No Verlander in Game 5? Really?
Tonight, the Tigers and Yankees face off in a winner-take-all battle, and just like both teams drew it up, the pitching match-up for the elimination contest will be Doug Fister versus Ivan Nova. Okay, so that’s not how either team drew it up — the rain in Game 1 on Friday made for some wonky rotations, and now both teams will try to keep their seasons going without their best pitchers on the mound.
Understanding that a round one exit will be looked at as a failure, Joe Girardi has stated that CC Sabathia is available out of the bullpen if needed tonight, despite throwing 106 pitches on Monday. However, Jim Leyland has categorically stated that Justin Verlander will not appear in tonight’s game.
Maybe Leyland is bluffing. Maybe he’ll change his mind if the Tigers are trying to preserve a small lead as the game goes on. If he doesn’t, though, this might be a decision he regrets for quite a while.
Verlander only threw 14 more pitches on Monday night than Sabathia did, and given that those pitches were spread out over a larger number of batters, you could make a case that he may have actually put less stress on his arm in Game 3. Traditionally, starting pitchers have a throw day in-between starts, which usually comes after two days of rest — today would be Verlander’s normal throw day. And, of course, there’s a decent amount of historical precedence for teams using starters out of the bullpen in the playoffs on short rest without seeing them suffer significant arm injuries.
But, Leyland insists that Verlander is unavailable today, and that he’s not willing to risk his health by having him take the mound on two days rest. I will say, though, that this is a bit of an odd time to begin worrying about Verlander’s workload.
During the regular season, the Tigers allowed Verlander to throw 3,941 pitches, the third highest total any starting pitcher has had in the last 10 years. The fourth highest total on that list belongs Verlander as well, as he threw 3,937 pitches in 2009. Last year, he “only” threw 3,745 pitches, the 13th highest total since 2002. Not surprisingly, no one in baseball has thrown more pitches in the last five years than Verlander — Sabathia comes in second on the list, by the way.
It’s not just cumulative work either. Back in May, Leyland let Verlander throw 132 pitches in a win over the Red Sox — only five pitchers have thrown more pitches in a single game in the last five years. In fact, since 2007, Verlander has thrown 120 or more pitches in a game 24 times, including his start on Monday. While there’s a lot more to protecting pitchers than just keeping their pitch counts down, the Tigers have not been shy about using Verlander over the years.
But now, with their season on the line, Leyland has stated that Verlander isn’t available. I can understand not wanting to risk the golden arm that helped get you this far, but at the same time, would using Verlander for an inning or two really be a significant health risk? If Verlander says his arm feels good and wants to pitch, isn’t the potential to advance to the ALCS worth giving him that opportunity? No one has really figured out how to predict pitcher injuries, after all. I’m not suggesting that the Tigers should knowingly put Verlander’s health at risk, but given all that we don’t know about how to keep pitcher’s healthy, it’s possible that facing a few batters tonight wouldn’t pose any real serious risk to Verlander’s arm at all.
Leyland knows Verlander better than we do, but the Tigers have been treating him like a workhorse for years. It’s just a bit odd to put on the kid gloves now and try to stave off elimination while Verlander sits and watches, especially if he’s capable of doing something about it.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
I think it makes sense to some degree, or at least I can understand the rationale. It seems like their thought process is to put themselves in the best position to win the World Series, and they might think that the best way to do that is to have Verlander at his best in the games he is slated for. In other words, the Tigers might think that they can’t win a World Series without relying on their #2-4 pitchers and their bullpen. Using Verlander tonight represents too big a loss, I guess, of what he could do in game 1 of the ALCS and perhaps beyond.
They also may have reservations about using him in a RP capacity. The whole “mindset” argument. It’s easy to dismiss it as a FG reader, but these are the kinds of decisions to which a manager could justifiably be deferred.
I’m not necessarily agreeing with Leyland, but I can see where he’s coming from…
Step one of winning the World Series: Getting to the World Series.
Sure, step one is getting there. But you have to balance it. Their “math” might say that they have a better chance of winning the world series by not using Verlander, even if it means they have a worse chance of winning this game.
To Nick V.
