BEAT L.A. (The Gamethread)

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
10,811
The Paris of the 80s
I still can't believe Cash pulled Snell. Whoever said "if the other team is cheering and giddy about your move it's probably wrong" nailed it. Obviously their analytics don't account for one of the best pitchers in the league having a career game at the most important time possible and facing a guy next who he made look foolish twice before. But they do allow for a gas can to take the mound in his place. It's madness, but yea, the numbers, or something. Loser decision for the loseriest franchise.
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,748
Pioneer Valley
I don’t think you can pull him yet. If he gives up a a couple base runners, he’s out. If he just gives up one base runner, that’s why Cash gets big bucks.
Does he, really? BIG bucks? Haven't read further than this in the thread, but I am curious to know who agreed with Cash when he removed Snell. I know I was yelling at my TV as I did my chores, "Nooooooooooooooo!" And then Anderson? Doesn't what one has done LATELY have any weight?
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
66,261
Oregon
"Absolutely over managing! Ridiculous / no way @snellzilla4 should be out of this game. Dodgers must love this. We have given the Dodgers life! I really can’t believe @snellzilla4 is out of the game. 70 pitches & dominant taken out I can’t believe it especially with our bats. Look Cash has been super all yr but @snellzilla4 was in his CY YOUNG groove / the Dodgers bats were lost vs him / I am getting loads of texts & social media comments that they can’t believe Blake was taken out. LET THE PLAYERS WIN OR LOSE THE GAME!"

Dick Vitale
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,713
This Snell move is really fascinating once you get past the hot takes and the traditionalist views on how to do things.

For the record, given the opportunity to decide, I wouldn't have lifted Snell given his dominance, pitch count, situation etc. However I am open to the idea that whatever metrics Tampa uses, they show sticking with a starter a third time through the line-up (or whatever trigger) leads to bad outcomes and that going to one of their relievers in that spot gives you the best odds of success.

Once again, the problem is getting humans to understand that their process doesn't mean success is guaranteed. Just that it should increase their chances overall. Unfortunately, that also means having to accept losing the World Series after following their model and lifting a seemingly unhittable pitcher with a lot left in the tank pitch-wise. That circle may be difficult, if not impossible, to square.

To be clear, this isn't an argument for or against Tampa's approach. Their process proved successful with their regular and post-season runs however it may have hit a limit in the last game.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
52,015
This Snell move is really fascinating once you get past the hot takes and the traditionalist views on how to do things.

For the record, given the opportunity to decide, I wouldn't have lifted Snell given his dominance, pitch count, situation etc. However I am open to the idea that whatever metrics Tampa uses, they show sticking with a starter a third time through the line-up (or whatever trigger) leads to bad outcomes and that going to one of their relievers in that spot gives you the best odds of success.

Once again, the problem is getting humans to understand that their process doesn't mean success is guaranteed. Just that it should increase their chances overall. Unfortunately, that also means having to accept losing the World Series after following their model and lifting a seemingly unhittable pitcher with a lot left in the tank pitch-wise. That circle may be difficult, if not impossible, to square.

To be clear, this isn't an argument for or against Tampa's approach. Their process proved successful with their regular and post-season runs however it may have hit a limit in the last game.
The confusing part to me isn't about Snell, it's that the previous time that Cash went to his 'A' bullpen guys (the wild game 4), they gave up 5 ERs in 3.2 innings between the four of them. I would understand that decision a lot better if the TB bullpen still looked as good as they did a few weeks ago, but clearly they were running on fumes.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
66,261
Oregon
The confusing part to me isn't about Snell, it's that the previous time that Cash went to his 'A' bullpen guys (the wild game 4), they gave up 5 ERs in 3.2 innings between the four of them. I would understand that decision a lot better if the TB bullpen still looked as good as they did a few weeks ago, but clearly they were running on fumes.
And this came up the other day ... the risk of over-use from bullpen dependent teams. Not only were the pen arms tired, the Dodgers had seen them enough over the past week they knew what to expect.

On the other hand, this was only Snell's second appearance in the Series. The "third time through the order" deficiency is mitigated (for me) by how well he was throwing — meaning you were removing the better option in the here and now against a singular opponent for what was successful over the long haul against multiple teams
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
36,355
And this came up the other day ... the risk of over-use from bullpen dependent teams. Not only were the pen arms tired, the Dodgers had seen them enough over the past week they knew what to expect.

On the other hand, this was only Snell's second appearance in the Series. The "third time through the order" deficiency is mitigated (for me) by how well he was throwing — meaning you were removing the better option in the here and now against a singular opponent for what was successful over the long haul against multiple teams
Yup. And it's not like he took him out for a prime Mariano or something. He took out a dealing former Cy Young ace at 73 pitches for a guy who had given up a run in 6 straight postseason appearances. There is just no way to credibly defend this move, IMO.
 

