Why They Don’t Run Like Mad On Jon Lester
In Game 5, the Dodgers stole two bases against Jon Lester, out of two attempts. Stretch that over, say, a 33-start season, and you’ve got a pitcher who’s given up 66 steals in 66 chances. That pitcher, we’d say, was historically bad at controlling the running game. It would be a huge, distracting problem. The Dodgers did take a little advantage of Lester, which was a part of their plan, and though in the end it wasn’t enough, it was something worth trying.
Yet the Dodgers could’ve pushed it further. And this was a topic of much discussion. The Dodgers danced around, taking incredibly, unprecedentedly aggressive leads, but still they didn’t seize every chance to put the game in motion. Even though Lester clearly has the yips, and everyone knows it, Dodger baserunners still exercised some amount of caution. A seventh-inning screenshot I took will stick with me:
You — you might remember Enrique Hernandez.
August has a post of his own going up soon. It’s also about Lester and the running game, but from a more analytical perspective. In that post, you can expect to see some .gifs of Hernandez shimmying around, but, what the hell, why not double up? Here are some clips of Hernandez in the bottom of the first:
Hernandez was teasing Lester. Baiting Lester. He wasn’t trying to be a prick or anything, but he was trying to at the very least get Lester distracted. Lester stepped off, but there was no throw. There’s never any throw. Which means there wasn’t a great threat to be nabbed. Hernandez didn’t steal. Here, to supplement, is a .gif from the seventh:
Look at that pose. Look at that pose! Joc Pederson is full-on facing second base, while being faced by Jon Lester. Pederson looks like he’s waiting for the starting gun, and were there to be any half-decent pickoff throw, Pederson would be screwed, because he’d have to turn around before retreating. He’s looking Lester literally in the eye. It’s a dare, and Lester did nothing. And, Pederson did nothing. He didn’t steal. The hitter got out.
The Dodgers ran, but the Dodgers could’ve done more running. It might not have been enough to win the game, but it felt like they were giving up opportunities to help themselves. And, very weirdly, at that, since in theory the burden would’ve been on Lester to show he was in control. The Dodgers didn’t force Lester to do much, and here’s a quote from John Smoltz on the game broadcast:
I’m amazed more guys aren’t going, though. I just don’t understand. It’s one thing to make somebody uncomfortable and add value to the guy at the plate by seeing better pitches. But the reality is, he’s not going to first. You get a big enough lead, you go on first movement, and you create stress at second base.
Jon Lester still has the yips. If that weren’t true, we would’ve seen a pickoff. Lester did successfully field a bunt, but for one thing, he bounced his throw, and for another, a bunt isn’t a pickoff. It feels like runners should run like crazy. Even the average ones. Even the slightly below-average ones. It doesn’t make immediate sense why Lester this year allowed fewer steals than, say, Jimmy Nelson. It doesn’t make immediate sense why Lester allowed fewer steals than anybody. But I think there’s one fascinating explanation.
Okay, so there are also some partial explanations. Lester deserves some credit for not being particularly slow to the plate. And David Ross is a terrific battery-mate, because of his ability to quickly throw to any base. Even, or especially, first, on a back-pick. Ross has attempted dozens of back-picks. Ross helps keep things under control. And just so we all understand where we are, Lester did have baseball’s second-highest stolen-base-attempt rate, behind only Noah Syndergaard. It’s not like people haven’t tried to run.
But they haven’t constantly tried to run. And they’ve had only modest success. Now we get to the fun, major explanation. Jon Lester has the yips. Won’t throw to first. Not a threat. The Cubs know this, and opponents know this. But opponents are only somewhat able to internalize it. I don’t think opponents can actually believe what they know.
Because it doesn’t make sense, right? How do you explain the yips? How do you convince yourself, as a baserunner, that that guy on the mound really, legitimately can’t throw to the base where you are, when that same guy on the mound can throw to the plate with extraordinary precision? As a player, you’re taught how to run the bases against left-handed pitchers. You’re taught which moves to look out for, and you know not to run so much, since the pitcher can see you standing right there. I suspect that, when you’re a runner against Lester, you take your lead and you remind yourself that that guy won’t try a pickoff. But then you hover there, and you see him looking at you, all left-handed-like, and you don’t believe your own thoughts. You don’t want to get in a position where he throws over and you look stupid because you wandered out into the middle of nowhere. What lefty can’t throw to first?
