The Night the Indians Flipped the Bullpen Script
The bullpen revolution was televised in Cleveland. While Buck Showalter was reaching for a short iron to lay up on a par five within reach of the green from the fairway of a golf course somewhere in Florida, Terry Francona was walking out to the pitcher’s mound at Progressive Field in the fifth inning of a one-run playoff game to summon the world’s best relief pitcher and make the bullpen of the future a reality in the present.
Andrew Miller pitched a fifth inning for the first time since 2013, and then he pitched a sixth inning, too, and a seventh inning for good measure. The Indians’ go-to high-leverage relief weapon — that’s the closest thing you’ll find to a properly titled relief role in Cleveland — struck out four Red Sox batters in two scoreless innings of work while throwing a season-high 40 pitches. Miller faced eight batters, though Terry Francona was reportedly willing to let Miller face as many as 12, a strategy that would have allowed him to face David Ortiz twice.
“He didn’t put a number on it,” Miller said when asked of his pregame discussions with Francona regarding what inning he would enter. “But I knew to be ready early.”
Miller was seemingly ready to pitch the moment he stepped off the plane in Cleveland this August after having been acquired from the Yankees on the morning of the trade deadline. In 27 appearances with the Indians, Miller’s entered a game in the sixth, the seventh (eight times), the eighth (11 times), the boring old ninth (five), and now the fifth. During a season and a half with the Yankees, he appeared before the eighth just once.
“I think that certainly bullpens are kind of being adjusted right now,” Miller said. “They’re certainly something everyone talks about. Everyone wants to talk about the Royals the last few years, I saw what Boston did in 2013, I was a part of Baltimore in 2014. Maybe as more and more stats come out, we realize there’s bigger moments in the game than the eighth and ninth inning, and that can be appreciated.”
There’s the case to be made that the timing on Thursday actually didn’t make a great deal of sense, that perhaps Francona was being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. When Miller took the ball from starting pitcher Trevor Bauer, there were two outs and nobody on base with Brock Holt — perhaps the least-imposing hitter in the Red Sox lineup — at the plate. The leverage index of the situation was just 0.57; Miller had only entered 14 lower-leverage situations all year.
But of course, this is the playoffs, where the leverage is always high, and really, the line of thinking doesn’t have to be so difficult. It can be quite simple, really. The Red Sox have a fantastically deep lineup. The Indians had the lead. Their goal was to keep that lead, and so they made the choice that best put them in the position to keep that lead.
“The guy is an absolute stud,” Indians reliever Cody Allen said. “So from [Francona’s] perspective, why not go to him?”
The leverage wasn’t to be found in the particular situation, but the leverage could be found in the game itself. The leverage could be found in the lineup. Francona didn’t want Bauer facing the heart of the Red Sox order — Mookie Betts, Ortiz, and Hanley Ramirez — a third time, and with a one-run lead, why mess around with any other reliever when you’ve got the best one? Why do something that increases the possibility there won’t be a high-leverage situation in which to use Miller later in the game at all? Oftentimes, the high-leverage situation is the one that’s right in front of you.
“I hate waiting for the ninth inning,” Francona told The Ringer’s Ben Lindbergh in September. “I never did understand that. You know, you wait around, wait around, and you lose a game in the eighth. Well, wait a minute, that might’ve been the most important inning of the game.”
Miller’s already unconventional appearance got off to an unconventional start once he took the mound. Holt immediately doubled and then Betts walked before Miller struck out Ortiz to end the inning. He retired each of the next five batters he faced. That’s the thing about bringing in the best reliever in the world: even when things don’t go as planned, they work out.
Miller gave way to Bryan Shaw, who gave way to Allen, who had an unconventional outing of his own. Allen recorded his first five-out save of the year after Shaw worked himself into trouble in the eighth, matching Miller’s pitch count of 40 in the process. In a game in which the starter, Bauer, threw 78 pitches, two relievers, Miller and Allen, combined for 80. Cleveland and Boston play again on Friday, and so of course it’s worth wondering whether Francona might have erred by potentially burning his top two relief options and rendering them unavailable for Game Two by allowing them each to throw a season-high number of pitches in Game One.
But at the same time, isn’t what Francona did simply a logical extension of the “use your best reliever in high-leverage situations and worry about what happens later” line of thinking, just stretched out to the scope of a full series? Cleveland had a game in front of them for the taking, and they took it. They can worry about what happens in Game Two when the time comes.
