I'm still steaming over last nights game. Tie game going to the bottom of the 9th, and the top of the Reds lineup due to bat in the inning. So Gonzalez summons Scott Linebrink to take the ball and face the most dangerous hitters in the Reds lineup (oh wait, that was Edgar Renteria batting 2nd. 2 out of the 3 were dangerous, but the point still stands). This is just stupid on so many levels when your best reliever is sitting in the pen, waiting for that save opportunity that could possibly be on the horizon in extra innings. Fredi is a firm believer in that you can't use your closer in the bottom of the 9th in a tie ballgame on the road, and it is a policy as stupid as Mike Woodson/Larry Drew's first half 2 foul rule.
It is preposterous that somebody hasn't been able to convince Fredi that this policy is wrong in his 5 plus years of managing. Basic mathematicians know that the road team loses 100% of the time when the home team scores a run in the bottom of the 9th (or later) of a tie game. In order to win the game, the road team must score at least 1 more run to break the tie. Logically, the road team must be able to bat again in order to score, as I'm struggling to find an instance where a baseball team gains a run on their opposition while playing defense. Combining all of this information, why would one choose to use a mediocre reliever over your best one? In order to have a chance to win the game, you have to score at least one more run, and you have a 0% chance to score a run when you don't bat again. In the immortal words of Herman Edwards, "YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!"
If any of you readers disagree, then you could be a major league manager someday. In the mean time, I will drive myself crazy trying to get my head around this. Extend the game first, and worry about closing it later. Which brings me to another point. If the save wasn't a stat, would this line of thinking even exist? It is a pretty pointless statistic, and one that has hand cuffed managers into using their best relievers in predetermined roles, rather than in the highest leverage situations. I've covered this in previous posts, but having a 3 run lead in the 9th is a time where the team in the lead wins over 90% of the time. What is the pitcher saving? Why should we celebrate that reliever not sucking terribly on that particular day? It isn't an entirely meaningless stat, as I would much rather have my best reliever pitching in the last inning of a game that I'm leading. However, the biggest point in the ball game can occur in the 7th or 8th inning, rather than the 9th. Why make your best reliever for these situations only because it isn't the 9th? It makes no sense, and the save statistic is what causes this line of thinking. Doing away with it would make the game better, but there is no way that will happen. Sigh.
