7D767E7277766D282E596078717676377A76190 wrote:
Edit:. Well what do ya know? baseball reference shows that Tony Watson by FAR has pitched the most in high leverage situations, while Rivero is even split between high, medium, and low.
So, Watson is creating his own high leverage situations. He isn't coming into the game with a high LI unlike Rivero. Four inherited runners compared to twelve would also demonstrate that.
That's not correct. But you're going to believe what you want to believe, that much is sure.
Leverage situations don't include self-inflicted high-leverage situations. it's measured from when the pitcher enters the game.
Generically counting the number of inherited runners when entering means almost nothing.
Most every middle relief pitcher is going to have a higher inherited runner COUNT than a closer that is almost exclusively used for the entirety of the 9th inning. This is such a flawed way to try to establish a high leverage situation, it's silly.
It's a widely understood opinion that the 9th inning of a 1 run game is a high-leverage situation. The highest, in fact. That's why there are closers in baseball. That's why "close and late" is a split from the 7th inning onward. The pressure is on because time is running out! Leverage!
Even if we think it's reasonable and TRUE that not EVERY 9th inning is the highest leverage situation in the game, are you really going to sit there and believe that it's NEVER the highest?
It cannot correctly be said Rivero pitches in the highest leverage situations when he's never allowed to close in ANY situation.
USING gmLI, which is what was just mentioned. 2017 gmLI Watson is higher than Rivero despite having many fewer inherited runners? Wait... how can that be? based on gmLI Rivero would need to be closing to be pitching in the highest leverage situations. What may be the best option, and is what I'm saying should be happening, is that Rivero closes but not exclusively. Perhaps an arrangement like that would push his gmLI up to 2.00
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
I will believe that is a stupid stat. Just like Wins and Saves, no way to judge a pitcher fully.
I pointed out how both players enter the game. I do not think entering a clean inning is harder than when runners are on base.
So, put this stat up there with Wins, Saves, and WAR for me.
I pointed out how both players enter the game. I do not think entering a clean inning is harder than when runners are on base.
So, put this stat up there with Wins, Saves, and WAR for me.
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
3C373F3336372C696F182139303737763B37580 wrote: I will believe that is a stupid stat. Just like Wins and Saves, no way to judge a pitcher fully.
I pointed out how both players enter the game. I do not think entering a clean inning is harder than when runners are on base.
So, put this stat up there with Wins, Saves, and WAR for me.
Interesting. Do you believe in close and late? The concept of clutch situations? Do you believe that pitching in the 9th inning is any different than pitching in the 7th?
I pointed out how both players enter the game. I do not think entering a clean inning is harder than when runners are on base.
So, put this stat up there with Wins, Saves, and WAR for me.
Interesting. Do you believe in close and late? The concept of clutch situations? Do you believe that pitching in the 9th inning is any different than pitching in the 7th?
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
I posted this in the "Cutch hitting .211" thread:
Its kind of the "clutch" discussion. Some players do very well in certain situations as others fail, even if the failing player is the better player. I would still rather pitch to Bobby Brown, Sean Casey or Lloyd McClendon than Alex Rodriguez or Barry Bonds.
To answer your pitching the 9th question, I think entering the game with men on base is tougher than entering a clean 9th inning. As I pointed out in this thread, Rivero has entered the game with 12 men on base compared to Watson's 4. In my opinion, that is a higher leverage situation.
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
Its kind of the "clutch" discussion. Some players do very well in certain situations as others fail, even if the failing player is the better player. I would still rather pitch to Bobby Brown, Sean Casey or Lloyd McClendon than Alex Rodriguez or Barry Bonds.
To answer your pitching the 9th question, I think entering the game with men on base is tougher than entering a clean 9th inning. As I pointed out in this thread, Rivero has entered the game with 12 men on base compared to Watson's 4. In my opinion, that is a higher leverage situation.
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
-
Bobster21
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
060D05090C0D165355221B030A0D0D4C010D620 wrote: I posted this in the "Cutch hitting .211" thread:
Its kind of the "clutch" discussion. Some players do very well in certain situations as others fail, even if the failing player is the better player. I would still rather pitch to Bobby Brown, Sean Casey or Lloyd McClendon than Alex Rodriguez or Barry Bonds.
To answer your pitching the 9th question, I think entering the game with men on base is tougher than entering a clean 9th inning. As I pointed out in this thread, Rivero has entered the game with 12 men on base compared to Watson's 4. In my opinion, that is a higher leverage situation.
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
I believe it should be tougher entering with men on base than being asked to pitched the ninth without losing the lead. But I think a large part of the problem is the pressure managers put on closers. Go back a few decades and look at stats and you'll see just about all teams had one guy who got the majority of saves but several others who each had a few. That was because teams used their top reliever as a fireman if needed before the 9th. If he got out of that jam and there was still a lead in the 9th, someone else was put in and got the save. It didn't seem like that big a deal. If the manager told you to pitch the 9th, you pitched the 9th.