Surely it would always be better for the Tigers to give every effort to win tonight if only for the increased revenue from the Championship Series.
Exactly, and there is no tommorow for the loser.
Yeah, if the express purpose is to not lose game 5 no matter what, then he should certainly be made available. If the point is to win the World Series, maybe not.
I see what Nick V. is saying. The marginal win percentage that the tigers give up in this game might be more than made up for IF they get to start Verlander in the first game of the ALCS (possibly being able to start him twice and use him once out of the pen there).
Using made up numbers, because that’s all I have, say they lower their chances of winning by 5% by pitching someone other than Verlander for a couple innings. They’ve reduced their shot at the series by 5%, but not their shot at the World Series.
Their chances at a World Series would probably go from about 12.5% to 0% by losing this game. But only 5% of that was caused by the Verlander decision. In other words, the Tigers only truly lost less that 1% of their WS win odds. But if hypothetically getting to use Verlander one extra time in the ALCS raises their chances of winning that series by 5%, that would go further toward getting them rings.
A team has a better chance to win the WS once in the ALCS. Probably closer to 25%. So that 5% advantage would end up increases their WS win odds by a little more than a percent. Win probability is no conserved I don’t believe that that hypothetical, and thus this could actually be a fair strategy. In my opinion. With no real data.
Also: don’t long-time starters who are forced into bullpen duty in the playoffs have a terrible track record?
I’m just saying that anecdotally, but someone could do that study. Sample all players who never pitched in relief during a given regular season, but did pitch in relief in the postseason the same year. Compare regular season performance to postseason bullpen performance.
The Book found that starters perform even better when put into a relief role. I don’t think the study was limited only to the playoffs, though.
NRPS, unlikely for Verlander–where is he going to go? Is he going to throw 103 MPH? I doubt he would rely too heavily on the curve on two days rest either.
Not from my memory, I’m thinking of Holland this year for the Rangers and the Marlins in 2003 only though
Clearly he is not thinking right these days, or else Donnie Kelly wouldn’t be starting games 4 and 5.
Kelly is 3 for his last 7! #funwithsamplesizes
and Betemit is 0-8 this series? Kellyz better lolz!!!
I’d take him over Betemit right now, who looks absolutely lost offensively and is useless defensively.
Looked lost in 8 PA’s? He was much better than kelly over extended sample sizes.
Yeah. Clearly Leyland doesn’t know what he’s doing.
can’t win a world series if you don’t win game 5 of the ALDS.
When you solve a game theory problem you start by solving the last step and then working your way backwards. Sometimes, causing apparent harm now helps you out down the road for winning the ultimate prize.
If you start from the last step, you can only go from a win at the ALDS.
It’s really simple: win or you don’t progress at all. There’s no game theory involved.
Um, game theory always applies.
Think of it this way: the win probability of winning this game might be 0.49 if he decides not to use Verlander and 0.50 if he decides to use Verlander. The win probability of winning the next series might be 0.55 if Verlander pitches the first game and 0.45 if he does not. If you look at the probability of reaching the World Series it is higher by not pitching Verlander [0.50*0.45<0.49*0.55].
Obviously the I just made up the probabilities, but there is a point where you are better taking the lower win probability for this game in order to secure a higher win probability in the future.
The factor missing from that calculation is also the money factor. How much more money will you make by even having an ALCS to play in, even if you don’t make the WS?
Most people don’t understand game theory and it is useless to attempt to explain it to them. I’ve worked through all the scenarios to come to this conclussion.
This whole discussion is predicated on the idea that losing game 7 of the world series is an equal outcome as losing game 5 of the ALDS. The fact is that, for both the fans’ emotions and for the Tigers’ finances, it’s much better to go deeper into the playoffs.
^Exactly right.
Yirmiyahu, not at all. It’s easy to include payoffs in your game theory for various outcomes, but the result remains the same–saving Verlander could make lots of sense for maximizing the expected payoff.
This is true even if you would rather trade some times wining the ALDS and lose the ALCS for scenarios where you win the ALDS, ALCS, and WS (which is what you are advocating).
