The playoffs often cultivate an ‘anything goes’ environment, where aces like Zack Greinke and Cliff Lee become legitimate bullpen options and starters get lifted before the fifth inning ends for a more favorable matchup. In a sense, playoff rules trump what fans grow accustomed to during the regular season as every single game is of tremendous importance. While many managers alter their mindsets to treat each playoff game as a must-win, the 2011 postseason has shown that the more holistic view of the series can lead to better decision-making processes.
Last week, Dave Cameron discussed Jim Leyland’s refusal to use Justin Verlander in Game Four of the Championship Series. Leyland’s quotes — mainly that using Rick Porcello over Verlander was a no-brainer, or that not using his ace was the best thing for the team — drew significant ire but ultimately made sense. Verlander pitching on short rest would reduce his effectiveness, and the Tigers still needed to win at least two games after that outing. Pitching him on short rest would have been an example of managing for the present as opposed to the future.
Though that type of approach is traditionally more optimal, especially in a five-game division series, it makes little sense in the latter playoff rounds.
Leyland wasn’t alone in that line of thinking, as both Ron Roenicke and Tony LaRussa made decisions based on playoff series, as a whole, instead of a collection of immensely important individual games.
Read the rest of this entry »
