What Went Wrong For The Tigers

It’s not a stretch to say that heading into the ALDS, the biggest concern in Detroit was about the bullpen — specifically how first-year manager Brad Ausmus had chosen to deploy it late in the season. Baltimore ended up sweeping the Tigers in three games, and the bullpen was directly involved in two of Detroit’s losses. At least one Ausmus decision — lifting Anibal Sanchez for Joba Chamberlain in Game 2 — was enough to get the manager torched by analysts and fans. There were some unhappy, as well, about Ausmus’ decision to bring in Chamberlain in Game 1 and with his choice to pinch-hit Hernan Perez for Andrew Romine in the ninth inning in Game 3 (as though that were really a thing that mattered at all).

Ausmus’ inexperience was perceived as a weakness. He made unpopular decisions that went poorly, and now his team is headed home. Guess we know where to place the blame, right? This is some quality #narrative, of course. It’s not necessarily wrong, entirely, because Ausmus certainly made some choices that didn’t require second-guessing, since they’d been first-guessed in the moment. It’s just a little too simplistic, a little too convenient.

If we’ve learned anything about managers this postseason, it’s that nothing they do impacts a game as much as everyone thinks it does. Ned Yost was crushed for taking out James Shields for Yordano Ventura in the wild card game, yet his team won. Don Mattingly gambled in leaving in the best pitcher in the world one day, then taking out the best No. 2 starter in baseball the next day. Both times, it blew up in his face. Matt Williams took out Jordan Zimmermann for Drew Storen, a move that really had a very small impact on the expectation of the Nationals winning Game 2 of the NLDS, and it backfired. Buck Showalter intentionally put the winning run on base last night, a very unusual move, and it worked.

Even when we’re absolutely sure there’s a right move — which there often isn’t — it doesn’t always work out. It’s baseball. Sanchez might very well have fallen apart had he stayed in Game 2; to act as though he would have continued getting outs indefinitely is foolish. Showalter is hailed as a genius for what’s he done with this Orioles club, but he didn’t push the right button so much as he made a decision and was fortunate enough to have his players back it up. Storen didn’t do the same for Williams. J.P. Howell didn’t for Mattingly. Chamberlain didn’t do the same for Ausmus. The Royals, luckily for Yost, rescued their manager.

Certainly, there’s no praise for Ausmus on this end coming out of the ALDS. It’s just when you look at why the Tigers lost this series, it’s not entirely because of the manager. It’s because this was a team with flaws, some of the same ones that had haunted them all season.

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.

If you want to know why the Tigers botched what might have been their last best chance with this core, it’s really not so complicated. Max Scherzer didn’t pitch well, and Justin Verlander was only decent. They made silly mistakes on the bases, namely Miguel Cabrera and Don Kelly. The offense, overall, didn’t provide much. The defense is rarely a plus, and the bullpen has been a problem for years.

During the regular season, the Tigers had baseball’s best offense, at least if you go by wRC+. If you filter out pitchers to avoid penalizing National League teams, they still had the No. 3 offense in baseball, tied with the Angels for the best in the American League. Along with Cabrera — even a somewhat diminished Cabrera is still a great hitter — the much-discussed breakout of J.D. Martinez and resurgence of Victor Martinez played a big part in that. Alex Avila was a league-average hitter, which isn’t always easy to find behind the plate. Ian Kinsler added value. Torii Hunter, Austin Jackson and Rajai Davis were all average or better hitters in the outfield. Shortstop was a season-long issue, and Nick Castellanos didn’t impress on either side of the ball as a rookie. Still, this was a good, deep lineup, with any concerns about Prince Fielder’s departure seeming so long ago.

Now, here’s the Tigers team line in the ALDS: .218/.269/.416. In three games, they scored 10 runs. The Cardinals and Orioles have each had eight-run innings this October. Nearly all of the offense came from Cabrera, J.D. and Victor Martinez. Kinsler, Hunter and everyone else added nothing. That’s partially a credit to the Baltimore pitching — namely Bud Norris, Chris Tillman and Zach Britton — but also because the productive Tigers offense didn’t show up.

