05-22-11--DETROIT VS. PITTSBURGH--1:35 PM

[Gehringer_2]

I just looked at his hit charts for 2009, 2010 and 2011. They're park-specific, so rather than go through the rigormarole of looking at every park, I just compared him at CoPa.

I looked at all hits within about 10 feet of the warning track, to the warning track/wall, and also homeruns.

2009 - 30 (81 games)
2010 - 27 (81 games)
2011 - 3 (18 games = 14 for 81 games)

So basically his warning track/HR power has been cut in half so far this year versus the last two years. His HR/FB rate is 2% vs. his career 10%, which is 1/5th. Either way you slice it his power has dropped off very dramatically.


The available data seems to confirm that Inge can't be counted on as a regular 3Bman for this year or next.

And for once we have complete agreement between the skill observation and the stats, as it's pretty plain to see his bat speed has gone bye-bye recently.

[Truth]

No, I'm not.

The fact Porcello gave up 1 hit in the 6th has negligible impact, at most, on his ability to come out and pitch the 9th well.

If one wants to claim using the closer is the right thing to do because it gave the team the best chance to win (something I am not convinced of, but setting that aside), then the same is true if he were pitching a no-hitter. As such, I'm saying that if someone supports using the closer there, s/he really ought to support using a closer even if Rick happened to be working on a no-hitter.

For me, I have a hard time parsing the idea - working on a no-hitter, pulling the pitcher is completely out of the question, but give up a single hit 2 innings before, well, there is no problem in pulling him for the closer, despite Rick working with a low pitch count, and the closer not having gotten work recently.

It is a silly consideration for the pull the pitcher / go with the pitcher decision to be hinged on or influenced by in my opinion. Either way Rick was dominant, and I don't think one hit allowed should change one's mind on how best to handle the 9th.

A no-hitter puts a pitcher's name in the record books, that's the issue. That becomes a factor in the manager's decision and though it doesn't invalidate the other considerations (strength, batters due up, quality of closer, etc.) it does trump them.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

A no-hitter puts a pitcher's name in the record books, that's the issue. That becomes a factor in the manager's decision and though it doesn't invalidate the other considerations (strength, batters due up, quality of closer, etc.) it does trump them.

A shutout and a 1-hitter gets you into the record books as well.

And doesn't trumping something have the practical equivalent of invalidating that something?

In any event, all I am saying is in this specific circumstance, I don't agree with the idea that a no hitter vs. a 1 hitter should have impacted the decision.

[Gehringer_2]

The best 3B in the system right now is probably Miguel Cabrera, all things considered. We won't do that, because he is god awful defensively, we don't want to jerk him around. That and the fact that moving Martinez to 1B leaves the team without a decent DH. But if the team had a decent DH or 1B in the system, moving Cabrera to 3B might actually be the best move.

I sure don't think it would have been the end of his world, or even anything he wouldn't be excited about, to have told Cabby to get a little IF practice at 3rd to play maybe a couple of games there in NL parks. He'd probably have loved it. And if he worked out decently and you have a start in an NL park with a hard throwing Verlander or Scherzer, and depending on the scouting on the opposing hitters, it probably would be a great move for a game or two.

[robgrave]

Welcome to the board, Rob.

Thanx, appreciate it. Not sure how much I can contribute here; rather sophisticated group, I'd have to say. I played some catch with Milt Pappas (remember him?) growing up, before he got serious about Bball. And that's about as close to the game as I've ever been. Just a fan now, who knows what he knows from watching.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Thanx, appreciate it. Not sure how much I can contribute here; rather sophisticated group, I'd have to say. I played some catch with Milt Pappas (remember him?) growing up, before he got serious about Bball. And that's about as close to the game as I've ever been. Just a fan now, who knows what he knows from watching.

My old man crossed paths with Milt from time to time back in the day after Milt was an established MLB player as well as after Milt had retired from baseball.

[Gehringer_2]

Sure, I understand. It's a good argument. I don't know the answer, I just have a POV myself, and I suspect the objective margin is pretty small between the various options.

Also, I wasn't trying to imply that you were calling for Leyland's head, I was trying to respond to your argument as well as address the collective angst in the game thread simultaneously.

In this case, I don't have a big problem with him pulling RP. His pitch chart looked like the FB might have been at the break of starting to trend down - and it's pretty conventional move in a close NL game even if it's a one hitter.

