The Nationals Try Something Entirely New, Clinch NLDS

The ball left Justin Turner’s bat at 70.3 mph, with a launch angle of 34 degrees. Per Statcast, batted balls with that exit velocity, hit on that plane, have an expected batting average of .550. A little better than a coin flip. There were two out, and nobody on base, and Sean Doolittle on the mound; there were thousands still left at Dodger Stadium willing the ball to fall, thousands more in the empty stadium in Washington praying for it to find a glove. The Washington Nationals had a 99.9% chance of winning the game. And also, Michael A. Taylor, out in centerfield, sprinting toward it — at the last moment, stretching out his glove — the ball, barely missing the ground, centimeters from escaping his glove.

Had the ball fallen, it barely would have made a difference. The Dodgers’ win expectancy would have improved to something like 0.5%. But that’s not what it felt like. Not for the Dodgers fans who had remained through the preceding disaster, looking for a sliver of hope, the slightest graze of cowhide against grass. Not for the Nationals fans, hoping for something they hadn’t yet seen — a glove closed around a ball for a series-clinching out, an end to the years of futility, the beginning of something completely new. This is where the postseason takes you: Years of your life, untold amounts of time and emotional energy spent, seeming to rest in the inches between a ball and a glove and a few blades of grass.

Taylor rose up and took the ball in his glove, a confused expression on his face. Turner, on the basepath 200 feet away, motioned to the dugout. But even as the game hung, for a few moments, in the purgatory of umpire review, the fans knew, and Sean Doolittle knew, jumping off the mound and into the stratosphere, and Adam Eaton knew, leaping in from right field. It was over. The Washington Nationals had won Game 5. They were advancing to the NLCS. And the Dodgers’ historic, 106-win season had ended. They were nine games too short, nine innings too short. A few runs, a few pitches, maybe. A few inches. Sometimes cliches are cliches because they’re true.

***

The game began with Walker Buehler striking out Trea Turner on a 97 mph fastball, just like he had to open Game 1. Buehler retired the side on just 10 pitches in the top of the first, looking for all the world like the dominant starter who had held the Nationals to just a single hit over six innings last Thursday. It was the opening the Dodgers had hoped for.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

And in the bottom of the first, they got the opening they had hoped for from the bats, too: a resounding double from Joc Pederson to lead off the game against Steven Strasburg — a double that, due to some wall-padding ambiguities, seemed for a moment to be a home run — and a home run from Max Muncy, around whom the Dodgers offense this series has turned. In Game 2, Strasburg carved up the Dodger lineup to the tune of 10 strikeouts over six innings of one-run mastery; within five minutes, the Dodgers had shed the weight of that poor performance, handing Strasburg his first-ever postseason home run. Leading off the next inning, Kiké Hernández, making his first start of the series over the beleaguered A.J. Pollock, sent a ball just barely over Michael A. Taylor’s outstretched glove.

For the three innings that followed, the game settled into a rhythm. Strasburg settled down — after the bottom of the second, Cody Bellinger was the only batter to reach base against him. Buehler didn’t have quite as much control as he did in Game 1 — the first turned out to be the only inning in which he didn’t allow a baserunner — but rarely seemed to be in distress.

An exception to this came in the top of the fifth. Buehler allowed a leadoff walk to Kurt Suzuki and a single to Michael A. Taylor, putting the tying run at the plate for the Nationals. That tying run came in the form of Strasburg. Instead of pinch-hitting for him, though, Dave Martinez left him in, unwilling to trade a better plate appearance for a few extra innings of the Nationals’ turbulent bullpen. Strasburg struck out on a full-count foul bunt, failing to move the runners, and Buehler retired Trea Turner and Adam Eaton to end the inning. The threat was over.

In another version of this game, that first out given to the Dodgers might have been a critical decision point in their favor, a blunder by Dave Martinez that cost the Nationals their best opportunity to score. As it turned out, it was just a footnote.

***

Buehler ran into trouble again to start the sixth. Facing the heart of the Nationals order, he quickly gave up a double to Anthony Rendon and a single to Juan Soto, putting Washington on the board. He remained in the game, though, and managed to coax a double-play ball from Howie Kendrick. (This, of course, prompted sarcastic comments about Kendrick’s status as the Dodgers’ NLDS MVP; his three errors accounted for all the errors made by the Nationals in the series.) He made it through the sixth without allowing another baserunner.

Still, it was clear that Buehler was no longer working at peak capacity. This was back-to-back innings where the first two Nats batters had reached. Now, every runner on base brought the tying run to the plate. With a well-rested bullpen and a season on the line, one might have expected Dave Roberts to err on the side of caution.

Yet Buehler reappeared to start the seventh, with nearly disastrous results. A 94 mph fastball nearly hit Suzuki square in the face. Its impact was dispersed somewhat by his helmet, but Suzuki was still shaken. He lay on the ground, face-down, for several tense moments; eventually, upright but dazed, he left the game. Buehler, though, remained, despite the scare, despite the number of pitches he had thrown, despite the complete availability of the bullpen. He struck out Michael A. Taylor; pinch-hitter Asdrubal Cabrera lined out.

The lineup turned over. And, facing him for the fourth time, Buehler failed to retire Trea Turner. A walk put him on first, with the speedy Taylor at second, and Adam Eaton coming to bat.

Dave Roberts spoke before the game of his intention to have Clayton Kershaw “piggybacking” after Walker Buehler exited. He stuck to his plan. Kershaw took the mound to face Eaton. He struck him out on three pitches.

