This game is all on Buck

[Tony-OH]

Have you seen Tommy Hunter pitch this year? That's the guy you want pitching in a sudden-death, walkoff situation? A guy who gives up homeruns to every two batters?

The O's just didn't have any good options at that point. Calling it "awful managing" is ridiculous.

Ha, he made you so mad you had to get on the internet in Europe to counter him! Have fun!

[Rex Thunder]

So you think Buck's decision not to go with Patton, or Hunter, wasn't rational? There are as good reason's to go with Strop and JJ, as there are with Hunter and Patton. They are all overworked except for Strop. Just because you can think of reasons for a different decision, doesn't makes Buck's wrong or you smart.

Amen! If you can't go to Strop with a 4 run lead, when can you?!?!??! That's as good a chance as you are goingt o get to get him over his mental hurdles, AND it worked out in terms of needing to rest the bullpen. He is a ONE inning guy!! Hunter needs to be saved in the event one of our starters, who struggle getting thru 5, much less 6 lately, gets pounded early and a long relief stint is necessary.

[Three Run Homer]

I agree that the Hunter criticism can sometimes be a little over-the-top. But I don't know what you do with Strop. Buck is clearly trying to get him enough work to get back on track, to try to recapture his release/mechanics/etc. He's got crazy good stuff, a high GB rate, but command that's always on the edge. He's frustrating, but he's also got about a year of being a dominant Oriole reliever under his belt.

You can't give up on Strop yet, but that doesn't mean that Buck should keep putting him in high leverage situations. He's in a slump and he needs to work in mopup situations until he regains better in-game command of his stuff. If that means you need to call up another reliever and go with a three man bench for a few weeks, so be it. Continuing to let Strop fail in high leverage situations will cost the O's ballgames and will do nothing to help Strop's confidence.

[eb45]

So you think Buck's decision not to go with Patton, or Hunter, wasn't rational? There are as good reason's to go with Strop and JJ, as there are with Hunter and Patton. They are all overworked except for Strop. Just because you can think of reasons for a different decision, doesn't makes Buck's wrong or you smart.

Please cut the cheap shots out.

I think Buck mismanaged the ninth inning on Saturday, and that mismanagement ended up contributing to the Orioles' loss on Sunday. You can think of reasons for anything, but that doesn't make them right. Something being "rational" doesn't mean it's the best course of action. The reasons for bringing in Johnson in the ninth basically boil down to "it was a save situation" which is a perfect example of the tail wagging the dog. With Johnson as overworked as he was entering Saturday, he should have been saved for emergency situations only. Even if that extra run doesn't score, a three-run lead isn't an emergency situation. Patton or Hunter should have started the ninth inning Saturday, they should have been the guys called to warm up, not Strop and Johnson. If one of them fails so abjectly that it becomes an emergency situation, then you bring in Johnson, but you have to trust Patton and Hunter not to abjectly fail.

This isn't about "Buck was wrong and I'm right". I think Buck is a very good manager, I just think he gets too constrained by the arbitrary save definition, and in this case it might have been a factor in the Orioles losing a game.

Amen! If you can't go to Strop with a 4 run lead, when can you?!?!??! That's as good a chance as you are goingt o get to get him over his mental hurdles, AND it worked out in terms of needing to rest the bullpen. He is a ONE inning guy!! Hunter needs to be saved in the event one of our starters, who struggle getting thru 5, much less 6 lately, gets pounded early and a long relief stint is necessary.

Right now, I'd only use Strop when the Orioles are losing by more than a couple, winning by more than five, or there are absolutely no other options. Under no circumstances would I bring him in in a ninth inning when he could lose the game quicker than someone else could get warmed up. That could change if he rediscovers his command, but right now if he had any options he would be in AAA, not pitching in tie games in the bottom of the ninth.

[TonySoprano]

Have you seen Tommy Hunter pitch this year? That's the guy you want pitching in a sudden-death, walkoff situation? A guy who gives up homeruns to every two batters?

