The Grand Slam That Almost Wasn’t

Astute readers with the internet access necessary to read this article are probably aware that the Boston Red Sox will be meeting the St. Louis Cardinals in the 2013 World Series. They are also probably aware that it was Shane Victorino who played hero for Boston, delivering a game winning grand slam in the seventh inning. Before Victorino’s home run, it was a bit touch and go for the Sox.

The Tigers threatened a monster of a rally in the top of the sixth. With no outs, two runs already plated and runners on first and third, Jhonny Peralta grounded out into an…interesting…double play. Dustin Pedroia tagged Victor Martinez on his way to second before throwing home. Prince Fielder – caught in a rundown – desperately tried to make it back to third. He fell short.

Still, the Tigers did take a 2-1 lead in the inning. Between Max Scherzer and a strong bullpen, the Tigers must have felt good about their roughly 80 percent chance to win.

The Sox weaseled their way out of a second potential rally in the seventh. Austin Jackson singled with one out but was promptly picked off. Jose Iglesias followed with a hit and Torii Hunter reached base on an error. Unfortunately for the Tigers, the shell of Miguel Cabrera grounded out to end the inning. With the Tigers out of it, we’ll be left to wonder if things would have been different with a healthy Cabrera. And there’s no doubt that plenty of analysts will second guess Jim Leyland’s decision to continue to play Cabrera through injury for most of the season.

Having handled two potential rallies while keeping the game within reach, Boston’s offense got to work in the home half of the seventh. Scherzer was lifted after recording one out and allowing two base runners to reach. Drew Smyly was brought in to face Jacoby Ellsbury, but a costly error by Iglesias allowed the Sox to load the bases. With Victorino coming to the plate, Leyland brought in former Astros closer Jose Veras to limit the damage. Let’s just say that some moves work out better than others. After Victorino’s home run, the Tigers went quietly into the night.

But slightly different circumstances could have led to a very different outcome (that’s always the case in baseball, but bear with me). Prior to Game 5, Victorino made the decision to begin switch hitting again. Ostensibly, he wanted to counter Detroit’s difficult all-right-handed rotation.

Victorino has switch hit for his entire major league career, but gave up batting left-handed in early August due to injuries. Batting lefty against Anibal Sanchez, his first two at bats produced weak results – a strike out and a fielder’s choice. Victorino reverted to batting right-handed for his third at bat. Coincidentally, that resulted in a strikeout against Veras.

Since giving up batting left-handed, Victorino has had one of the most productive stretches of his career. August saw him post a .419 wOBA and seven home runs. Between August 4th and the end of the season, six of his 10 home runs came batting righty against right-handed pitching. He posted a .395 wOBA in 115 plate appearances against same-handed pitchers.

Victorino has always featured better power from the right side. His career numbers bear that out – a .204 ISO batting right-handed versus a .132 ISO batting left-handed. His power batting left-handed has been even worse over the past two seasons, although the sample size involved limits our ability to draw strong conclusions.

Given the numbers discussed thus far, it’s fair to wonder why Victorino bats left-handed at all. After all, he performed well in the regular season and provided postseason heroics without batting lefty. While it’s possible that Victorino may be better as a purely right-handed batter, it appears to be a trade off between power and plate discipline. He struck out over 21 percent of the time against same handed pitching compared with a rate around 12 percent against opposite handed pitching. His walk rate also halved against same handed pitching, falling from a little over five percent to 2.6 percent.

Over a small sample, that poor plate discipline didn’t adversely affect his numbers, but it’s quite possible that major league pitchers would find ways to further exploit Victorino by discovering where he’s weakest. Alternatively, it’s not hard to imagine that Victorino could improve those rates with practice, although it does seem a bit late in his career to work that out.

Had Victorino stuck with his plan from prior to Game 5, he would have come to the plate against Veras batting left-handed with the bases loaded. He probably would not have hit a grand slam. The Sox did have a 56 percent chance to win the game at that point and our hypothetical lefty batting Victorino may have added to those odds. But it probably would not have the 37 percent leap that his home run provided.





You can follow me on twitter @BaseballATeam

86 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
the fume
10 years ago

Another way that it almost wasn’t……if Bogarts is called out on strikes like he should have been, and Scherzer is still in the game to face Ellsbury and/or with 2 outs Iglesias doesn’t try a fancy glove flip to turn two.