Euclis20

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
3,589
Imaginationland
Yup. And it's not like he took him out for a prime Mariano or something. He took out a dealing former Cy Young ace at 73 pitches for a guy who had given up a run in 6 straight postseason appearances. There is just no way to credibly defend this move, IMO.
Exactly. In a vacuum maybe it's the right move, but this isn't a vacuum, there are clearly other factors that needed to be taken into account. It really is the reverse Grady Little.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
51,960
San Andreas Fault
Probably been mentioned, but, about the third time through the order “rule”, Snell is normally probably sitting at, what, 90 +/- something pitches when he gets to that. Last night he was at ~70. That should trump the third time rule, especially when Snell was Koufax last night. Also, Cash should have at least bent the rule enough to keep Snell in for Seager. Before Seager, Mookie had been pretty helpless. How much good will has been undone with the players, especially Snell, who yelled out the F word just feet from the mound walking off and was still pretty bitter in his post game interview. Maybe the Rays next chance will come as soon as next year, like the Sox after '03 (Sox with a new manager though).
 

ledsox

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 14, 2005
304
The Rays GM, Neander was on MLB Now about a week ago and he mentioned that he was surprised that Cash pulled Morton so soon in game 7 vs Houston. He said it was gutsy but he wouldn't have done it and he told Cash that. Will be interesting to hear his take this time. I'd be surprised if it's much different.
 

cannonball 1729

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 8, 2005
2,976
The Sticks
There's something fitting about the fact that the 2018 series turned when Roberts pulled a cruising Rich Hill in game 4 and let the Sox back in the game. Now he wins a series when the opposing manager pulls a similar stunt.
 

VORP Speed

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
5,003
Ground Zero
The Rays faced the exact same situation in Game 2. Snell was dealing -- throwing a no-hitter in the bottom of the 5th -- and sitting at 71 pitches and then went BB, HR, BB, 1B before getting pulled. He was super-pissed when he got pulled. The guy turns into a pumpkin in the 5th and 6th inning. He never went past the 6th all year. Of the 8 starts he had after he was fully stretched out, he got pulled in the 5th or 6th in each of them...and 3/8 were with pitch counts in the 70s. That's just how the guy is used. They went against the pattern in Game 2 by giving him more rope when he was dealing, and they got burned. This wasn't some crazy out of left field decision and if anything it was probably more gut driven because Cash got burned in Game 2 when I imagine he was probably thinking he should have pulled him. He basically overreacted to a small sample size unlucky outcome. The even bigger mistake was bringing in Anderson. If you're going to bring him in, better to leave in Snell. He regressed in the playoffs and he shouldn't have been trusted in what was a super aggressive and, charitably, coin flip call to pull Snell. Anderson was otherworldly in the regular season and Cash did not adjust when his performance changed in the post-season. It's the same thing he did with Lowe when he just kept putting him in the 2 spot game after game as he was a complete black hole for 2 weeks. It's the trust your guys approach he took in the post-season that actually isn't analytical at all.

All that being said, they weren't going to win the game scoring 1 run. Offense was the problem.
 

OurF'ingCity

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
4,939
New York City
All that being said, they weren't going to win the game scoring 1 run. Offense was the problem.
Yeah, I do find it a bit odd that there has been so much focus on pulling Snell when ultimately the bullpen gave up 3 runs. It's not like there was a total implosion and the Rays lost like 8-5 or something and keeping Snell in for an extra inning or whatever might have totally changed that outcome.

The Rays had great opportunities in the first two innings to, if not totally break open the game, at least get a few more runs, which would have entirely changed the tenor of the game - particularly in the first inning when they had runners on first and second with one out after Arozarena had already hit the HR and it looked like Gonsolin might not even get out of the inning. When they didn't score in either of those two frames after the HR I knew they were in trouble - I've seen too many games now when a team clinging to a lead squanders multiple chances to extend their lead. Most of the time, it doesn't work out well for that team.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,713
Exactly. In a vacuum maybe it's the right move, but this isn't a vacuum, there are clearly other factors that needed to be taken into account. It really is the reverse Grady Little.
Again, if and how they adjust their process to give the human more discretion over these decisions is the interesting part to me. I think most people would agree that keeping Snell in the game is the no-brainer decision based on how he looked. Its still not clear if that is the actual right decision (see VORPs post above), even if the results argue otherwise.

But what if their metrics tell you that is a bad decision the third time through the line-up regardless of pitch count? Smoltz even alluded to the mental fatigue being a bigger issue for pitchers than the physical strain - maybe they account for that factor.

Again, not defending their approach but also trying to be open-minded too. Whether we like it or not, this is the direction all sports are headed.
 

