I can't believe Buck pushed Chen that far again

[Tony-OH]

I was surprised when Chen came out for the 8th. IMO, this has to be Buck trying to push Chen farther. If a pitcher leaves the game around 100 pitches every game, he never builds up the endurance or confidence to pitch past that. If you can push a starter to 110-120 he becomes stronger between 80-100. So instead of the tank becoming empty at 90-100 they stay stronger during those pitches.

Even if this is true, and I'm not sure there is a direct correlation of effectiveness earlier in the game if a starter is stretched out, you don't do this with a one run lead. You do this when your team has a comfortable lead. This point seems to go unnoticed by Buck for some reason.

[DrungoHazewood]

I will say one thing. Not that long ago quite a few people were saying Chen was good for 6 innings and 90 pitches. He clearly can do more than that.

But should he? The whole roster is designed so that the starter doesn't have to risk high pitch counts, multiple times through the order, facing hitters when gassed. I'm happy Chen got out of it. I don't have a good feeling that's the usual case. He has almost two years of track record of not pitching well from the 6th-on.

IIRC, 15-20 years ago, 120 pitches seemed to be the norm.

Yep, and when everyone did that you weren't at a competitive disadvantage when your starter gave up an .800+ OPS the third or fourth time through the order. But today you are.

In 1915 a starter went the whole game, even if he was throwing 13 innings and 198 pitches on short rest. But you know what, you still would have won more games if you'd have capped your starter at 8 innings and had someone come in and throw gas for the 9th. It just wasn't culturally acceptable.

This was strictly a BS "see I was right move". See, Chen can be effective into the 8th. Salvation for leaving him in against Hosmer.

Why did DD make the recent trade if he isn't used in the 8th inning?

It makes no sense.

Why have a whole battalion of short relievers if you're going to have your starter go into the 8th inning on 110+ pitches? If you're gonna do that I'd much rahter have a functioning bench than several "in case of emergency break glass" relievers.

[Malike]

Imagine the game thread if Chen had let up the tying or go-ahead run there. Complete meltdown.

Those folks supporting Buck here, I feel you, but ask yourselves if you'd be supporting Buck if the decision backfired. It's extremely risky. Buck knows his team better than us, but DAMN did he get lucky.

Let's be honest, if he brought Rodriguez in and he gave up a hit and a HR, Buck would have been crucified for the move, DD would have been crucified for the trade. If the move doesn't work out either way, Buck gets crucified. There are dozens and dozens of posts questioning why the starter was pulled when the reliever blew the game for them. Then there are dozens upon dozens of posts complaining about why this reliever was used instead of that one. Classic damned if you do damned if you don't.

I also don't see this as Buck being stubborn or trying to prove something. I think he knows the Astros can't hit, I think he knows one ball was hit hard nearly the entire game.

In the game thread, people were actually saying this is the reason Buck gets fired from every job, it's ridiculous.

[Redskins Rick]

That was ridiculous, I'll give you that.

Wasn't Buck fired in NY, because he refused the owner's order to fire the whole coaching staff and bring in new people?

I agree that this is just a classic damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

[Frobby]

That was ridiculous, I'll give you that.

Agreed. I actually think Buck is above average at knowing when to change pitchers. But that doesn't mean I agree every time out.

[Malike]

Agreed. I actually think Buck is above average at knowing when to change pitchers. But that doesn't mean I agree every time out.

No manager is perfect, but Buck is the best one we've had since Davey by far. We are lucky to have him, even if he doesn't nail every decision we think he should.

[Redskins Rick]

No manager is perfect, but Buck is the best one we've had since Davey by far. We are lucky to have him, even if he doesn't nail every decision we think he should.

:agree:

Nobody is perfect, Buck is by far the best since Davey was ran out of town.

[CA-ORIOLE]

But should he? The whole roster is designed so that the starter doesn't have to risk high pitch counts, multiple times through the order, facing hitters when gassed. I'm happy Chen got out of it. I don't have a good feeling that's the usual case. He has almost two years of track record of not pitching well from the 6th-on.

No, I don't think so. I think it's quite a bit more nuanced than this. It looks to me that Chen is very capable of going 7/100 and maybe more (and being effective) rather than the 6/90 most people were stating earlier. i've seen the same/similar case stated for Gonzo as well. In addition to that we've had several other starters this year show they haven't been able to go deep into games. If your goal is 6/90, you're probably going to average less than that. I don't care how good your BP is, if that's your philosophy, you're heading for trouble. There are a lot of questions here: How long does it take to build a starter up? What's the cost of that? What's the marginal rate of effectiveness in the later innings once he is built up? What's the residual impact on innings/effectiveness of the BP? What's the quality and depth of the BP? etc, etc.

I think it's a little ironic that some people (not necessarily you) are harping on the importance of PPA in order to knock out the starter and get to teams weak BP's and at the same time advocating (or at least were advocating) 6/90 for a couple of our better SP's. In reality most teams are fairly strong at the back end of the BP, but a lot of teams are weak or vulnerable in the middle. Many of these guys aren't starters for a reason. Some have poor splits and managers routinely stagger lineups for this purpose.

Overall, I don't think we have a very strong BP, particularly in the middle and the difference between a starter going into the 7/8 innings vice the 5/6 innings could be as many as 2-3 extra relievers per game. That has a huge impact if you continue to repeat it.

