Bottom line we need a real closer.

[backwardsk]

I think Buck does an excellent job at managing the bullpen. I think he is under appreciated in that aspect. However, I wouldn't have warmed up Britton last night. Hunter was nasty with his one batter. I would have gone with him in the ninth as his game to win or lose. Britton's now pitched in 4 of the 5 games since the break. Can you really use him tonight?

As far as bullpen management goes, I often hear from those that do not like the traditional closer role that you should use your best reliever in high leverage situations. While on paper that sounds good, it's more difficult to do in practice.

For example, let's say Gonzalez is cruising along into the 7th of a 2-0 game. He gives up a bloop hit to the number 9 hitter and Calhoun is up with Trout next. Do you make a visit to the mound to give Britton time to warm up so he can face Trout? Then Gonzalez gets a DP and the threat is gone. Now you have Britton ready to go, but you have Gonzalez still with the shut-out and the tying run in the on-deck circle.

[Guest rochester]

I've watched baseball for 35 years and I've never seen a manager maximize a bullpen as well as Showalter. laRussa was really good. I don't like him but Giriardi is good. I think the reduced warm ups and understood roles are factors. I'm not going into any more depth than that, because my experience with these conversations is that few are actually open to change when discussing these types of things.

But I want to be on the record as saying that the bullpen management is a major facet of a manager's influence on actual game results and Buck does it extremely well IMHO.

I dunno - I would really like to read it. Remember us folks that kind of lay in the weeds.

[Redskins Rick]

I've watched baseball for 35 years and I've never seen a manager maximize a bullpen as well as Showalter. laRussa was really good. I don't like him but Giriardi is good. I think the reduced warm ups and understood roles are factors. I'm not going into any more depth than that, because my experience with these conversations is that few are actually open to change when discussing these types of things.

But I want to be on the record as saying that the bullpen management is a major facet of a manager's influence on actual game results and Buck does it extremely well IMHO.

I thought the knock on LaRussa was the way he over-managed his bullpen?

[24fps]

This is the essence of the closer debate for me. Its not about Britton, its about how to properly assign roles and how to use your bullpen most effectively.

There is so much to juggle for a manager and it seems Buck doesn't like to warm guys up and not use them. This might be more important then we think it is which is why if Britton gets warm, he is coming in instead of letting the previous guy keep pitching.

I have to wonder, if the manger had an iPad with custom software figuring out the ramifications of each possible bullpen move (its much like a chess game) would we see bullpen usage change like we are seeing defensive shifts change?

Or is this something they can be monitoring from the clubhouse and phoning into the dugout?

I agree with vatech1994 that Showalter (usually) does an excellent job of bullpen management. He also seems to do an excellent job at creating and maintaining team cohesion. I have to think that part of that stems from not only assigning roles but also attaching responsibility to those roles. When Britton got the closers job he responded exactly as we all hoped he would and I don't think Buck will reward that by removing him until he conclusively demonstrates that he can no longer handle it. In this regard Buck may be loyal to a fault. I certainly don't think he would ever allow a piece of software to make that call for him, I think he respects the human dimension of the game too much.

Any closer debate that involves the Orioles right now necessarily must be about Britton first and foremost. So far he hasn't provided us much reason for concern.

[srock]

I agree with vatech1994 that Showalter (usually) does an excellent job of bullpen management. He also seems to do an excellent job at creating and maintaining team cohesion. I have to think that part of that stems from not only assigning roles but also attaching responsibility to those roles. When Britton got the closers job he responded exactly as we all hoped he would and I don't think Buck will reward that by removing him until he conclusively demonstrates that he can no longer handle it. In this regard Buck may be loyal to a fault. I certainly don't think he would ever allow a piece of software to make that call for him, I think he respects the human dimension of the game too much.

Any closer debate that involves the Orioles right now necessarily must be about Britton first and foremost. So far he hasn't provided us much reason for concern.

