The Decision Making of Game 4

HOUSTON — The power of the role of the manager has diminished as more authority is concentrated in the front office. But the manager position is a significant one and never more important than on the World Series stage. Managers can win and lose games. And it was decision-making in Game 4 that was particularly fascinating in the Dodgers’ 6-2 win to even the series Saturday.

Game 4 was about a lot of things. Cody Bellinger ended his three-game slump. Joc Pederson warranted his placement on the postseason roster, and the evening was also a game about human and managerial decision-making.

Following the game, and even during the game, A.J. Hinch was criticized for not sticking with Chris Devenski long enough, for remaining with starting pitcher Charlie Morton a little too long, and for ultimately turning the game over to Ken Giles. Giles’ struggles continued as he faced three batters, all reached, and all scored, including the decisive run. Giles has allowed a run in six of his last seven appearances and has allowed 10 runs in 7 2/3 postseason innings (More on Giles Sunday at FanGraphs).

“He can get outs and he’ll continue to get outs,” Hinch said to reporters. “You have the ball in your hands at the most critical time because you have the best stuff. … I’ve always tried to give the reliever a little bit of a leash.”

Hinch also allowed Morton to face a portion of the Dodgers’ lineup for a third time — despite Morton’s well-documented issues when pitching deeper into a game — a decision that allowed the tying run to score.

Hinch is a smart man, the manager of one of the most analytical clubs in the game. But his decision-making Saturday was interesting because he managed traditionally — sticking with his starter, turning the game over to his closer in the ninth — after he recently managed much more unconventionally and analytically.

It was in Game 7 of the ALCS when Hinch did not allow an effective Morton (five innings, two hits, no runs allowed) to face the Yankees a third time. Morton faced 18 Yankees. The night before Game 7, Hinch called Lance McCullers on his drive home and let McCullers know he was finishing the game as something of a piggy-back, tandem stater. And then on Friday night, he pulled off another tandem start with McCullers starting and Brad Peacock pitching the final 3 2/3 inning to secure a victory.

But he managed differently — more emotionally? — Saturday.

I had asked Hinch about his decision-making process earlier this year. I was curious how major league managers avoid the trappings of their human hard-wiring, how they avoid becoming too risk-averse. It is a problem central to Michael Lewis’ book “The Undoing Project” which focused on the work and relationship of Israeli psychologists Danny Kahneman and Amos Tversky.

Said Lewis in an interview with Time advancing the book:

“Some of the most interesting ideas were these throw-away thoughts, like Danny’s idea they played with for a while—how people making decisions aren’t actually trying to maximize their returns, but minimize regret. I see it all that time in people’s decisions.”

For instance, when offering research subjects $1,000 — or — having a 50% chance to earn $2,500 depending on the result of a coin flip, most chose the certainty of $1,000.

To avoid letting emotion creep in, Hinch told me this summer he made as many decisions as possible in his office at “2 p.m.” in advance of a night game. Hinch said he tries to map out every scenario, and his response, before games.

“It keeps the emotion out of the game,” Hinch said.

But Saturday? Hinch explained some of his decision-making processes to reporters in the interview room late Saturday night.

“It’s always in your best interests to take the pitcher out a hitter too early rather than a hitter too late. At least that’s how I’ve gone about it,” Hinch said Saturday night. “But the context of the game is always going to shift and change. You can draw it out perfectly and map it out, but you never know how the other outcome would have been. It’s easy to say everything you do and it goes wrong. Everybody in baseball thinks that the other way would have been perfectly good, and we don’t know. And our jobs are criticized because of outcomes that we already know and outcomes that we assume.”

We as a people like to treat problems after they occur rather than do everything we could to head them off. It is in part why it’s more difficult to prove the benefits of preventive practices and care. We are good with procedures, pills and auto repair, we are less committed to taking 10,000 steps per day, eating our kale chips, and giving our cars regular oil changes.

As you’re probably aware, most pitchers are less effective each time they go through the lineup due to a combination of fatigue, loss of stuff, and batter familiarity. It’s the Third Time Through the Order Penalty.

If the Dodgers had a plan to pull Alex Wood after two times through the order no matter what, Saturday was a good test for such rigidness as Wood had a no-hitter through six innings. Dave Roberts allowed Wood to begin to face the Astros a third time. Wood faced only one batter a third time:

Moving to the crouched position did not appear to help Wood impose his will upon the missile hit by George Springer. The ball seemed like it had a chance to go through the support wall and into the old Union Station beyond the left-field wall.

Give Wood credit for gutting out six-plus innings and allowing just the one hit, but it would not be accurate to say Wood had good stuff. His fastball velocity was down, which can mean trouble for Wood and about every pitcher. He generated just four swinging strikes on 84 pitches.

I asked analytically-minded Dodgers pitcher Brandon McCarthy about the situation. McCarthy said “symbolically” it would have been difficult to lift Wood until he allowed a hit.

