Why Rocco Baldelli Went to Cole Irvin on Sunday, and Whether He Was Right

[MrAV]

Did you just actually write an article saying a discarded non-performer with an ERA of nearly 10 (and worse in Fenway specifically) was the smart thing to do?

I am speechless.  I would GLADLY keep the ball in Zebby’s hands over Irvin.  Irvin shouldn’t even be on the team.  

[USAFChief]

Ridiculously bad decision by the manager.

 

Pretty transparent fanboy writing.

[Aerodeliria]

If it were Lopez, does he stay in? Absolutely....and everyone knows this. I think it is demoralizing and wrong not to let Zebby get a chance at a W. Instead, we go to the slum dog island of misfit toys millionaire instead of trusting Zebby's young arm, so you can rationalize all you want, but the decision was wrong from so many angles. Rocco for all of his analytical knowledge has terrible in-game instincts...

[Parfigliano]

10 hours ago, ashbury said:

The third-time-through logic has this one missing piece: Zebby's OPS-against is even worse the first time through (.862) and second time (.904) than the third (.813).  If you were not going to let him continue a third time through, due to the numbers, then those numbers say you shouldn't have started him in the first place.  Given this paradox, I'd be inclined to give less credence to the small sample of data to work with.

Here's the other way I look at it.  If you leave Zebby in and he fails to get Duran, you can take him out and put in a righty to replace him that you trust more.  If you put in either lefty and he fails to get Duran, you are stuck with no new option for two more batters.

Ultimately, though, if Sands would have been the man (to clean up immediately after Zebby vs Duran), the outcome when he actually did come in a few batters later doesn't suggest anything better.  A lose-lose proposition.  We do not have a shut-down bullpen.

I leave Zebby in, last batter regardless of the outcome, feeling that all the options are low probability for success.  Maybe a success against a tough batter gives the youngster an extra shot of confidence going forward., plus it puts him in line for the W since it'll be 5 complete innings.  If he fails, worst case it's 2-2.  We saw the worst case with the lefty he brought in: 3-2 (okay okay, I guess 4-2 was a possibility too).

 

Stop Making Sense

[DJL44]

7 hours ago, ashbury said:

That's more or less a restatement of what I thought I was trying to say.  I don't know what his third-time-through numbers "really" are,

If you don't have a large enough sample size for an individual pitcher then you assume the base rate (use the data from all pitchers). The base rate says pitchers get worse the 3rd time through the order.

[DJL44]

7 hours ago, NYCTK said:

In a playoff push especially, RP are often asked to extend themselves a little bit. Every single one of them had the day off before, and every single one had the day off after. It's not too much to ask them to get 5 or 6 outs instead of 3.

Either Jax or Duran would have to get MORE than 6 outs to finish that game. There were 13 outs to get. We have already seen it blow up trying to get multiple innings out of Jax and Duran this September.

[dxpavelka]

Not all things can be measured analytically.  If you disagree please explain the metric for momentum.

[NYCTK]

44 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Either Jax or Duran would have to get MORE than 6 outs to finish that game. There were 13 outs to get. We have already seen it blow up trying to get multiple innings out of Jax and Duran this September.

If you'll go back to read my original comment, you'll see I'm not saying he should try to get out using only Jax and Duran. He COULD try to get out using only 3 RP, which wouldn't be unique or unprecedented in MLB. I do recognize that this bullpen is fairly coddled and they've not been asked to work like that this season so I do understand that another reliever is likely necessary. 

But then we've gotta ask if Irvin facing their heart of the order with tying run at the plate in the 5th is preferable to, say, Varland facing their 7-8-9 hitters later in the game in an unknown situation. 

If this game was as important as we all know it to be, Rocco should be managing it with more urgency than a game in mid - June. 

[TwinsDr2021]

9 hours ago, DJL44 said:

This is perfect hindsight. Zebby Matthews has almost no track record of success in the majors. Irvin has managed to stay in the majors for six seasons.

Every option Rocco had was a bad option

 

Watching the game with my son, we both said walk Duran and bring in Sands. I was good with taking Zebby out but IMO the only two options where Sands walking Duran or Sands pitching to him.