This I agree with. Britton is ideal closer for a team that doesn't have a Mariano Rivera type talent because Britton is effective without being expensive.

Software is already making all kinds of decision, such as the defensive shifts. Its a matter of what information is available to the dugout in realtime. The possible scenarios for shifting aren't that many, so having a notepad with the shifts written down is sufficient. Bullpen usage is far more complicated.

Where I question Buck is going overboard with the roles. For example, Britton has pitched two days in a row both times entering in the 9th with a 2 run lead. Same situation occurs tonight, does Britton come back in?

Buck used Jim Johnson like this even though the numbers clearly indicated Johnson was far less effective when used without rest.

To me, the role of closer (or any role) needs to include exceptions. Such as: Britton will be the 2nd choice closer if he has pitched two days in a row. Therefore, tonight closing might the job of Webb or Hunter or whoever makes sense today.

[DrungoHazewood]

I thought the knock on LaRussa was the way he over-managed his bullpen?

My knock on LaRussa is that he almost personally introduced the concept of matching up situational relievers almost batter-for-batter for the last 3-4 innings of a game. He probably gained advantages by doing that, but as soon as his model became standard games got longer, and almost all roster flexibility and strategy involving position players totally disappeared. Because his methods require 12-13 pitchers he basically killed platooning, AL pinch hitting, and extensive use of defensive replacements/pinch runners.

[El Gordo]

Few bullpens have more than a couple of guys who can pitch effectively to both handed hitters. If for example we had Koji, Britton, Hunter and O'Day, in the pen you might see something more like closer by committee. But we don't. Even Hunter and O'Day have questionable splits v LH batters. The thing having one closer does is to allow for more flexibility for match ups in the 6th, 7th, and 8th, where you really need it. Assigned roles and not warming people up without using them is as much psychological as it is physical. If guy knows when he is to be used he will be able to focus on what hitters he will be facing and how he wants to pitch them. Hard to do that if you can be sent in any time with little notice. Also getting up and sitting down a lot just diminishes the pitchers focus and adrenaline. One thing I would suggest to Buck is since Britton is our closer we know he won't be needed before the 8th . Why not keep him on the bench as our LH bat, he probably is the best one we have not already in the lineup. :laughlol:

[weams]

My knock on LaRussa is that he almost personally introduced the concept of matching up situational relievers almost batter-for-batter for the last 3-4 innings of a game. He probably gained advantages by doing that, but as soon as his model became standard games got longer, and almost all roster flexibility and strategy involving position players totally disappeared. Because his methods require 12-13 pitchers he basically killed platooning, AL pinch hitting, and extensive use of defensive replacements/pinch runners.

And kept teams of the 80's and 90's from scoring 12 runs a game.

[DrungoHazewood]

And kept teams of the 80's and 90's from scoring 12 runs a game.

If I made that post Gordo would already have chimed in to beat me up for exaggerating.

In any case, I think LaRussa's machanations with the pen probably saved him a few tenths of runs a game, while costing him and his opponents some number of runs on offense. I believe that the practice of turning Tommy Hunter, mediocre starter, into Tommy Hunter, 100 mph reliever, has has more impact than the constant L/R matchups with sidearming, one-out Tony Fossases.

[Guest]

Now that inning was just nasty wow.

[Barnaby Graves]

I have no idea how our cheap plastic Chinese knockoff closer struck out the side tonight.

[Hank Scorpio]

Dude is absolutely FILTHY.

[weams]

Three Strike outs! That's pretty real. And T.J. and Matusz did their jobs.

[bpilktree]

Three Strike outs! That's pretty real. And T.J. and Matusz did their jobs.

Everyone says we need a strikeout closer but if you look at the numbers for Britton as the closer he is near the top in k's

[Ruzious]

Now that inning was just nasty wow.

Dude is absolutely FILTHY

Philthy McNasty.

Yeah, this team desperately needs a closer.