Everett — but who are the payoff revenues going to? If windfall revenues from each postseason series are largely directed towards baseball operations in 2012 and beyond (player salary, scouting, drafting, int’l free agents, etc), then maybe the field and front office management decide that it’s important to start Verlander in the ALDS game 5. But maybe that revenue from advancing is largely paid out to the TIgers’ owners as 2011 dividends — then ALCS and WS $$ shouldn’t be much of a factor in starting Verlander (assuming the Tigers’ owners don’t have a phone line to Jim Leyland and that he will listen to their directions).
I wonder if it has something to do with Verlander’s tendency to not really get going until a few innings of work.
Is this a tendency or perception?
Presumably if it’s there it’s due to him saving the 100 mph for later. In a bullpen appearance I imagine he’d come out full force.
It’s demonstrably untrue. For his career, the first 3 innings, he’s got a 3.33 ERA and .641 OPS-against. Compared to innings 4+, where he has a 3.71 ERA and .676 OPS-against.
Or, you can do it another way. First time through a lineup, he has a .638 OPS-against. Compared to the rest of the game, where he has a .672 OPS-against.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=verlaju01&year=Career&t=p#innng::none
In both 2009 and 2010 Verlander struggled mightily in specifically the first inning on a regular basis, which is where this perception comes from:
2010 – 6.00 ERA and .800 OPS
2009 – 5.14 ERA and .761 OPS
I know as a Tigers fan it was painfully obvious that if he was going to give up runs, it was probably coming in that first inning. He’s corrected it this year, but the Yankees getting 1st inning runs on him in Game’s 1 and 3 was not surprising. I still hold my breath through that first inning.
Isn’t the fact that he’s thrown all those pitches this year a point favor of Leyland’s argument?
I’d prefer to see Verlander go on short rest, than to see him come out of the pen…he’s still a young guy…this isn’t Randy Johnson or Hershiser situation here, where there’s less regret if he blows his arm out in a relief appearance, because he’s already had a great career. Tigers are on the hook for $20M+ for a while, and Verlander is a young guy with a long career ahead of him. He’s shown the ability to throw a bunch of pitches and a bunch of innings, but he has not thrown out of the pen…stick with what is known to work.
Dave, it seems you’ve missed the obvious game theory at hand.
Verlander, if he pitches tonight, will be doing so on 2 days rest, aka less than 100% true Verlander. We’ll call his this variable of his effectiveness Vsub2, where V is Verlander at full capacity.
If he doesn’t pitch tonight, say that his expected number of innings pitched in the ALCS is 18, at full capacity. So we have 18*V of expected performance. Since V is so much higher than replacement level, this is extremely valuable.
If he does pitch tonight, out of the bullpen or otherwise, not only do you diminish the expected amount of innings he will pitch in the next series, but the marginal value of Verlander (Vsub2) is drastically lowered, since slightly worse Verlander has much less value than full capacity Verlander. That is a bit cionfusing, let’s put it this way:
V: 2.5 FIP
Vsub2: 3FIP
Replacement Level for Tigers in this scenario aka Fister: 3.5 FIP
So do you sacrifice innings at V (2.5 FIP) in the next series, when your marginal gains are small by starting or pitching Verlander tonight in a suboptimal scenario? If you really crunched the math and ran simulations, you’d probably find that you win the World Series more often by not pitching Verlander tonight.
(The math in this post was shoddy, but an attempt at conceptualizing the variables at hand. Sorry if it’s hard to follow, the last paragraph is the crux.)
Ahh very sorry. I missed the entire point of my post!!!
There is a breakeven point, where Vsub2 is equal to some FIP or ability level where it becomes exactly 50/50 whether or not you start Verlander tonight. Clearly, if Vsub2=V, ie, Verlander is just as good on 2 days rest as he is normally, then yes, you obviously start him tonight.
Also, this entire argument is ignoring the human element/injury factor, etc. That would clearly help the “don’t pitch Verlander” side.
Seems to me the teams I remember using their ace in relief in the postseason were all doing so because they had all kinds of problems in the back end of their pen (like AZ when they won)
Both of these teams have proven veteran dominant closers. Both of these teams have setup men that are more than adequate. So I guess what I’m saying is, why does this even matter?