That moment — as Kershaw, he of the much-discussed playoff demons, walked off the mound, the lead intact, only six outs remaining between the Dodgers and the NLCS — was the loudest Dodger Stadium got all night.

With Strasburg now out of the game, Tanner Rainey and Patrick Corbin retired the Dodgers 1-2-3 in the bottom of the seventh.

***

Clayton Kershaw is one of the best pitchers of his generation. He has been a cornerstone of one of the most successful franchises of this decade. If people still read baseball history in the future, if anything of this sport remains, what will remain with those baseball historians of the future will be an impression of Kershaw’s greatness.

But Kershaw was not the best pitcher the Dodgers had to face Anthony Rendon and Juan Soto to open the top of the eighth. Kenta Maeda, over three and two-thirds innings in this series, had allowed just one baserunner, and struck out four of the 12 batters he faced. Adam Kolarek, whose one job in the series seems to have been to retire Juan Soto, had been successful all three times he was called upon to do so. There was no reason that Roberts needed to put Kershaw in to pitch the eighth.

Six pitches from Kershaw later, and the game was tied.

And if someone had been scripting this game, there could be no more fitting players to the Nationals’ tides turning but Rendon, the long-tenured superstar who had suffered through the disappointments of the past six seasons, and Soto, the Wild Card hero, the bombastic young phenomenon, the hope for the future. Rendon’s home run was a shot, a burst of energy; Soto’s home run was an explosion.

Another postseason failure to hang over Kershaw’s head — and this time, a completely unnecessary one. He should never have been in that situation. Roberts put Maeda in the game — too late. He struck out the next three batters. The Dodgers went quietly in the bottom of the eighth.

***

Joe Kelly appeared for the Red Sox in all five games of last year’s World Series. He pitched a total of six innings. He allowed zero runs. He allowed zero walks. He struck out 10 of 22 batters. He was, in a word, overpowering, an essential part of the Sox’s bulldozing of the Dodgers. This postseason, he once again played a critical role in the Dodgers’ demise.

It was surprising that Kelly came into the game in a tied ninth at all. Again, Dave Roberts had the pick of his bullpen. Kelly left his most recent appearance in Game 3 having allowed two runs on two hits and three walks without recording an out. Just nine out of the 22 pitches he threw were strikes. It’s hard to believe that, in the highest of high-leverage situations, Kelly was the best option available. The clean ninth he pitched was wrought with tension, like he was pitching it on borrowed time.

But with Eaton, Rendon, and Soto coming up to bat in the top of the 10th, out came Joe Kelly again. No sign of Kenley Jansen. No sign of anyone else. Eaton walked. Rendon doubled.

When the decision was made to walk Juan Soto, leaving the bases loaded with nobody out, and leaving Kelly to face Howie Kendrick? That felt like the game was already over.

***

The Washington Nationals have never won a postseason series. It’s been so often repeated that it’s almost axiomatic. They’ve come so close, so many times; they’ve had the best players having the best seasons, only to see their season frittered away by some cruel act of God, some failure so incredibly random and unpredictable that it seems to have had to be divinely ordained. Drew Storen in 2012, the wild pitch in 2014, the Jansen-Kershaw tandem in 2016, the bottom of the fifth in 2017 — there have been so many iterations of loss that it becomes difficult to imagine what victory could possibly look like.

As it turned out, it looks like this: Howie Kendrick, the veteran of over a decade somehow having one of the best seasons of his career, turning on an 0-1 fastball in the top of the 10th.

And it looks like Michael A. Taylor, holding out the ball, confusion on his face. Like when you’re a very little kid, and every time a ball is hit to you in a game it feels like the first time you’ve ever seen a baseball, and every time you catch it you can’t believe it. Your heart pounds, and when you look at your glove, and take the ball in your hand, you don’t expect it to actually be there. But there it is. There it is!

That is what the Washington Nationals winning a postseason series looks like. Who would have guessed? Who would have wanted to?

***

Five years ago, on episode 551 of the Effectively Wild podcast, ESPN’s Sam Miller said this:

“The point of this entire enterprise is to entertain us with baseball games. The point of it is not to decide who is the best team. The illusion that that is what we’re doing has long been a powerful draw to sports. But it is ultimately not the point. There is no scenario where the universe will care or remember who the best team was out of this collection of collections. It only matters inasmuch as we create this illusion that it matters.

If you lose even the illusion, then it becomes problematic. But the point is not to have the illusion: the point is to entertain people and make them forget that we are all dying right in front of each other — that this is just this horrible, rotten slog to rigor mortis, that we are going to lose everybody we know, that we are going to lose everything we have and the only way to distract ourselves is by separating our day into distractions.”

The Dodgers won 106 games this season — the most in franchise history. Now, like all but six of the teams in franchise history, they will head home for the winter without having won the World Series, the ostensible point of all this baseball-playing. That failure hurts. It hurts the players and staff of the team: that they didn’t manage to bring home a championship for their teammates, for their friends, for the fans who supported them. It hurts that they will never be able to win with this exact group of people, who they’ve spent so much time and gone through so many highs and lows with. And it hurts for the fans, the people who invest their hours and their money and their identity into this fantasy called a baseball team. The hurt is real, ridiculous though it might seem to people who aren’t invested. Talk to any player, any fan, and you will know it’s real.

The joy, for the winners, is just as real. Washington Nationals have now won a postseason series, and for the first time in the history of their franchise, they will be playing for the National League pennant. They might play for the World Series, too. More likely is that they don’t — that they, too, lose. Either way, like the Dodgers, they will go home, regroup. And they will come back next year, ready to do it all again. Ready to try to win. Ready to probably fail — to get hurt again.