[TwinsDr2021]

9 hours ago, DJL44 said:

Those 3 pitchers usually get 9 outs. It is quite unlikely they can each go more than one inning and keep the game scoreless. In fact, Sands was terrible in his chance to keep the game close, so with the benefit of seeing what happened in the game he was an awful choice.

Do you think Jax and Duran could get 13 outs and keep the Red Sox off the board? Are you prepared to do ask Jax and Duran to do that every game from here on out? What happens if either one gets injured because you're suddenly asking them to pitch multiple innings at the end of the season? Would you defend Rocco's decision to throw away an entire future season due to injury rehab in a desperate move to try to win this one game against the Red Sox?

Sands has went more than 1 inning 21 times this year. He could get you or 6/7 and the other two could 6/7get

[JD-TWINS]

11 hours ago, S Bart said:

I have seen 10 other teams play in person this year including 4 division leaders. This lefty/righty analytic concept simply is not deployed like it has been to the high degree by the Twins. It is especially true when a team does not have solid relief pitching like the Twins with their lefties. Momentum plays a part in the equation. An example is when Ober was having a great game recently (did not have a high number of pitches) and he was pulled due to the batter's hitting side. One needs to consider that a relief pitcher has to face 3 batters and the next two could be from the weaker side of the plate (analytically).

In the end, the lack of going after new relief pitchers at the deadline last month was a damaging decision. Although, the hitting has been atrocious and there have been games lost due the low number of hits by the Twins. The lack of victories is not totally due to the pitching issues.

Boston series: ONE run through 11 innings on Friday night ……1 run in 9 innings first game Sunday ……..3 runs in finale on Sunday. Your point about the offense is very real. If the offense cannot get the pitchers 4 runs, there should be little expectation to win ballgames.

[Trov]

I did not watch the game, but the writer suggests pulling Matthews was correct because of third time through and Matthew was facing a lefty, and there was 2 outs.  Well, you could have walked Duran and pitch to the righties.  One thing I hate about this no third time, even more so on rookies, is the rookies never get the chance to work a third time, to learn how to do it.  

Yes, the numbers are up on the third time, and normally it is because the hitter has a better idea on how the pitcher plans to pitch to them.  The best pitchers back in the day would set guys up for that third time through.  They planned to face them a third time and would set up a hitter through first 2 at bats.  The the third at bat the hitter would see something different normally.  Now pitchers unload everything the first 2 times the hitters have a better idea of the plan against them and the pitcher does not adjust. 

Part of it is lack of good mix of pitches, but let the kids learn to pitch a third time through.  With 2 outs, you walk Duran, and let Matthews face the righties and hopefully get the third out. It may not have worked out any better, but Matthews is hopefully a future starter for us and we will want him to learn to pitch deeper than the 4th inning. 

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

Sands has went more than 1 inning 21 times this year. He could get you or 6/7 and the other two could 6/7get

Sands was terrible on Sunday. In theory Sands was a decent choice. In practice he was bad.

[chpettit19]

My problem with it wasn't the 3 batter rule, it's that the entire reason you say Irvin is here is for length. Alcala and Henriquez had to go away because you needed length out of your relievers. Irvin is a starter. He's not a mid-inning lefty specialist. If you're bringing him in in the 5th it's because you also expect him to get the 6th. The 3 batter rule didn't matter because they should've been planning on him going out there for those righties anyways because that's literally the entire reason he's here. He's not even here for high-quality length, just length. If he's not here because he's one of your 14 most talented arms but just one of the guys who can throw the most pitches without getting tired, you shouldn't be bringing him in in the 5th to face 1 guy.

I don't think the move was completely absurd, but I don't think it was the right one, either. 

[DJL44]

12 hours ago, BSLinPA said:

"Zebby is 87 pitches in…….he’s got 2 outs and he JUST gave up a double to the #9 hitter".

Yep......And wasnt that just the second hit he'd given up ALL night??  

Yes, by some miracle the coaching staff coaxed 4-2/3 scoreless innings out of Zebby Matthews. How long do you want them to press their luck?

[ashbury]

2 hours ago, DJL44 said:

If you don't have a large enough sample size for an individual pitcher then you assume the base rate (use the data from all pitchers). The base rate says pitchers get worse the 3rd time through the order.