What I hated was his justification "Your closer is supposed to be better than your starter after 8 innings". I hope his thinking really isn't that much of a simpleton's. Forget about all this 'supposed to be' BS. You watch the game Jim, and YOU DECIDE, in real time, on an individual basis, on all the current facts, whether your closer is better than your starter at any point X. There surely have been times when it was slam dunk that JV had more in the 9th than anyone in the BP - so that was just a dumb thing to say. And if that is what you really did, good for you, so don't pretend it's ever some kind of Robo-response.

[sabretooth]

In this case, I don't have a big problem with him pulling RP. His pitch chart looked like the FB might have been at the break of starting to trend down - and it's pretty conventional move in a close NL game even if it's a one hitter.

What I hated was his justification "Your closer is supposed to be better than your starter after 8 innings". I hope his thinking really isn't that much of a simpleton's. Forget about all this 'supposed to be' BS. You watch the game Jim, and YOU DECIDE, in real time, on an individual basis, on all the current facts, whether your closer is better than your starter at any point X. There surely have been times when it was slam dunk that JV had more in the 9th than anyone in the BP - so that was just a dumb thing to say. And if that is what you really did, good for you, so don't pretend it's ever some kind of Robo-response.

If he made this decision for robotic/formulaic reasons that would be especially lame.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

I think he made the decision based solely on wanting to end the 5-game losing streak and wanting to get Valverde work.

EDIT: I think JL's post game comments are aimed to the casual fan in general, and suspect more goes into his decision making process than what he articulates.

[Gehringer_2]

If he made this decision for robotic/formulaic reasons that would be especially lame.

To be fair, I just read a more expanded version of his comments on the MLB site than the first one I saw, and they do give a better reading.

[ROMAD1]

so how long of a winning streak do they go on now?

[C03BRA]

85 pitches.... he's gone 110 this year. Every inning was effortless. I can safely assume he wasn't close to tiring. We've seen relievers come in and blow up too many times this year.

Your being a little ridiculous about this....especially when we won the game

Whats the benefit of Porcello pitching a complete game (assuming he could have). There's really not a legit reason. As I have already stated he was about to face the top of the line-up for the 4th time, odds were against Porcello.

Yes we have seen "relievers come in and blow up too many times"....I completely agree with that statement. How many saves has Valverde blown this season?

0....he's 11 for 11 in save opportunities. He's given up 6 ERs in 20 IP, 3 of those against Pittsburgh (in a non-save situation) when we were already down 7-1. I'm assuming Leyland brought him in because he hadn't pitched in 6 days.

[C03BRA]

At this point, I would simply put Santiago at 3b. He's got to be at least as good a fielder, and he's probably a better offensive option at this point. If Guillen comes back I'd probably put him at 2B and maybe platoon Sizemore and Santiago at 3b, remove Kelly from the 25-man roster and make Inge the Kelly-like backup.

The idea of Santiago starting on a daily basis makes me want to vomit. I'd rather watch Inge check his swing.

There's a reason he doesn't play 3B...I would assume its his arm.

[sabretooth]

The idea of Santiago starting on a daily basis makes me want to vomit. I'd rather watch Inge check his swing.

There's a reason he doesn't play 3B...I would assume its his arm.

At least Santiago does something roughly average offensively, that is get on base.

And the stats and fan surveys say that Santiago's arm at SS is of average strength and excellent accuracy, so he should be fine at 3B.

The reason he doesn't play 3B is because the organization is sold on Inge as the 3Bman. The reason Santiago doesn't play everyday is because the organization is convinced that he's a backup. They may be right about Santiago, but I strongly suspect that they're wrong about Inge at this point.

Whatever, I'm not hooked on Santiago, but there's got to be a better option for 3B than Inge in the organization not named Cabrera.

[The Truman Show]

I guess it all comes down to how you view the role of the bullpen. If you think the bullpen arms are guys to be sought out in wins, then you make the move. If you think the bullpen is there to serve as reserves for the starters, you don't make the move.

I've always been in the latter camp. Any pitcher, even the best closers, are liable to have a game where their stuff just doesn't show up. When you got a guy throwing scoreless through 8, you already know his stuff is working.

[byco42]

Leyland: "To me, we had the best guy out there for the ninth inning, no matter how it turned out."

