In a win-or-go-home game that finishes 9-8, there are going to be a lot of important moments. Big plays made or not made by players. Important decisions made or not made by managers. Huge calls made or not made by umpires. We never want to focus on the umpires if at all possible because it takes away from the more important and more entertaining aspects of the game. At some point, however, it’s impossible to omit them from the conversation.

In the top of the fifth inning of last night’s deciding Division Series game between the Cubs and Nationals, the visiting team had runners on first and second base. With two outs and an 0-2 count, Max Scherzer threw Javy Baez a pitch in the dirt. Baez swung and missed for strike three, but the ball got past Matt Wieters, allowing Baez to run to first base. During Baez’s backswing, his bat made contact with Wieters’ helmet.

Read the rest of this entry »

When I talked to Tanner Roark back in 2014, he was in the middle of his breakout season and made sure to explain all the adjustments that led to that excellent year. But, even then, he gave us clues about his second act and what he might do in the future. And though the overall results have been uneven at times, it’s that kind of forward-thinking that has kept him productive. If he stays on the mound long enough in tonight’s Game 5, we’ll see some of those secondary adjustments in action.

Read the rest of this entry »

Maybe it was the antibiotics, maybe it was the shame. Whatever the reason, Stephen Strasburg pitched Wednesday and offered an extraordinary performance, particularly given the context.

Strasburg gave us his Jordan-with-the flu, Reed-coming-out-of-tunnel, Gibson-homering-on-zero-healthy-legs, Schilling’s-bloody-sock moment on a dreary, blustery afternoon at Wrigley Field.

Largely because of Strasburg, there will be a Game 5 in this series. Against the Cubs last night, Strasburg surrendered just three hits over seven shutout innings, striking out 12 while conceding just two walks. Over two starts and 14 innings in the NLDS, Strasburg did not allow an earned run, striking out 22 and walking just three. He’s pitching as well anyone on the planet.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’m not going to defend the Nationals for their miscommunication. Stephen Strasburg wasn’t going to start Game 4 against the Cubs, because he wasn’t available, and it was silly that he wasn’t available, and no one was really quite clear on why he wasn’t available, and now he is available, and he is starting Game 4 against the Cubs, and the game’ll start pretty soon. All’s well that ends well, right? The Nationals mistakenly created their own off-day drama. It’ll all be forgotten provided they play a good ballgame. We just needed something to carry us through the night.

It’s just — okay, Strasburg is going to start Game 4, now. He’s sucking it up, and he’s going to take the mound with the Nationals’ collective back against the wall. There are few pitchers to whom you’d rather hand the ball for a game with such high stakes. But even if the Nationals win Game 4, tomorrow they’ll have to play a Game 5. Strasburg won’t pitch. Max Scherzer would be available only out of the bullpen. The Nationals need to win two games, not one, and Strasburg was already going to get one of the starts. In part, maybe this is about Gio Gonzalez vs. Tanner Roark. Yet I still can’t shake the feeling like the Nationals might’ve just made things a little worse for themselves.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Nationals have created quite a mess — or, at the very least, exhibited a failure to communicate.

As you’re probably aware, Stephen Strasburg was originally not scheduled to pitch Game 4 of the NLDS. Following the postponement of Tuesday’s game to Wednesday, however, circumstances appeared to change for the Nationals. Facing elimination, they could throw Strasburg — who’s been pitching as well as anyone on the planet — on his normal rest.

Strasburg appeared at the ballpark and played catch on Tuesday. He wasn’t 100%, though. He was feeling “under the weather,” according to manager Dusty Baker. Washington Post columnist Thomas Boswell reported on the situation:

The Nats, knowing that Game 4 might be rained out, asked Strasburg whether he could pitch Wednesday.

“I’ll give you what I’ve got,” Strasburg said, according to General Manager Mike Rizzo, who was in the meeting.