“We wanted to win the game tonight,” Francona said. “And we did.”
And with ace Corey Kluber taking the mound for Game Two, the hope from Cleveland’s perspective is that they won’t have to worry too much about the bullpen anyway. If they have to, Dan Otero is fresh. Shaw threw just 13 pitches. And Miller, who’s already declared himself available for Game Two, could still potentially be used to face Ortiz in a more traditional LOOGY-style role. But that can all be handled when the time comes. What’s more important for the Indians is that they won Game One. What’s more important for the future of the sport is the way they did it.
“Nobody ever said you have to be conventional to win,” Francona said.
August used to cover the Indians for MLB and ohio.com, but now he's here and thinks writing these in the third person is weird. So you can reach me on Twitter @AugustFG_ or e-mail at august.fagerstrom@fangraphs.com.
Yup. I’m a Red Sox fan but seeing old pal Francona do things the way that most of us Fangraphs-type people want to see them done was deeply, deeply satisfying. I’d love to see a Cubs/Indians W.S!
Yup I am too, and Tito was fantastic. Of course no decision that has benefits has no costs, and the Sox are going to have to eat against the lesser guys he’s going to be forced into using today, or this series is over.
Tito went big to get the series lead, but the pen’s going to be shorter today. It’s bash or die for Boston. I’m already miserable.
Idk. I suspect they lean heavily on Kluber even if hes relatively inefineffective. 7 innings at least. That leaves Miller available as a LOOGY for Ortiz and Otero/Shaw for matchups. Then a day off and another bullpen game. I don’t think last nights usage effects the series too much.
Presumably if Kluber’s relatively ineffective Boston’s winning. If the Sox crater at run prevention, this is all moot.
Of course. But thats probably the case even with a fresh pen.
Two things happen today. Kluber deals or Kluber gets hit. I assume he goes deep regardless. Its why he’s slotted as 2nd. Bullpen game-Ace-Day off- Bullpen game. The pen is irrelevent today by design.
Couldn’t agree more Rufus. This sox fan pulls hard for Francona too. He can’t have enough success after the disgraceful way the BOS brass ran him out of town and dirtied his good name on the way out.
Yeah, but my question is, how long will it take for this to be a normal practice in the MLB? It seems like Francona is just beginning to crack open the Overton window, so despite fans clamoring about this strategy for years, I still believe it will take a while for it to be commonplace practice in the MLB.
One problem is that arbitration rewards closers with higher salaries. So arb-eligible (and pre-arb) players want to be closers, naturally. For this to work, I think you need pretty consistent buy-in from everyone in your bullpen.
This will be an impediment for a long time, so in the short term, the only alternative teams have is build their pens primarily through free agency, which is too expensive for most teams.
So, my short answer: a really long time.
Yeah, that definitely is bottle necking the whole process. I’m a Pirates fan, and while Clint Hurdle definitely has embraced a lot of more recent, analytically driven methodology, bullpen management is not want of them. His reasoning is pretty much exactly what you said, and I’m sure it’s the same way with most managers across the game. What it leads me to wonder is this – we’re now at a point where advanced analytics very much dictates the money players get paid as free agents or with extensions, so why is arbitration so far behind? What exactly is slowing them down from not placing such a heavy emphasis on saves and instead on something like WPA? If say, Will Harris and Jeanmar Gomez were both going into their first year of arbitration, what’s stopping the arbiters involved from concluding that Will Harris should be getting paid more than Jeanmar Gomez despite the latter and his more gawdy save numbers? It doesn’t seem that difficult.
Miller doesn’t care about labels cause he’s already getting good money.
That’s not true about every great reliever.
But…reliever performance varies a lot. Few can be consistently good year after year. If usage changes, reliever valuation and salaries will change to reward consistently getting outs rather than ERA or saves.
We’re already seeing some of that with Miller himself and with O’day.
It’s seems pretty questionable whether Francona would have done the same thing in a regular season game, which is what would have to happen repeatedly for it to be normal practice. And that’s just for him, before we get to normal across MLB.
Francona already did the same thing in the regular season – the Indians had a slew of bullpen games in September that went a lot like this game. Maybe not Miller for 2 full innings but middle relief in the 6th and 7th, MIller anywhere from 6th to 8th, and Allen to close.