Does this hint of a bit of a** covering after the fact? I now wonder if Leyland simply said to Valverde on the mound to do his gah-dam job and not to make him (Leyland) play the goat for pulling Porcello.

[Truth]

In this case, I don't have a big problem with him pulling RP. His pitch chart looked like the FB might have been at the break of starting to trend down - and it's pretty conventional move in a close NL game even if it's a one hitter.

What I hated was his justification "Your closer is supposed to be better than your starter after 8 innings". I hope his thinking really isn't that much of a simpleton's. Forget about all this 'supposed to be' BS. You watch the game Jim, and YOU DECIDE, in real time, on an individual basis, on all the current facts, whether your closer is better than your starter at any point X. There surely have been times when it was slam dunk that JV had more in the 9th than anyone in the BP - so that was just a dumb thing to say. And if that is what you really did, good for you, so don't pretend it's ever some kind of Robo-response.

Except this isn't what he said. I can't remember his exact quote but he qualified the statement that made it clear that this wouldn't apply to a JV type thrower who was going strong.

[JonBenke]

I hope the closer blows it and Leyland is fired. I am so pissed off at this formulaic crap!

When you have Bert posting stuff like this -- wow, things aren't going all that well.

Serioulsy, I really hope this is Leyland's final year in Detroit.

[Gehringer_2]

Except this isn't what he said. I can't remember his exact quote but he qualified the statement that made it clear that this wouldn't apply to a JV type thrower who was going strong.

Yes - duly noted in a second post. The first article I read had abbreviated his quotes substantially, I read the expanded version later and agree that what he said made more sense than the edited version.

[pyrotigers]

I'm OK with taking out Porcello because Valverde is a good pitcher, but I think in general taking out a guy who is pitching well for an unknown quantity is a bad idea, that's the main problem with modern bullpen usage, even the best guys have off days, and the more pitchers you put into the game the more likely you are to run into one

[JonBenke]

Question is what W would have been better for Procello going forward ... A - or - B ?

A.) 9 IP, 1 H, complete game shutout
B.) 8 IP, 1 H

Seriously, you're not telling me one wouldn't help the kid, going forward, more than the other?

[Johnny Mac]

Question is what W would have been better for Procello going forward ... A - or - B ?

A.) 9 IP, 1 H, complete game shutout
B.) 8 IP, 1 H

Seriously, you're not telling me one wouldn't help the kid, going forward, more than the other?

How do you know he goes another inning shutting them down? What would have been better going forward..... A or B

A) 8 IP 1 H Win
b) 8.2 or 9 IP 3-4 H 2 er and a ND or even a L

[Truth]

Yes - duly noted in a second post. The first article I read had abbreviated his quotes substantially, I read the expanded version later and agree that what he said made more sense than the edited version.

Oops, sorry. I don't multi-task (working on a project) well

[JonBenke]

How do you know he goes another inning shutting them down?

Touche. Hey, but what would have been better for Rick ... getting the chance, or not getting the chance?

That's a simple question.

[C03BRA]

Question is what W would have been better for Procello going forward ... A - or - B ?

A.) 9 IP, 1 H, complete game shutout
B.) 8 IP, 1 H

Seriously, you're not telling me one wouldn't help the kid, going forward, more than the other?

They both go down as a win....does it ultimately matter? (assuming the BP complete the shutout)

How does 1 more inning help someone? (serious question)

[The Truman Show]

I'm gonna give Rick enough credit to say that he can probably handle his job as a big league pitcher without going around with a shiny CG SHO in his stat line.

[sagnam]

Also, I don't know who's quiet. Most of the people I remember that were on that train post pretty much every day.

I meant in their criticism of Sizemore.

[JonBenke]

I'm gonna give Rick enough credit to say that he can probably handle his job as a big league pitcher without going around with a shiny CG SHO in his stat line.

No ****. But if you tell me he wouldn't feel better with it, I don't believe you.

I don't think it'll have much effect on his next start, but stuff like that helps in sports.

[Tim Mitchell]

Shoulda left Rick in. Obviously an ego problem for Smokes.
What is with this guy anyway?
I am surprised he didnt put Perry in there.
This will be his last year.