Those are the words you want to hear, in one sense, because it means your $175 million star will suck it up and perform. On the other hand, they’re exactly the words you don’t want to hear because Strasburg has, in recent years, shown such a high tolerance for pain that he has touched [sic] it out until he ended up on the disabled list. So, “I’ll give you what I’ve got” means the guy is sick as a dog.

Perhaps unconvinced that they’d get the best version of Strasburg on Wednesday, the Nationals’ decided to save him for a potential Game 5 on Thursday and let Tanner Roark take Game 4.

Still, other Washington Post columnist Barry Svrluga articulated thoughts that many seemed to share inside and outside the Beltway on Wednesday morning.

If Strasburg is truly sick and if he actually wanted to pitch, let’s make sure the public gets some details about this illness. What was his temperature? What are his symptoms? How are the Nationals treating him? He threw a bullpen session Monday, was in the dugout for Game 3 that night, returned to the ballpark Tuesday. It’s nothing for a pitcher — never mind a pitcher who wouldn’t pitch Monday or Tuesday — to remain back at the hotel to recuperate. Why wasn’t Strasburg, so ill he can’t pitch, recuperating?

That leads to another possibility: Strasburg had been preparing all along to take the ball in a Game 5 on Thursday. When the weather altered the schedule for all of baseball, Strasburg declined to alter his own schedule. USA Today’s Bob Nightengale reported that Strasburg refused to pitch Wednesday. The Nationals deny that report.

Baker even mentioned something about mold affecting players in Chicago:

And then this breaking news from Jon Morosi appeared late Wednesday morning:

Quite a turn of events! This author even had to re-write the current post.

And a number of questions remain unanswered. Like, is Strasburg feeling better? And: are the Nationals and Strasburg wilting before public opinion?

Whatever’s going on, the Nationals could have communicated this much more clearly and offered much more transparency — unless, in fact, there’s actually something to hide. Baker couldn’t even get the day right when Strasburg threw his bullpen, which was cut short. (It was Monday, not Tuesday.)

Svrluga shared some insights offered by two former major-league players on Tuesday evening. Said Mark Teixeira via ESPN: “Unless this guy is in the hospital and getting fluids and can’t even go to the ballpark, he’s gotta be on the mound.” Said David Ross during the ESPN tonight telecast: “If I’m his teammate… I can’t look him in the eye.”

Strasburg has developed a reputation, fairly or unfairly, as something like a high-maintenance, high-performance automobile.

There was, of course, the infamous innings limit of 2012, when the Nationals publicly revealed they had set a hard cap on Strasburg’s playing time for the season following Tommy John surgery late in 2010. They didn’t permit him to pitch in the postseason. While the intent was to protect Strasburg, we really have no idea if pitch and innings limits are doing much good with regard to injury prevention. Moreover, by refusing to play Strasburg, the Nationals failed to give themselves their best chance of succeeding in the playoffs. (And perhaps there was a way not to cross that innings mark and have Strasburg available later in the season.)

Strasburg has made a number of trips to the disabled list. His competitive zeal has been questioned. He’s also perhaps misunderstood as one of the game’s less outspoken of players.

Wrote Svrluga on Wednesday morning:

“So whatever Strasburg says now, his rep is in flames… Mike Rizzo, the Nationals’ general manager, has said out loud that it’s the time of year for heroes.

‘Be John Wayne,’ Rizzo said Sunday at Wrigley, in between Games 2 and 3.”

The American public likes to see their stars perform even if ill, and perform well even if dealing with illness. It can lend a legendary quality to already talented performers. Michael Jordan’s excellence in the NBA Finals with the flu, Willis Reed’s dramatic return to the court after suffering a torn muscle, Kirk Gibson’s walk-off home run with zero healthy legs: these are career-defining moments.

If he’s healthy, if Strasburg is feeling much better, that’s one thing. But if he’s not, if he’s ill, if this is about trying to prove bravery and and play hero ball… is that a good idea?

