some teams/managers are trend-setters. Others less so. Next season even a team that is not trend-setting will have their best reliever ready to do more than pitch the ninth once they get to the playoffs.
 
rawwr said:
It might just be me, but it seemed like there was significantly more conversation about leverage and reliever usage during the playoffs this year than ever before. The Royals' WS win already had people paying more attention to the bullpen, so I could see teams putting more thought into the way they use relievers. As you say, during the regular season in-game strategy will probably still take a backseat to workload management, but I think we might see teams start changing the way they construct their bullpens.
Click to expand...

I think we also saw the pendulum swing a little too far in the direction of BP usage, verging into over-usage. While it was wrong to "save your guys" for the 9th, it is also wrong to err too far the other way and pull effective starters too early like Maddon did with Hendricks. BP guys are BP guys for a reason, and that reason is typically that they don't have the stamina/repertoire to go multiple innings in multiple outings over a short period of games.

There's a balance that needs to be found with starter vs BP usage, and hopefully Snitker can find it. I seriously doubt he will, but I can hope.
 
Grats to the Cubs! I've never been happier for a team I don't follow.

I wouldn't be surprised if 5 or 10 years down the road teams have 6 man quasi-starting pitching staffs where they go 4 IP, 3 IP, on three days rest. The trend has been in that direction since the 70's.
 
Nerfherders said:
Grats to the Cubs! I've never been happier for a team I don't follow.

I wouldn't be surprised if 5 or 10 years down the road teams have 6 man quasi-starting pitching staffs where they go 4 IP, 3 IP, on three days rest. The trend has been in that direction since the 70's.
Click to expand...

Go back and look at teams from the 1950s. Granted, most teams had nine- or ten-man pitching staffs back then and the closer role wasn't nearly as prominent as it is today, but you'd see a lot of multi-inning saves and a lot of different guys in the rotation (and star starting pitchers used in relief).
 
gilesfan said:
I wish more would be mentioned of stupid intentional walks. Gave them a free base runner (decreasing odds that Indians win from 44% to 42%).The Indians end up finding a way to put across a run in the bottom half as well.

I wonder if next year is the year managers realize not to give away free outs (bunts), not to give away free baserunners (int. walks) and to use best relievers in highest leverage situations. (tougher to do managing through regular season, for sure)
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but do those odds of winning take into account the fact that it was Rizzo that was walked?
 
Enscheff said:
If you are talking about these win odds:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/congratulations-chicago-cubs-2016-world-series-champions/

then no, they don't. I'm pretty sure those odds are tabulated by comparing the state of the current game with the outcome of all games that were ever at that state. There is no consideration of who was walked, who is on base, or who is coming to bat.
Click to expand...

Those seem to be similar to this statistician that I follow on twitter. I will have to look up his name, but he essentially provides a game log and indicates what moves affect the win probability. Rest, platoons, relative ability of batter/pitcher, etc. are all considered. It's not tango Tiger, I don't think, but someone that works with him maybe.
 
Enscheff said:
If you are talking about these win odds:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/congratulations-chicago-cubs-2016-world-series-champions/

then no, they don't. I'm pretty sure those odds are tabulated by comparing the state of the current game with the outcome of all games that were ever at that state. There is no consideration of who was walked, who is on base, or who is coming to bat.
Click to expand...

This is what I assumed the odds took into account. But if they do take into account who was actually walked, and who it brings up to the plate, etc. then they become much more useful. Odds solely based on situation are informative and helpful but shouldn't really be relied on to determine the correctness/stupidity of decisions, IMO.
 
smootness said:
This is what I assumed the odds took into account. But if they do take into account who was actually walked, and who it brings up to the plate, etc. then they become much more useful. Odds solely based on situation are informative and helpful but shouldn't really be relied on to determine the correctness/stupidity of decisions, IMO.
Click to expand...

A tool like that could certainly be developed, and it could be referenced by the manager in game on a tablet. I am 100% confident that given a month or so and access to the underlying data, I could write such an application. I would actually be shocked if MLB teams don't already have tools like that ready for use.
 
This is what I would do with a tablet in the dug out:

bill-belichick-smashed-a-tablet.gif
 
except for miller the tribe lacked a lefty to bring in to face rizzo/zobrist...it was a significant flaw in their roster construction...they shoul have asked us for one of cervenka/krol/alvarez
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top