[Yoda]

I'm OK with taking out Porcello because Valverde is a good pitcher, but I think in general taking out a guy who is pitching well for an unknown quantity is a bad idea, that's the main problem with modern bullpen usage, even the best guys have off days, and the more pitchers you put into the game the more likely you are to run into one

This is my general thinking. I'm always in favor of leaving the starter in versus bringing in a reliever, especially when he's worked so hard in keeping his pitch count down and he's still pitching extremely well.

As an aside, what's the incentive for keeping your pitch count down, knowing you're just going to be taken out after 8 regardless. Reward the pitcher and let him finish what he started. These guys aren't heartless robots, they care about these sort of things.

[JonBenke]

These guys aren't heartless robots, they care about these sort of things.

Exactly.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Sadly, I am a heartless robot.

On second thought, it is odd that I think it sad, seeing as I am an emotionless robot.

[Dawgs]

The way Porcello was dealing in my mind makes him a better option to start the ninth than a closer who you cant be sure what you will get that particular day. Its a known quantity vs an unknown. Doesnt mean it couldnt blow up in your face either way tho. Personally I wouldnt have pinch hit for Porcello unless they got someone in scoring position and he would have started the ninth. BPs are over used and managers over manage in baseball today.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

I meant in their criticism of Sizemore.

I am pretty sure my critique was one of Sizemore gives them the best chance of having a league average 2B, whereas Rhymes gave almost no to no chance, because he simply didn't do enough in the minors to support the idea he would be an effective major leaguer long term.

I still think that is the case, and there really wasn't a good or compelling reason to give Rhymes that shot at the beginning of the year. Even if (when?) Sizemore bombs out, it doesn't make the decision to use Rhymes at the begininng of the season a good one IMHO. It just makes it an irrelevant one.

Sizemore has been a massive disappointment at the plate thus far.

[pyrotigers]

I like Sizemore a lot, he's not been very good since getting called up from AAA, but their is no one who can replace him so what's the point of complaining? I'll gladly slam players I like when they are terrible, for example I like Ryan Raburn, and he's basically been a complete abomination this year. Were it not for the fact that Boesch now sucks again I'd have no problem with him getting pretty much 0 playing time at this point.

[Turnbuckle]

Haven't been posting much at all lately and I'm late to the thread but I wanted to also chime in on how disgusted I was that Porcello was pulled after 8. Valverde may be a better pitcher for a single inning, but there's no good reason to pull a pitcher who has shown that his stuff is working for that game especially when their pitch count is so low.

This team is weird. I never would have thought our starting pitching would be so impressive and our bullpen would be so depressive.

[sabretooth]

Arguments derail around here for a host of reasons, just like anywhere, but credibility is important. I think credibility requires that people state their beliefs but it's also important to admit mistakes and acknowledge the superiority of others' arguments.

Obviously Raburn and Sizemore have been horrible so far. Honesty requires that I point out that I support them not for what they do over any 100 at-bats nor for what I think they'll do for the next 100 at-bats but for what I think they're likely to do over the next 400-500+ at-bats, which is the minimum period required for any valid projection.

What I want is simple: (a) put the best available players on the field and (b) seek alternatives when necessary. The converse is (a) don't leave better alternatives on the bench or in the minors (the Sizemore vs. Rhymes debate is an example) and (b) don't spend limited trade/$$ resources on alternatives when you have an adequate option available (Raburn is an example of a guy who can hold down the LF position full-time, but he's been absolutely horrible this year so far).

[The Truman Show]

No ****. But if you tell me he wouldn't feel better with it, I don't believe you.

I don't think it'll have much effect on his next start, but stuff like that helps in sports.

Of all the reasons I'm doing things in a baseball game, just gotta say that I don't think "Because it will make someone feel better" is going to enter the calculus at all. Just my philosophy.

I'm sure I've posted at some point about how Sizemore's play invokes all sorts of vulgar notions about sucking and so forth. If I haven't, do note that, like with Raburn, I am upset that I stuck up for the guy and he has responded by being useless. Thankfully, I still look smart for ripping on Boesch.

[JonBenke]

Truman Show - I understand, I am just really over Leyland right now ... I can't wait till he's gone!

[tiger337]

It's been a bad year for both sabers and traditionalists. The sabers are losing on Raburn and Sizemore. The traditionalists are losing on Boesch and Rhymes. Is there somebody out there we can all embrace? Maybe Dirks.