The base rate goes on to say, "very slightly.". The effect is there but IMO is overblown.  How the pitcher looks that day may override the usual trend.  "He'll be a little worse than so far, but he's been very good." 

I'm not saying it's clear-cut to leave Zebby in.  

[DJL44]

6 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

My problem with it wasn't the 3 batter rule, it's that the entire reason you say Irvin is here is for length. Alcala and Henriquez had to go away because you needed length out of your relievers. Irvin is a starter. He's not a mid-inning lefty specialist. If you're bringing him in in the 5th it's because you also expect him to get the 6th. The 3 batter rule didn't matter because they should've been planning on him going out there for those righties anyways because that's literally the entire reason he's here. He's not even here for high-quality length, just length. If he's not here because he's one of your 14 most talented arms but just one of the guys who can throw the most pitches without getting tired, you shouldn't be bringing him in in the 5th to face 1 guy.

I don't think the move was completely absurd, but I don't think it was the right one, either. 

If I'm re-doing Saturday with hindsight I use Irvin in Game 1, which was already lost, and save Headrick for the situation where they used Irvin in Game 2. Irvin is best used soaking up innings when the game is already over but they decided to use Headrick in that situation instead. This means Baldelli trusts Headrick even less than he trusts Cole Irvin.

The big problem is it's hard to win games with 6 "low leverage" relievers in your bullpen and only 3 guys you can trust when you have a lead. That's a recipe for a .333 winning percentage.

[Riverbrian]

If I were inclined to place blame. I'm not... but if I were inclined. 

Roster construction is where I point my finger. In consideration of the roster construction and the importance of the game... It isn't an easy decision for Rocco. 

All season long the team has treated our left handed hitters like a virus when facing left handed pitching with Margot and Farmer the prescribed penicillin. Not so much so on the mound. 

On the mound it's been much different. We staff all right handed starters while our left handed relievers have basically underwhelmed. Okert gone, Funderburk demoted. Leaving only Thielbar.  

Bottom Line: This is why Cole Irvin booted Alcala off the roster. To come in with his 0.78 WHIP against left handed hitters.

Here's the problem chasing this split. They face more right handers.

Just like Margot and Farmer... these specialists end up facing the wrong side of the spreadsheet more often than they face the correct side. This is a problem and also a firm argument against rostering these specialists... or worse yet... creating career long specialists out of your young developing talent.  

The Orioles are not releasing Cole Irvin with those numbers against lefties. The problem is that they can't keep him away from righties. His OPS against Right handers is .942. He faced Right Handers 370 Times and he faced Left Handers 117 times. 370 to 117 basically shows the difference of the amount of right handed hitters compared to left handed hitters across the league because Cole Irvin made 16 starts this year. He wasn't a reliever... he pitched in 25 games for the Orioles... 16 of those were starts.     

A lefty reliever like Caleb Thielbar is closer to 50-50. He has faced right handers 111 times and left handers 96 times. Not many Managers are going to stack up their lefties in a neat pile for Thielbar or Irvin to come mow down.

The Red Sox started 5 lefties and one switch hitter against Zebby. Occupying 1,3,5,6(Switch),7 and 8. If Irvin was going to be deployed. The Spot for Irvin's deployment would have been at the 5 spot. He could face Casas, Sogaard, Abreu and Valdez and then called it a day. 

I think the article is correct. Irvin's job was to get Duran and probably sit down after that with Sands taking over the 6th. Once he failed to do that. They immediately lost the split advantage because the next guy was right handed. Irvin couldn't have been worse. He walked the two lefties he was needed to face. After the 5th was completed. There was that bunch of lefties to start the 6th. So... Again Rocco played the percentages and left him on the mound. Which included plunking a left handed batter. 

The final scorecard for Irvin and the 4 lefties he faced. Walk, Walk, Out, Hit Batter. That's a far cry from his 0.78 WHIP. He didn't do what he was brought here to do. 

I like the idea that Ashbury floated. Let Zebby face one more hitter in Duran. Bring a right hander in to face. Right Left Right... Then go with Irvin or Thielbar for Left Switch Left Left. 

But... Whatever... Duran is pretty scary and you are trying to win a ball game. I'm not going to pile on Rocco. 