This isn’t just some unsupported theory I made up. Consider Andy McCullough, who has dealt with Lester a few times in his day. He tweeted about how the leads players need to take against Lester will make them uncomfortable. Also from McCullough, there’s this nugget, on Eric Hosmer. Hosmer at one point was told to sprint home, because Lester wouldn’t be able to make a good throw to get him. But Hosmer hesitated, because, what? How would that make sense? Hosmer couldn’t believe the advice he was given. There’s no reason to think he’d be unique.
*Lester* is unique. What you can do, in theory, against Lester, you can’t do against anyone else. Take Julio Urias. His pickoff game is fantastic! When Urias is on the mound, you absolutely have to pay close attention at every instant. With Lester, there’s an unbelievable amount of theoretical freedom. There’s too much freedom for players to be able to comprehend.
This might sound insane to you. After all, you know Lester has the yips, yes? Imagine you’re an actual runner, though. Especially a runner in an important game. Or, actually, imagine you’re just a person. You’re behind a door, and in the next room, there’s a sandwich, and there’s a grizzly bear. I’ve already told you that the grizzly bear won’t attack you. I’ve assured you the bear isn’t aggressive, and you aren’t going to be hurt, and you can just go have the sandwich. It’s a delicious hot sandwich. I’ve shown you a few videos of other people going in and getting sandwiches. Sometimes the bear roars. It certainly looks menacing. Acts like a mean bear. Hasn’t hurt anybody. How confident are you going to be about getting that sandwich? You know all about grizzly bears. You know about attacks by average grizzly bears. How much are you willing to believe that this particular bear is unusual? How much are you willing to believe this bear will remain unusual for however long it takes you to go retrieve a sandwich?
If a runner made some kind of mistake against Jon Lester, he wouldn’t get literally mauled to death. So the stakes are lower. But everyone is still programmed to not look like an idiot. Get picked off by several feet, and you look like an idiot. So runners are more conservative than they have to be, or even than they should be, and what makes that funny is it also protects Lester from looking like an idiot. If teams just constantly ran against Lester, he would look helpless. Yet his problem is so bizarre that in a weird way it sort of keeps opponents honest.
If more pitchers had Lester’s problem, it would be easier to take advantage of them, because the problem would be more familiar. Lester gets some sort of indirect benefit for being the only one. He still gets run on, but he could be run on so much more. The leads could be even bigger. The teasing could be even worse.
Someone really ought to push it. Someone ought to force Lester to try a throw, if only to see what happens. The runner might have to do something comical, and the play could turn into an ineffective disaster, but what’s one out, for science? Especially when the upside could be almost unlimited extra bases? Lester hasn’t quite had his boundaries challenged. He should be challenged, but the reality of it is that it’s the playoffs, and every out is important, and players are naturally cautious. It would be daring to force Lester to make the move, and most players wouldn’t have the stomach, given what’s on the line. What a world we live in.
Jon Lester threw seven innings of one-run baseball on Thursday. His season ERA was 2.44. It’s hard to believe there’s this simple thing he can’t do. It’s just too hard to truly believe it.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.
Much like Chris Carpenter and his non-swings on 3-0, If i was playing part of me would worry if it wasn’t just a huge slow play as well. I’m 99% sure it isn’t but what if in the biggest game and moment it turned out it was, damn how daft you’d feel. Too good to be true just puts doubt in you i guess
Not sure Chris Carpenter saw too many 3-0 counts but he definitely wasn’t swinging if he did.
According to BRef, Chris Carpenter (assuming we mean the St. Louis one) had 6 plate appearance that went to 3-0. He went 0-4 with a walk and a successful bunt sac, and only one strikeout. So he might have bunted at 3-0, but probably not?
Matt Carpenter maybe?
You mean Matt Carpenter, and he did exactly that in the last game of the season.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/matt-carpenters-big-reveal/
haha you are indeed right i meant Matt…bonehead mistake
I don’t know. I think the runners are intentionally staying at first base – at least in this series. If Lester sees Hernandez dancing around and can’t do anything about it, it’s possible his pitches lose some degree of effectiveness. Which in turn could snowball into a rally.