I think DAve is 0-3 as far as articles during this series. First its the “Verlander is good but not historic” argument (who cares?). Then it was the “Leyland used a guy who is blah against hard throwing lefties instead of a guy thats really blah against hard throing lefties” argument. And now its the “Leyland wont use the unhistorical verlander in the pen, even though chances are he really wouldnt ever need to anyway” argument. Yikes
The thing that’s really interesting is that I’m having a hard time imagining a scenario where CC, whom Girardi says is available, would actually be needed. Given all the rest Robertson and Rivera have gotten, they’re easily good for six outs each. Soriano only threw nine pitches on Tuesday, he can probably go another inning. Hughes, Wade and Logan are all available. Unless the game goes many extra innings, or Girardi decides he needs a LOOGY more than once, I really doubt CC comes in.
CC>Logan
If Nova were to only go 5, you could see CC coming in to face Avila in the 6th, for ex., then 6-7-8-9 Soriano/D-Rob/Mo.
I wonder if Dave still considers Nova the 6th best Yankee starter, as he had been doing all season long.
Nova really isn’t very good.
Based on what? FIP based WAR says 2.7, or above average. And his ERA is better than his FIP, xFIP slightly worse. 21 of 42 AL qualifiers in ERA, 26th in FIP, 35th in xFIP. He may not be #2 starter good (like he’s being counted on now). But sure seems #3 starter good.
He’s been very useful this year, no doubt. I didn’t mean to diminish what he’s done. But going forward, I think his 4.16 xFIP is the operative stat to look at. Which puts him in the decent 5th starter territory. (There were only about 15 qualified SP worse than that this year)
Count how many starters qualified. 42 in the AL. That’s three per team. Just being able to qualify for the ERA title with a remotely average ERA is enough to be a #3 starter. Most guys picking up the extra starts but not pitching that many innings stink. Teams who have a definite 5th starter are usually the best pitching teams, most teams cobble together the last few rotation spots all year, even without injuries.
I set the fangrpahs filter to 100IP, AL only. This got me 70 pitchers, or 5 per team (quite a coincidence, but hey, it works). Call these guys the starters in the league; they all made at least a few starts. Nova was 44/70 by xFIP, 33/70 by FIP, and 26/70 in ERA. If you were drafting pitchers, fantasy draft style, Nova would pretty clearly be a #3, at worst, for somebody.
5th starter performance is typified by Guthrie, Wakefield, Burnett, Cecil, Blackburn (by FIP). 5th starters suck. If your team doesn’t usually have 5th starters that suck, count yourself lucky. But Nova is better than that, or at least he has been so far.
Fair enough. I can get on board with him being a solid 3/4 starter going forward.
Timeout for a minute.
Pitching a baseball is a repetitive physical exercise that Justin Verlander has done tens of thousands of times in his life, and is now paid tens of millions of dollars to do so. He must be good at it.
Yet some people are suggesting that he is so frail, so delicate, and so finnicky that he cannot manage to slightly alter his routine and pitch an inning or two of relief in a do-or-die game on a day he was scheduled to throw at full strength in the bullpen anyway.
The two ideas are incompatible.
Saving him for a Game 1 start that may never happen is stupid. If Verlander can’t pitch if needed, and if Jim Leyland won’t even consider asking him, then neither of them belong in the big leagues, and the Tigers don’t belong in the ALCS.
Yet here both of them are, 1 win away from another ALCS
Time out for a minute.
Have you ever felt jello where you arm is supposed to be after throwing a 9 ounce rock 120 times (excluding 40 warmup tosses) – throwing either 95 MPH, or in a violent torquing motion – over a 3 hour period? The attrition is rate is higher for starting pitchers than it is for any other position is any sport, ever. For a good reason.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: there is no evidence, medically, scientifically, or otherwise, to suggest that a veteran pitcher *needs* exactly four days of rest between starts if he hopes to pitch effectively, or that he ever can’t occasionally pitch an inning or two out of the bullpen between starts.