But today, closers are "groomed." They are told they have to have a certain mentality. Every team has a bullpen full of relievers who have been led to believe that there's only 1 guy among them who can be trusted to pitch the 9th with a lead. If a reliever is warming in the 8th with a 4-run lead and the other team scores a run, that reliever sits down because only the closer can pitch the 9th with a 3-run lead. This mentality that only certain guys can be trusted to get saves has been standard for decades. To many relievers, it doesn't matter. They go from being good setup men to good closers. But it has also produced pitchers who look great in the 7th or 8th innings but consistently fail if their role is changed to pitch the 9th. They have been schooled in the thinking that this is a job that only someone else on their team could handle and, when thrust into it, they fail due to feeling a great deal of pressure.
Its kind of the "clutch" discussion. Some players do very well in certain situations as others fail, even if the failing player is the better player. I would still rather pitch to Bobby Brown, Sean Casey or Lloyd McClendon than Alex Rodriguez or Barry Bonds.
To answer your pitching the 9th question, I think entering the game with men on base is tougher than entering a clean 9th inning. As I pointed out in this thread, Rivero has entered the game with 12 men on base compared to Watson's 4. In my opinion, that is a higher leverage situation.
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
I believe it should be tougher entering with men on base than being asked to pitched the ninth without losing the lead. But I think a large part of the problem is the pressure managers put on closers. Go back a few decades and look at stats and you'll see just about all teams had one guy who got the majority of saves but several others who each had a few. That was because teams used their top reliever as a fireman if needed before the 9th. If he got out of that jam and there was still a lead in the 9th, someone else was put in and got the save. It didn't seem like that big a deal. If the manager told you to pitch the 9th, you pitched the 9th.
But today, closers are "groomed." They are told they have to have a certain mentality. Every team has a bullpen full of relievers who have been led to believe that there's only 1 guy among them who can be trusted to pitch the 9th with a lead. If a reliever is warming in the 8th with a 4-run lead and the other team scores a run, that reliever sits down because only the closer can pitch the 9th with a 3-run lead. This mentality that only certain guys can be trusted to get saves has been standard for decades. To many relievers, it doesn't matter. They go from being good setup men to good closers. But it has also produced pitchers who look great in the 7th or 8th innings but consistently fail if their role is changed to pitch the 9th. They have been schooled in the thinking that this is a job that only someone else on their team could handle and, when thrust into it, they fail due to feeling a great deal of pressure.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
dmetz,
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
-
johnfluharty
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
What's the score, Dog, and who is coming up to bat next? That has to be considered.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
313A323E3B3A216462152C343D3A3A7B363A550 wrote: dmetz,
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
dmetz,
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
dmetz,
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
373C34383D3C276264132A323B3C3C7D303C530 wrote: dmetz,
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
dmetz,
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
I do not, if it's a 1 run game. But I do believe that history shows time and time again that closing in the 9th, even while opening the inning, is a very high leverage situation.
Maybe it shouldn't be, but time and again throughout baseball we see pitchers who are able to handle pitching in the 7in and 8th, fall flat on their faces when they are "promoted" to closer.
There's undoubtedly something very high octane about closing in MLB. If there weren't you could easily transition a middle reliever or even a LOOGY to the closer role. That seems to rarely be the case.
That inheirent pressure is what the leverage stats are trying to measure. Both hitting and pitching
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
dmetz,
Do you think it is easier to enter the 7th inning with men on second and third compared to entering the 9th with no one on base?
I do not, if it's a 1 run game. But I do believe that history shows time and time again that closing in the 9th, even while opening the inning, is a very high leverage situation.
Maybe it shouldn't be, but time and again throughout baseball we see pitchers who are able to handle pitching in the 7in and 8th, fall flat on their faces when they are "promoted" to closer.
There's undoubtedly something very high octane about closing in MLB. If there weren't you could easily transition a middle reliever or even a LOOGY to the closer role. That seems to rarely be the case.
That inheirent pressure is what the leverage stats are trying to measure. Both hitting and pitching
June 6, D-Day, vs Orioles
But Ive not been trying to make an absolute statement that the 9th is always the highest leverage, only that it sometimes is. It is more often than it isn't in a 1 run game.
The pirates were making a BS absolute statement by saying Rivero was being used in the highest leverage situations but never once allowing him to close. It's impossible for that to be true, and Rivero never being allowed to close a game.
Thats since been remedied and I hope he isn't used exclusively as a 9th inning closer now either.
The pirates were making a BS absolute statement by saying Rivero was being used in the highest leverage situations but never once allowing him to close. It's impossible for that to be true, and Rivero never being allowed to close a game.
Thats since been remedied and I hope he isn't used exclusively as a 9th inning closer now either.