OurF'ingCity

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
4,939
New York City
But what if their metrics tell you that is a bad decision the third time through the line-up regardless of pitch count? Smoltz even alluded to the mental fatigue being a bigger issue for pitchers than the physical strain - maybe they account for that factor.
If the plan was always to take him out after two trips through the order Cash should have conveyed that very clearly before the game - "I don't care if you have a no-hitter and have struck out everyone you face, you're coming out after two times through the order unless we're up 5 runs (or whatever)." The fact that it doesn't seem like he did that (given Snell's and the team's anger at the decision) is something that Cash can rightly be blamed for more than the decision itself, I think.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
34,713
If the plan was always to take him out after two trips through the order Cash should have conveyed that very clearly before the game - "I don't care if you have a no-hitter and have struck out everyone you face, you're coming out after two times through the order unless we're up 5 runs (or whatever)." The fact that it doesn't seem like he did that (given Snell's and the team's anger at the decision) is something that Cash can rightly be blamed for more than the decision itself, I think.
I don't disagree that communicating that approach beforehand is ideal and sets expectations all the way around (except you probably don't want to make it public for competitive reasons) but the Fox booth kept repeating Cash's comment about how Rays pitchers/players need to have a thick skin and a short memory. Maybe they did communicate this approach to the team and the message wasn't received as intended or perhaps the players didn't really take things at face value. Without having more information its impossible to say.

Whatever they do, it seems like there is a disconnect between the players and management. That seems to be the area that needs to be focused on as they continue on their bold experiment.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
6,924
There's something fitting about the fact that the 2018 series turned when Roberts pulled a cruising Rich Hill in game 4 and let the Sox back in the game. Now he wins a series when the opposing manager pulls a similar stunt.
Roberts has also been killed many more times for leaving Kershaw in too long. It's almost like no matter what the manager does if it doesn't work people are going to criticize it.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
10,251
Silver Spring, MD
Current World Series drought (* indicates year team entered league if they've never won)

I'm old enough to remember all of these Series except the Indians.

1. Cleveland Indians 1948
2. Texas Rangers/Washington Senators 1961*
3. San Diego Padres 1969*
Milwauke Brewers/Seattle Pilots
5. Seattle Mariners
1977*
6. Pittsburgh Pirates 1979
7. Baltimore Orioles 1983
8. Detroit Tigers
1984
9. New York Mets 1986
10. Oakland Athletics 1989
11. Cincinnati Reds 1990
12. Minnesota Twins 1991
13. Colorado Rockies 1993*
14. Toronto Blue Jays 1993
15. Atlanta Braves 1995
16. Tampa Bay Rays 1998*
17. Arizona Diamondbacks 2001
18, LaCaAnLAAn Angels 2002
19. Florida/Miami Marlins 2003
20. Chicago White Sox 2005
21. Philadelphia Phillies 2008
22. New York Yankees 2009
23. St. Louis Cardinals 2011
24. San Francisco Giants 2014
25. Kansas City Royals 2015
26. Chicago Cubs 2016
27. Houston Astros 2017
28. Boston Red Sox 2018
29. Washington Nationals 2019
30. Los Angeles Dodgers 2020
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,898
And this came up the other day ... the risk of over-use from bullpen dependent teams. Not only were the pen arms tired, the Dodgers had seen them enough over the past week they knew what to expect.

On the other hand, this was only Snell's second appearance in the Series. The "third time through the order" deficiency is mitigated (for me) by how well he was throwing — meaning you were removing the better option in the here and now against a singular opponent for what was successful over the long haul against multiple teams
As far as throwing well, somewhere (maybe here?), it was pointed out that Pollock popped up a hanger and then Snell gave up a hit to the 9 hitter, Barnes. Ultimately, i am much less critical of removing Snell than I am for putting Anderson in.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
66,261
Oregon
Dave Roberts on the Dan Patrick Show this morning: "When they took Snell out, Mookie turned to look at me and winked, and I knew we were going to win."

Did the Dodgers think they had caught up to Snell: "No, there was nothing like that. He was on point all game."
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
9,530
Dave Roberts has made more than his fair share of bad decisions with regard to pitching decisions. I forget, have other managers so undiplomatic publicly about his head-scratchers?
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
6,998
Westwood MA
The Mets should be tied with the Padres/Brewers/Pilots...................and the Indians; wow, 72 years.

They realistically do not have a fan under the age of 80 who can honestly say they remember the last time they won it all.
 

InsideTheParker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,748
Pioneer Valley
The Mets should be tied with the Padres/Brewers/Pilots...................and the Indians; wow, 72 years.

They realistically do not have a fan under the age of 80 who can honestly say they remember the last time they won it all.
I am 78 and remember 1986. I listened to most of the WS. I am not a Mets fan, but 78 is under the age of 80. The greater NY area is pretty big, so there must be lots of people with memories that long.
Edit: It just occurred to me that even though the Mets appeared to be the subject of your post, your last line of course refers to the Indians. We old people can have trouble following you whippersnappers.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
6,998
Westwood MA
I am 78 and remember 1986. I listened to most of the WS. I am not a Mets fan, but 78 is under the age of 80. The greater NY area is pretty big, so there must be lots of people with memories that long.
Edit: It just occurred to me that even though the Mets appeared to be the subject of your post, your last line of course refers to the Indians. We old people can have trouble following you whippersnappers.
You're not old.................anyone who is as passionate of a baseball fan as you are will always be young at heart.
 

Ford Frick's Asterisk

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
808
My dad listened to the Indians win their last World Championship on the radio at Lazarus department store in downtown Columbus on a shopping trip with his mom. He's now 81.