One of the worst Sox losses I've ever witnessed

[Dick Allen]

Yes, the key point other than the fact that Ventura 1) believed that Sale was his best choice there despite the unique circumstances of the end of the 7th and the start of the 8th, after the 1 hitter up until that point...2) shouldn't have been over-riden by the fact that Chris Sale probably convinced Ventura to let him face Mike Trout when he was only 3-4 starts removed from a serious injury DLing and 3) the season, as we've been told over and over is basically meaningless, so why push one of the two most important assets to the brink in a high leverage situation where he's throwing a ton of pitches there at max effort (especially reaching back for every ounce of FB left against Trout) when you have relievers who have been doing the job for the last 6 weeks or so?

Yet you complain at the choice of relievers. Of course after the fact.

 

If you are saying if Ventura pulled Sale and put Putnam in, at the time you chose, of course, after the fact, and Putnam blew the game, you wouldn't be calling him an idiot and mentioning stuff like no ball had been hit hard, Trout was hitting .100 vs. Sale, he was at 108 pitches, or saying he should have used some other reliever, sorry I don't believe you. And there are several others in the same boat. The Sox lost, of course it has to be Ventura's fault, because hindsight makes everyone a genius. Either the Sox have the talent right now to be world champions or game threads blaming Ventura for this and that have become beyond ridiculous. If you take them as gospel, if any one of several posters on here replaced Ventura, the White Sox would be close to undefeated. Sale is an ace. He got beat. It's baseball, not a sign that Robin Ventura doesn't know what he is doing.

[Kyyle23]

Just like your non-response about any area of managing that Ventura would be considered among/st the Top 5-10 in the game at ???

 

I gave statistical reinforcement for my answer, and covered both bases of argument.

 

More than anything, gut/intuition/logic said Putnam was better to use against Hamilton than Petricka.

 

Oh, you mean after you named 10 ex sox players because thats what you love to do.

 

Please, show me this statistical reinforcement

 

Besides, how can I cite eye test when I've never actually WATCHED/SEEN Petricka or Putnam pitch this entire season?????

 

and this is the absolute gold nugget here. I absolutely love when you criticize players and managers for everything from body language to fundamentals, and you NEVER ACTUALLY WATCH THE GAMES

[Eminor3rd]

More than anything, gut/intuition/logic said Putnam was better to use against Hamilton than Petricka.

 

Well, to be fair, maybe Ventura's gut said Petricka.

 

With this bullpen, I think we're grasping at straws here looking for a scapegoat. They're a bunch of similarly half-decent arms with consistency issues -- sometimes they're going to blow up on us. Even a guy who has three good outings in a row is just a guy who had three good INNINGS in a row. It's just not enough to predict any kind of dominance or crappiness. There's really no clear best guy, so going with who is rested or seems ready is a reasonably defensible move pretty much every time.

Edited June 9, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[caulfield12]

Oh, you mean after you named 10 ex sox players because thats what you love to do.

 

Is that a ban-worthy offense at WSI???

 

Please, show me this statistical reinforcement

 

 

 

and this is the absolute gold nugget here. I absolutely love when you criticize players and managers for everything from body language to fundamentals, and you NEVER ACTUALLY WATCH THE GAMES

 

Lefties vs. Petricka

14/50 .280 and .662 OPS

 

Lefties vs. Putnam

7/38 .184 and .533 OPS

Edited June 9, 2014 by caulfield12

[Eminor3rd]

That's not even remotely close to enough of a sample to be predictive.

[Kyyle23]

That's not even remotely close to enough of a sample to be predictive.

 

Hey, Robin Ventura bad and those advanced statistics prove it out

[Dick Allen]

Didn't Petricka come in to face Pujols?

[Kyyle23]

Didn't Petricka come in to face Pujols?

 

yep

[iamshack]

Well, to be fair, maybe Ventura's gut said Petricka.

 

With this bullpen, I think we're grasping at straws here looking for a scapegoat. They're a bunch of similarly half-decent arms with consistency issues -- sometimes they're going to blow up on us. Even a guy who has three good outings in a row is just a guy who had three good INNINGS in a row. It's just not enough to predict any kind of dominance or crappiness. There's really no clear best guy, so going with who is rested or seems ready is a reasonably defensible move pretty much every time.