If failure hurts so much, why keep doing it? Why keep coming back? Baseball is a game, after all. That’s the worst and best thing: It’s just a game. It is people’s livelihoods, people’s passions; it lifts families out of poverty. It is an unimaginably large business, a gross display of wealth. It exploits people. It brings joy to millions. It gives people purpose when they can find none. And it is a game, a frivolous entertainment played with a bat and a ball, where the difference between success and failure, between pain and triumph, is a few inches of leather, a few slivers of wood.

What an incredible thing, to will into existence so much meaning from something so small. To feel pain, to feel it acutely, and know that it will end — to be able to believe that there’s always next year, always another team or another player, always another chance for things to go right, always someone who will get their win in the end, and that they will deserve it. Life has no such guarantees. But baseball isn’t life. Baseball is just a game.

And so another season ends for the Dodgers, and a season doesn’t end yet for the Nationals, not this time. They will celebrate, and then they will get ready. The NLCS starts on Friday.





RJ is the dilettante-in-residence at FanGraphs. Previous work can be found at Baseball Prospectus, VICE Sports, and The Hardball Times.

81 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
EonADSMember since 2024
6 years ago

“This is where the postseason takes you: Years of your life, untold amounts of time and emotional energy spent, seeming to rest in the inches between a ball and a glove and a few blades of grass.”

Just caught me right in the feels, Rachel. And I have no investment in this series.

Also, a note: the ball that hit Suzuki hit his wrist, not his face. The ball ricocheted into his helmet, and knocked it off, but did not hit him directly in the face.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  EonADS

that was a really strange play with Suzuki- definitely looked worse in real time than it did when you saw the replay.

echong91Member since 2018
6 years ago

Great piece, Rachael. I’ll remember Michael A. Taylor’s reaction to the clinching catch for a long time.

During his postgame interview, he said he was “fired up” about making the catch, and I believe him, but what I saw in the moment was something between the child-like wonderment you describe at having done something that feels so rare (and in this case, actually is rare) and embarrassment that he was the one who did it, and that he’ll be the one on TV, mobbed by his teammates, wondering “what do I do with my hands (and face)?”

“Why me?”, but in a good way.

lilpudgeMember since 2020
6 years ago
Reply to  echong91

Childlike wonderment and childlike self-loathing are the only emotions I’ve ever seen that guy display on the field. It’s really beyond charming to me how much he seems to see himself as the luckiest guy in the world to be on the field.

That time he hit a walkoff double and just stood on second base, dazed, taking his batting gloves off as his teammates stormed the field is one of my favorite ever regular season moments. I love him so much.

Hank G.Member since 2016
6 years ago
Reply to  lilpudge

I like Taylor a lot as well. It’s a real shame that he has never developed as a major league hitter, but he can play center field about as well as anyone in the majors right now.

JoserMember since 2021
6 years ago
Reply to  echong91

I was wondering if he was wondering what he should do with the ball — it’s kind of an important one for the franchise and should go somewhere but… it’s not like there’s a lot of precedent for the this, for that team. To me it looked like he wasn’t sure to whom he should entrust its safekeeping.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago

One of the absolutely worst managed deciding games you will ever see. The handling by Roberts of the pitching was just brutal….

FrodoBeck
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

I have something of a personal rule in which I rarely, if ever, criticize a manager. I just think they have access to way more information, quantitative and otherwise, that the vast majority of the time they’ll make the right decision. That rule is now broken for me. Kershaw should not have been anywhere near this game, and not because of his playoff reputation. But because he didn’t need to be.

Maeda had been incredible. Kolarek had one job and was perfect at it. May has probably the nastiest stuff in that bullpen. And then some guy named Kenley Jansen is in there too, even if he had a disappointing year.

But Roberts went with the soft-throwing, wrong side of 30 Kershaw. There were no numbers to justify it, in fact quite the opposite. Not to mention the disaster that was leaving Joe Kelly in for the 10th. I was speechless, I felt like I was watching a spring training game and suddenly it was over.

johnforthegiants
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

I would not argue with this but in terms of all playoff games, i am.not sure that this was roberts’ worst effort. There are so many to choose from.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago

lol. I felt like the 2017 World Series he bungled- but that was a cumulative thing. This one game just took the cake. The Kershaw thing was one thing. But what he did with Joe Kelly was just utterly bonkers. Not necessarily the 9th given who was up. But the 10th?

johnforthegiants
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

After i made the post i realized the same thing–generally roberts’ catastrophic blunders are strategic, this one was tactical.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago

Not just what we’ve said about the bullpen…. But what about Buehler? Lets say the Dodgers had won. What was Buehler going to be like going forward after throwing a career high 117 pitches last night(on a lot of pure emotion as he revealed after the game his aunt had just passed away). On the chat we were all shocked he went out to start the 6th inning, let alone 7th inning……

johnforthegiants
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Given how thoroughly roberts mismanaged the bullpen, one could argue that the longer he left in buehler before turning the game over to the bullpen the better

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago

True. What I was getting at is that Roberts would have been questioned about things even with a win on Wednesday.

Oh, and lets say everything happened thru 9 innings and the shot by Will Smith goes out. Who starts game 1 for LA? Kershaw(coming off of that) or Ryu?