The Front Office on the other hand. Yeah... this is where the root of the problem is. 

Stop wasting roster spots on specialists. Bring in guys that get people out. You are not bullpen serious as long as you try to dance your way through with these specialists. 

One more thing... This is why Buyers Buy at the deadline. 

AJ Puk for example is the left hander you are looking for. Tanner Scott is the guy you are looking for when Duran is in the batters box.   

 

 

[chpettit19]

25 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

If I'm re-doing Saturday with hindsight I use Irvin in Game 1, which was already lost, and save Headrick for the situation where they used Irvin in Game 2. Irvin is best used soaking up innings when the game is already over but they decided to use Headrick in that situation instead. This means Baldelli trusts Headrick even less than he trusts Cole Irvin.

The big problem is it's hard to win games with 6 "low leverage" relievers in your bullpen and only 3 guys you can trust when you have a lead. That's a recipe for a .333 winning percentage.

I've always been a "talent wins, not managers" guy. Vogt looks like a genius because he has an army of top end relief pitchers. I don't think Rocco is great or terrible. I don't think any manager really is. Tom Kelly has 2 championship rings and a career 47.8 winning percentage as a manager. Did he forget how to manage in the 10 seasons he ended up under .500 or was his roster just more talented in the 5.25 (his first year wasn't a full year) that were above .500?

My problem with decisions like the one we're talking about in this thread is pulling the starter who's doing well for a reliever who you know isn't good. 3rd time through or not. Just gave up a double or not. Using the arm that another crumbling playoff team sent packing who's only on the roster to eat innings in a crucial spot just because he throws with the other arm doesn't seem like the best decision that could be made there.

The Twins seem to use general stats more than specific stats. Generally lefties struggle against lefties so we'll platoon like mad without so much concern for what our specific players are doing. I get that many of their strategies are large sample, 162 game strategies. But once August hits it's time to change your strategies based on what your guys are actually doing. Stop pinch hitting Manuel freaking Margot. Stop using Duran in non-9th inning or save situations. On and on. The decisions that appear to have been made before the game even started is what I don't like. That's not all on Rocco. That's an organizational strategy coming from Falvey and Levine. But Rocco is the one who implements it so he takes the heat. The strategy of trying to out manage your lack of talent by putting guys only into specific situations is a bad strategy. But it starts at the top (well, just under the top cuz I don't think the Pohlads came up with it). "We don't need good players because we can platoon weaker players to success" doesn't work in the real world. And this felt like one of those strategy decisions.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, Trov said:

I did not watch the game, but the writer suggests pulling Matthews was correct because of third time through and Matthew was facing a lefty, and there was 2 outs.  Well, you could have walked Duran and pitch to the righties.  One thing I hate about this no third time, even more so on rookies, is the rookies never get the chance to work a third time, to learn how to do it.  

Yes, the numbers are up on the third time, and normally it is because the hitter has a better idea on how the pitcher plans to pitch to them.  The best pitchers back in the day would set guys up for that third time through.  They planned to face them a third time and would set up a hitter through first 2 at bats.  The the third at bat the hitter would see something different normally.  Now pitchers unload everything the first 2 times the hitters have a better idea of the plan against them and the pitcher does not adjust. 

Part of it is lack of good mix of pitches, but let the kids learn to pitch a third time through.  With 2 outs, you walk Duran, and let Matthews face the righties and hopefully get the third out. It may not have worked out any better, but Matthews is hopefully a future starter for us and we will want him to learn to pitch deeper than the 4th inning. 

"The best pitchers back in the day" also had worse numbers the third time through. So I'm not sure that's actually fact instead of just how things were talked about. I did this exercise in another thread with another poster. They picked 3 Hall of Famers and 3 All Stars and they all got worse the 3rd time through. The 3rd time through is a real thing. The question, to me, is more about how drastic you want to get with it.

Does it have to be the second the leadoff hitter comes up the 3rd time? Does game situation matter? Does how dominant the pitcher has been matter? Does the quality of your bullpen matter? Pitchers have always been worse the more they throw to the same lineup. Finding the nuance in managing around that fact is the trick. 