I was totally against Miller entering the game in the 5th, but it ended up working out really well. Hats off to Francona
It will be interesting to see if the high-profile contrast between this Indians win and the Orioles Britton-less loss pushes more teams in the right direction on reliever usage. If so, I hope we can all appreciate the irony of reactive, small-sample results-based thinking finally leading to a change that’s long been obvious to anyone taking the longview.
I can’t help but wonder, if Mookie had gotten on and came home of the Oritz double to tie the game in the eighth, or if Ramirez’s groundout had snuck through to score the pinch-runner Hernandez to tie the game in the eighth, would this be a completely different article with a completely different conclusion?
Given that FG focuses on process as more important than SSS results, my guess is that the answer would be “no.”
No, for the same reason that if Ubaldo had pitched out of trouble and the Orioles won, the FG articles would still be overwhelmingly negative.
You know you’ve asked a good question, chas, when people thumb’s down you merely for asking it.
Gil Scott Heron is smiling in his grave. We all know he was talking about the Bullpen Revolution.
Ha! No, Gil Scott Heron may have recorded a tune called “The Revolution Will Not be Televised” but I doubt that he gave one whit about baseball. (His father, whom he barely knew, was a soccer player though.) For poor Gil, who once quipped thus about rap: “Don’t pin the blame on me,” it was always about social issues and sadly, cocaine.
Funny line though nonetheless.
I was going to suggest maybe Tracy Chapman, but then I remembered she’s an ardent feminist.
You say that likes it’s a bad thing.
He preferred starting pitching. Hence “Whitey Ford on the Moon”
Given a chance to win the only game in which the SP matchup would favor Boston, I think Francona was absolutely right to go all-out. And I think he’s darn relieved that it worked.
It’s great to see this step forward finally being taken in such a prominent forum. But aside from the high-leverage aspect, there is also the multi-innings aspect, which had been done particularly by the Royals in recent years. An intriguing question for the future will be what effect this has on relievers’ careers. It’s striking that 2014 seems to have seriously damaged Holland for 2015, then 2015 seriously damaged Davis for 2016.
Possibly, but it’s a stretch to claim this usage pattern caused those two injuries. What makes you think it was the usage pattern, and not just the natural turnover of relievers?
Member Gagne? Member all the other elite elite relievers who fell off a cliff very quickly?
Further, we don’t know jack about the relationship between usage and injury, even in starting pitchers, where we have MUCH bigger sample sizes.
I’m not claiming it caused the injuries, I’m saying that we’re apparently entering a new age of reliever usage, we don’t know what’s going to come out of it, the Royals in some way pioneered in terms of using great relievers for multiple innings and often, and it isn’t to early to start gathering data on how this affects relievers’ careers. Losing your closer in two consecutive years after following this strategy is at the very least worth noting.
The collective sport media types threw Buck Showalter under the bus Tuesday evening and Wednesday morning. Today should be a full on celebration of Francona’s brilliance.
What is most impressive? He demonstrated what all good managers/coaches seem to figure out…or have some sixth sense to do…he trusts his players to do their jobs in the right situation.
Now he trusts Corey Kluber is be Corey Kluber. Go 7 or 8…lift him for Miller to take on the LOOGY role vs. Ortiz, and figure out some way to hold it off in the 9th.
However…if any of this goes wrong…for example, I don’t see Allen pitching today, the Red Sox will win on some 9th inning rally that people will hot take into “Red Sox magic” for the rest of the weekend. That may be fun, too.
Tito is a great manager so I hope he screams at Ramirez “BREAK UP THE DOUBLE PLAY BUDDHA!” They still won the game but what was he doing in the bottom of the eighth…just stood there.
He was nowhere close enough to second to break up the double play. The ball was already on its way to first before he started his slide, which is why he just stopped and stood there. I guess he could’ve flopped and flailed his arms to please you and your ilk, but the most that would’ve accomplished is some entertaining gifs (and perhaps an interference call if his flailing had actually got in the way of the ball).
Thats a great idea! its the playoffs in a one run game…just don’t even try…
I guess they shouldn’t run out dropped 3rd strikes either?
And doesn’t the defensive player throwing to first have to move out of the base path and throw around the runner? It must be nice when the baserunner just quits and moves out of the way enabling a clear throw to first for the double play. That’s what me and my “ilk” have to say.
He was avoiding the tag. If he gets tagged it’s an easy double play.
