Robin Ventura Bullpen Management

[Dick Allen]

I love you measure context by citing linear weights. Not all outs are created equal, which is you're completely ignoring. An out right in front of Jose Abreu is much more costly than an out by #7 hitter all else being equal. But hey, all outs = -.299 runs.

 

Regardless, Leury Garcia posted a .067 OBP in the leadoff spot last year. Alexei's career average in the leadoff spot is .339. So in just those 30 at-bats, Alexei could have reached base 8 more times. I'm not going to argue the significance of that, but that's a better estimate of the opportunity cost than the one you provided. You can't put the worst hitter in baseball in a high pressure spot and expect the same exact outcome.

 

My main point all along was that Robin makes numerous decisions that go against all available information. I cited a specific example that I find particularly mind-boggling and you basically said it's ok because "it doesn't matter". I'm not even sure why I'm wasting my time arguing this. Whether you think that particular decision was material or not, there's no denying it was a stupid decision. Managers should be evaluated by their decision-making process and somehow Robin Ventura thought the worst hitter in baseball was the best alternative for the leadoff spot on multiple occasions.

4 games. He started as a leadoff hitter 4 times. Joe the genius Maddon had Desmond Jennings leading off most of the year. .301 OBP as a leadoff man.

[Chicago White Sox]

4 games. He started as a leadoff hitter 4 times. Joe the genius Maddon had Desmond Jennings leading off most of the year. .301 OBP as a leadoff man.

Are you suggesting it was a smart decision then?

 

And Desmond Jennings had a wRC+ of 105 last year, Leury Garcia had a wRC+ of 2 (worst in baseball). Not exactly a great comparison.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Chicago White Sox

[caulfield12]

Fun with statistics.

 

 

[ptatc]

Defined in a very broad manner. This business of "X has the 7th", "Y has the 8th" is silly stuff. It only makes sense when you have a sizable lead in a game. Their role is to get outs. Use the best pitchers when there are men on base.

I thought he handled the pen fine, running out of pitchers in that game notwithstanding. He tended to leave in starters too long - the good ones were overpitched (although Ventura quit using them 110+ pitches after he put Sale on the DL) as were the bad ones (presumably because the bullpen was weak - hopefully he'll yank Danks this year before he pitches us out of games).

His personality is fine, as long as the players are motivated, which these players should be.

You contradict yourself. You said he leaves starters in too long, which i disagree with, 110 is not too long. Then you say you hop he pulls Danks earlier. He didn't have a bullpen to work with. They sucked. You can't pitch only a few guys in the bullpen repeatedly.

 

You have to define the role in the bullpen. You don't need to do it by innings. The pitchers are most effective when they know what the role is, such as if they have a lead and need someone in the 7th and the good hitters are up, Duke is in. If it's the same situation but the bottom of the order is up Petricka is in.

 

They can't just say the job is to get outs. How comfortable would you be at your job if your Boss said your job was to do what he said when he says it. right now it's getting the coffee, later today you need to change the transmission in a semi tractor and I don't care if you have never done either one. By the way I expect you to get it right otherwise you're fired.

You could do it but the odds of you being successful are pretty low.

 

Outs at different points in the game are different. If you put your best reliever in the game in the 7th inning how do you know there won't be a more important situation later.

Edited December 17, 2014 by ptatc

[Eminor3rd]

I love you measure context by citing linear weights. Not all outs are created equal, which is you're completely ignoring. An out right in front of Jose Abreu is much more costly than an out by #7 hitter all else being equal. But hey, all outs = -.299 runs.

 

Regardless, Leury Garcia posted a .067 OBP in the leadoff spot last year. Alexei's career average in the leadoff spot is .339. So in just those 30 at-bats, Alexei could have reached base 8 more times. I'm not going to argue the significance of that, but that's a better estimate of the opportunity cost than the one you provided. You can't put the worst hitter in baseball in a high pressure spot and expect the same exact outcome.

 

My main point all along was that Robin makes numerous decisions that go against all available information. I cited a specific example that I find particularly mind-boggling and you basically said it's ok because "it doesn't matter". I'm not even sure why I'm wasting my time arguing this. Whether you think that particular decision was material or not, there's no denying it was a stupid decision. Managers should be evaluated by their decision-making process and somehow Robin Ventura thought the worst hitter in baseball was the best alternative for the leadoff spot on multiple occasions.

 

1. Leury had not posted an .067 OBP at the time the decisions were being made. Back to my original post that you responded to: "people refuse to judge decisions based on the information available at the time."

 

2. Linear weights make the most sense BY FAR when making a decision about the thing that's about to happen, because they are designed specifically to measure the mean result. RV was not able to go forward in time and see that Leury Grcia batted almost as bad as anyone can possibly bat in those four games. The ONLY thing that matters when you're about to make a decision are the likely next outcomes and the likely next cost/rewards -- and linear weights stats were literally MADE to do the latter.

 

You want to use context-dependent stats when describing what DID happen, but that is never an option when you're deciding what you WILL do now.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[ptatc]

1. Leury had not posted an .067 OBP at the time the decisions were being made. Back to my original post that you responded to: "people refuse to judge decisions based on the information available at the time."