Every two batters? Three HR in 10.2 this season. Even with as many HRs he gave up last year, he didn't approach 1 in 2. I never figured you to go to hyperbole to make your point.

[LookitsPuck]

Have you seen Tommy Hunter pitch this year? That's the guy you want pitching in a sudden-death, walkoff situation? A guy who gives up homeruns to every two batters?

The O's just didn't have any good options at that point. Calling it "awful managing" is ridiculous.

I think there's a pecking order in that situation. You pitch the more effective guy. Whether that's McFarland or Hunter is a coin flip. But it's not Strop.

[atomic]

What if Buck didn't bring in JJ on saturday night and they lost that game and then he brought JJ in last night and they lost the game on sunday night. Would that have made you happier? As then Buck would have would have done the right thing in both games according to you.

[eb45]

What if Buck didn't bring in JJ on saturday night and they lost that game and then he brought JJ in last night and they lost the game on sunday night. Would that have made you happier? As then Buck would have would have done the right thing in both games according to you.

why would you think I'd be happier? of course I'm not happy when the Orioles lose. my frustration might be directed somewhere other than Buck (or I might not be frustrated at all, I tend not to get frustrated with baseball players), but I certainly wouldn't be happy.

To answer your question, if the Orioles brought in Hunter or Patton on Saturday and they pulled a Strop-like meltdown (unlikely), then Johnson should have come in. If the A's still win, then you tip your cap and move on. Their players beat the best you had. Fine. Then Johnson's unavailable Sunday, and I think I'd probably have done everything the same except bring in Strop in the ninth. If the A's still win again, it's a real tough loss, but you tip your cap and move on, because their players beat the best you had.

However, I think a far more likely outcome would have been that Hunter/Patton doesn't allow four runs before getting three outs, the O's go to the ninth on Sunday up 8-6, Johnson comes on and picks up a save. If that had happened instead, would Buck's moves still have been the right ones?

edit: this logic is so poor that in hindsight I don't know why I bothered responding. baseball decisions are made on a balance of probabilities, a hypothetical result doesn't change that balance of probabilities, it is merely one result. in my opinion, the balance of probabilities indicates that Buck made the wrong call Saturday, and saying "well what if..." doesn't change anything. construct a more likely, more positive scenario, please.

[PaulFolk]

Every two batters? Three HR in 10.2 this season. Even with as many HRs he gave up last year, he didn't approach 1 in 2. I never figured you to go to hyperbole to make your point.

I thought it was pretty clear it was hyperbole. The point is that a homer-prone Hunter is no slam-dunk choice to pitch in an extra-innings game on the road. I don't think he or McFarland are noticeably better choices than Strop, at least not to the point that it's "awful managing" not to put them in.

Ha, he made you so mad you had to get on the internet in Europe to counter him! Have fun!

Well, someone was wrong on the Internet. I can't let that stand, no matter what continent I'm in!

[eb45]

I thought it was pretty clear it was hyperbole. The point is that a homer-prone Hunter is no slam-dunk choice to pitch in an extra-innings game on the road. I don't think he or McFarland are noticeably better choices than Strop, at least not to the point that it's "awful managing" not to put them in.

I get your logic and I don't necessarily disagree, but the run expectancy after a leadoff walk is .85, which has to rise when teams are playing just to get one run.

[TonySoprano]

I thought it was pretty clear it was hyperbole. The point is that a homer-prone Hunter is no slam-dunk choice to pitch in an extra-innings game on the road. I don't think he or McFarland are noticeably better choices than Strop, at least not to the point that it's "awful managing" not to put them in.

After what you saw from Strop on Saturday, you would have went right back to him on Sunday?

[PaulFolk]

After what you saw from Strop on Saturday, you would have went right back to him on Sunday?

Well, he's bounced back from erratic outings before. With the four best relievers all having pitched already (or unavailable, in JJ's case), it's a pick-your-poison situation with the remaining three. There's not a big difference between Strop, Hunter, and McFarland in my mind. As I said, this isn't on Buck...his options weren't great.