That’s my theory anyway. The Dodgers weren’t looking to improve their chances at scoring one run. They wanted to break Lester.
You can break Lester by scoring a 1 run every inning.
You guys aren’t thinking like a pitcher. The runner on first is in his field of vision as he’s making his pitch, begging for his attention. Runners on second base simply aren’t very distracting by comparison.
As for the run scoring argument, stealing second base doesn’t increase the odds of scoring THAT much. It certainly helps, but on most days it wouldn’t affect the outcome of the game. Case in point, if we assume the same sequence of events, the Dodgers might have scored one additional run (in the first inning) if they stole second base on the first pitch every time.
Lester clearly has been plenty effective – it should be clear by now that this strategy of staying at first isn’t working. A pitcher would have to be incompetent to melt down every time a runner is screwing around – they do it at third on righties all the time. If anything, when a runner starts hopping around, you know he isn’t running and is going to get a poor jump on batted ball.
Getting to second base is very significant. You are much more likely to score on a hit and there is zero chance of a standard double play. Not to mention that someone has to hold the runner up the middle… or all the productive outs which can happen from that situation.
If you don’t comprehend how important it is to get to second base, then you really should not be analyzing real-world baseball. Number-crunching is fine and all, and I am sure you can fine some interesting trends in the data, but don’t mistake it for meaningful baseball strategy.
Go through Lester’s splits, though, and he’s still been a very effective pitcher with a runner on first base.
You can actually look up stuff to back-up your argument with empirical evidence… or to find out that your argument isn’t supported by the evidence at all. For example, someone collected data over a 10 year period (1984-1994) and determined that with a runner on 1st and 0 outs, the likelihood of scoring at least one run was 43.5%. Put the runner on 2nd, and it goes up to 63.3%. With 1 out, 27.6% to 41.4%. With 2 outs, 12.8% to 22.4%. Granted, this was against the entire league, which doesn’t average out to Jon Lester, but even with 2 outs your odds of scoring goes up by AT LEAST ~10%. Combine that with the fact that Lester has been an effective pitcher with runners on first, and your argument doesn’t work. The best thing you can do is to better your odds of SCORING RUNS. That’s how you win baseball games.
Plus, who says the runner has to be satisfied with just stealing second? Your scoring potential goes up that much more after stealing third as well. If you can get THAT big of a lead, and have decent speed, it’s almost a virtual certainty that you will be successful. Why not take the two bases for free?
“As for the run scoring argument, stealing second base doesn’t increase the odds of scoring THAT much”
Didn’t we just see the inverse of this play out in the first inning? Hernandez didn’t score that inning precisely because he was unable to advance on a stolen base (or, to be fair, go 1st to 3rd on a single). Saying that it doesn’t increase your odds of scoring ‘that much’ does a disservice to the more basic fact that it increasing your odds of scoring at all. And when you’re facing Lester, scoring is at a premium in the first place.
I don’t get all the down votes here. I don’t necessarily agree with the strategy itself, but it’s a reasonable guess as to WHY the Dodgers did what they did.
But wouldn’t it be more distracting to go ahead and start stealing bases? Wouldn’t that put more pressure on, and get more in Lester’s head? Not to forget making it easier to score.
This sounds like a comment you’d find on an ESPN article, not a Fangraphs one….
Or the strategy was to be so ridiculous that you baited a poor throw to first base. I really have a hard time believing a team that’s trying to get to the W.S. would value playing mind games on a pitcher over taking a free base. At some point you’re getting too cute.
Its almost as if there is some unwritten rule at play here. It is infuriating to see teams not take advantage. If he is going to let guys stand there like Pederson, why in the world are they not taking the free base?
If they want to steal, then they should shorten up the lead and get a flying-start. A good jump is worth a lot more than a few extra feet of lead.
I think it is just an unfamiliar situation and the runners really don’t know what to do with it.
I think the biggest factor is that stealing second base is just a bad idea with the current replay situation. If you don’t beat the throw, then you are out – if there is a frame which suggests that your body may have come out of contact with the bag, then you are also out. If this form of replay persists, then stolen bases will become a thing of the past. I hope that someone who actually cares about the game makes some changes to this situation. How about 10 seconds max for a replay? Catch the obvious bad call and nothing else.