Yes, pitchers typically do receive four days off between starts because most teams decided to use five starting pitchers decades ago, but let’s not let the tail wag the dog. When you do something often enough for a long enough period of time, people begin to believe it to be correct, ideal, and inerrant strategy. In truth, this is none of those things, it just is, and that’s not a good enough reason to reduce your chances of winning a critical postseason game game.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again:
4 days rest =/= 3 days rest =/= 2 days rest
Mike,
Whenever a news story is written about the supremacy of a four-man rotation, the reporter invariably interviews some Major League pitchers for their perspective. For example, in a USA Today article published in 2007, Tom Glavine stated the following about a four-man rotation: “It’s just something that in this day and age, we’re not conditioned to do. It’s not part of how we’ve all been brought up in baseball as pitchers.” Bud Black was quoted in that same article that it would take years to condition pitchers to grow accustomed to pitching on shorter rest. Other pitchers were quoted saying they felt they needed the four days of rest to be effective. General managers were quoted that young pitchers advance so quickly through the minor leagues now that they do not pitch many innings before making it to the big leagues. As a result, they would not be conditioned to throw 250 to 280 innings per year from the get go, which is what would be required in a four-man rotation (a pitcher would make 40 starts per year instead of 33 or 34).
I agree that there is a paucity of evidence that pitching after four days of rest is healthier than pitching after three days of rest. But the reason MLB teams decided to use a 5-man rotation was not by fiat, as you suggest. It was a way of ensuring that pitchers would not throw 280 to 320 innings per year, which became almost routine for elite pitchers in the 60s and 70s. And there is a sound basis for concluding that throwing that many innings will lead to arm fatigue and injury, especially in an age of higher pitch counts per batter than ever before, smaller strike zones, and lineups with more power.
I’m giving Leyland the benefit of the doubt here. I’m sure he’d love to have Verlander come out of the bullpen, ideally, but there’s a big possibility he knows something we don’t know. Maybe he talked to Verlander about it, and Verlander didn’t give him an enthusiastic response. Maybe he has knowledge Verlander is nursing an injury. Whatever, it could be a thousand and one things. I think it’s kind of bizarre, though, to think that instead of a valid, legitimate reason, it must be a stupid asinine reason related to Verlander’s workload, or an effort to set their rotation for the ALCS, etc.
My swag is that he is available, but only as something like the 4th or 5th pitcher out of the pen. I don’t think he comes in in the 7th inning to relieve Fister for 30 or 40 pitches. I think he gets used in a higher scoring game where the bullpen gets burned up a little bit or in an extra inning game.
“My swag is…”?
Your what? Isn’t swag the free crap they give out at trade shows? Or are you trying to invent some new slang usage here and hoping we won’t notice. ‘Cause if you are, that’s totally wompant.
Froopy, man.
No, SWAG is an acronymn for “Silly Wild-A** Guess”. Popular in military circles.
Mike –
I guarantee you Verlander want to pitch I down capacity today if needed. He’s insatiable when it cones to doing all hecan for his team. Leyland, on the over hand, doesn’t like putting Justinout of his role or usin him too much, relatively speaking. If Verlander I unavailable to pitch, it’s because Jim won’t let him, not that Justin doesn’t want to.
Like, I suspect, many people on this site, I’m predisposed toward thinking of Jim Leyland as a moron because a fair number of his decisions (constructing his lineup; chosing batter/pitcher matchups) are identifiably sub-optimal.
BUT here’s a huge caveat: There’s a hell of a lot more involved in managing a 25 man baseball team than writing out a lineup card, and Jim Leyland has experienced enough success over the years to suggest that he is good-to-excellent at many other parts of his job.
I agree that making an absolute decision that Verlander must not pitch today would be a head-scratcher, but, as Dave says, Leyland knows Verlander better than we do. We shouldn’t be outraged by his decision. (Plus: he may still be bluffing.)
I was thinking, might it make sense to bluff the other way? As Dave points out, he should be throwing today, why not do the pen session during the game?
Leyland can still use this tactic, though. Get Justin up for his bullpen session in the 6th/7th inning.
It has the added impact of coming as a surprise. Thinking Verlander is coming in, when you *knew* he wouldn’t be pitching would a little more jarrring than seeing him warming up when you were expecting to see him in the back of your mind. Whatever psycholical voodoo this would place on hitters would still be there. This is to say not that I believe in voodoo – but if I did, this would work, too, and argubaly better.