All that said, this is a balancing act and I probably wouldn't have brought Chen out for the 8th of yesterday's game. I'm probably a bit more concerned about getting him hurt. I'll also say I'm not overly impressed with what I've seen of KRod and I'm fine if Buck wants to take things a little slow with him for right now.

[Tony-OH]

Let's be honest, if he brought Rodriguez in and he gave up a hit and a HR, Buck would have been crucified for the move, DD would have been crucified for the trade. If the move doesn't work out either way, Buck gets crucified. There are dozens and dozens of posts questioning why the starter was pulled when the reliever blew the game for them. Then there are dozens upon dozens of posts complaining about why this reliever was used instead of that one. Classic damned if you do damned if you don't.

I also don't see this as Buck being stubborn or trying to prove something. I think he knows the Astros can't hit, I think he knows one ball was hit hard nearly the entire game.

In the game thread, people were actually saying this is the reason Buck gets fired from every job, it's ridiculous.

Every time we have one of these threads this stupid logic gets brought up. No, most of the smart, educated fans would have totally understood bringing in a reliever to start the 8th inning in a one run game with Chen at 106 pitches.

As for the Buck getting fired, as the guy who brought this up, what I actually said was the Buck's stubborn ways cost him three jobs in the past and after watching him push Chen twice past when he should have been taken out, I'm starting to understand why Buck has worn out his welcome in places.

That does not mean I think Buck should be fired or that Buck is a terrible manager, but it does mean that for all the good Buck brings, he seems to hunch manage or go against the statistical match a bit more than I would like. It was a one run ball game and regardless of whether it was the Astros or the Yankees, it only takes one swing to tie the game. When your pitcher is getting hit at a .500 clip this season past 100 pitches and .333 last year and you have a fresh bullpen with your two main set up men in need of pitching, then it's a head-scratching move why Chen started the 8th.

[mark_beckens]

Even if this is true, and I'm not sure there is a direct correlation of effectiveness earlier in the game if a starter is stretched out, you don't do this with a one run lead. You do this when your team has a comfortable lead. This point seems to go unnoticed by Buck for some reason.

I have no idea what Buck is thinking. I agree it's better to do it with a larger lead. We haven't had many lately.

[Tony-OH]

All that said, this is a balancing act and I probably wouldn't have brought Chen out for the 8th of yesterday's game. I'm probably a bit more concerned about getting him hurt. I'll also say I'm not overly impressed with what I've seen of KRod and I'm fine if Buck wants to take things a little slow with him for right now.

Then why not bring out O'day to start the 8th? He hadn't pitched since last Wednesday? What you and few other Buck apologists are apparently not taking into consideration is the score. If the Orioles are up 6-3 or more and you want to see how your starter goes up to 120 pitches than great, but Buck took an unnecessary risk in a 4-3 game. It cost us in KC and if O'day doesn't get that last out it would have cost us in Houston.

The bullpens are put together the way they are for a reason. I would have perfectly happy with O'day, Hunter, or F-Rod in the 8th and if any of them would have blown the game it would not have been on buck, but rather that pitcher.

[Tony-OH]

No manager is perfect, but Buck is the best one we've had since Davey by far. We are lucky to have him, even if he doesn't nail every decision we think he should.

And I doubt any of us would argue this point. This is a discussion community where we talk about the good and bad points of managers and players. Overall Buck is an outstanding manager, but he's been making some questionable bullpen management decisions of late and they should be questioned and discussed.

[Malike]

Then why not bring out O'day to start the 8th? He hadn't pitched since last Wednesday? What you and few other Buck apologists are apparently not taking into consideration is the score. If the Orioles are up 6-3 or more and you want to see how your starter goes up to 120 pitches than great, but Buck took an unnecessary risk in a 4-3 game. It cost us in KC and if O'day doesn't get that last out it would have cost us in Houston.

The bullpens are put together the way they are for a reason. I would have perfectly happy with O'day, Hunter, or F-Rod in the 8th and if any of them would have blown the game it would not have been on buck, but rather that pitcher.

Why do you lower yourself to calling people Buck Apologists because Buck made a defensible move that you didn't like? I've seen CA-Oriole be critical of Buck, I have been plenty critical of Buck, but because this one instance is defensible we're called apologists? That's wacky.

[Tony-OH]

Why do you lower yourself to calling people Buck Apologists because Buck made a defensible move that you didn't like? I've seen CA-Oriole be critical of Buck, I have been plenty critical of Buck, but because this one instance is defensible we're called apologists? That's wacky.

Because I don't have a better term to describe you people, honestly. I don't know why you are so concerned over it? Would defenders be better? Buck defenders? I wasn't trying to insult you all just trying to find a way to put you together.

By the way, it's your opinion that his move was defensible. I find it only defensible if it were 1970 again and the Orioles had a 10-man pitching staff. Other than that , the only "wacky" thing around here is that some of you rush to Buck's aid no matter how unconventional his decisions may have been. I like Buck, but I'm able to be critical at times without feeling like I'm calling for him to be fired.

Buck is not perfect. The sooner some of you understand that the better this place will be.

[mark_beckens]

Buck is not perfect. The sooner some of you understand that the better this place will be.

No one is perfect. Many think they are but that is just one of the many things that make them not perfect.