Should the Nats really want him pitching Wednesday afternoon? (And if Strasburg isn’t sick — why would he have wanted to take a PR hit like this?)

Because this piece has required a quick turnaround, I haven’t had time to perform an exhaustive study of pitchers working through illness in 2017.

Thankfully, Ben Lindbergh did such a study back in 2012 for Baseball Prospectus. Lindbergh found 10 starts made by nine pitchers — Matt Harrison, Vance Worley, Chris Tillman, Jeremy Hellickson, Derek Holland, (twice and left to toil for 14.1 innings), Josh Beckett, Anthony Swarzak, Jon Niese and Clayton Kershaw — who were known, publicly, to have performed despite illness.

Of those 10 starts, seven produced box-score lines worse than their individual seasonal performance — and only two met the criteria for a “quality start”

They combined for a 5.84 ERA over 42.1 innings, allowing 68 hits and 18 walks against 50 strikeouts. While we should perhaps revisit this with a more exhaustive study, it would make sense that pitchers don’t perform as well when feeling sick (or on short rest). Think about trying to complete a work day, or to parent effectively, or just get up to go the refrigerator when feeling ill.

Assuming Strasburg really is sick — and is ill in such a way that it impacts his ability to perform — he should be saved for Game 5. It’s a smart, tactical retreat. After all, the Nationals still have to win two consecutive games. Their best bet to win one of those two is to have an ace-level pitcher at, or nearer to, 100%.

If he’s feeling better, if he’s prepared, he ought to pitch. He should be adaptable enough to change routines if relatively healthy to help a team facing elimination. But if he’s sick? The precedent isn’t great.

Consider the start by Matt Harrison (flu-like symptoms) included in Lindbergh’s research. He allowed five runs, four earned in 4.2 innings. Said then-Rangers manager Ron Washington:

“He’s under the weather a little bit, but he still went out there and left it all on the mound. He gave us everything he had. He took the ball and battled.”

Said Worley (four runs, 3.2 innings) of the appearance he made while dealing with a stomach ailment:

“I felt like I was going to see Earl* a few times today. You know, I just couldn’t get it out. And then I went out there, and it seemed like every time I tried to let loose today, it didn’t go where I wanted. And neither did my stomach. Everything arm-wise felt fine. I came out with good action. It just wasn’t going where I wanted because I couldn’t control my stomach.”

Said Tillman (five runs allowed in five innings):

“I was kind of out there fighting stuff on the mound, just trying to get through.”

Strasburg is a more talented pitcher than those cited above, but Kershaw couldn’t get through the fourth inning on April 5, 2012, and his fastball velocity sat at 89.3 mph, well below his seasonal average. On Wednesday evening, is Strasburg going to talk to reporters about hoping to have performed better but not having been at 100%?

Discretion is the better part of valor. Bravery can be misguided.

I have to admit to a bias. I’ve been aware of Tanner Roark since he entered the major leagues a few years ago, but my evaluation failed to evolve. In my head, Roark was still the guy he was when he made his first impression, as a strike-throwing and hittable sort who seemed to pitch with the intent of beating his peripherals. It is my job to try to know as much as I can, and I concede that this is my own failing, but in my partial defense, Roark hasn’t been close to the most interesting member of the Nationals’ pitching staff. Why would I choose to concentrate on Roark, when I could focus instead on Max Scherzer or Stephen Strasburg?

I have to admit to another bias. I find it tempting to believe that the larger population perceives things in the same way that I do. I haven’t kept up with Roark; therefore, I bet no one has kept up with Roark. Sometimes this gut feeling is correct. Sometimes, I’m just out of the loop. In any case, I’m about to put you all to the test. This isn’t going to be about me anymore.