Absolutely. Jim Leyland excels at the part of managing that is not calculated on spreadsheets and graphs.
He is in the clubhouse everyday. He reads his players better than anyone in the game. He has pushed all of the right buttons this year.
I honestly don’t think Verlander pitches tonight, and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Lets not throw Fister to the trash heap after his first ever playoff start in an unconventional situation. He has been kinda good this year. Likewise for the 8-9 combo in Benoit & Valverde
It doesn’t show up in the spreadsheets!!! What a burn!!!
One additional thing he could be doing is having everyone talking about him. Because if everyone is saying “WTF Leyland”, they’re not saying “WTF Tigers, you’re one game from elimination”. Yes, they’re all pro athletes who should be able to handle pressure, but it wouldn’t be the first case of a manager trying to shield his players.
How about the possibility that Verlander takes very long to warm up, and thus is impractical to use when a tight spot arises?
I predict he’s there closer if the tigers have a lead in the bottom of the ninth.
I predict unicorns exist.
Will not happen. Leyland sticks with his guys, even if they’re struggling (like Valverde did the past two games).
Justin Verlander even gave very strong hints that he’d like to go when he said that he’d try to sneak down to the bullpen and get warmed up, and maybe that’d convince Leyland to use him. Every indication is that this is a Leyland decision and not a Verlander decision. It’s his throw day anyway, so its not like he started, then threw yesterday, and is adding tons more work (though obviously pitching in a game is different as far as total stress than a regular throw day).
If CC comes in, I’d be willing to wager that Verlander follows.
Yes… from either perspective, quite a way to move on, or not move on.
i think it’s more fuel to the fire when discussing playoff format and why a 5 game series is so undesirable. 1 rain delay completely derailed the nature of this series. To play an entire regular season a particular way, and then put your hopes into such a limiting competitive form is very unsettling.
IMO, if Verlander says “I’m pitching, put me in.” Leyland puts him in.
I interpret Leyland as meaning “if I can avoid pitching Velrander, I will”.
However when the poop’s about to hit the fan in the 7th inning of a close game, we’ll see Verlander in the game … and Leyland will comment on how Verlander is a warrior and how he couldn’t keep him out of the game.
Ley;land may not be a sabermetric favorite in regards to managers, but it’s hard not to like the old guy.
Hell, I remeber one time Jim Lelyand was th emost popular manager in the game … especially the day after spring training when he ripped into Barry Bonds on the field.
I agree with DC, Leyland has used and damn near abused Verlander over the years. Now is not the time to get all conservative and protective. He’d be throwing a bullpen session on the side anyway, of which 15-20 pithces would be “game intensity” anyway.
I think a point could be made in favor of using your SPs as short relievers on their in between days, provided it’s monitored and balanced … as if it were just part of their regularly scheduled routine.
Yeah, I’ve always wondered why there hasn’t been a shift in exploring more of this available option during the playoffs. Why not take the side bullpen session and turn it into a game appearance. It’s surely a different kind of workload, but with special pitchers, I think it could be a reasonable option to adapt.
Because no one wants to be the manager when (for example) Strasburg’s arm blows out in one of these appearances. Your logic is sound, but just like using your best reliever in the highest-leverage situations and punting on 4th and 1, when logic runs up against self-preservation, logic often loses.
Verlander made about 65 warm-up throws prior to his last start, including long-toss. He could probably accomplish 25%-40% of his long-toss regimen during a commercial break when his team is in the field, but that still leaves him well short of what he feels his arm needs to be game-ready. Add cold weather and a spike in heart rate induced by a rushed bullpen session and . . . I don’t know.
Technically, it’s about the same for any starter being used as an emergency reliever, but Leyland must feel Verlander wouldn’t be vintage Verlander, at least mentally, when the bell rings.
However, if this was Verlander’s decision, he needs to look himself in the mirror and ask himself: “What would Randy Johnson do?”
According to a Buster Olney tweet Verlander just finished is between starts bullpen session. That pretty much insures this is not a Leyland bluff.
Maybe he figures Fister is just as good (and the second half stats do support that) and he wants Verlander more for the series with the Rangers.