[atomic]

why would you think I'd be happier? of course I'm not happy when the Orioles lose. my frustration might be directed somewhere other than Buck (or I might not be frustrated at all, I tend not to get frustrated with baseball players), but I certainly wouldn't be happy.

To answer your question, if the Orioles brought in Hunter or Patton on Saturday and they pulled a Strop-like meltdown (unlikely), then Johnson should have come in. If the A's still win, then you tip your cap and move on. Their players beat the best you had. Fine. Then Johnson's unavailable Sunday, and I think I'd probably have done everything the same except bring in Strop in the ninth. If the A's still win again, it's a real tough loss, but you tip your cap and move on, because their players beat the best you had.

However, I think a far more likely outcome would have been that Hunter/Patton doesn't allow four runs before getting three outs, the O's go to the ninth on Sunday up 8-6, Johnson comes on and picks up a save. If that had happened instead, would Buck's moves still have been the right ones?

edit: this logic is so poor that in hindsight I don't know why I bothered responding. baseball decisions are made on a balance of probabilities, a hypothetical result doesn't change that balance of probabilities, it is merely one result. in my opinion, the balance of probabilities indicates that Buck made the wrong call Saturday, and saying "well what if..." doesn't change anything. construct a more likely, more positive scenario, please.

Well you are using hypothetical hindsight on here. The Orioles won the game on Saturday. You can't rely on one guy. I am sure Buck thought that it was best to get the win in hand. Colon had been pitching well and it might be a 5-0 loss on Sunday.

I don't blame him at all for bringing JJ on saturday night. I think it was the right move. Get the win tonight and worry about the next game when it happens. If they lost Saturdays game by leaving Strop in you would have been on here complaining about that.

[atomic]

Well, he's bounced back from erratic outings before. With the four best relievers all having pitched already (or unavailable, in JJ's case), it's a pick-your-poison situation with the remaining three. There's not a big difference between Strop, Hunter, and McFarland in my mind. As I said, this isn't on Buck...his options weren't great.

I think McFarland would have been a better choice but Buck has to think about today. What if Britton lasts two innings tonight? You need McFarland to back up Britton. Last two Britton starts he went 4 innings and 3 innings. He also had a game where he lasted 2 2/3 inning last year and another 4 inning start. That is out of 11 starts.

[eb45]

Well you are using hypothetical hindsight on here. The Orioles won the game on Saturday. You can't rely on one guy. I am sure Buck thought that it was best to get the win in hand. Colon had been pitching well and it might be a 5-0 loss on Sunday.

I don't blame him at all for bringing JJ on saturday night. I think it was the right move. Get the win tonight and worry about the next game when it happens. If they lost Saturdays game by leaving Strop in you would have been on here complaining about that.

You can't "worry about the next game when it happens." Buck gets paid lots of money to do exactly the opposite of that. If using Johnson Saturday would have made him unavailable Sunday, then Buck should have rested Johnson if at all possible (i.e. don't bring him in in a four-run game).

And yes, if Strop had blown it I'd be upset about Buck's decision to go to Strop, as I have been throughout this thread. I've stated time and again that what I would have done in that situation would be to bring in Patton to face Rosales, Crisp, Jaso, and Smith, and if he can't get three of those guys out, then start warming up Johnson with the intention of bringing him in if a run scores and there are runners on base.

Leverage isn't defined by whether it's a save situation or not. Four runs in the ninth is too high leverage to use Strop and too low leverage to use an overworked Johnson. Buck sacrificed Johnson for Sunday to protect a lead that any of his other relievers could have protected, and that wound up coming back to bite him. It's poor bullpen management, whether or not there are reasons for it.

The sort of forethought required to not make your best reliever unavailable in a situation where you really don't need to do that is exactly Buck's job, it's exactly the sort of thing he's so good at doing, unless it's technically a "save" situation, in which all forethought flies out the window and it's time to get the closer in there.