“Whether it works or not, it’s not the fourth time through, it’s not the ninth inning, it’s not 110 pitches,” McCarthy said. “To pull a guy with a no-hitter, I think it’s a little harsh… that might be a little too hard and not enough of feel. There is still a balance there of numbers versus feeling. You can believe in numbers, which both teams do, but there has to be some consideration of feel.”

What Wood and Morton have in common is each struggles the deeper they pitch into games both in 2017 and for their careers.

Consider the following charts:

Alex Wood by Times Through Lineup
Season Times Through Innings ERA wOBA
2017 1st Through Order as SP 56.0 2.41 0.274
2017 2nd Through Order as SP 55.2 2.10 0.261
2017 3rd Through Order as SP 34.2 4.67 0.294
Total 1st Through Order as SP 221.0 2.44 0.290
Total 2nd Through Order as SP 217.0 3.11 0.295
Total 3rd Through Order as SP 157.2 4.11 0.307

Charlie Morton Times Through Lineup
Year Times Through Innings ERA wOBA
2017 1st Through Order as SP 57.2 1.25 0.245
2017 2nd Through Order as SP 51.0 3.71 0.339
2017 3rd Through Order as SP 36.1 7.18 0.335
Career 1st Through Order as SP 392.1 2.84 0.304
Career 2nd Through Order as SP 355.1 5.07 0.348
Career 3rd Through Order as SP 270.2 5.72 0.343

With men on the corners and one out in the sixth, Chris Taylor entered the right-handed batter’s box and became the first batter to face Morton three times. Taylor grounded a ball to third that Alex Bregman threw home to successfully cut down the lead runner. Corey Seager flew out to left, one of the few air balls against either pitcher, to end the threat.

There were some warning signs as Morton did appear to leave his stuff more elevated in the zone.

Morton’s pitch locations in the third inning:

Morton’s pitch locations in the sixth inning.

Morton returned for the seventh. With one out, he hung a curveball to the Bellinger, who doubled to the left-center gap. The star rookie had been 0-for-the-series after a strong NLCS.

The third-time-through alarm sounded and Hinch appeared from the first-base dugout. While Hinch perhaps waited one batter too long, the margin for error is small this time of year. Astros reliever Will Harris allowed Bellinger to score on a Logan Forsythe base hit that tied the score at 1.

Hinch gave the ball to Devenski, who he had allowed to go multiple innings regularly the last two seasons, perhaps a more revolutionary role than the celebrated one of Andrew Miller last October. But Hinch did not allow Devenski to finish the game after he threw a clean eighth. Instead, he showed loyalty and faith in Giles. It went unrewarded.

It’s perhaps too simple to say a manager should always adhere to the spreadsheet, to the never-let-a-non-top-of-the-rotation-arm-face-the-lineup-a-third-time rule. But perhaps it’s even easier to get caught up in the moment, trust eyes, listen to a player’s plea to continue, and leave a pitcher in for a batter too long, to make the walk to the mound moments too late.

The default position is usually adhering to tradition for most people, not doing something unconventional. From a Kahneman and Tversky paper documented in “The Undoing Project:

“The greater sensitivity to negative rather than positive changes is not specific to monetary outcomes,” wrote Amos and Danny. “It reflects a general property of the human organism as a pleasure machine. For most people, the happiness involved in receiving a desirable object is smaller than the unhappiness involved in losing the same object. … Happy species endowed with an infinite appreciation of pleasures and low sensitivity to pain would probably not survive the evolutionary battle.”

We’re wired to do the safe thing, to survive. Charlie Morton looked great, but pitchers often look great until they don’t. Ken Giles hasn’t looked great in some time but he still has the closer label. The unconventional Astros were handled more traditionally Saturday and perhaps it hurt them. Regardless of what happens on Sunday, the series will now shift back to Los Angeles where more decisions await.





A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.

9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
member
6 years ago

This piece seems overly results-oriented. If Giles had pitched well and the Astros had won the game, you would probably be saying that Hinch had “managed analytically” by not overreacting to Giles’ recent poor performance.

Maggie25
6 years ago
Reply to 

The strongest statement he makes is that the Astros were handled more traditionally and “perhaps it hurt them” and you say it’s overly results-oriented? Travis spends the rest of the article explaining how decisions on both teams strayed from their typical process last night.

I don’t know, if you want to get a thoughtful article about the difficulties of in-game decision-making on a Sunday morning and somehow interpret it as a harsh criticism of AJ Hinch, go for it.

member
6 years ago
Reply to  Maggie25

Well, I don’t agree with the notion that going to Giles for the 9th is the “traditional” play and sticking with Devenski would have been the “analytical” play. It seems to me that riding Devenski would have been more of a gut feel decision and the the numbers would indicate that Giles in his first inning of work is more likely to be effective than Devenski in his second. The only factor going the other way is Giles’ last 7 or so innings of work, and basing your decision on that doesn’t seem super-analytical to me.