RonnieDobbs
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

I don’t really believe that Roberts makes any of those decisions… but the blame has to go somewhere. You think Roberts is like, “yeah, I don’t mind watching Bellinger spin in circles in CF” or “let’s get Matt Beatty in there” or “why use our actual bullpen lat in a decisive game”. The trend is to hire these young managers with little to no experience… because they don’t do anything other than give post game interviews. Someone made some bad decisions – I personally don’t think it is Roberts. Games are increasngly lost by off-field personnel.

carterMember since 2020
6 years ago
Reply to  RonnieDobbs

I disagree. His position player decisions seem to be fine, assuming he is making them.

His pitching decisions are unjustifiable. They are so bad that I joked even if they won the World Series last year he should be fired. And basically every year before that. They are the 3rd, if not 2nd best team in baseball this year and have been this good basically every year. I am not one of those fools who thinks the only thing that matters is World Series wins, because only one team wins it, and variance is a real thing. Buuuut his mistakes have been brutal. I don’t even understand how he can possibly think his decisions are right, as they are so incredibly bad. This isn’t a one-off either, and he doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt since he does it EVERY SINGLE TIME IT MATTERS.

Dave TMember since 2016
6 years ago
Reply to  RonnieDobbs

“You think Roberts is like, ‘yeah, I don’t mind watching Bellinger spin in circles in CF’ ”

Huh? The various defensive metrics are consistent that Bellinger is a good defensive centerfielder, albeit not in that big of a sample for defensive metrics at this point (about 700 innings in centerfield).

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  Dave T

yeah, we saw that just last night.

RonnieDobbs
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Thanks sir. Sometimes I am the only one here. We certainly don’t always agree on things but we can on occasion. I respect that.

RonnieDobbs
6 years ago
Reply to  Dave T

You didn’t watch the games did you? A MLB CF should look silly zero times in a 5 games series and he did it twice at least. You can’t deny that. Who else in MLB looks shaky every time they catch a ball? I very much question how computers measure defense and so should you. When I hear that he is a great CF I wonder if players get rewarded for being bad. For example, if I run in a circle and then catch the ball is that good or bad? If I bounce one off my head and catch it is that good or bad? I am not certain that a computer has the right answer to those questions. Everyone knows that defensive metrics have problems. Put it this way, people have been attempting to quantify defense for decades. How bad was the analysis from a decade ago if they keep changing and “improving” the data/metrics? Yet, we never circle back and talk about why it was absolutely not great. The same is certainly true of today. I can evaluate defense with my eyes very well and he is putrid in CF. Maybe he does some things I can’t see on tv, but I kind of doubt that he is bringing enough to compensate for how awkward he looks catching fly-balls and the bad read he gets. Hid blooper reel is ugly – I can tell you that with certainty. Perhaps he compensates somehow but I ain’t buying it. Probably a lot of people wonder how he got stuck at 1B in the first place – its pretty obvious based on how awkward he looks in the outfield. There is some possibility that he makes up for his deficiencies, but it defies baseball logic. I really do think that defensive metrics are worth close to nothing. The best and worst players are easy to spot and the rest is probably just inaccurate as player float between below and above average. There could be major problems with the way that defense it calculated. I once saw a ball hit 20 rows into the stands with an 80% hit probability. Those things are linked.

thestatbook
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

There’s a part of me where I want to defend Roberts, because some of those decisions weren’t as bad as one would think.

Joe Kelly struck out the side in a situation where the leverage index ranged from low/average (1.29) to medium (2.29). He was almost unhittable that inning. So sending him out for the 10th wasn’t as bad. He started with the same LI as the 9th started (2.29).

But when he walked Eaton, it jumped to 3.45. The Win Expectancy went from 41.5 to 18%. I still don’t blame Roberts for letting Kelly pitch to Rendon. Even though Rendon already had a home run and a double in the game, Roberts should expect Kelly to get outs.

But after Rendon hit a ground-rule double, how do you let Kelly pitch with runners at 2nd & 3rd with no outs? That’s where I can’t defend Roberts.

It’s decisions like these that managers earn their paychecks, and so often, it seems like Roberts is dropping the ball. So as much as I want to defend him, this is par for the course.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  thestatbook

Part of the 9th though was who the Nats had up. Taylor/Adams/Turner a whole hell of a lot different than Eaton/Rendon/Soto.

thestatbook
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Sure, but at some point you have to trust your guys, right?

Where I think I part ways is Roberts letting Kelly pitch with a bases loaded situation he created for himself (kind of, the IBB was a little bit forced).

EasyenoughMember since 2016
6 years ago
Reply to  thestatbook

I mean, trust your guys, but not that guy. Trust your guys enough to put them in a position to be successful. Don’t trust them to do well when there are better options. That’s untrustworthy.

Hank G.Member since 2016
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

As a Nats fan, I have had that feeling about Dave Martinez. Some of is second guessing, of course, but some of it is just inexplicable decisions, like the time he left an overworked and ineffective Sean Doolittle in after getting hammered to let him get hammered some more and not only lose the save, but the game.

I don’t know the Dodgers’ relievers well enough to know how bad Roberts’s decisions were, but I feel for you.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  Hank G.

1 thing in regular season. Another thing in deciding game of a playoff series.

bly
6 years ago
Reply to  Hank G.

Leaving Scherzer for the 7th of game 4 was a pretty awful decision. it worked out, but he was completely tapped and basically pitching to contact with that middle-middle change up with the bases loaded.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  bly

not really though. Scherzer entered the 7th inning with 82 pitches. Maybe they left him in 1-2 batters too long- but they did have a 5 run lead. No where near the same as what we saw last night.