I don't care who he brought in. The point is he should have just gotten Chris out.

[The Ginger Kid]

That was a tough losss. And I do blame Ventura in part for it, but it's such an easy second-guessing. But I still think he's a good manager. Did any of you get the chance to hear Vin Scully discuss Ventura's hiring and the psychological profile KW had worked up on him?

[Eminor3rd]

I don't care who he brought in. The point is he should have just gotten Chris out.

 

I can definitely see the argument in this part of it.

[Jerksticks]

Who are these 95% of managers that are for sure pulling Chris Sale with a low pitch count after a few chop hits? It's Chris Sale.

 

Imagine if robin had pulled him before trout and the bullpen guy gave up the same home run. The same people would crucify robin for not leaving sale in the game, citing low pitch counts and chop hits n shoddy defense..."Dude you gotta leave your ace in there. Robin needs to be fired."

[knightni]

Pull Sale early and the BP blows it, people would scream and blame the manager for allowing the "miserable" bullpen to blow it for Sale.

 

Pull him early and the BP saves it, people would say that he was timid and shouldn't manage if he has no confidence in the Ace to allow him to finish what he starts.

 

There's no win for a manager in that scenario. The players have the game on their shoulders in the bottom of the ninth.

 

I'm sure that there have been worse losses than this in the 113 years that this team has existed.

 

People shouldn't fall prey to emotion and hyperbole over one of - at minimum - 60 (70-80) losses this season.

 

Just relax. You'll all live longer with less stress.

[greg775]

For future reference, Chris Sale at 108 pitches, Robin is an idiot if he lets him face the next hitter if the game is on the line, let alone Mike Trout. Soxtalk would rather see Petricka face him. People are acting like the hits he had given up were rockets all over the place.

 

 

If that is how you really feel, one thing is certain. Chris Sale INAA.

 

Exactly. Keeping Sale in was the correct call. s*** happens. Grand slam. Boom.

Plus, you guys won't comment on this, but Sale appears to be one of these Peavy-types that doesn't like to come out of games. Without a couple implosions like the granny by Trout, you won't get Sale to see the value in getting yanked for a reliever. I don't know why, but managers tend to leave their ace candidates in there much too late. It's happened with Verlander numerous times. REMEMBER PEAVY? Sale appears to be the same way.

[RockRaines]

Pull Sale early and the BP blows it, people would scream and blame the manager for allowing the "miserable" bullpen to blow it for Sale.

 

Pull him early and the BP saves it, people would say that he was timid and shouldn't manage if he has no confidence in the Ace to allow him to finish what he starts.

 

There's no win for a manager in that scenario. The players have the game on their shoulders in the bottom of the ninth.

 

I'm sure that there have been worse losses than this in the 113 years this team has existed.

 

People shouldn't fall prey to emotion and hyperbole over one of - at minimum - 60 (70-80) losses this season.

 

Just relax. You'll all live longer with less stress.

Most of the reactions are by people who never saw the actual pitch location and also apparently have never heard of Mike Trout. Blame someone, kick the dog, grrr.

[ptatc]

I don't care who he brought in. The point is he should have just gotten Chris out.

I would rather have the best pitcher on my staff face the best hitter on the other team. I'll take those chances. This one just didn't work.

 

[SCCWS]

I would rather have the best pitcher on my staff face the best hitter on the other team. I'll take those chances. This one just didn't work.

\

 

I think you missed the point. No question you want your best pitcher facing Trout. But the question is was Sale out of gas. If so, he was not your best pitcher at that point. But if he pulls him, fans would complain as well. Hell, Ozzie won a WS and fans say he couldn't manage. Robin loses 99 and he can't manage. Walker stunk/not his fault. It is what message boards are for.

[cabiness42]

Disclaimer: I didn't watch the game and only saw the boxscore and read this discussion.

 

If you look at all of Sale's innings this year, you can probably count on one hand the number of them where he allowed 3+ baserunners in an inning. Once that point was reached, it should have been pretty obvious that Sale was no longer himself.