What a terribly shortsighted analysis. Before replay, if the throw beat you, you were always out. Always. Now, with replay, the correct call can be made if the throw beat a runner, but he managed to somehow avoid the tag.
of course… dissension will not be tolerated. All change is good – I get it now. Thanks for the reminder.
I don’t think this has anything to do with why they aren’t running on Lester, but I am on the same page with you in regards to the ridiculous “the guy beat the throw, wasn’t tagged, kept contact with the base except for one millimeter as he transitioned from leg to hand.” It’s awful. Slows the game, goes by the letter of the rule instead of the spirit of the rule, and makes steals much harder.
Now I want a runner to just stand 2 feet off first base and pretend like he’s keeping his foot on the bag ready to go — like he’s not aware he’s not on first — and see what happens. Eno, make this happen! Can we crowdsource a bribe for Eno to give to a player to try this? =p
Uh… scratch that last line. Sorry, I briefly forgot bribes aren’t funny in baseball. Regardless, Eno can still sweet talk SOME lead foot, right?
I was thinking during last night’s game of an experiment. Why not attempt a delayed steal? Take a moderate lead, not one that would invite a back-pick, and take off as the catcher releases his throw back to Lester. I think John would probably stand like a statue.
This, I think, would be the surest test.
I could see the Indians doing this to him. Jose Ramirez might be the guy to drive Lester nuts.
he fields bunts and his position so i still think he’d throw in that situation (weirdly he’s been fine in the field this year)
Yeah, he runs toward first base and underhands it. Except for last night when he was forced to throw overhand and barely got it there. If the runner was stealing second on the catcher’s return throw, I think he could get it there in time. Could work the first time as a surprise though.
But why bother with all of that when you can probably take a 20 ft lead and run on first movement? Even if he does throw to 1B, odds are it would be either a lollypop throw, or off the mark, and if he doesn’t, you’re virtually guaranteed to be safe
Or just go while he’s looking at the signs….
You can also steal off of the back pick with 100% success if you want to go that route.
To the grizzly bear analogy:
The Dodgers refused to go for the sandwich. As a result, they starved and died anyway.
Most players end up taking a lead they are uncomfortable with and then their reaction to first move by Lester is back toward the base, regardless of the knowledge that first move by Lester is always going home*. A Rod used the term “negative secondary” to describe this. The runners end up costing themselves positive momentum toward the next base because of their discomfort with the leads they take. It’s almost as if Jon Lester having the yips gives the runners the yips, too.
The runners need to get back because Ross will throw down to first without a second thought.
You’re right though, it’s pointless to take that big of a lead if you aren’t going to try and steal because you can’t be 20 feet off first when Ross receives the pitch or else you’ll be picked off first.
Except they dont’ “need to get back”, they can run on the first pitch every time.
I agree, I’m talking about the negative secondary where the Dodgers players are, rather than taking a step towards second like you usually see, were retreating back to first when Lester went home.
I agree, and I have to assign a lot of blame to the manager and the first base coach.
There is a reasonable plan here: take an absolutely huge lead at first and then run first pitch on first movement by Lester. There should be plenty of time to go over that in detail before the game and to go out to first base and walk through exactly how big of a lead a baserunner should take. The first base coach should be reinforcing that point when a player reaches first and yelling at the player to take a bigger lead if need be.
If a player simply can’t execute that plan, or the team is uncomfortable with asking him to do so, then such a player should just run the bases like normal rather than take a negative secondary lead.
This plan doesn’t need to be the same for every player on the team: some can steal on the first pitch, and some can run the bases normally. But I would limit players to those two options.
This is a relatively rare situation where baseball coaching/managing looks a lot like football or basketball. It’s setting up a play – taking into account the capabilities of the players in question – and then telling a player exactly what to do.
Yep, totally counterproductive. If Kiké had taken an ordinary lead and been able to take a secondary lead, he could’ve reached 3rd on Seager’s single and scored on a sac-fly. Instead, the stupid game the Dodgers were playing kept him at 2nd and nobody scored.
I have to imagine the Indians are working this into a practice as we speak. Just keep walking until he steps off. Then start running.
Maybe he shows you he can make that throw. Still worth finding out if he can’t.
