Powered By Blogger

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Explaining John Farrell's Moves

John Farrell, like every other manager, coach or head of in-game decision making deserves to or at the very least is not immune to criticism. We should go over the in-game situations and whether it was a defensible decision.

(***Note: Do not base opinions on outcome, base it on thought process. No one likes a Monday Morning Quarterback.***)

Pitching to Evan Longoria with two outs, runners on 2nd and 3rd, First Base open: 

Many people drew parallels to what Joe Maddon should have done by letting Ortiz beat him with a man on third and two outs but the situation is completely different. At this point, as manager, you are already behind 2-0 and you don't want to go down 3-0 by arguably the hottest hitter on the team especially with strikeout machine Mike Napoli on deck. The move should have been to walk Ortiz.

However, while up 3-0 if you walk Longoria you are putting the tying run on first base. Myers hasn't done much throughout the series admittedly, a double ties the game but a home run in that situation puts the Rays ahead while a home run with Longoria although difficult to stomach, only ties the game.

The other aspect is Clay Buchholz history vs. Evan Longoria and it has been largely one-sided. Entering yesterday's game in 34 at-bats Longoria had 7 hits (.206 average), 0 home runs, and 13 strikeouts. That number of strikeouts is the most for Clay Buchholz vs any batter and conversely the most for Evan Longoria vs any pitcher. This is called domination by a pitcher versus a batter.

Longoria is undoubtedly the best player on the Rays, and you don't want the best player to beat you on most occasions. But given Buchholz and his gaudy numbers versus one of the leagues best and ultimately putting the tying run on base is risky. Hindsight says you shouldn't have pitched to him, however at the time the call is totally defensible and what I would have done knowing the batter history vs said pitcher. Pitch selection however is a completely different argument.

Farrell Decision: Defensible

Pinch Running Quintin Berry for David Ortiz in the 8th inning:

This is another move that people are judging based on the outcome and the hindsight of not having Ortiz up in the 9th inning.

Quintin Berry has one job on the team during this post season: pinch run for David Ortiz or Mike Napoli late in the game and steal the base or score the run.

David Ortiz led off the 8th inning with a walk. (Lead off base runners score almost 40% of the time) Given that there is only one regulation inning afterwards the odds of the Red Sox batting around to get back to Ortiz, not impossible, but slim. Ortiz is not fleet of foot so any ball in the gap it is a question whether he can score from first, however with Berry, it is a certainty. Also Berry gives you the stolen base factor which is one more thing for relievers to think about which means their full focus is not on the batter. If there are any outs I doubt Ortiz comes out of the game, but given that no men have been retired in the inning you need someone that can run in that situation.

Berry then stole the base while Mike Napoli was up, in turn giving the Red Sox three opportunities to hit with a runner in scoring position without sacrificing an out to get a runner to second base. Ultimately the Red Sox didn't get a hit in the next three at-bats and Ortiz is out of the game for its duration.

Berry came in and did the only job he has on this team and if you aren't going to use him in this situation when would you use him?

Farrell Decision: Defensible

NOT Pinch-Hitting Bogaerts for Drew with 2 outs in the 8th inning: 

Jake McGee is on the hill, very hard throwing lefty that is actually better against righties (.217) than lefties (.235).

Stephen Drew at the plate has a wretched .196 batting average on the year vs lefties.

Xander Bogaerts is on the bench, Jamey Wright (righty) warming up in the pen.

There comes a time when sticking with a player is detrimental to team success and that time comes when Stephen Drew faces lefties. If he starts the game versus a lefty I have no problem with it, but later in the game it is not beneficial to have a .196 hitter against a lefty especially one that has lefties only hitting .235 off of him. If the splits were above .250 for the year it could be an acceptable risk to let Drew bat.

Farrell's explanation:

"McGee has been dominant against right‑handed hitters. He's almost a right‑handed reliever in some ways because of the strong reverse splits he has," Farrell said. "Stephen is a good fastball hitter. We know McGee is going to come at us with 95 percent fastballs, if not more. There was no hesitation to leave Stephen at the plate."