 

Now, I'm not going to go out and proclaim that Robin is a terrible manager because of this decision, but it seems evident that a pitching change needed to be made.

[RockRaines]

Disclaimer: I didn't watch the game and only saw the boxscore and read this discussion.

 

If you look at all of Sale's innings this year, you can probably count on one hand the number of them where he allowed 3+ baserunners in an inning. Once that point was reached, it should have been pretty obvious that Sale was no longer himself.

 

Now, I'm not going to go out and proclaim that Robin is a terrible manager because of this decision, but it seems evident that a pitching change needed to be made.

Nope. And he made a good pitchers pitch to Trout and he put a great swing on a change out of the zone.

[iamshack]

I would rather have the best pitcher on my staff face the best hitter on the other team. I'll take those chances. This one just didn't work.

Maybe you should read the other posts in the thread before that, in which I mentioned the problem wasn't so much Sale facing Trout. At that point, I agreed with the decision to leave him in (although I was holding my breath at that point). The point was to get him out 3 batters before that.

 

I understand he is Chris Sale. But he's human. He's coming off a recent injury. He had thrown 100 pitches. He had given up 4-5 hits in a span of 6-7 batters.

 

I could really care little about the outcome of the game. What I care about is Chris Sale's long-term health.

 

How would you feel if he would have reinjured himself overthrowing to Trout, so he could get this meaningless win?

 

A large part of a manager's job is to protect the players from themselves. Otherwise, we would just allow the pitcher to determine himself when he wanted to come out of the game, which, let's face it, would be never.

Edited June 9, 2014 by iamshack

[iamshack]

Nope. And he made a good pitchers pitch to Trout and he put a great swing on a change out of the zone.

This is just so much of an oversimplification.

 

I guess the other 5 hits were great pitches that good hitters got to as well.

[oldsox]

Fact is. Sale struggled a bit in 7th inning, then gave up a hit and the botched double play by Alexie. I would have taken him out. Then, the pitch to Trout was not that bad. The result was, but it was not a 'cookie' that Trout hit. The title to this post is appropriate.

[Eminor3rd]

Here you go: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-watch-...ething-amazing/

 

We take Mike Trout for granted. It’s not a thing that’s unique to Mike Trout. We take all consistently great baseball players for granted. We take all consistently great anythings for granted. That’s why we’re always trying to figure out the next big thing — it doesn’t take long to get used to the current big thing. Mike Trout, right now, beats the hell out of Gregory Polanco, but Polanco might be of greater current interest, because he’s fresh and he could become a star. Trout’s already been a star for years. This is just part of having a human brain — we acclimate. We’re incredible at it. It has its upsides.

 

Once you start taking a player for granted, though, it’s that much more difficult to really appreciate what the player’s able to do. The best players aren’t guys regularly doing amazing things — the best players are guys regularly doing good things, some percentage more often than the inferior players. Usually those are standard good things. We get to the point where, in order to feel an appreciation, we need something extraordinary. So let’s seize a chance. Feel like you’ve been taking Mike Trout for granted? You’re not alone. Let’s watch him do something extraordinary, to remember that he is extraordinary.

 

We’re going back to the weekend, when Trout faced off against Chris Sale. They faced off a few times, but, as far as the memories are concerned, they faced off but once, in the bottom of the eighth of a four-run game. Trout batted with the bases loaded, and he and Sale ran all the way to a full count. Sale threw a changeup, and Trout won, and the game was tied in a matter of seconds.

 

 

Just the simple fact that it was a game-tying grand slam, late, makes it a career highlight. That it came against Sale boosts it a level or two. But now, think smaller-picture, think more granular. Look at the pitch that Trout hit out to straightaway center. Or, just stare at the following similar screenshots:

 

PIC

 

PIC

 

The changeup was just about perfect, for the situation. It was right on the outer edge, and it was down, maybe too far down to be a strike, but close enough that Trout would have to swing. Trout said later he thought it was a strike during its flight. For Sale, this wasn’t a failure to execute. It was just a failure of a human being, against Mike Trout. Basically, the pitch Sale threw can sometimes get lined the other way, but it isn’t a pitch you expect to go for four bases, when thrown just so. It was the ideal pitch in a full count. Hence:

 

PIC

 

The pitch was Sale’s last, and when he returned to the dugout, he grabbed a baseball bat and let out some frustrations in the tunnel. Sale might’ve been mad at himself, but he didn’t have a reason to be. He didn’t so much allow a grand slam as Mike Trout just hit one.