This is an interesting theory, but I don’t buy it. If they were afraid that Lester might attempt a pick off, they wouldn’t be doing the one thing they were actually doing…taking HUGE leads. It wasn’t their fear of Lester that kept them from running. They were absurdly far off first base while Lester was holding the ball, showing they had no fear of Lester whatsoever. As Joe Buck said in one inning, if Lester just tossed the ball to first, he’d be out of the inning. They were afraid of being thrown out at 2nd, or being back-picked by David Ross, which is why so many players were moving back toward first as the pitch was being thrown.
In fact, at one point, Smoltz (who really knows his stuff and makes great points) actually messed up and stated the players should definitely be trying to steal third since it’s easier to steal third. But the only reason it’s easier to steal third is because you get a bigger lead at second base. But if the leads were the same, as they were in this game, stealing second is the easier base, as the catch has a farther distance to throw to get you out. And runners at first had leads that you would expect from runners at second, where you’re not being held on the base by a fielder.
I don’t know why the Dodgers didn’t run more, but it was incredibly frustrating to watch. They danced and danced and danced, and perhaps early on, your strategy is to break Lester, but outside of a couple at bats, Lester pitcher phenomenally. If the “distraction” strategy doesn’t work in the first innings, ditch it and switch to the “take the base that’s being given to you” strategy. I’m flummoxed by the whole affair.
I’m a little baffled by this whole situation, so the below isn’t quite an “argument.” More just some thoughts I want to throw out there.
This article argues that what’s going on is, basically, psychological–opposing players are restrained from doing what they COULD do by their own assumptions and fears. I wonder if there’s more to it than that. Watching Game One of the Division Series it looked to me like the Giants ran themselves out of a couple innings because they tried to exploit their opponent’s weakness (Lester’s inability to throw) even though running was not one of their strengths. They had the leadoff runner on a few times; once he was picked off first, another time he was thrown out trying to steal. The Cubs have a good defense and have clearly spent a fair amount of time figuring out the best ways to compensate (to the extent they can) for Lester’s throwing issues. So, while the psychological explanation is the one that seems to explain things from my perspective as a fan (“it looks like they could make it if they wanted to; they must not want to”), I wonder if there’s a simpler athletic/strategic explanation: stealing bases is more difficult than it seems, especially for players/teams that don’t do it routinely as part of their offensive game plan. If you’re, e.g., Hernandez (who has stolen two bases and been caught twice in a three-season MLB career), walking out there and jumping around a little bit is easy; cleanly executing a stolen base, without doing something idiotic like ending up having Lester just run over and tag you because your lead was actually dumb, may be a lot harder than it looks. And once you combine the physical/strategic difficulties with that natural reluctance to really believe that Lester CAN’T make a throw, you get what we saw last night.
I kind of can’t believe this is true, given how seemingly-simple it would be to just take that massive lead and run. On the other hand, the pure “they can’t go because the psychological implications are too mind-blowing” explanation also seems bizarre to me.
Jon Lester’s inability to make a nice, easy 60 foot toss to first is the strangest thing in sports.The grizzly bear metaphor was very entertaining.
It’s as if a great regular/three point shooter somehow couldn’t make free throws. Like if Ray Allen was a 50% free throw shooter. Best example I could find is Bruce Bowen, who shot 39% from 3-point line (51st all time) and only 57% from the free-throw line (25th WORST all time). That includes 2002, where he shot better from 3 than from the free throw line. Jon Lester = a better overall version of Bruce Bowen.
“He wasn’t trying to be a prick or anything”
strong disagree
In ten appearances behind the door, Eno has eaten the sandwich 10/10 times making him the all time highest wSAND individual of all time.
Looking back at the box score, it’s the 1st and 6th innings were the Dodgers should have been running more.
In the 3rd and 4th, when Turner and Kendrick got on, they both ran. The Kendrick steal lead to their only run off Lester. No one reached in the 2nd or 5th.
Pederson reached in the 7th, but with two outs. He probably should have been more aggressive. But, again, two outs and Grandal grounded out anyway.
In the 6th, Seager gets on with one out, but doesn’t run. But, as mentioned a number of times in the broadcast, he might have been banged up. Ruiz and Kendrick make easy outs, so it’s unlikely he would have scored.
That leaves the 1st inning, where Hernandez walks, dances, and then ends up on second after Seager’s single. He probably scores if he’s on second when Seager singles, and if he doesn’t there, he would when Ruiz flies out.