Realistically what can either pitcher contribute to their team in this game? The 8th and 9th innings for both teams are undoubtedly spoken for, Robertson to Rivera for the Yankees and Benoit to Valverde for the Tigers. And while Soriano struggled early in the season and Al Albuquerque has struggled in this series I think both managers would use these relievers rather than bring in there over worked starters. In a situation where your starter struggles early or gets knocked out I think both teams have better options than asking either of these guys to go out and give a lengthy relief appearance. So I think the question is why would CC be available? And I think the answer is handedness. Because he’s a lefty he could be used in a key situation for only one or two outs and because he throws with his left hand it could be very effective. Verlander is right handed and the Tigers have three very good right handed relievers who can throw in high leverage situations. No Yankee fan wants to see Boone Logan throwing in a key situation. So if Alex Avila or Wilson Betemit are up with runners in scoring position I could see using CC for one out. Otherwise I think fresh arms would be more effective.
No one here has asked the obvious question: Is this really Jim Leyland’s decision? Does anyone truly believe that David Dombrowski – the man who extended Verlander to a tune of $80 million over five years – isn’t making the call on this one?
Maybe (I’m sure someone has compiled the history, but I can’t find it with a few lackadaisical googles) but everybody remembers Randy Johnson charging out of the bullpen to lock down the win in Game 7 a decade ago (on zero days rest!) and in something like this anecdote trumps data every time.
Thanks Dave! Leyland read your last article and realized “This Verlander guy is totally F**KING over rated.”
IMO, Leyland is protecting Verlander from bearing the sole responsibility of the decision … and the possible backlash from a decision not to pitch on 2 days rest.
Verlander is now over 265 IP for the season, and labored through 8 tough innings the other day. The expectation that he would be available for quality service tonight is likely unrealistic … and could lead to false assumptions about his character.
However, if the starter gets pulled in the 4th, and Verlander expresses a desire to pitch, then the stated plan could change drastically.
We saw some backlash not too long ago when Cliff Lee refused to pitch on short rest in the playoffs.
Verlander has carried his weight and then some, and I’m not completely convinced he won;t pitch tonight. But, then he’ll also be expected to make his regular starts in the next series and go deep in all those games as well … and the series after … and …
The research shows that starters pitching on 3 days rest are about as effective as they are on 5 days rest (on average). I’m not aware of any data that shows the results of pitching on 2 days rest after a high pitch outing.
My overall thought is if Verlander pitching well today is the only way DET can win the game, then perhaps DET doesn;t deserve to move on to the next round … but that’s easy for me to say, I am neither a Tiger player, coach, and/or fan.
err, 4 days rest, not 5.
I can’t forsee a situation where Verlander would even be useful in this game. He’s obviously on short rest after a high pitch start previously. Has he ever started a game on short rest? It’s not like we have any kind of history of how he performs on short rest.
And when exactly would he get used? Benoit is well rested and could go 2 innings tonight in a tight game. Valverde is good for at least 3 outs (entertaining as they may be). Would you bring him in the 5th inning of a 5-4 ballgame with 2 outs and 2 on? He has no experience in getting ready in a hurry in the pen and coming into a game with runners on. Furthermore doing so on short rest is nearly idiotic considering the situation when there are other reasonably talented and well rested relievers sitting in the pen that do this all the time.
CC being “available” at least gives Girardi a left handed option in the pen that he may be more comfortable with. Verlander isn’t a lefty and the Tigers have plenty of righties in the pen. I’d rather take my chances with Al Alburqurque’s electric stuff coming out of the pen for a handful of outs than Verlander on short rest.
I think the reason Leyland went public with it is to show Fister that he has the utmost confidence that he won’t even be need to be pulled until the 8th.
Who knows, maybe that last start was jittery (even though 3 of his ER were after he left the game)
I think it’s probably that Verlander’s effect on this game would be pretty minimal, whereas if he does appear, he might be able to start game 1 of the ALCS, or he wouldn’t be as effective if he did. Pitching 2 innings of one game in exchange for possibly sacrificing a whole start in the ALCS isn’t worth it, if that ends up happening.