Wagner sent back to NY

[Guest AG/DC]

OlerudOwned wrote: Was that aspect ever up for debate here?

Mebbe I'm misreading, but it seems right there explicitly in the question you're speculating on.

[batmagadanleadoff]

OlerudOwned wrote: I think we might all be arguing slightly different things here.

Since I started it, I'll tell you what I'm sayin': That it's no harder to get a batter out in the ninth inning, than in the sixth, or seventh, or any other inning, all things being equal. Obviously, it's harder to protect a smaller lead than a larger lead, but that was never the point of discussion, which should be obvious by reading the posts in question together.

[Guest OlerudOwned]

AG/DC wrote: ="OlerudOwned"]Was that aspect ever up for debate here? Mebbe I'm misreading, but it seems right there explicitly in the question you're speculating on.

I think I may have been the one off track there. What I'm saying is what magadan is saying, "That it's no harder to get a batter out in the ninth inning, than in the sixth, or seventh, or any other inning, all things being equal."

What I'm also saying is that all things aren't equal, psychologically, for whatever reasons that may or may not have to due with the culture of the game. It's harder to protect that 1-run 9th inning lead if you've been convinced that it's harder.

[Guest AG/DC]

And I'm saying that, even with run differential frozen at one for all innings considered, on average, you're going to face better batters in the ninth.

[Guest OlerudOwned]

AG/DC wrote: And I'm saying that, even with run differential frozen at one for all innings considered, on average, you're going to face better batters in the ninth.

I don't think that's going to make too dramatic of a difference. I'm out of my depth running the math here, but there's a whole lot of variables to that. Where the inning is starting off, double-switches earlier in the game, how good the batting team's bench is, the thought that a team would probably just as likely to go with their top pinch-hitter in, say, the 7th inning of a close game. Also, prototypical closer has the benefit of usually starting off the 9th inning. You'd be better off going to the best man in the 'pen with a baserunner on in a 1-run game in the 8th, no?

[batmagadanleadoff]

By the ninth inning, it's entirely random as far as what part of the batting order will bat. Pinch hitters? They're usually bench players anyway.

[Frayed Knot]

Wagner's little speech - and particularly the line about "everybody in there" (implying the rest of the pen) is as good as I am if not better - was more sticking up for the rest of the pen than anything else. Having to hear how much they suck all the time can't be easy even if no one wants to hear them complain about it. Wags is just the only one who's going to say something like that and not worry about how it sounds.

His best line overall was when he said; "the only reason I'm the closer is that I sucked at starting"

[Guest AG/DC]

In the early innings, you pinch hit for your pitcher only if the game has already gotten egregious. In the middle innings, you pinch hit for the pitcher only, and only if he's finished or a game-changing RBI.

In the later innings, you pinch-hit for the pitcher, the eighth guy if the tying run is up, and potentially the second, seventh, and maybe sixth if it can help you get a fortuitous matchup in a game-changing situation.

I wouldn't to poo-poo the difference. Managers bend over backwards trying to get their best available hitters into game-changing situations, as they try to get their best available pitchers, often over-focusing on saving their best card for the ninth as they do with pitchers.

This seems pretty clear. Pinch-hitters in the National League in 2008 have a .651 OPS --- no great shakes, but they sure have an advantage on pitchers, who check in with a .353.

[Guest OlerudOwned]

AG/DC wrote: In the early innings, you pinch hit for your pitcher only if the game has already gotten egregious. In the middle innings, you pinch hit for the pitcher only, and only if he's finished or a game-changing RBI. In the later innings, you pinch-hit for the pitcher, the eighth guy if the tying run is up, and potentially the second, seventh, and maybe sixth if it can help you get a fortuitous matchup in a game-changing situation. I wouldn't to poo-poo the difference. Managers bend over backwards trying to get their best available hitters into game-changing situations, as they try to get their best available pitchers, often over-focusing on saving their best card for the ninth as they do with pitchers. This seems pretty clear. Pinch-hitters in the National League in 2008 have a .651 OPS --- no great shakes, but they sure have an advantage on pitchers, who check in with a .353.

They've got a plenty big lead on pitchers, but they're about even with hitters in the 8th spot (with LaRussa and Yost dragging down the position by sticking pitchers in there) and significantly worse than every other place in the order, making your second point something of a wash. It doesn't matter how much managing you do, having the middle of the order come up in the 9th is a matter of fortune.

Edited August 19, 2008 by Guest

[batmagadanleadoff]

The pitcher's batting slot isn't any more likely to come up in the ninth inning, as opposed to the eighth or seventh. Therefore, the idea that the pitcher will not bat in the later innings does not, by itself, justify the opponent's predetermined use of its' best reliever in the ninth inning.

I don't believe that pinch hitters who bat for someone other than the pitcher are used significantly more frequently in the ninth inning.

[batmagadanleadoff]

OlerudOwned wrote: They'd got a plenty big lead on pitchers, but they're about even with hitters in the 8th spot (with LaRussa and Yost dragging down the position by sticking pitchers in there) and significantly worse than every other place in the order, making your second point something of a wash. It doesn't matter how much managing you do, having the middle of the order come up in the 9th is a matter of fortune.

I agree. No one can dispute the huge offensive upgrade in pinch-hitting for the pitcher. But the pitcher's slot doesn't come up in the ninth inning any more so than in the eighth or seventh innings. And the other pinch hitters are usually bench players. Do you think that Marlon Anderson strikes fear into the heart of the opposing manager?

[Guest AG/DC]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The pitcher's batting slot isn't any more likely to come up in the ninth inning, as opposed to the eighth or seventh. Therefore, the idea that the pitcher will not bat in the later innings does not, by itself, justify the opponent's predetermined use of its' best reliever in the ninth inning.

If there's any doubt whatsoever in the game, it's almost guaranteed to never come up. And I'm not justifying anything. I'm arguing that the ninth inning is harder, other things being equal.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I don't believe that pinch hitters who bat for someone other than the pitcher are used significantly more frequently in the ninth inning.

Believe it.

[batmagadanleadoff]

AG/DC wrote: If there's any doubt whatsoever in the game, it's almost guaranteed to never come up. And I'm not justifying anything. I'm arguing that the ninth inning is harder, other things being equal.

What's your favorite ocean: Pacific or Atlantic?

[Guest AG/DC]

The Ocean of Love.

[Fman99]

Billy Ocean, duh.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Get out of my dreams and into my car.

Get out of the Mexican League and into the Mets bullpen, Ricardo Rincon.

[Centerfield]

Daily News says Billy is doing better. Could pitch in a simulated game this weekend and be activated by next week.

[Guest holychicken]

Centerfield wrote: Daily News says Billy is doing better. Could pitch in a simulated game this weekend and be activated by next week.

You know at that point our BP will have continued this nice little run they are on and having him come back will make people nervous.

[Guest cooby]

So what's the deal? Should I put him back on my fantasy team?