RonnieDobbs
6 years ago

How do you not use the best closer of the past decade in an extra inning game with the season on the line? Joe Kelly should not even be on the playoff roster. He has a penchant for blowups like few pitchers in MLB. I have a feeling that someone wanted to prove that he was worth the investment last night.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  RonnieDobbs

He should have been on the roster but he should never have been in the game with that situation…. Jansen should have been in there. Their usage of him was just baffling.

RonnieDobbs
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

I don’t think he should be on the roster but I am very extreme in that regard. I don’t see how you can use him in any situation other than mop-up duty. LAD was using Kenley very strangely down the stretch too. I do root for LAD a lot but I was kind of happy to see them get burned by not using him. Can you imagine how pissed Kenley is? He seems like he is in a bad mood a lot to start with! I thought it was insult to injury to bring him at some point in that inning – lol that he retired the two hitters he face.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago

So Kershaw…. I know in NFL you hear folks talking about Tom Brady falling off a cliff. It happened for sure with Peyton Manning….

Are we seeing the same with Kershaw? His last 7 starts(plus 1 inning appearance last day of regular season) and then playoffs he had a 4.72 ERA. A .246/.311/.542 slash line for a .853 OPS. 15 homers in 47.2 innings.

His OPS prior to this was .615 this year. 15 homers in 137 innings.

This playoffs just felt like a continuation of the regular season.

RonnieDobbs
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Yes, Kershaw’s best days are way behind him. Scherzer has been a shell since his DL stint. That seems to be going unnoticed. I think it is somewhat motivated because if you talk about that, then DeGrom isn’t such an easy choice for NL Cy Young. Scherzer was having his best season prior to missing a month. I think people want DeGrom to be the Cy Young so the larger discussion of how much better Scherzer was when they were both healthy isn’t productive in that regard.

I thought Manning was an absolute legend. It took him a European neck fusion to fall off and even then he could still do enough. Sure his arm was a wet noodle, but the running game was always solid when he was managing that offense. Are people talking about Brady falling off? I don’t read sports media (shocker I know with my out there opinions), but you could have fooled me about Brady’s demise. Belichick has always been the most valuable player on NE and Brady has always been the primary beneficiary. His role has always varied but I don’t think he has fallen off much in terms of play. Sure the rest of the league is throwing for 5K yards, but Brady dosn’t need to do that.

HandsomeBoyModel
6 years ago

I was watching this game with my friend who is a huge Dodgers fan but not a stat geek at all. He questioned why Kershaw was warming up in the bullpen and remarked “this seems more about some narrative than the best way to win the game”. I looked at him when he said that and knew what was coming.

I’ve defended Roberts in the past but his bullpen usage was inexcusable. And he left Kelly in to face Zimmerman after the slam which was the cherry on top for me.

Peak Kershaw is gone. He should’ve not been in the bullpen and he shouldn’t have started game 2, Ryu should’ve.

RonnieDobbs
6 years ago

The progressive narrative has come to dominate discussions about baseball. To the off-field personnel, making unusual decisions and seeing them work is like Kirk Gibson pumping his arm as he rounds the bases. There is a growing contingent of decision makers that profit from destroying tradition. It serves to promote their own agenda and undermine their competition. I don’t really think Roberts is coming up with these ideas. There is inexplicable decision making from a baseball perspective happening all over baseball. Teams are ridiculed if they utilize traditional strategies and lauded for anything outside the box. I think the managers son’t play much of a role in the decision making process. Look at all the “smart” managers that get canned. I don’t think they do a lot.

BROD
6 years ago

It’s funny that both the Braves and Dodgers used their respective clubs’ best starter in Game 3, for some stupid reason, and went home.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  BROD

I’d agree with the Braves.

For the Dodgers though, it’s tough to argue with them using Buehler. Now, I do think the Dodgers should have used Ryu in game 2 instead of Kershaw.

HandsomeBoyModel
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Ryu was 10-1 with a 1.93 era and a 0.94 whip at home. He has a higher WAR than Kershaw.

Baffling choice.

Buehler is their best SP, he should’ve opened. But I swear Roberts thinks peak Kershaw is still a thing.

BROD
6 years ago

“Buehler is their best SP”

Is this a joke or something?

– ERA (2018-19) –
Ryu: 2.21
Buehler: 2.85
Kershaw: 2.90

Besides, Buehler didn’t throw as well yesterday as you might think; in yesterday’s game, he allowed 2 Barrels and 1 Near-Barrel, which is to say that he was pretty lucky to allow only 1 run.

Dave from DCMember since 2018
6 years ago
Reply to  BROD

ERA is a strange choice, especially on Fangraphs. Looking at FIP and xFIP, starting Buehler game 1 is justifiable, and he might very well be their best SP.

BROD
6 years ago
Reply to  Dave from DC

“ERA is a strange choice, especially on Fangraphs.”

Because FIP doesn’t take into account the following facets of a pitcher’s job.

1) Contact management (both muting contact authority and inducing low-output batted ball types)

2) Controlling the running game

3) Inducing GIDP

4) Minimizing WP

5) Stranding runners

And in case you didn’t read my previous post on this subject…… see below.

BROD
6 years ago
Reply to  BROD

Of course, if one uses metrics such as WAR, wOBA and xwOBA to evaluate pitchers, pitch-to-contact groundballers like Ryu and Soroka will be undervalued, especially one like Ryu.

“Yeah, but that 2.86 FIP doesn’t take into account some following facts about Ryu at all (and that’s why he has always outperformed his FIP, except for ’14; there are many variables at play here, so outperforming FIP literally every year is nearly impossible).