Just a few paragraphs above, I said that the Tigers flaws weren’t new. This would appear to violate that: Their offense had been good. It’s fair to say that trading Jackson in the David Price deal hurt a bit, because that got more playing time for Davis, who faded badly down the stretch. But there had also been a problem with the Tiger offense all year — the performance in big spots. In high-leverage situations, that wRC+ fell to 15th.

That’s pretty much what our Clutch stat tries to measure — how a player (and team) does in big spots as compared to context-neutral performance. The Tigers didn’t do well there this season:

Rk Team Clutch
1 White Sox 4.38
2 Giants 3.79
3 Royals 3.78
4 Orioles 1.88
5 Twins 1.54
26 Dodgers -3.25
27 Tigers -3.34
28 Rangers -3.41
29 Rays -3.76
30 Blue Jays -4.15

That’s a fascinating chart. The Orioles and Royals are about to meet in the ALCS. They’ve long been seen as decent teams playing over their heads, thanks to hits in the right spots. For the Tigers, with runners on in the ALDS — when they could even get them, because again, .269 OBP — they hit just .235/.297/.412. They hit five homers, but four came with the bases empty. For whatever reason, they had trouble getting the big hit all year. That was an issue in the playoffs, too.

If you’re wondering if I feel ridiculous quoting a slash line over three games, the short answer is yes. You can thank Bud Selig for having best-of-five series deciding seasons, I suppose, because there’s small samples and then there’s this. In a three-game stretch in early May, Detroit scored 26 runs against the Royals. In a three-game stretch later that week, they scored five runs against the Astros and Twins. Trying to put any particular meaning in three games is generally an exercise in futility, yet we have to try because it’s the playoffs.

You can get away with an indifferent offense if you pitch and play defense like Kansas City. Needless to say, that’s not the Tigers brand of baseball. They’ve had a bottom-three DRS in each of the past two years, and a bottom-six three years running. Moving Cabrera off third and Fielder off the team was supposed to help, but Castellanos has been poorly-reviewed on defense, and Hunter has been one of baseball’s worst outfielders. Part of what went so badly in that eight-run eighth-inning in Game 1 was that it included two errors, one by Davis and one by Romine. Chamberlain and Joakim Soria were awful that inning, but they also didn’t get much help.

Really, though, there never should have been an expectation that the bullpen was going to be useful. As I wrote about over at ESPN before the playoffs started, including this chart about the Detroit relief crew:

2014 ERA FIP K% BB% Shutdowns Meltdowns
First half 4.26 (26th) 3.79 (21st) 21.1 (20th) 8.1 (8th) 56 (29th) 31 (3rd)
Second half 4.33 (25th) 4.47 (29th) 17.5 (29th) 11.8 (30th) 43 (25th) 32 (26th)

There wasn’t a lot to like in the first half, and anything that looked decent headed the wrong direction. The Detroit bullpen was one of only three to have a negative RA9-WAR, and beating out the Rockies and Astros isn’t really much to be proud of. Only one reliever, Al Alburquerque, was worth even 1.0 RA9-WAR. If you prefer regular FIP-WAR, even he was only 0.2. Remember this wasn’t a good bullpen last year, and that was with Joaquin Benoit, Drew Smyly and a solid finish from Bruce Rondon.

They tried to fix that with Ian Krol (poor performance, demoted, didn’t merit a September recall), Evan Reed (poor performance, off-field trouble), Joe Nathan (inability to throw strikes or miss bats), Chamberlain (great first half, awful second half) and Rondon, who blew out his arm in the spring. When it didn’t work, they went out and paid heavily for Soria, who missed time with an oblique issue and rarely looked great when he could pitch. This was a lousy collection last year, with Jim Leyland in charge. It was only moderately better in 2012 when they were relying on Octavio Dotel and Jose Valverde.

That’s a lot of misshapen puzzle pieces to try to fit together, and when Soria and Chamberlain were given the opportunity in the ALDS, they both failed miserably. (Nathan pitched one scoreless inning in Game 3.)

This team lost, because the players on the field didn’t perform — and yeah, because their manager wasn’t much of a strength, either. Again, the point here is not to absolve Ausmus of everything. Watching Game 2 live, knowing how bad Chamberlain had been for months (and the night before, last year, and the year before, and the majority of the past five years other than a span of two months or so earlier this season) it certainly seemed questionable to take out Sanchez. Ausmus gambled, and he lost, though we don’t know what the outcome would have been had he gone the other way. (You imagine the other relievers would have had to be called upon at some point.)