 

2. Linear weights make the most sense BY FAR when making a decision about the thing that's about to happen, because they are designed specifically to measure the mean result. RV was not able to go forward in time and see that Leury Grcia batted almost as bad as anyone can possibly bat in those four games. The ONLY thing that matters when you're about to make a decision are the likely next outcomes and the likely next cost/rewards -- and linear weights stats were literally MADE to do the latter.

 

You want to use context-dependent stats when describing what DID happen, but that is never an option when you're deciding what you WILL do now.

I would disagree that the only thing that matters is the next likely outcome. I think the manager also needs to look at what the other manager may do in response to certain decisions and think ahead to this decision may impact decisions later in the game.

[Eminor3rd]

I would disagree that the only thing that matters is the next likely outcome. I think the manager also needs to look at what the other manager may do in response to certain decisions and think ahead to this decision may impact decisions later in the game.

 

Well, that's a separate issue but consistent with what I'm arguing -- which is that you need to consider only what informs the future when you're making a tactical decision.

[ptatc]

Well, that's a separate issue but consistent with what I'm arguing -- which is that you need to consider only what informs the future when you're making a tactical decision.

True, but the linear stats don't take these into consideration. There is no stat available that will predict what the other manager will do thus what your decision must be two innings later. So, regardless of what the linear weights say, sometimes you just can't make that move. It may tell you what the best move would be but that isn't always the correct one. Just like in a given season there are times where a manger will realize that he must lose a game for the bigger objective of having a better season. This could be due to saving a bullpen, starting pitcher or resting players.

[Eminor3rd]

True, but the linear stats don't take these into consideration. There is no stat available that will predict what the other manager will do thus what your decision must be two innings later. So, regardless of what the linear weights say, sometimes you just can't make that move. It may tell you what the best move would be but that isn't always the correct one. Just like in a given season there are times where a manger will realize that he must lose a game for the bigger objective of having a better season. This could be due to saving a bullpen, starting pitcher or resting players.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think this is completely outside of what we're arguing. I think what you're saying is definitely an important component, but it doesn't relate to the use of context-neutral or context dependent statistics when projecting the likely success or failure or a player at bat.

 

So, good points! But I don't think it's evidence against linear weights in the scenario in the way I just used them.

[GreenSox]

Hiring guys like Ventura is a trend. I think it's for 2 reasons. 1, they can handle the player and personalities, which obviously is important. Second, the inexperience and presumed open-mindness of the manager allows them to do some managing from the front office (which I'm not sure is a good idea, but Beane started it and a lot of teams are doing it).

I think Ventura has improved on his biggest weakness - overuse of pitchers; probably as a result of front-office prodding.

He'll be better with experienced and improved personnel, esp. the improved pen and bench if it ends up being improved.

 

[caulfield12]

With the Leury Garcia example, it's not as simple as using his current season stats.

 

You have a LONG track record of minor league struggles...in the context of last season, it's easy to say it doesn't matter and we were never going to compete in hindsight.

 

Clearly, we were lacking in talent...and our bench has been a black hole for two years now, particularly after Avisail Garcia went down last year early.

 

That said, hopefully this year when they HAVE to rest players more easily like Alexei, there's a better option offensively (what Keppinger was supposed to be, and what Saladino might have to be...whether he's ready or not).

 

 

[cabiness42]

With the Leury Garcia example, it's not as simple as using his current season stats.

 

You have a LONG track record of minor league struggles...in the context of last season, it's easy to say it doesn't matter and we were never going to compete in hindsight.

 

Clearly, we were lacking in talent...and our bench has been a black hole for two years now, particularly after Avisail Garcia went down last year early.

 

That said, hopefully this year when they HAVE to rest players more easily like Alexei, there's a better option offensively (what Keppinger was supposed to be, and what Saladino might have to be...whether he's ready or not).

 

Leury Garcia was on the roster last year because the Sox chose to keep a backup 1B/DH on the roster, forcing them to have a bench player who could play 4+ positions to compensate.

 

Look, as much as it might hurt to think of it this way, when the Sox decided to keep Konerko around for 2014, it was a pretty clear sign that they didn't believe they had much chance to contend.

[lvjeremylv]

How many statistics are out there for quantifying manager effectiveness?

Just two. The first is called Wins. The second is called Losses. That's all that matters.

[Reddy]

Just two. The first is called Wins. The second is called Losses. That's all that matters.

And yet they don't matter when evaluating pitchers?

[LDF]

Leury Garcia was on the roster last year because the Sox chose to keep a backup 1B/DH on the roster, forcing them to have a bench player who could play 4+ positions to compensate.

 

Look, as much as it might hurt to think of it this way, when the Sox decided to keep Konerko around for 2014, it was a pretty clear sign that they didn't believe they had much chance to contend.

 

there are or has to be other factors on why the sox kept Paulie around another yr.

the thing is, we, as fans are not privy to those reasons. we can make educated guesses

and we may be near the truth.

 

second thought, the sox, and i would put even money down on this, was totally

surprised at how well most of the team performed. there by fast forwarding the

rebuilding plan timetable.