That umpire was horrible, he would’t have known an outside corner if it was a foul tip and he was Avila’s face mask. Oh well, at least we get some more 4 hour 9-inning games.

Mister
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

That umpire was awful, and that call was particularly awful at an important point in the game. But he was awful the whole game and had bad calls that affected both teams.

the fume
10 years ago
Reply to  Mister

No, he wasn’t bad for both teams actually. 4 clear strikes called balls, all by Tiger pitching. 9 clear balls called strikes, 7 by Boston pitching. Hideous, biased.

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/zoneTrack.php?month=10&day=19&year=2013&game=gid_2013_10_19_detmlb_bosmlb_1%2F&prevGame=gid_2013_10_12_detmlb_bosmlb_1%2F&prevDate=1019

FoffTODD
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

Quit whining. Every team has games where calls don’t go their way. It works both for and against them throughout the season.

The Umps don’t have any bias towards the Sox or the Tigers.

Nick
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

Do I sense some pains in your anus?

Clutch Narrative
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

That’s really interesting. Most of the bad calls are clustered around the same part of the zone (lower glove side for the catcher). Avila is a pretty good pitch framer, but his knee injury may have affected that. Have to go back and see if he is stabbing.

Mike
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

lol at “Every team has games where things don’t go their way during a season.”

It was freaking game 6 of the ALCS. It’s kind of a big deal when you’re facing the most patient line-up in the league and your starting pitcher gets squeezed all night compared to the other starter (and getting squeezed played a huge part in the deciding inning).

the fume
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

i’m sorry, i didn’t know that pointing out facts was whining. i guess i should just ignore incompetence from now on because i guess that’s whining or hot diarrhea according to FoffTODD and Nick, clearly experts in this area.

FoffTODD
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

The Tigers hitters had MANY opportunities to put this game away. But they DIDN’T.

Blame the umps all you want, but the Tigers lack of hitting and even worse baserunning did them in last night.

The Tigers were up 2-1, with runners on the corners, and no outs. The second best hitting in the AL couldn’t score anymore runs. lol

FoffTODD
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

Bad calls are part of the game. They go both ways. They are independent of teams. They have no bias.

You think the Tigers are the only team where calls didn’t go there way? It sure looks like it.

The Tigers lost. Deal with it.

Mike
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

Who is saying there was a bias? The bad calls went against Detroit in game 6 when it comes to balls and strikes. I don’t think that’s debatable.

The reality is that Bogaerts walking on strike three changed that inning, and you can’t honestly talk about what happened there without acknowledging that Scherzer got squeezed at the worst possible time. Maybe Ellsbury hits a bomb with only one runner on. Maybe they walk the next two and Pedroia hits the GS. I don’t know. I do know that I would have liked the umpire to do his job in that instance, though, so we could have found out what happened.

FoffTODD
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

“Hideous, biased.”

This could have been a normal discussion but that second word was thrown in. Looks like whining to me.

the fume
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

the bad calls were biased against the tigers. clearly. i didn’t mean nor say that the ump did it intentionally.

the fume
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

And yes, I realize that questionable bullpen use, base-running, hitting, etc. all took place during the series. that doesn’t change the fact that they got hosed prior to referenced at-bat, got hosed during the rest of the biggest game. And yes the fact that they got hosed doesn’t mean they would have won the game or the series. No need to be so defensive, as if someone pointing out something unfair somehow invalidates the win.

E-Dub
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

One call doesn’t cost you a series, and a lot of this discussion is hindsight, but I was amazed at the time that the presumptive CY winner lost out to a player with 50 regular season PA to his name on a borderline call. Bogaerts is a phenomenal player, and had shown an excellent eye to that point, but it was still bemusing. And lest we forget, Iassogna also brought us the comically bad “neighborhood” call in Game 4 (also coincidentally in favor of BOS), so he had a rough LCS. The difference between the two is that one was followed by DET runs in a game they won and the other was followed by BOS runs in a game BOS won. Equally terrible calls for those of us without a dog in the fight besides the desire for clean officiating that doesn’t adversely influence the events on the field.

Guy
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

It’s called pitch framing.

Mister
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

Look, I’d like to see machines replace umps, but I don’t think that means that these plots from Brooks should be taken as gospel. They’re probably good for saying whether or not a pitch crossed over the plate, but as far as high and low goes, that’s different for every player. So saying “clear strikes” and “clear balls” about a lot of these that the radar shows as borderline is placing too much confidence in the system.