It’s fair to wonder if this was the last best chance for the core of this recent run of Tigers dominance. Scherzer, Victor Martinez and Hunter are all free agents. It’s anyone’s guess as to what Verlander can provide, and he and Cabrera are due $50 million between them in 2015, plus $10 million for Nathan. The bullpen is a mess. It’s time to start wondering if Avila, who suffered another concussion in Game 3, can still play catcher in the big leagues. Castellanos may not be a third baseman. They may need to fill two outfield spots, and that’s if J.D. Martinez can replicate his great season.

Ausmus may not be the man to lead them, either. That’s fair to wonder. There’s just a lot of issues that went way beyond the manager, and any accounting of this ALDS that doesn’t offer Baltimore a ton of credit shortchanges them. That won’t be comfort for Tigers fans this winter, though, after a fourth-straight division title ended in the 30th year since they last won it all.





Mike Petriello used to write here, and now he does not. Find him at @mike_petriello or MLB.com.

65 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
worstfan_NA
11 years ago

did AA even pitch one time??

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago
Reply to  worstfan_NA

In the ALDS? No.

Bill
11 years ago
Reply to  worstfan_NA

Really surprise he didn’t come in for Sanchez. Soria and Joba were a hot mess just a few hours earlier, I’m not sure why Ausmus thought they’d be better now. If he thought Sanchez was tiring, he should have gone to AA.

Greg
11 years ago

Quite a few questionable decisions by Ausmus that weren’t touched on: Why is Hernan Perez on the roster? Especially when going into the ALDS Ausmus knew Rajai was banged up. Why did Joe Nathan pitch the ninth inning when Anibal Sanchez and Al-Al are sitting in the bullpen (luckily that didn’t cost him).

On the baserunning errors – Dave Clark sent Cabrera. Kelly made a dumb mistake given his experience, but he was also blocked by Schoop (either way, dumb play by Kelly).

Greg
11 years ago
Reply to  Greg

Also kind of baffling that Perez pinch hit instead of Suarez (Suarez was going to pinch hit for the nine hole following Perez). Perez’s minor league WRC+: 94,37,82,61,72,94,80,105,101,102. Suarez: 123,192,116,126,147,102,135,159. I know Suarez struggled down the stretch, but Perez over Suarez is questionable.

Tom
11 years ago

Very good article! It made me wonder if there ever will be a metric for “teams that win despite poor managerial decisions?” That to me would be a great team! Right now, KC would likely lead that category.

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago
Reply to  Tom

Did anyone’s beginning-of-the-season predictions call KC-Baltimore in the ALCS? If so, they deserve a cookie.

Colonel Obvious
11 years ago
Reply to  Yirmiyahu

Not if they used a flawed process to get there!

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago

Surely, in order to make that prediction, it was a flawed process. But a cookie deserved nevertheless.

David
11 years ago

A flawed cookie then.

Orsulakfan
11 years ago

But who decided what is a ‘good’ process? Does Fangraphs get a cookie for their process that predicted the AL East in almost the exact opposite order of finish than what happened in reality? If so then what’s the point of even following the games?

pudieron89
11 years ago

Anaheim Angels 2014 Projection Champs is a nice consolation prize.

Joshua Northey
11 years ago
Reply to  Yirmiyahu

Each year I predict that the Saint Paul Saints are going to win the World Series. When the asteroid hits and they are one of the only teams left and win it all I am going to look like a genius!

Sandy Kazmir
11 years ago

I disagree on what you’re saying about Buck. You’re using run expectancy instead of run frequency. While putting the winning run on base, free of charge, isn’t a good idea in the long run, there are instances where it makes some sense. In this instance, the goal was to lower the likelihood of the Tigers scoring one run.

According to The Book, Table 9 on page 33 shows a Scoring Distribution, by Base/Out state for a low scoring run environment (3.2 run environment) table. With a runner on second and one out you’re looking at a run expectancy of 0.55 runs, but, the probability of scoring one run (the tying run) is 24.0%.