It’s impossible to say how that changes the game from there on out, but the dynamic of the game would have changed a bit. I’m guessing the Cubs still win because of what we saw in the later innings, but maybe Maddon has a shorter hook with Lester and the Dodgers get to the Cubs bullpen a lot sooner.
Lol at using at bat results to justify not running. Its no garuntee he executed those pitches as well with runners in scoring position. Against lester everyone should run. Period. Doesnt matter how many outs, it’s a free base. You get the biggest lead of your life and get to go on first move.
Huh? The point of the exercise was seeing when the Dodgers could have run, but didn’t. The first inning really was the only time the Dodgers had the chance to run, but didn’t. We don’t know if Seager hurt himself to the point where he wasn’t comfortable to run in the 6th; if he was basically fine, he should have ran.
You said x and y made easy outs so it wouldn’t matter if they ran. My point is their is no garuntee it’s the same at bat outcome if you do run. No garuntee he executes as well. I said nothing about seager because it applies to everyone, he gives you 1/3 the way there and you can go on first move. Even Ruiz can getting a walking lead and take a bag.
It’s embarrassing that a major leaguer doesn’t take a free base. Reddick ran last night With 2 outs when his run didn’t even matter in the the 9th. I was laughing so hard like oh now you run…
Maybe they’re just saving it for the WS … One of these games it’s going to be close and late, with a runner dancing around way off the bag like this. Then before anyone has a chance to react, Rizzo’s going to drop into a catcher’s crouch and Lester will fire a 91mph fastball pickoff right at him. The runner will be meat and it will be glorious!
If the Cubs make it to the World Series maybe Lester will suddenly unleash an Andy Pettitte-caliber pickoff move in the first inning of Game One to nail Lindor at first base. Post-game press conference:
“Well, I’ve been tinkering with that move for a few years now, but I didn’t want to use it in a game before I felt like it was really perfect. Don’t want to look foolish out there.”
I stumbled on this video of Lester practicing his pickoff move in a split squad spring training game. Pretty fascinating stuff – he tries the bounce throw, maybe on purpose? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWEB9JLTftU
Interesting. If he could make that bounce throw with any consistency, without throwing the ball into the dugout, that would pretty much solve his problem. Now that the cat’s out of the bag a bounce throw wouldn’t tell teams/runners anything they don’t already know. He’d be just another pitcher who uses throws to first purely to limit runners’ leads, with no intention of trying to pick them off,
When Lester left as a free agent, Boston writers (and fans, on comment boards) noted this particular shortcoming. The problem is that Lester happens to be a very good pitcher and manages to live with this. What may be playing with the runner’s minds is that Lester doesn’t give up a lot of baserunners (3rd in WHIP this year) and is actually rather good at getting outs…so, in a playoff game especially, do you want to be the guy who ends up back in the dugout, possibly spoiling a rally? Testing Lester might best be left to a less critical regular season game (or games).
No, testing lester is best saved for critical games. The less critical game is when he would be more combfortable throwing over. Its not testing by the way if you have watched him, he just won’t throw over, he’s scared to throw over the top to first on infield hits as well, he underhands everything.
Classic loss aversion behavior.
https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/loss-aversion-theory-the-economics-of-design
Makes sense.
Jeff Sullivan I will read everything you write from here to eternity.
Spoken like Julian Assange.
The grizzly bear analogy is probably the greatest thing I’ve ever read. Bravo!
Those guys are so far from first maybe the Cubs can work on a pick off play involving the second baseman. Can he throw to the second baseman in the shift? Why is the first baseman on first in that one picture? So many questions
The rule says he has to throw to the base that the runner currently occupies (first). So he could throw to the second basemen, but only if the second basemen is right on (or next to) first. I’m not sure what the rule is for how close “next to” the base needs to be.
I do like the explanation of why the Dodgers didn’t want to run despite ridiculous leads.
With that said, what exactly is the risk here for taking a huge lead and then bolting for second on the first movement? Lester tends to make terrible throws to first. There is a strong likelihood that the throw will be somewhere down the right field line. If he actually gets it to the first baseman, there is a good chance it will cause the first baseman to perform minor gymnastics to actually catch it, or it will be a bouncing throw like with the bunt last night, or a lob. I want Lester to throw to first. Getting picked off by 20 feet is an out. Getting picked off by 40 feet, which is probably the worst case scenario breaking on first movement, is a stolen base. Someone like Billy Hamilton could be “picked off” by 75 feet under the right circumstances.