 

About the spot that Sale hit. I looked for pitches in the same spot over the course of the PITCHf/x era. I got ultra-precise and created a location box measuring one inch by one inch, and since 2008, there have been 940 swings by right-handed batters against pitches right there. Of those swings, 40% have missed. Of those swings, one has gone for a home run — Mike Trout’s. So that’s a homer/swing rate of 0.1%. On average, 1.4% of all swings lead to homers. A homer is never the most likely outcome, but for Sale against Trout, a homer was probably the least likely outcome, and still Trout went yard.

 

Here’s a plot of all the right-handed homers since 2008, so you can understand Trout’s homer in more context. I corrected a few measurement errors but I sure as shoot didn’t correct all of them, but you should still get the gist.

 

CHART

 

It’s not the most unusual homer that’s been hit — this might be the most unusual homer that’s been hit. But clearly, there’s the main cloud, then there’s the rest, and Trout’s homer is around an extreme. The closest homer is one hit by Alfonso Soriano, but Trout’s pitch is in an area where few other pitches are.

 

This is an example of where Trout really shines. Dave has noted that Trout has been somewhat vulnerable up in the zone. But, down in the zone, there is no better hitter in either league. Since 2012, Trout has baseball’s highest slugging percentage on pitches down, over the inner third. He has baseball’s third-highest slugging percentage on pitches down, over the middle third. He has baseball’s highest slugging percentage on pitches down, over the outer third. On pitches down and over the plate, overall, Trout has slugged .709. In second is Yasiel Puig, at .617. And Trout doesn’t swing and miss down there very often, which wouldn’t show up in the slugging results. He does the most damage when he hits the ball, and he very often hits the ball, when it’s down but over the plate.

 

It’s not that Trout doesn’t have any weaknesses. He can definitely be exposed up in the zone with good heat. But the same goes for a lot of hitters, and Trout is unbelievable around the knees. You should never want to pitch him down and in. You should never want to pitch him down and centered. And while, usually, down and away is the best location in general, Trout covers that location, too. Chris Sale threw exactly the down-and-away changeup he wanted, and it led to the worst possible result. On Monday, Jesse Chavez threw Trout a low-away cutter, and it went for a double that was an on-field homer before a replay review. Mike Trout stands out in a number of ways, but one of them is that a common low-and-away weakness isn’t by any means a weakness of his.

 

Chris Sale caused a little stir in April. Speaking to Jeff Passan:

 

“All I know I’ve got to do is give up less runs than we score,” Sale said. “I don’t care about anything else. Not the numbers. Not the ISPFMLBLSSRs and whatever else Brian Kenny has come up with to define what makes a good player or not.”

 

Reminded the numbers love him, Sale said: “I don’t love them back.”

 

Said Sale after the Trout homer game:

 

“That’s why he’s the best in the league,” Sale said of Trout. “I can’t really say too much about a guy like that hitting a home run off of you. The best.”

 

Sale shares a division with Miguel Cabrera. He’s faced Cabrera 27 times; he’s faced Trout 13 times. Cabrera, even, has had more success in the matchups. It seems distinctly statheadian to refer to Trout as the best in the league. Or maybe Sale can just see what the rest of us do, using his own two eyes. Mike Trout does an awful lot of good things. Sometimes he does amazing ones. This is most probably because he is amazing.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[Bigsoxhurt35]

Most of the reactions are by people who never saw the actual pitch location and also apparently have never heard of Mike Trout. Blame someone, kick the dog, grrr.

 

I don't think anyone thought it was a bad pitch. It's wasn't it was good. Trout is just great.

[Eminor3rd]

I don't think anyone thought it was a bad pitch. It's wasn't it was good. Trout is just great.

 

But Ventura should be fired, right?

 

At least that's what the thread is about.