Meanwhile, first and second with one out has a run expectancy of 0.766 which is around 41% higher than the former scenario, BUT, the probability of scoring one run (the tying run) is 16.2% which is around 48% LOWER than the previous scenario.

Additionally, with a 2-0 lead in the series, it’s quite possible that a protracted, extra-inning game that depletes future bullpen options, or God forbid, forces you to use a future starter in a long relief role puts additional onus on either winning or losing in 9 innings and moving on either way.

None of this even brings into the equation that Nick Castellanos is a pretty good hitter while Romine/Hernan are almost certainly a weaker hitter, particularly with an elite groundballer on the hill. It seems that you’re castigating Showalter for “not knowing the numbers” or “getting away with one”, but you should try viewing this stuff through a different lens.

Sandy Kazmir
11 years ago
Reply to  Mike Petriello

Let’s not make this personal, Mike. I’m letting bygones be bygones. I tried to make this as snark-free as possible because I think you’re a good writer and I enjoy reading what you have to say. I just thought this was one avenue that should have been explored, but is often left on the wayside to use things that are a little more accessible. Keep up the great work, pal!

Sandy Kazmir
11 years ago
Reply to  Sandy Kazmir

Check that, around 33% lower on the frequency. Apologies for the calculation mistake.

Bill
11 years ago
Reply to  Sandy Kazmir

It’s worse than that. The numbers from the book represent the general case. The change of a GBDP was higher with a ground ball pitcher such as Britton on the mound. So, the chance of scoring a single run with runners on first and second was actually less than 16.2%. But, I’m with you in that I think it had to do with the relative quality of the batter, as well. If the Tigers had anything approaching a respectable bench, Buck might have hesitated.

Grumpy Ole Bass Turd
11 years ago
Reply to  Sandy Kazmir

That’s not really a good way to read the chart. In th chart, the chances of giving up no more runs are 63.8% pre-IBB and 62.2% post-IBB. The odds of giving up *exactly* one run are 24% pre-IBB and 16.2% post-IBB, and the odds of giving up more than 1 (losing outright), are 12.8% pre-IBB and 21.6% post-IBB. So basically he was trading a profile of 63.8% win outright, 24% extras, 12.8% lose outright for a profile of 62.2% win outright, 16.2% extras, 21.6 lose outright. By the chart, that’s just plain awful. Castellanos being the better hitter plus Britton’s GBing ways push the needle in the other direction of course, but the idea that this is a Book-approved decision in a (3.2R/G) vacuum is just wrong.

Joe
11 years ago

Thanks grumpy, I was going to criticize along the same lines, but I don’t have the charts in front of me. Clearly you need to look at the chance of “1 or more” not “exactly 1”

arc
11 years ago
Reply to  Sandy Kazmir

You are so bad at this. You didn’t even read the chart correctly.

You should quit fangraphs for the 1,589th time.

worstfan_NA
11 years ago

Do the Royals play that Lorde song at their games? at least once/game? Can that be the new Sweet Caroline to be sing-songed by bro’s everywhere?

and by bros I mean girls

mch38
11 years ago
Reply to  worstfan_NA

I’ve literally been singing the chorus-line to my roommates all week in my best female kiwi accent.

Randy M from South Park, CO
11 years ago
Reply to  mch38

Middle aged dude accent?

Steve
11 years ago

This really isn’t very hard:

Don’t inexplicably trade Doug Fister in the winter and there is no need to weaken your club to get David Price.

Sad Dave Dombrowski
11 years ago
Reply to  Steve

You say that as though Robbie Ray didn’t put up a 5.23 FIP in just over 28 innings of work.

Vlad
11 years ago
Reply to  Steve

You forgot the 2nd part of the Doug Fister trade rationale — to free up payroll space to sign Joe Nathan. That’s a double compounding error.

asdfds
11 years ago
Reply to  Steve

Give it a rest. The Tigers didn’t lose because they traded Fister.

thebamoor
11 years ago
Reply to  asdfds

asdfds,

Ironically, the Nats might lose today because Fister is starting. His ERA this season is great, but Gio has a significantly better FIP/XFIP/SIERA. Can’t really blame Williams though as there will be fans howling if he started him instead of a pitcher who went 16-6 and 2.43.

arc
11 years ago
Reply to  thebamoor

lol

francis
11 years ago
Reply to  thebamoor

Fister 1, Thebamoor 0

Kevin
11 years ago
Reply to  asdfds

We didn’t lose because of giving up Fister, but it sure as hell didn’t help!