[Texsox]

You have to define the role in the bullpen. You don't need to do it by innings. The pitchers are most effective when they know what the role is, such as if they have a lead and need someone in the 7th and the good hitters are up, Duke is in. If it's the same situation but the bottom of the order is up Petricka is in.

 

Interesting. I'm going to think about this a bit but my first reaction is the pitcher has time to physically warm up, are you suggesting that is not sufficient time to also mentally warm up?

 

I'm all about putting people in positions to be successful. Perhaps this is one of those traits that great bull pen guys have that mediocre ones do not, the ability to mentally be ready in four or five minutes. Another top of the head thought, in baseball the situation changes with each batter, with each pitch. If you are in the pen warming up because it is the eight inning and that is your role, in a matter of three pitches the situation could change from no one on base to bases loaded in a blink of an eye.

 

I believe I agree that the best possible scenario is a guy having maximum time to prepare for the situation, I just don't think that really can happen much in the real world.

 

[southsider2k5]

Interesting. I'm going to think about this a bit but my first reaction is the pitcher has time to physically warm up, are you suggesting that is not sufficient time to also mentally warm up?

 

I'm all about putting people in positions to be successful. Perhaps this is one of those traits that great bull pen guys have that mediocre ones do not, the ability to mentally be ready in four or five minutes. Another top of the head thought, in baseball the situation changes with each batter, with each pitch. If you are in the pen warming up because it is the eight inning and that is your role, in a matter of three pitches the situation could change from no one on base to bases loaded in a blink of an eye.

 

I believe I agree that the best possible scenario is a guy having maximum time to prepare for the situation, I just don't think that really can happen much in the real world.

 

If I took you and shoved you into a classroom of Kindergarteners, how much notice would you need to be fully effective? Afterall, it is just teaching kids, right?

[lvjeremylv]

If I took you and shoved you into a classroom of Kindergarteners, how much notice would you need to be fully effective? Afterall, it is just teaching kids, right?

Equating grown professional men with 5 year olds? lol

[lvjeremylv]

And yet they don't matter when evaluating pitchers?

I never said that.

 

Would you rather be 7-15 with a 2.00 ERA, or 20-3 with a 4.75 ERA?

[southsider2k5]

Equating grown professional men with 5 year olds? lol

 

Way to miss the forest for the trees.

 

I am equating taking the same "profession" and asking them to do two completely different things within that profession. Tex is a middle school teacher. Asking him to teach K on a moments notice is akin to asking your middle reliever to close.

[southsider2k5]

I never said that.

 

Would you rather be 7-15 with a 2.00 ERA, or 20-3 with a 4.75 ERA?

 

How is this even a question? The first is clearly better, and having his team let him down. The second is clearly bad, but lucky.

[greg775]

I think his bullpen management was great. He would pick a closer and go with them until it was obvious they had to be replaced.

Not crazy of all the situational lefty/righty crap, but it's not Robin. All managers do it way too early in games.

I was incensed that game he ran out of pitchers. Hope that never happens again. But Robin's bullpen management was fine. He had one of the worst collection of pitchers to work with, expecially the few lefty hacks he was provided.

[caulfield12]

Way to miss the forest for the trees.

 

I am equating taking the same "profession" and asking them to do two completely different things within that profession. Tex is a middle school teacher. Asking him to teach K on a moments notice is akin to asking your middle reliever to close.

 

 

Having taught high school and university my entire life, I actually did go into this exact situation in South Korea in a KG/hagwon just to see if I could do it.

 

It wouldn't have been very easily without a South Korean assistant teacher to help manage the kids. Having your own classroom in a situation where they don't understand you well in their 2nd language would be darned-near impossible.

 

In hindsight, it was challenging because there is that assumption that "teachers can teach anything/anyone" and that's simply not true. There are teachers with great content knowledge who fail to communicate or instruct, and great classroom managers and motivators who are lacking in knowledge.

 

In the end, to go back to the middle reliever changing to a closer role comparison...it takes a LOT more energy. 20-30 minutes with those kids is like 2-3 hours with high school or univ students. The amount of preparation and the need to vary your instruction (or you will completely lose the students' attention) is something an "adult" teacher would never be ready for.

 

Most good middle relievers can't close. Most high school or uni teachers can't teach KG effectively.

Edited December 29, 2014 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

I think his bullpen management was great. He would pick a closer and go with them until it was obvious they had to be replaced.

Not crazy of all the situational lefty/righty crap, but it's not Robin. All managers do it way too early in games.

I was incensed that game he ran out of pitchers. Hope that never happens again. But Robin's bullpen management was fine. He had one of the worst collection of pitchers to work with, expecially the few lefty hacks he was provided.

 

 

Were you equally incensed with Ozzie Guillen when Pablo Ozuna would have had to relieve Mark Buehrle in the World Series had the game gone on any longer?

 

Sometimes situations like that can happen...especially when the relievers who come in early simply fail to get the job done.

[lvjeremylv]

How is this even a question? The first is clearly better, and having his team let him down. The second is clearly bad, but lucky.

 

.....

 

So which would you rather be?