Here's What a Postseason Start Looks Like in 2020

This is the new normal.
...managers being more cognizant of the dangers of allowing pitchers to go through a lineup a third time is exactly why that number has gone down. After all, in 2019 hitters had a .777 OPS the second time they faced a starter and an .807 mark the third.

And this probably should be the new normal.

I have grown tired of hearing Bert and Jack complain about "kids these days". We have phased into the era of a pitching staff functioning as a team rather than relying on today's starter. A 26-player roster with 13 or even 14 pitchers allows the manager to bring in fresh arms more frequently. Certainly there will be exceptions based on how a starter is performing on a given day but in general it makes sense to me to use several relievers who can let it fly for an inning instead of using a pitcher who has already thrown 70+ pitches when the game gets into the sixth inning or so.

It's analogous to track. The times in a 1600-meter run will always be much slower than those in a 4x400-meter relay. Starters are distance runners and relievers are sprinters. Better overall to use your sprinters when you can.

Old schooler here. It's hard to argue against these, or most, stats.

But I can ignore them.

Well if baseball would adopt my rule that a batter can only have 2 fouls after two strikes, you would have starters going deeper and games going faster. There are several 8-10+ pitch at bats which greatly increase the number of pitches thrown per inning and game. I also feel that, at least for this year with very few days off-especially in the post-season, you can't have a starter go very far because you will need him again soon. However, during a normal season there is no reason to have a starter throw less than 90 pitches unless they are getting hammered. Pitchers today aren't as good as pitchers in the past because they don't vary the game plan and thus can't get through a lineup the third time. And several hitters know how to spoil many 2 strike pitches to prolong the at bat.

So if your starting pitcher has retired 18 straight batters and has thrown 70 pitches, the "metrics" tell you to yank him to avoid the "third time though penalty"? What a load of #$@. Why would you replace a known quality with someone from the bullpen whom you haven't seen throw a pitch today? Analytics are taking instinct and common sense out of baseball and is trying to make a Nintendo game out of it. And I do realize that the Nintendo reference dates me. I was going to say Intellivision (which I owned) but I figured not many of you would know what that was.

Hey. I'm an Atari man myself- not to mention a Radio Shack TRS-80

A roster of 25 players may provide a return to more balanced decisions. There are managers who allow and pitchers that are able to successfully throw 100+ pitchers. Francona and Cleveland come to mind and we hear that Bauer wants to throw every fourth day. The game continually evolves and changes. Teams and players adapt and change to match the scenarios facing them each year. Houston swings hard until two strikes and then puts the ball in play. The Dodgers do the same. 

Nevertheless, there is a time to lift a pitcher and manager judgment and knowing the players makes a difference. In high school there is no reason to risk a pitcher's arm. I lifted a pitcher with a perfect game after 5 innings because it was early in the season and we had a rough pitch count. A kid can play baseball until his 50s. The kid thanked me and said he was gassed. Now he dominates Town Ball in his 30s. The pros are different because money plays a major roll in game decisions. Nobody wants to ruin a player's arm with overuse. So the dynamic is fluid in today's game and when MLB expands the roster the usage of pitchers is effectively changed through additional options. My own thought is that Maeda and Berrios would have been more effective than a reliever but the manager, in concert with the coaches, would be more attuned to that decision than any of us. Hopefully, the decisions are based on observations such as control and movement rather than on the third trip through the order. Certainly we all must be noting how hitters are managing to square up a fair amount of pitches from relief pitchers at near 100 mph. I'm not a fan of the three batter rule for pitchers or the expanded rosters. I would rather see a limit of twelve pitchers on the roster and a return of the fifteen day injured list. In any event, the hitters must adjust to reduce the empty at bats and futile three pitch strikeouts. A diehard baseball fan of 60+ years will never tune out but I have many conversations with younger fans turned off by the walks, strikeouts, and homeruns that result in 3-4 hour games with little action from their point of view. It is an opinion that baseball needs to consider in the 21st century.

But how often are weather forecasts correct.

The majority of the time. And similarly if a baseball strategy works the majority of the time then it makes sense to employ it.

Sorry, not able to quote properly today, but this is from the original post: 

 

"Is this “penalty” the baseball equivalent to the boogeyman? Hitters actually had a lower OPS in their third plate appearance against a starting pitcher this year than the second time seeing them (a .765 OPS the second time, .754 the third)."

 

I assume that you're talking about all pitchers who pitched a second or third time through. One factor here is that the only people who got to face a batter the third time through are those that have been effective that day. It's a SSS, but my hunch is that the guys who contributed to the .754 the third time through probably were better than .765 on their second time through. 

Yep. We would need to know the OPS against the second time through for ONLY those pitchers who pitched the third time through.

I really didn't want the Dodgers to win, but I was so happy the "analytical" move blew up in the Rays face.  There was absolutely zero reason to take Snell out of the game at that point.  He was cruising at 73 pitches with 9 strikeouts and only 2 hits.  The next three batters due up were 0-6 with 6 strikeouts. Mookie Betts numbers against right handers pitchers was SIGNIFICANTLY better than it was against lefties.  Additionally, Nick Anderson had a brutal postseason having given up at least 1 run in 6 straight games entering play last night.

Overall it was a terrible decision by Kevin Cash and one that deserves a better explanation than, "I didn't want Snell to pitch against those guys a third time."