Anon
11 years ago

If you filter out pitchers to avoid penalizing National League teams

That reduces the penalty to NL teams, but does not remove it completely. DHs in 2014 averaged a 106 wRC+. Also, the effect of having pitchers in the lineup skews the NL non-pitcher to have a slightly higher percent of PA with the bases empty, which has a lower wRC+ than PA with men on base.

Mike
11 years ago

I don’t see how people keep questioning Ausmus for taking Sanchez out in game 2. The guy had thrown 1 inning in two months because of a significant injury. He struggled with some shoulder issues earlier in the season. No one but the Tigers knows what his rehab schedule was like, and how many pitches he was throwing in his side sessions and simulated games.

Ausmus made a fair amount of moves that I don’t like, but it’s ridiculous to me that anyone would criticize him for not stretching out Sanchez in a must win game when he couldn’t even throw off a mound until two weeks prior.

Orsulakfan
11 years ago
Reply to  Mike

Did reporters ask Sanchez and Ausmus about that decision? I assume they did. I would be interested in the answer. but the broader point that we don’t know how Sanchez was feeling, or what Ausmus saw with his eyes or knew about Sanchez’s ability to pitch, means that we can’t fully evaluate this decision. Buck Showalter points out repeatedly that there are a lot of things an observer doesn’t know that only those in the dugout do about how a guy feels. Mattingly said Grienke was gassed after 7 in game 2: if true, that should change our evaluation of that move. Same is true for Sanchez.

Mike
11 years ago
Reply to  Orsulakfan

Ausmus said that 35 pitches for Sanchez would be “pushing it”. He was at 30 after his last out in the 7th.

The “he shouldn’t have pulled Sanchez” crowd is just wrong for a number of reasons, even if he could have hypothetically gone another.

ralph
11 years ago
Reply to  Orsulakfan

From the bottom of this article: http://www.mlive.com/tigers/index.ssf/2014/10/brad_ausmus_3.html

“I felt good,” Sanchez said. “I think the command was there and the speed for my fastball was there. I think that I did everything I could to help the team in those two innings.”

Sanchez was asked if he felt he could have gone more than two.

“As soon as I was done with the second inning, it was setup time,” Sanchez said. “That’s the time for Joba.”

A minute or so later, Sanchez was asked the question a second time.

“That’s for the setup man situation,” he said. “We’ve got a lead of three runs and that’s the way you have to go. That’s Joba’s job right there.”

Orsulakfan
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

Classy response from Sanchez. Good teammate.

But we still don’t know what really went on in the dugout, and whether he could have gone another.

ralph
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

We’ll never know for sure, but I suspect if Sanchez had felt like couldn’t pitch another inning, he would have said that.

I figure, he didn’t want to lie, but wanted to be as much of a team player as he could. So, if he could have said “I was done” without lying, he would have.

That said, a pitcher isn’t always the best judge about whether he can go another.

hookstrapped
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

He was channeling Yost with that answer.

Robert Hombre
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

This doesn’t tell us anything one way or another, I don’t think.

What I’m about to say is wholly unrigorous but possibly not incorrect. I don’t agree that Sanchez would have said he didn’t feel ready. Shields saying in the WC game that he was done was probably the most shocking thing I’ve seen this postseason. Top-flight pitchers are about as alpha as they get and will throw 130 pitches in a post-season game if given the chance. It’s up to the manager to know the limits of his pitchers, so Sanchez not telling him demonstrated very little.

Sanchez’s comments also said very little.

‘No one knows anything,’ is what Jeff Sullivan would probably say. I’m inclined to agree with this hypothetical Jeff Sullivan.

Ruki Motomiya
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

I think the important part is why do you put Joba in there? As pointed out, aside from small stretches he has sucked on the whole from 2011 on.

ralph
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

There actually seems to be a recent trend of SPs at least giving cover to managers by the SPs themselves saying they were gassed. I think on the Tigers alone, Scherzer did this in the Boston game last year, and even Verlander said as much about the other day.

