The Accidental Genius of Charles F. Manuel

Yeah, I wish I could have expanded it a bit (and I’d welcome any addenda) but just going through the game-by-game OPSes and what-not was hecka time consuming. I’m wondering if anyone has any better ways of doing this kind of thing.

Extend that principle even further, and you’d say that the leverage of the situation should dictate which reliever pitches at which time, all the way down through the bullpen. In that vein, check out the leverage measures for this season (via BP).

A far cry from the hand-wringing of last year, I’ll tell you that. The clear cut top three relievers are pitching the highest leverage situations, followed by the fourth best reliever and the (still not-on-track) LOOGY. And for all the Baez complaints, he’s been successfully marginalized by Charlie.

Since there are a lot of Phils fans visiting our slice of the intertubes, I thought I’d venture over here, and see what’s up in Philly-land. This has been one of my favorite topics for a while now, and if you don’t mind, here’s my take on it.

In short, get rid of singular saves and holds, and replace them with save and hold innings; measured by how many outs under certain circumstances are converted. Best way to explain it, is example.

• Phillies down 1-2 in the 6th inning, and Blanton is knocked out of the game after pitching 5.2 IP. Jose Contreras is brought in while there are runners on 2nd and 3rd, and completes the inning with no damage. He is now credited with 0.1 held IP, for keeping the score within 1-run.
• Phillies then tie the game 2-2 in the bottom of the 6th, and in the 7th, Danys Baez is called in, and pitches a scoreless frame, and is credited with 1.0 held IP for keeping the game in check.
• Phillies take one-run lead in bottom of 7th. Baez left in to pitch 8th (yes, I’m aware that’s not very logical but for the sake of explanation), and gets one out, but then gets in trouble, and suddenly there’s a single and double, runners on 2nd/3rd, 1 out. Madson is called in, gets two strikeouts. He is credited with 0.2 save IP, for quite literally saving the lead, under the circumstances.
• Brad Lidge protects the 1-run lead, and despite the two frustrating walks (had to get my ribbing in in here), converts 1.0 save IP.

I wrote this giant idea proposal last year on our site, and I’m aware of the holes and inefficiencies that still exist, but the rationale is simple: relief pitchers need stats like holds and saves to justify their earnings, and getting rid of them altogether would be outright unfair. As statistically obsessed we internet nerds may be, arbiters, and still a lot of FO people aren’t looking at FIP, platoon splits, WHIP, WPA, or any other advanced metrics, and will undervalue middle-relief, despite how important they are in modern baseball. My theory supposedly floats a little more value to middle relievers, without destroying the late-inning guys’ stat padding. And would very likely eliminate the scenarios of “can’t bring in the closer in the 7th because it’s not the 9th.”

I agree with your second sentence about control, but there is some strategy involved when Romero is brought in to face a lefty to start the 8th inning. But how do you come to the conclusion that Lidge’s recent success is because he’s not facing the best hitters? Do you know that he would be less successful against other hitters? Why be negative about Lidge at this point? About the only thing FM said that indicated Lidge did less than brilliant work was the comment about the blown save against the Nationals, and that came against a very good hitter, Ryan Zimmerman, a guy with numerous walkoff homers. Making Lidge’s job easier in the 9th is Madson’s job in the 8th inning. Just because Madson does his job well doesn’t mean Lidge has an easy time of it. Be thankful when both pitchers do well.