[Heiny]

Acknowleging all the arguments for third time through the order, lefty vs. lefty, inexperience and all the other examples of what is happening throuout the league and with the Twins specifically there is just one thing that seems to bother me.  And that is that everything Rocco does makes me want to puke.  How bout in this situation, we offer the Red Sox Margot to pinch hit for Duran.  LOL.  C'mon, please get rid of Rocco.  It doesn't matter what Rocco does, it always feels wrong.  I would bet that TK, Gardy, Molly or any other "real" baseball man gets that same gut wrenching feeling about Rocco that I get.  Please please please do the fans a favor and get rid of Rocco and the hitting coaches can go with him.

[saviking]

Bullpen? What Bullpen?

[bean5302]

Irvin's miserable year...
As a starter 4.07 ERA, 4.20 FIP.

ERA better than Lopez, Paddack. Festa, Varland and Matthews.
FIP better than Matthews and Varland, essentially tied with Paddack.

As a reliever 8.65 ERA, 6.63 FIP

Baldelli's preferred deployment? LOOGY.

[NYCTK]

30 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Irvin's miserable year...
As a starter 4.07 ERA, 4.20 FIP.

ERA better than Lopez, Paddack. Festa, Varland and Matthews.
FIP better than Matthews and Varland, essentially tied with Paddack.

As a reliever 8.65 ERA, 6.63 FIP

Baldelli's preferred deployment? LOOGY.

This is why his claim was actually good. He honestly should have started instead of Zebby, and would be interesting to potentially have a bit under market value next season. 

He's SP depth, not a high leverage reliever. Had the twins been a proper organization we would have traded for him (or someone like him) on July 30th when he would have provided some good value. 

Oh well. 

[karcherd]

4 hours ago, NYCTK said:

This is why his claim was actually good. He honestly should have started instead of Zebby, and would be interesting to potentially have a bit under market value next season. 

He's SP depth, not a high leverage reliever. Had the twins been a proper organization we would have traded for him (or someone like him) on July 30th when he would have provided some good value. 

Oh well. 

He couldn't beat out Cade Povich and his 5.59 era for the fifth starter for a playoff team.  A team that has two other starters out injured.  But yeah we will fix him like every other pitcher from Misfit Island.

[knothole61]

18 hours ago, MrAV said:

Did you just actually write an article saying a discarded non-performer with an ERA of nearly 10 (and worse in Fenway specifically) was the smart thing to do?

I am speechless.  I would GLADLY keep the ball in Zebby’s hands over Irvin.  Irvin shouldn’t even be on the team.  

Preach MrAV!

The Sawx must have been licking their chops when Irvin took the mound. Hey Rocco, the fact that Boston has seen Irvin a ton and absolutely light him up in Fenway might have been the most important factor to consider when contemplating using him in that situation.   

[Riverbrian]

10 hours ago, Trov said:

One thing I hate about this no third time, even more so on rookies, is the rookies never get the chance to work a third time, to learn how to do it.  

I agree with this.

But I have to add a twist. 

If you haven't been doing it all year. 

Right Now would be a horrible time to start doing it. 

 

[Mark G]

On 9/23/2024 at 10:11 PM, DJL44 said:

It is frowned upon (for good reason) to walk a guy to bring the go-ahead run to the plate. That's what Irvin did and it went poorly for him.

But the point was, would it have gone poorly for Zebby?  If the point of pulling him was not facing the tough left handed hitter, just bypass him and go to the guy you should be able to get out.  

The whole not putting the go ahead run ( or winning run) on base is for the late innings, not the 5th.  If you are only looking for match ups, that is just as valid a tool as changing pitchers that early.  

[JensenGregory]

On 9/24/2024 at 7:50 AM, dxpavelka said:

Not all things can be measured analytically.  If you disagree please explain the metric for momentum.

Your belief that momentum exists, especially within the context of a game where teams can only score runs on a specific half of an inning, is probably why you posed such a bizarrely framed question.

[dxpavelka]

17 hours ago, JensenGregory said:

Your belief that momentum exists, especially within the context of a game where teams can only score runs on a specific half of an inning, is probably why you posed such a bizarrely framed question.

believing that momentum does not exist is merely a part of why analytics has revolutionized the game.  and not in a good way