Of course you’re right that the Sullivan Doctrine is the only thing that we’re likely to be able to go to with confidence here… but Sanchez pointedly not answering the question twice means I’ll always wonder.

Atreyu Jones
11 years ago
Reply to  Mike

Pitching a 3rd inning isn’t “stretching out” a starter, and it was not a must win game.

Either it was a mistake taking him out or a mistake putting him on the roster in the first place.

Bill
11 years ago
Reply to  Atreyu Jones

He’s coming off an injury limiting his pitches arguably justifying the decision to pull him. He gave them two good innings justifying the decision to put him on the roster.

Mike
11 years ago
Reply to  Atreyu Jones

This is like saying a starting pitcher in spring training should throw 6-7 innings in his first start because he’s a starter.

ralph
11 years ago

Yes, Sanchez might not have done well had he started a third inning. And for health reasons, it may not have been a good idea anyway.

But at that point, it seems like many people still thought Sanchez was the Tigers’ best option for the 8th. And if Sanchez had stayed in Joba’d it all up, I really don’t think there’d be nearly as much criticism of Ausmus.

As far as I can tell, the reason so many people were critical of putting Joba in was that it was really hard to see Joba being even close to the best option there before he even threw his first pitch.

While there are always exceptions to the rule, a manager can usually escape criticism by making sure to put the best option out there. (That does mean when there is disagreement about what the best option is, the manager will be criticized in case of failure no matter what.) So yes, leaving Anibal in might have backfired, but I feel like Tiger fans (and analysts) would have much more accepting of that seemingly-best-option-scenario than the Joba.

Mike
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

Health reasons are a big deal for a guy with $50+ million left on his deal the next three years coming off a significant injury. He also has a history of shoulder problems. Those aren’t small concerns.

Just simply talking about not taking him out, the Tigers were going to have to get something out of Joba and Soria at some point. If Sanchez goes 3+ on Friday, he’s out for Sunday and possibly even Monday if you’re stretching him to the max in that manner. If people are going to tell me that Ausmus’ chances rested on throwing no one but Sanchez out of the pen, it seems the Tigers would end up in the same place no matter what he did.

ralph
11 years ago
Reply to  Mike

I mostly wrote that in response to the author of the piece saying that Sanchez could have blown it anyway. He seemed to be saying that the Ausmus narrative would be no different if Sanchez had stayed in and contributed to a loss. I think it’d be a lot different.

It’s nearly impossible to say how much extra health risk there’d be from Sanchez pitching 1 more inning. So granting that’s a constraint, I would have much rather seen Alburquerque or Soria to start the inning off. Really, anybody but Joba.

The funny thing is that I think aside from Joba, Ausmus actually did a pretty good job managing the pitching staff in Game 2. Verlander has throughout the season pitched well enough for a while, then imploded as his pitch count/times through the order climbed. So pulling him as soon as there was a baserunner (even though it was more Carrera’s fault than Verlander) in the 6th actually seemed like a good idea. And then he was really very quick to pull Joba.

Whether Soria was the right call to relieve Joba is much tougher to say. I just don’t know what to think about Soria about this point. He should be the Tiger bullpen ace, but his strikeout rate plummeted once he joined the Tigers, pointing to a possible injury.

Mike
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

Judging by what Soria was throwing up there (90 mph fastballs with no life and breaking stuff with no bite), Joba was the better option to him. Which pretty much sums up why Detroit is already home.

ralph
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

Perhaps. With the Tigers, it seemed like the only time Soria was brought into high-leverage situations was when there were already men on base. Maybe if he came in to start an inning, he could have been just good enough to get out of it allowing only a run or two.

In the end, I probably lean Al-Al… who of course wasn’t used.

ralph
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

One other factor with Sanchez that I haven’t seen discussed (though Mike P.’s mention that this might have been the Tigers’ last best shot might hint at it):

Getting 1 more scoreless inning from Sanchez in Game 2 might have had a bigger impact on the chances of the Tigers winning a World Series over the course of Sanchez’s contract than having Sanchez healthy for the rest of his contract.