That said, here’s game 5:

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/zoneTrack.php?month=10&day=17&year=2013&game=gid_2013_10_17_bosmlb_detmlb_1%2F&prevGame=gid_2013_10_19_detmlb_bosmlb_1%2F&prevDate=1017

I certainly thought Lester was getting squeezed during the game, particularly in the 1st inning. This plot is consistent with what I observed.

I think that all we are saying here is home-field advantage in action. There has been work done that shows that home-field advantage is likely mostly due to umpires being psychologically influenced by the crowd and calling the game in the home team’s favor.

Dan
10 years ago
Reply to  Mister

the strike zone map shows Detroit got clearly shafted compared to Boston in game 6 with the ball/strike calls and none was more impactful than Bogaerts “walk” in the 7th to set up the big inning.

Could Detroit have overcome it? Sure. Did they? No.

Chief Keef
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

Yeah, go back and examine the missed calls in games 1-5.

Colin
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

Given the situation and the, in my opinion, obvious nature of the call, I thought it was probably the worst ball-strike decision of the series for sure.

Clearly the Tigers got hosed big time on the zone in game 6. I have to wonder what of that is just randomness and what of that is the influence of Fenway.

Trey
10 years ago
Reply to  Colin

Avila was setup for a pitch in and Scherzer missed his spot by a good 20 inches.. So even though it may have grazed the zone, Avila had to stab at it and the umpire will call that a ball 9 times out of 10.

Bingo
10 years ago
Reply to  Trey

Bingo.

Jonathan
10 years ago
Reply to  Trey

Yep. Even Scherzer admitted to that. Hell, it was his last batter anyway, if he thought it was that awful a decision, he’d have registered it with the ump.

Colin
10 years ago
Reply to  Trey

I tend to think that Cy Young caliber pitchers who are dealing will tend to get the outside corner of the zone (in the zone as well and not the outside which they still tend to get) 9/10 whether or not the catcher had to stab it.

BMacK
10 years ago
Reply to  Trey

A computer will make the correct call ~100% of the time while keeping the game fair.

Jonathan
10 years ago
Reply to  Trey

Because computers are never wrong and there completely infallible.

Whoops! Meant to say ‘they’re,’ looks like spellcheck missed it.

NS
10 years ago
Reply to  Trey

No one said that. In fact, the person above you specifically said “~100%” instead of “100%”.

Mike
10 years ago
Reply to  Colin

Well, you’ll have at least two more opportunities to study “the influence of Fenway” this season.

The Party Bird
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

Yes, the call was bs, and yes, it changed the complexion of the inning. But (and I say this as a Tigers fan) if the Tigers (and especially Fielder) weren’t so damn stupid on the bases the entire series has a different feel. Compare to the Red Sox, whose biggest baserunning gaffe of the whole series was Ellsbury barely getting caught stealing second.

The Red Sox were sharper in the field too. Remember Fielder’s “scoop” of Iglesias’ throw in game 2? How about Cabrera’s error in game 5? Those were definitely game-changers.

The umpire may have changed this game (and we’ll never know how it might have turned out if the really-surprisingly-patient Bogaerts is correctly rung up there), but the ump also didn’t throw a hanger to Victorino. He didn’t take out Smyly – the Tigers’ relief ace for crying out loud – after one batter in both “grand slam” games. The Tigers really were outplayed for the whole series in every aspect of the game except starting pitching. Damn, let’s look back and admire how awesome that rotation was, just in case Max gets traded in the offseason at his peak value.

The Party Bird
10 years ago
Reply to  The Party Bird

Not to mention the double plays, which the Red Sox turned at key moments and the Tigers, well…

No disrespect to Iglesias, who is a freaking wizard.

B N
10 years ago
Reply to  The Party Bird

Iglesias looked like he was doing the job of 3 or 4 fielders at shortstop sometimes (Fly ball in the OF? Got this. Dribbler almost to the pitcher’s mound? No problem. Balls almost to the 3B line? Yup.). Unfortunately, with the defensive limitations of some of his fellow fielders, he needed to do the work of at least 5.

If the Tigers didn’t have such good swing and miss stuff, their defense would be a real liability.

Rippers
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume
chuckb
10 years ago
Reply to  the fume

You neglected to mention also that it probably wouldn’t have happened if Leyland hadn’t had his 4th best reliever in the game at the time.

I’m sorry you were victimized by such a grievous injustice but it’s one that could have been managed if your manager understood the concept of leverage.