1) He’s great at limiting contact authority; 5th lowest average exit velocity allowed among 181 pitchers with at least 1000 BBE in the Statcast era.

2) He completely shuts down the running game, boasting the lowest rate of SB allowed per IP among pitchers to debut in the last 50 years; he’s also pretty good at minimizing WP and HB.

3) He has the third-highest career LOB% in modern baseball history among 1398 starters with at least 700 IP.

Do you know who’s directly above Ryu on the exit velocity list? Kyle Hendricks.

Below are those two pitchers’ MLB ranks in some career stats (of 82 active starting pitchers with 700+ career IP).

Ryu: 33rd in K%, 9th in BB%, 21st in K-BB%, 13th in HR/9, 10th in FIP, 3rd in ERA
Hen: 43rd in K%, 10th in BB%, 25th in K-BB%, 20th in HR/9, 19th in FIP, 6th in ERA

That’s what happens when you (FIP) consider only 36 percent of plate appearance outcomes (for an average pitcher) and ignores everything else.”

* WP – SB – GIDP *
Ryu – 0, 1, 15
Soroka – 3, 6, 23
deGrom – 2, 21, 9
Gray – 7, 14, 13
Scherzer – 0, 8, 7
Flaherty – 6, 1, 13
Corbin – 4, 11, 14
Buehler – 4, 5, 7
Strasburg – 8, 16, 12

sadtromboneMember since 2020
6 years ago
Reply to  BROD

I’m really confused by the return of ERA in some small segments of an otherwise intelligent set of fans. If you don’t like FIP there are other tools out there like SIERA, DRA, and xwOBA and virtually all of them wind up saying the same thing as FIP. You have to make a pretty strong argument that LOB% is something meaningful and not just an error term to go with ERA over the alternatives.

johnforthegiants
6 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Obviously fip is better than era in general but there are some things which fip misses. One is that fip doesn’t account for pitchers who have mechanical trouble pitching from the stretch. This has for example been a problem for jeff samardzija for a lot of his career, especially when he tweaks his delivery, which has happened not infrequently. This typically shows up in lob%, although there are of course also pitchers with aberrant lob%s due to luck. The other is that some pitchers give up weaker contact on average than others, which other than hrs isn’t considered at all in fip–you can’t just dismiss exit velocity as irrelevant for pitchers who are consistently and significantly above or below the mean.

Dave from DCMember since 2018
6 years ago
Reply to  BROD

This argument is an old one, obviously, so your position can’t be dismissed out of hand, but we know with certainty that we have many better predictors of future ERA than current ERA. For example, right here on Fangraphs you can sort by SIERA, which has Buehler as the 7th best pitcher in baseball, Ryu 14th, or you can hop over to BP and check out DRA, the shiniest new toy and a more robust model, and see Buehler at 13th, Ryu at 15th. Basically, all the newer and more sophisticated data points indicate that while both are great, Buehler is probably a bit better. So yes, ERA is a weird choice.

johnforthegiants
6 years ago

My theory with roberts is that his pitching decisions are based on imitating what recently successful teams have done without considering that circumstances and personnel are different. In 2016 the cubs and indians got to the world series by using their ace relievers to the point of exhaustion, so roberts did the same thing in 2017. The astros relied on piggybacking in 2017 and the red sox put kelly into high leverage situations effectively in 2018, so roberts decided he would do the same yesterday, even though it made no sense in the situation.

carterMember since 2020
6 years ago

“Washington Nationals have now won a postseason series, and for the first time in the history of their franchise, they will be playing for the National League pennant. They might play for the World Series, too. More likely is that they don’t — that they, too, lose. ”

I think you are talking about the winning the World Series here? Because they are certainly favored versus the Cardinals meaning that they will play for the World Series.

Mike NMN
6 years ago

Michael A. Taylor (the look, not the exact position). Try about 2:40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zslUua_jGy4

My kids are well past this point, but some things you don’t get out of your head.

Hank G.Member since 2016
6 years ago

As much as I enjoy the feeling as a Nats fan of them advancing to the championship series for the first time, I do feel bad for Kershaw. I think he has been the best pitcher of his generation, not just “one of the best”, yet as things stand now, his brilliant career will have the shadow of not performing well in the postseason. It shouldn’t, but I think it will.

thestatbook
6 years ago
Reply to  Hank G.

Why shouldn’t his career have the shadow of not performing well in the postseason? I’m not trying to be argumentative, but it’s a curious position.

I don’t think his playoff woes take away from what he’s capable of doing in the regular season, but I think many try to pretend that we shouldn’t look at this when it comes to Kershaw.

How do we factor in this detail that he hasn’t performed well in the playoffs and does that, or should that, affect how he’s viewed?

johnforthegiants
6 years ago
Reply to  thestatbook

It’s sad. I’m a giants fan and even i think it’s sad.

bly
6 years ago
Reply to  Hank G.

I’m a Nats fan, I gained a lot of respect for him, sticking around and giving an interview where he was honest about what was going through his head at a very emotional moment.

Sultan of Say
6 years ago

Watching the replay of Kendrick’s HR, it’s refreshing to see someone put their head down and sprint instead of watching and celebrating. I don’t think many would have faulted him for celebrating since it was obvious it would drive in at least 1 run.