What do you have to lose? This is Jon Lester. He’s not going to give up many runs. Unless it is obvious he does not have good stuff that day, take the free bases and try to manufacture something.
This is actually a really good point. If you take off on first movement with that ridiculous of a lead and Lester throws to first, you probably make it because the time it take the ball to get to Rizzo and then have Rizzo throw around the runner to the second baseman is probably going to result in you taking the base. And is Lester even able to throw to second base? I mean, I’ve seen plenty of pitchers without the yips who attempt pick off moves regularly struggle with throws to second base, especially to a moving target. If you take off on first movement, you’re either going to be involved in a play with David Ross throwing to get you, who will be a significant disadvantage (especially if a breaking ball was thrown) or you have Lester attempting to throw to first followed by a throw by Rizzo or Lester attempting to throw to second, which theoretically has to be an even ore yip-sy throw for him than the throw to first.
This is the whole issue. Because nobody actually runs, there isn’t any theoretical advantage to the runners (especially with Ross holding their leads down). The thing with Lester isn’t “big leads” but “big leads that become stolen bases.” Those haven’t materialized. Hernandez got 20 feet from Lester… just start running before he throws home! Nobody has tried that, they’re all too scared or hesitant, but until Lester proves he and Ross can handle that (which they haven’t, nobody has tried to make them prove it), GO!
Note: Rizzo had a 20 steal season despite his lack of speed… because he took advantage of pitchers not throwing over! Yet, nobody seems to be able to do this with Lester. They can’t get out of their own heads…
Goldy was 32-37 in steals this year. Would anyone call him fast? Some baserunners are just smarter than others.
I was beyond frustrated, as a dodger fan. I was in a text storm with some friends, and I kept wondering why they didn’t just steal to third, then safety squeeze right at Lester. It seemed like they had a strategy but hadn’t thought it through all the way. When Lester failed to call their bluff and wound’t throw over, they needed to steal, every time. That’s the only way to “break” him. It was maddening to realize that they weren’t committed to the strategy, especially once Lester failed to respond.
The commonsense play is to go on the back pick. After watching Javy draw one out at third base I don’t see how that fails.
Because going on a backpick has nothing to do with lester being inept. Also Baez should have been out, was two bad throws. Last if you get halfway the catcher won’t just throw a backpick, he’s going to run at you and make you choose a base.
Any form of a delayed steal is probably the least effective way of capitalizing on his deficiencies. Just run while he is looking at the signs, that way batter Doesn’t have to take first pitch, you add a balk as a possible outcome, and he still won’t throw the ball.
Assuming the Cubs advance, there’s no way the Indians are this reticent about taking second against Lester, right? They’re already the second base base stealing team (by wSB) in the majors. They don’t need the added incentive of a nonexistent pickoff, because there’s relatively high probability they’d be running anyway.
No one can predict the future but I have a feeling Cleveland will be more aggressive than LA was if/when they face Lester in the World Series.
I wouldn’t be so sure. They didnt really get all that aggressive on Happ and Estrada in the ALCS and those two are pretty terrible at controlling runners as well.
The analogy works so well, too.
Bears -> Cubs -> Jon Lester
I literally LOL’d at that entire paragraph.
It isn’t even that the Dodgers didn’t run when the opportunity arose, it is that EVERY SINGLE RUNNER made a move back to first base when Lester lifted his leg. Even Joc Pederson when he was in his sprinter’s starting block stance made his first move back to first base the instant Lester lifted his leg. On top of that, you could hear the first base coach very clearly on the field mic telling every runner to be careful and watch the backpick.
So not only were they not running, it was made obvious to anyone watching (and surely to the Cubs) that the Dodgers had no interest in stealing bases. So what exactly is the purpose of the strategy? If the goal was simply to distract Lester, I think they severely overestimated Lester’s give a sh*t level.
The Dodgers looked absolutely terrified to attempt a steal in this game. That shouldn’t be a huge shock, since they are 27th in stolen bases this year (45) and just 14 players on the team even registered a steal, 4 of whom aren’t even on the roster. 21 of the Dodgers’ 45 steals this year came from 3 players, Kendrick, Pederson and Puig and Roberts hit Pederson and Puig 7th and 8th, the 2 spots in the lineup least conducive to attempting a steal while letting Hernandez lead off.