*Full Disclosure: I understand there is a Small ML Sample Size here, however this is a player that EVERYONE expects to be handed the reigns at the beginning of next year. But we will use some Minor League Splits for a greater sample*

If Xander Bogaerts comes in the Rays might make a pitching change or they may let McGee face Bogaerts.


  • If they let McGee face Bogaerts LHP vs RHB (.298 avg, .926 OPS)
  • If the let Wright face Bogaerts RHP vs RHB ( .280 avg, .782 OPS)
The comment that "Stephen is a good fastball hitter" is also a bit contrite given that in a small sample size at the Major League level Bogaerts is hitting .600 against similar pitchers. Also, wouldn't you want a rookie batter up at the plate against a "one-trick pony" as McGee is with his fastball? If you want to take Ferrell's number at his words and you're getting 95% fastballs Bogaerts is one of the top prospects in all of baseball, the kid can hit a fastball, it would seem to at the very least be a push. 

If they make the pitching change then you get Jamey Wright on the hill, whom is a worse reliever than McGee and also his splits versus righties yield a .255 avg. 

So here's the decision:

Drew at .196 versus McGee .235 vs Lefties
Bogaerts at .298 versus McGee .217 Righties
Bogaerts at .280 versus Wright at .255 Righties

Most likely Maddon keeps McGee in the game and you get a slightly more-favorable matchup, albeit a big spot for a rookie, where a predominantly fastball pitching Southpaw versus a good fastball hitting right-handed batter

The decision Farrell made (letting Drew hit) was based largely on defense later in the game. But where you have already pinch ran for Ortiz in the inning you have already committed to needing this run to come in and assuring that you weakened your lineup for the right reasons. Not pinch hitting for Stephen Drew not only doesn't make sense it was borderline irresponsible. 

If, as a manager, you are unprepared to hit for a player with drastic splits as Drew has versus lefties and are that worried about his defense, then he should not be on the roster and John MacDonald should have gotten the roster spot. 

Farrell Decision: Indefensible

Shane Victorino bunting with runners on 1st and 2nd no one out in the 9th:

The semi-progressive baseball crowd saying, "you can't bunt with 1st and 2nd no one out, you're killing an inning" doesn't get it. 

While a runner on second with no one out has a 60% chance of scoring, all things being equal , a bunt gets you two runners in scoring position with Pedroia coming up. Great contact hitter. If Victorino doesn't get a hit you are looking at a 45% chance of getting the runner in with one out from second or a 54% chance of getting the run in with one out and the runner at 3rd.

It would be one thing if the personnel that you have bunting was incapable or unfamiliar to bunting but Shane Victorino is a virtual certainty at getting the bunt down. Therefore with one out you have a better than 50% chance of the run scoring with a guy that is in top 5 in the league in hardest to strike out.

Also, consider Victorino's thumb. A pitcher with a power sinker pounding him inside is asking for a weak ground ball to the left side and possible rally-killing double play.

Thinking ahead, they could possibly have intentionally walked Pedroia to get to Mike Carp who just a few weeks ago beat the Rays on a grand slam against a similar sinker ball pitcher. However, with a historically wild pitcher, Farrell made an educated guess thinking that they would pitch to Pedroia to give him some flexibility in case he walked someone. Also this move takes away Rodney's change-up. A pitch that frequently bounces in the dirt and gets away from the catcher, which leaves you with two players that feast on fastballs in Pedroia and Carp coming up in the next two batters.

Ultimately, he put his players in the best position to succeed with this decision. And the tying run ended up scoring so the juice was worth the squeeze.

Farrell Decision: Defensible


Very rarely are you going to see a successful double-switch in an American League game, which leads me to believe that the Rays got a little lucky, but sometimes its better to be lucky than good. The Red Sox are still in the drivers seat, and have an advantage going into Game 4 with Peavy getting the nod against Hellickson.

Stay Tuned

Norton

No comments:

Post a Comment

Let us know what you think!