Adam C
6 years ago

Just a small factual correction. The Nationals/Expos have won a postseason series before. They won an NLDS in 1981 defeating the defending World Series champion Phillies in five games. They then lost to the Dodgers in the NLCS due to Rick Monday’s famous home run. This is the second time the Nationals will play for the NL pennant.

bly
6 years ago
Reply to  Adam C

The Expos are not the Nats. If anything the Nats fans and team pull from the Senators for their baseball heritage. Walter Johnson’s name adorns the facing of the second deck near where Zimmerman’s will after he retires.

Adam C
6 years ago
Reply to  bly

No, the Expos ARE the Nats. They are the same franchise. MLB confirms this ad they list the team’s yearly results and it shows the Expos as well.

http://mlb.mlb.com/was/history/year_by_year_results.jsp

JimMember since 2016
6 years ago

Excellent writing, Rachel.

Dave TMember since 2016
6 years ago

I have grown tired of reading that Soto was 0-3 against Kolarek in this series. This article doesn’t go as far as some of the other recaps that I’ve seen in emphasizing this point, but making decisions on that sort of information is exactly what I expect to see articles at this site rightfully arguing against.

I can certainly believe that RHP vs. Rendon, Kolarek vs. Soto, then another RHP (or pitchers) for the 4 consecutive RHB’s due up after Soto was the better way for Roberts to approach the game from the start of the 8th inning. But I think without delving into the details – and I could be wrong – that the reason for that difference is that one of the available RH relievers is expected to be quite a bit better than Kershaw against Rendon, not that Kolarek is expected to be better than Kershaw against Soto.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
6 years ago

One of the things that I find pretty baffling is how the Dodgers can possibly struggle this much in the playoffs when they’re so good in the regular season. I suspect that some of it has to do with the modular nature of their roster, where they have so much depth on their 40-man roster that they never have a problem with running out truly terrible pitching. But they have a weird number of questions in the middle of their pitching crew, after Buehler, Ryu, and Maeda. Kershaw looks like he’s on the decline, something is up with Jansen, Joe Kelly’s kind of a scary player, etc.

I understand most of the problem in this specific game is that Roberts seriously mismanaged the bullpen, but I do think that they wouldn’t have even been in a position to screw that up if they had more concentrated value on their roster.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

In the regular season, teams can’t compete with the depth in pitching the Dodgers have. In the playoffs, both teams have the same number of players active- and no changes can happen. So some of the value disappears.

Dodgers going forward will be interesting to see what they are like with all the rules changes next year. LOOGY’s gone. Everyone getting a 26th player(and only 28 for September). 15 day IL for pitchers instead of 10(that’s a big one as they probably have to some degree abused that). So some stuff that has helped them feature depth is gone now.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

This is something similar to what I was wondering,, but it was fuzzy. Thanks for laying it out in concrete terms.

Dave TMember since 2016
6 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Have the Dodgers really struggled an outlandish amount in the playoffs relative to reasonable expectations given quality of competition (and perhaps small sample variance)?

Their last three years have been really great regular seasons looking at Pythag record – over .600 Pythag each year, with the tops being .662 this year. Their playoff record in that time is 20-16. Winning 55.6% of games against other playoff teams – a 90-win pace across 162 games – doesn’t seem off the mark even for a “superteam”. The Astros, for example, are 17-13 in the playoffs over that same time span (.567 winning percentage) going into Game 5 of this year’s ALDS.

The Dodgers playoff winning percentage gets worse as we go back to 2016 and earlier seasons, but those were also teams with regular season run differentials more in the range of “typical playoff team” than “dominant superteam”: pythag records between .550 and .560 each season from 2013 to 2016.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  Dave T

Well, the Astros aren’t done yet this year. They win tonight and then win both series 4-2 and they are 26-17 for a .605 winning percentage.

Also of the 16 losses-
3 came in extra innings
3 were in 9 innings by 1 run
3 were in 9 innings by 2 runs

so lost a LOT of close games and/or late games like last night.

They’ve scored the last 3 postseasons 162- and allowed 135 runs. That’s a .590 Pyth. projection. So .556 is lower than expected. Only by 1 win, but if that win is in 2017 they’re champs, or if it’s in 2019, they’re still playing.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
6 years ago
Reply to  Dave T

I think you can make an argument that the Astros and Red Sox were better teams than the Dodgers, although not so much more than the Dodgers that we’d expect the Dodgers to lose both times in the WS. They did, however, actually make it to the WS two years in a row, so maybe that’s not that weird.

This, on the other hand, I think is pretty surprising.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I thought the Astros and Dodgers were equal- if not a smidge better for the Dodgers. Do agree with you last year with the Red Sox.

FrodoBeck
6 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

This is partially why, as a Dodgers fan, I hate that the NLDS is only 5 games. I know the playoffs overall are a different animal than the regular season, but boiling down 162 games of excellence into a 5 game series seems to really diminish the work a front office does to make the playoffs in the first place. I would personally not be opposed to a change in the playoffs format that looked like this:

#1 and #2 best records in each league get a first round bye. #3 vs #6, and #4 vs #5 in a five game series that basically replaces the current wild card games. Then you go to best of 7 for AL/NLDS and AL/NLCS.

This adds one more playoff spot, I think creates a lot more incentive for teams to be the 1 or 2 seed even if they have their division locked up, and greatly rewards a team for being more productive during the season than the current format.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  FrodoBeck

that won’t work though. Because the 1 and 2 seeds would have 10 days of not playing. That’s not ever going to fly. Also if those series don’t go 5 games- it makes it even worse for LA as say they still get the nats in the LDS. They get Scherzer, Strasburg, and Corbin in games 1 thru 3 and 5 thru 7.

