Major league management of closers makes me angry. Anyone who has watched a baseball game with me has probably seen me throw things when managers make the same mistake again and again. What is that mistake? Not using your closer in the highest-leverage situation in the game.
In the 7th inning, A.J. Burnett allowed two baserunners without getting an out. With a two run lead, this situation was the highest-leverage situation that the Yankees can reasonable expect to have (they can’t just expect the bases to be loaded in the 8th or 9th, and that wouldn’t necessarily even be higher-leverage). This is a situation that calls for Mariano Rivera, Girardi’s best reliever. Instead, Phil Hughes and Damaso Marte blew the game, and the Yankees lost.
Joe Girardi made the move that every major league manager today would make, and its still the wrong move. He was holding Mariano for a theoretical situation that may or may not happen (and he did end up using Rivera in a lower-leverage situation) , or because Mariano’s defined role involves the end of the game except in a tie.
“Closer” is a title, but “Best Reliever” is a fact. The best reliever should pitch in the toughest situation once the starter comes out, be it the 8th, 9th, or 5th inning. Had Rivera come in for the 7th, the likelihood is that he would have pitched a scoreless 9th, and some combination of Coke, Marte, Hughes, and Robertson could have pitched the 9th inning. My theory has always been that your best reliever should almost never come in without men on base. But they don’t give out saves for, you know, being a valuable baseball player.
On to game 6.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
14 Responses to Joe Girardi Should Have Used Mo In The 7th
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
What happens when there are two on an nobody out in the 8th & 9th when the pressure is much higher. Phil should have been able to get the job done and he didn’t.
Functionally, that is the same exact situation. If Phil Hughes can get out of a two out, no one on jam in the 7th, shouldn’t he be just as good in the 8th? Point is, you can’t assume that a 2 on, no one out jam will come up in the future. Who knows what the future holds. Its like saving your chips to bet when you have a pair of aces and not when you have queens in front of you.
I’ll agree that you can’t positively assume that the Angels would threaten again later, but as good of a club as they are, it would be hard to bet that they wouldn’t.
In my opinion, two men on in the 7th is not the toughest situation in the world where you need to bring in your closer. Unless we are looking in hindsight here you would have expected the job to get done with the moves Giardi made.
Last, if we want to argue all innings are the same and the high leverage situations are more important than the 9th I’d turn to the game Coke closed earlier in the season where in the post-game he pretty much admitted to shitting his pants.
I’d just like to add that Steve did a good job in the previous post – I’m unsure why every game lost falls on the manager, especially when the manager does a fine job.
what I wrote about it last night
You are absolutely 100% right. In a do or die situation you use your best reliever. I hate closers and I hate saves. I still don’t understand why major league managers refuse to use their best in the toughest situation. JeffG isn’t wrong, but honestly, what are you waiting for? The game didn’t matter in the 9th, why save him for an inning that is less important because he was sitting in the pen?
Rivera for 3 innings with days and days of rest… if this situation comes up in Game 6, this SHOULD be the plan.
Who said anything about 3 innings? Why is the 9th inning so sacred that Rivera has to pitch it? Sure, its a high pressure situation. So is every inning in the playoffs. Big whoop. Rivera pitches for 6 outs and then sits down.
I agree, EJ. The problem is, if Burnett had not started the 7th, the Yankees would have won the game. There would have been no need to go to Mariano, at least until the 8th. Give the Yankee bullpen a lead with no men on base and I think they’ll keep it that way. Hughes had some trouble, but perhaps if there weren’t men on in the first place it would have been different.
seeing as how the other Yankees relievers were miserable against the bottom of the Angels order… imagine if they had to face the top of the order on that night as well.
the rationale for my proposing 3 innings for Mo is that it follows the logic that, no matter who is due up, the Yankees relievers will struggle.
Imagine if Rivera preserves the lead only for a rally monkey to strike in the bottom of the 9th over Hughes or Chamberlain. Time for some… THIRD (inning) guessing.
I agree with you 100% and this is supported by stats. You bring your best arm in at the most critical game changing juncture. The ninth with no one out doesn’t make any sense. Rivera had much more potential to affect the outcome in the 7th. If you need to go to someone else later, so be it. At least you know you threw your best arm at a critical moment in the game.
Managers are wed to the closer idea, so don’t expect any change soon.
The yanks were the ones who invented the setup/closer scenario. No reason we cant reinvent it.
As good as Rivera is (the best), he isn’t being used to his full potential.
I like it, not all save situations happen in the 9th inning or later, last night it was in the 7th, I wonder if any manager out there has the guts to do it
Hell guys, there WASN’T even a ninth inning last night. It was over by then.
It’s just a matter of time before the bullpen ace replaces the bullpen closer. It will happen…but a manager will have to have both the guts and support of upper management/ownership to do it.