It’s a brutal thing to think, but I wouldn’t be surprised if even Sanchez would trade a World Series title for more shoulder problems.

Bill
11 years ago
Reply to  ralph

Soria looked terrible just a few hours earlier in Game 1; I’m not sure why Ausmus would have expected him to suddenly turn it around. Ideally, that would have been a spot for your closer, but I’m not sure if I would have trusted Nathan their either. I’d have gone Al-Al for want of a better option.

Matthew Weflen
11 years ago

Article about the White Sox’s “Clutch” performance this season, please! I’d like to learn more about this stat and how it was applied to such a disappointing team.

mikecws91
11 years ago
Reply to  Matthew Weflen

If I had to guess, it has something to do with a lot of big late swings in White Sox games this year, especially in April. They got a lot of big hits to win games, and the pitchers gave up a lot of big hits to lose games.

tomjefMember since 2014
11 years ago

Ausmus said (as stated above) that all staff and Sanchez were in agreement on a 35 pitch limit before the game started. Since he was at 30 at the end of the inning, they made a change. that decision was made in advance and in concert with the trainers and pitching coaches, I doubt you would want your manager to risk an $80M asset in that scenario. It could be argued that it would be business malpractice to risk doing so. that is what they have relievers for, even as incapable as the Tigers’ relievers were.

pft
11 years ago

No bullpen and a weakened offense following the loss of Fielder, Jackson and Peralta last year.

Need a strong pen since SP’ers only go 6-7 innings nowadays, even the best of them against good hitting teams.

Jason B
11 years ago
Reply to  pft

Although losing Fielder and adding Kinsler was a huge, HUGE, HUGE!!! win for the Tigers this year. 2013 Fielder might have been a loss, but 2014 Fielder was a godawful disaster; without that trade, they don’t win the division and very likely miss the playoffs.

D
11 years ago

Os have better pitching, better defense.
Tigers have better hitting.

Todd Beall
11 years ago

Maybe I don’t understand fangraphs. But you folks had Detroit winning this series easily on your projections page. Now you write an article explaining why Detroit lost.

Perhaps, just perhaps, you might actually consider that Detroit lost because Baltimore is a better, more well-rounded team. Why not do an article on why Baltimore has continued to win the entire 2nd half of the season, ran away with the AL East, and now swept Detroit (and its 3 Cy Youngs) in 3 games?

But no, I see that for the O’s next series, you think KC has a 60% chance of beating the O’s, and a 30% chance of winning the World Series. The O’s only have a 40% chance of winning (even though they have home field advantage), and a 16% chance of winning the Series. Really?

Perhaps one day in the near future you will actually realize that the Orioles are an exceptionally good baseball team with very few flaws. Or…perhaps not.

Dave
11 years ago
Reply to  Todd Beall

Why do you guys care so much? Why do you need Fangraphs to validate your fandom? Aren’t the O’s doing that already?

hookstrapped
11 years ago
Reply to  Dave

This has become the stupidest defensive meme on these pages, even more stupid than the defensive my team gets no respect meme. No one needs FanGraphs to validate one’s fandom. People enjoy FanGraphs, are interested in what the articles say, the analyses presented. People get invested a bit in a site they like. So, when the site repeatedly presents stuff that ends up being wrong… I think the disgruntlement here mostly centers around projections. FanGraphs looks wrong a lot in its team projections. Then points out after the fact, “something something random variation” when events don’t align with the projections. Why make these projections? Especially in the extremely small sample environment of playoff series? To even make them seems to run counter to a fundamental understanding of statistics upon which FanGraphs is based.

arc
11 years ago
Reply to  hookstrapped

In other words, you don’t understand anything that happens here – especially the math – and it makes you angry.

Jason B
11 years ago
Reply to  hookstrapped

Ha! Arc for the win. It’s like, “those numbers don’t have my guys at an 80% chance of winning or better! I request, nay, DEMAND, a full apology for this model, and then fiddle with it to give the answer I want!”

The method used to assign win probabilities is not perfect. Can it be improved? Sure. The folks who developed it would tell you as much, and part of the fun is when things don’t go as expected, and figuring out what we don’t know. But a 3-game sample as sure evidence that the model doesn’t like your precious team? *sigh*