FrodoBeck
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

I didn’t mean this strictly from the perspective of “how can I rearrange the playoffs so the Dodgers beat the 2019 nationals rotation?”. I just think the current system doesn’t really seem to reward the best teams as much as it should. But that’s just my perspective, I can definitely see the excitement with the current setup. That Nats 1-2-3 is insane regardless of the number of games in the series.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  FrodoBeck

i guess though the question becomes what could they do to fix it? Your thing really doesn’t help the top teams at all- and in fact would probably hurt them more….

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  FrodoBeck

You do wonder if we may see something done. If Tampa wins tonight the Wild Card winners in the 8 years would have gone 8-8 in LDS and 34-34 in games.

johnforthegiants
6 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The quantity-over-quality theme does sound potentially relevant. The dodgers seem to be constructed so as to be able to make the playoffs even if they suffer a large number of injuries, but the downside is perhaps a relative shortage of players who can catch fire and dominate a postseason. The other things which really stick out are roberts’ almost unbelievably bad managing in the postseason (this is by no means the first occasion, go back to the discussion here of the 2017 postseason for extensive exemplification) and kershaw’s almost unbelievably bad performances in the postseason (unbelievable because of how good he’s been in the regular season). On the other hand, if roberts is that bad in the postseason, why doesn’t this interfere significantly with the dodgers’ great performances in the regular season? Not following the dodgers in the regular season i really can’t answer this; i can only suggest that maybe the postseason calls for managers to manage in a different (more urgent/desperate) way and this somehow brings out the worst in roberts. Regarding kershaw, this really is a significant factor which can’t be dismissed, because it’s very hard for a team to win a world series when your ace (which he was for a long time), around whom your general postseason pitching plan is built, is systematically and radically underperforming in more or less every postseason. I think that the problem is compounded in the case of the dodgers because of sadtrombone’s point, which has resulted in a situation in which kershaw has always been put into the ace role in the team’s postseason plans even in postseasons when he just wasn’t pitching well (as opposed to a team which has effectively two aces, where in a specific pistseason a manager can go with whichever ace is pitching better at the time), so the effect of his poor performances has been magnified. I have sometimes suggested here that one of the writers at fangraphs take a really serious look at why kershaw has performed so poorly in the postseason in his career, but noone has done this yet.

JCCfromDCMember since 2016
6 years ago

There are many things that I like about this article, but a couple of minor quibbles. First is that while watching the game at Nats Park I had no sense that Kelly was pitching on borrowed time. My impression was that he was as sharp last night as he had been wild in the earlier game. His curve was really tough, and he struck out the side. He had pitched multiple innings before. I wasn’t particularly happy that he was left in the game. Now, lifting him after a couple of batters? Sure.

Also, as a Nats fan I had no problem with letting Strasburg bat with runners on and no outs. The key part is to keep him from hitting into a double play. Lifting him means you would need more outs from the part of the bullpen that as a Nats fan you never, EVER, want to see in a high leverage situation – much less in an elimination game. It was stressful enough when Rainey was pitching. Even if the Nats gave up a scoring chance there, they were impacting their ability to stay close in the game. Could the move have been criticized after the fact? Sure. Welcome to the world of a big league manager, where many (most?) solely judge a move by the metric of whether it worked. If he inserts a PH in there and the Nats manage not to score and then the bullpen blows up (again!), Martinez gets savaged.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  JCCfromDC

the problem though was that 2 of the 3 guys Kelly got out were MAT and Adams- hardly good hitters…. They were tempting fate sending him back out there for the heart of the lineup….

The Strasburg bunt thing was fascinating. could see either way….

bly
6 years ago

When I was watching and I saw Kershaw’s hanging slider I was pretty sure Rendon was going to destroy it. I wondered why Kershaw was left in to face Soto.

Dave from DCMember since 2018
6 years ago
Reply to  bly

Pretty sure the pitch Rendon hit was a four seamer, and it was at the bottom of the zone too. Certainly not a cement mixer.

bly
6 years ago
Reply to  Dave from DC

if he made his pitch, how was it a bad decision to have him in and not just the success of Rendon and Soto? Sometimes pitchers make good pitches and batters just destroy them anyway.

Dave from DCMember since 2018
6 years ago
Reply to  bly

I didn’t suggest otherwise. My point is Rendon did not hit a hanging slider, which means in fact that yes, I am giving him credit for hitting it out. And you’re the one who said Kershaw shouldn’t have been left in to face Soto, and now you seem to be arguing the opposite. Not really sure what your point is.

bly
6 years ago
Reply to  Dave from DC

I wasn’t arguing, I’m trying to form my opinion about if it was actually bad to leave Kershaw in. I feel it’s too easy to focus on the results and not what was known before the consecutive homers.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  bly

I guess the question would be would you rather have had-
a- Baez(for Rendon), Kolarek(for Soto), Maeda(for Kendrick)
or
b- Kershaw(for Rendon, Soto), and Maeda(for Kendrick)

hate to say it, but I would have probably chosen a.

RaleighNat
6 years ago

That was one of the most sublime pieces of writing ive ever read about the meaning we find in baseball. As an old Expos and now Nats fan, I’ve come to see a franchise as a story that unfolds across our lives. That it is an ongoing story is a salve to the pain of any individual season ending in defeat. Anyway, thanks for the well written piece.

johnforthegiants
6 years ago
Reply to  RaleighNat

I agree, great writing, rachael! Fangraphs is kind of in a jam come playoff time because by definition analytics can’t really be that meaningful in such a small sample size, so you guys really need writing like this for the playoffs.