The moment the Dodgers started talking up how they were going to screw with Lester prior to the game, I knew it was BS. I’m convinced the Dodgers had zero interest in running in that game and instead were trying to get the Cubs to displace defenders to cover bunts and steals and open holes to hit through. In a way, that worked, Kendrick got a double past Bryant playing in at 3B when Kendrick would never bunt but what an absurd thing to even talk up. Jon Lester is high on the list of people I’d never want to piss off before a game. I’m not sure Lester wouldn’t literally maul someone if provoked.
The problem with this article is it assumes that players only run when they feel like it. Managers can call for the steal and the runner has to go. If it fails, its on the manager and not the player. For some reason Roberts was afraid to make the call. For some reason writers fail to hold him accountable.
The only thing that truly gets to Lester is when they take the base. Teasing him while staying at 1B just makes him laugh. Like a puppy stalking his 200 lb master . Cute, but the master only truly pays attention when the teeth latch on to some skin
Yes! For science!
There’s also the 7 sb game the Royals had against him in the 2014 wild card game..
There are a couple of other factors at play here:
1. Lester is incredibly fast to the plate. From when he starts his delivery to when he releases the ball, he is as fast as any pitcher in baseball.
2. Lester has become very good at varying when he will start his delivery. Sometimes he will sit there and hold the ball a long time, Other times he quickly start his delivery.
3. Lester will vary where he is looking as he starts his delivery. Sometimes he starts his delivery while he is still looking at the runner at first. Other times he will look at the catcher. Sometimes he will look back and forth between the catcher and first base.
What this all means is that even though it is easy to get a big lead on Lester, it is incredibly difficult to get a good jump on Lester. A bad jump combined with Ross’s good arm means that even with a good lead a runner will be thrown out. If you look at all of the times a runner was caught stealing against Lester this year, most of the time the runner had a great lead, but got a terrible jump and didn’t start running until the ball was already out of Lester’s hand.
So imagine you are a runner on first. You know you should steal so you take a huge lead. You tell yourself you are going to go on first movement. Lester looks in to get the sign and then looks at you at first. You get ready to jump, but Lester is not moving. He is just looking at you. A second or two more goes by and Lester is still looking at you. You are already uncomfortable taking a bigger lead than you have ever taken in your life and now you are in a staredown contest while you are 17 feet from safety. You take a deep breath to release some of the stress while Lester is still looking at you. Just as you do that, Lester delivers the ball to the plate. You know you are too late to go so you stay at first. You vow to ignore Lester’s stare on the next pitch and go on first movement. Next pitch Lester looks in for the sign. Goes to the set position and then delivers the ball to the plate without looking at you. The ball was gone before you even had time to prepare. Third pitch you are so discombobulated you take your big lead, then take a bigger secondary lead as Lester throws to the plate. Ross throws to first and picks you off.
Good points. It’s like Lester has taken control of all the tools at his disposal that don’t involve having to make an actual throw over. And his comfort level with Ross is so strong that he’s not consuming a lot of mental energy thinking about how to approach the hitter, so he can put a little thought to varying his look, timing, etc.
What you say is true.
The part that you are leaving out is there is essentially zero danger of Lester throwing to first. Why are you looking at his face? Like that matters? As soon as Ross throws the ball back to Lester, you are 20 feet off the bag. As soon as Lester’s right leg moves, you break for second. You either get a great jump, or he throws to first and you still have a very good chance to be safe before Rizzo gets the ball down, assuming Lester didn’t uncork another one in which case you are on third.
This is not to say that the runner is not thinking like this. He expects the pitcher to throw to first. But if you are going to take advantage of the yips, you have to take the yips into account. This is not normal base running. If your players cannot handle this, then don’t bother.
To repeat what others have said, the Dodgers should have either gone one way or the other. Either steal like mad or stop screwing around. The only compromise position was to steal like mad with some players and play it normal with others. This half-measure nonsense probably was a net negative to the Dodgers.
As John Steinbeck wrote in East of Eden, “It is one of the triumphs of the human that he can know a thing and still not believe it.”