Read the rest of this entry »

Yesterday, the Nationals lost Game 3 of their division series to the Cubs 2-1, and now trail by the same margin in the series. Despite a brilliant outing from Max Scherzer, the Cubs managed to plate a couple of runs against the team’s bullpen, putting the team on the brink of elimination in the first round once again. And because the Cubs got their runs with Sammy Solis and Oliver Perez on the mound, with Max Scherzer, Ryan Madson and Sean Doolittle all watching, Dusty Baker has come under fire for his bullpen management once again.

But on this one, I have to say that the criticism feels a bit unfair. If we look at the circumstances and what actually happened, it seems like Baker mostly made reasonable decisions.

Read the rest of this entry »

In Monday’s pivotal Game 3, the Cubs beat the Nationals because Anthony Rizzo hit a stupid little doink. The inning before, the game was tied up when Albert Almora came off the bench to rip an RBI single. Almora hit for Kyle Schwarber, who had opened the door for the Nationals in the top of the sixth when two errors on the same play gave Daniel Murphy three bases. Almora hit for Schwarber because Dusty Baker relieved Max Scherzer with Sammy Solis for some reason. Scherzer was relieved immediately after allowing his first hit of his entire game, which was 19 outs old.

For a game that had only seven hits and three runs, there’s an awful lot there for people to talk about. The Cubs now find themselves in a commanding position, after coming uncomfortably close to getting shut out. There’s resiliency to discuss. Baseball luck. Managerial second-guessing. There’s almost everything you could possibly want. I’d like to discuss a called ball in the top of the fifth inning that didn’t matter for beans.

Read the rest of this entry »

The first of two Wild Card games is scheduled for tonight. In addition to must-win baseball, this time of year is also typically marked by the appearance of a Dave Cameron piece on the merits of “bullpen-ing” a game — that is, the practice of using nothing but relievers in a single contest, of attempting to exploit matchups in order to maximize the chances of winning.

While the logic of “bullpen-ing” is sound in theory, it also fails to account for the comfort of pitchers who’ve potentially become attached to their roles. To get a better idea of how they might adapt to such an approach and how it might be handled in practice, I asked some actual players about it. Turns out, there’s a particular type of reliever who’s best suited to take the ball in the first few innings of a win-or-go-home game. And a particular type of pitcher who should follow him.

The first thing revealed by my inquiries is that relievers love the idea. “I’m down for whatever,” said Giants reliever Hunter Strickland with a smile. Nationals closer Sean Doolittle just laughed for a while. “Would I get paid like a starting pitcher?” he finally asked after the laughter had subsided.

Relievers would be fine with it because they’re accustomed to answering the call whenever. “We’re used to throwing in whatever inning, [if] not usually the first,” said Strickland. Added Miami’s Brad Ziegler: “I don’t think it would be very different for me, as much as it would be for the starter coming into the game [in the later innings]. His whole routine would have to change.”

And a starter probably would have to throw a couple innings in such a game — in order to reach a full complement of nine and still leave some arms for extras, that is. So the question is probably which kind of starter would adapt effectively to an otherwise unusual arrangement.

The answer? Probably a young one. Older starters are more married to their routines. “It’s very hard for me personally,” said Brandon McCarthy regarding the idea of starting a game in any other inning but the first. “My routine as a starter is fixed to the minute and a lot of guys are like that. It’s certainly not something impossible to deal with but could make a team nervous.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Over in the American League, there’s a clear two-horse race between Chris Sale and Corey Kluber for the Cy Young Award. Both are head and shoulders above the rest of the league and both have very strong cases for the honor, depending on what metrics you prefer.

Over in the National League, that isn’t quite the case. Max Scherzer is the clear front-runner at this point, with a host of other pitchers behind him all trying to make an argument why they might have had better seasons. Clayton Kershaw has a lower ERA. Zack Greinke pitches in a much tougher park. Teammate Stephen Strasburg has a lower FIP.

Those are just the stats that measure outcomes, though. Let’s see what Statcast has to say about the sort of contact the other candidates are allowing to see if anybody has a real case against Scherzer.

Read the rest of this entry »