“The Indians’ go-to high-leverage relief weapon — that’s the closest thing you’ll find to a properly titled relief role in Cleveland”
I propose the title “Stopper” for a team’s unconventional bullpen ace. Sounds sort of like closer, but drives home the point that the pitcher will be used in any high-leverage situation.
When I was a kid a long time ago, the ‘stopper’ was the ace of the staff because he would stop losing streaks. Actually I don’t think I’ve heard this usage for a while…
Once upon a time the term was Fireman.
(And there was no Closer.)
The Fireman would come in with the game on the line, typically either tied or with a small lead. A three run lead was not a Fireman situation.
Names like Hiller, Marshall, Gossage, Fingers…
That’s close to what were traditionally called “firemen”, and I’d use the term for a role like Miller’s. Those guys like Bruce Sutter, Rollie Fingers, and Goose Gossage would lots of time also finish the game after entering in the 7th or 8th, often in high leverage situations with runners on. But how they were used was arguably closer to how Miller is used than to the 3 out closer who starts the 9th inning.
Also keep in mind that winning Game 1 puts you in a much better position to with the series than losing Game 1 does. That probably has to count for something in the leverage equation.
“isn’t what Francona did simply a logical extension of the “use your best reliever in high-leverage situations and worry about what happens later” line of thinking, just stretched out to the scope of a full series? Cleveland had a game in front of them for the taking, and they took it. They can worry about what happens in Game Two when the time comes.”
Also known, long before baseball was around, as “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush”
The situation you actually face is always much higher leverage than the situation that never happens.
Can we please decide who the “best” reliever is? Two days ago it’s Britton today it’s Miller. I’m not one for saying one guy’s better than the other but if you’re going to say the best can you please stick with one guy?
Tomorrow it will be Chapman!
Madison Bumgarner
Yeah, that bugged me too. Britton is the best closer in baseball and nobody else is close.
I was listening to a regular season game Baltimore broadcast, and once they brought Britton into the game, the TENSION disappeared. They started laughing and talking about the next day’s game. He is that good.
John Gibbons was a genius for using David Price in the exact same way, despite the poor outcome.
The stupidest nitpick ever: Showalter couldn’t be playing golf in Florida because Florida is currently being flooded by Hurricane Matthew 🙂
It was so dumb. You had 2 outs, nobody on and Holt was up. No need for Miller there. Not saying removing Bauer was wrong, but the Indians have more good RP’ers and the game is still early so the offense has a chance to put up some more runs. Save your best guy for a higher leverage situation.
This ended up costing Miller and Allen 40 pitches each, which could have had significant negative impact on todays game. Francona lucked out in this respect.
Many times in baseball bad decisions have a way of working out, the game is so random, but using Miller when he did was still dumb. Perhaps a kne jerk reaction to Bucks failure to use Britton, only Tito went to the other extreme. Both were bad decisions, one worked out, the other didn’t
If only Tito had some way of knowing he had one of the very best pitchers in baseball going today and an off day tomorrow…
I would love to believe that this is really a change but the sabermetric community declared the closer dead 10 years ago (when the red Sox tried a different model) and since then a few times but it never held up.
sometimes a team went closer by committee for a couple months but usually only because they did not have an ace. as soon as they got an ace again they went back to the closer.
the average fan doesn’t understand this. he will be much more likely to forgive a lost lead by s middle reliever (after all his team would still have a chance to turn it around) than a game blown in the 9th.
in practice of course it doesn’t matter when the lead is blown but for the fan and most mainstream media that is not the case. even Francona would have gotten flag if the 9th guy blew it.
These kinds of maneuvers make more sense in the playoffs than in the regular season, because the games are higher leverage.
These moves make sense statistically at the single game level because it doesn’t take into consideration factors like wear on the pitcher’s arm and disruption of their routines.
As an extreme example, while you can get a MadBum or a Randy Johnson pitching in a game 7 relief role because it’s statistically the right move, you won’t be doing that in April or May.
So, I don’t know if this presages some revolution that we’ll see in the regular season, outside of some very important games.
…except that Francona has been using Miller this way since he arrived midsession. If Miller is now a Fireman’ is he getting a ‘hold’ or do we rerun it ‘ conflagration’?
“Andrew Miller pitched a fifth inning for the first time since 2013, and then he pitched a sixth inning, too, and a seventh inning for good measure.”
So not really …