Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    MASS
    Posts
    53,301

    Sergio Romo To Start Again

    Sergio Romo started last nights game vs the Angels. Tonight he will make the start again. Yesterday he only pitched an inning before the real starter game in

    Like this strategy? Dislike?


    First Sim League Title!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,518
    At first thought it was stupid but actually i think its a good and creative strategy. Romo is the type of pitcher when hes right can really get hitters screwed up.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    4,790
    I dislike it, outside of putting the DH in the National League, I am a Baseball purest and hate seeing the game change. The “opener” there should only be a “Closer” the “opener is called a starting pitcher. I hate the shift even though the numbers/analytics back it up. It just looks weird every position should have a set spot on the field, nerds are ruining the game of baseball. I hate instant replay Baseball was beautiful when mistakes were made and the number of mound visits having a limit. Again I’m not a fan. I hate changes and Baseball is slowly but surely becoming a different game than I grew up watching. I am however a fan of pitch counts and matchups in the Bullpen I think that’s great.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    37,987
    Damn nerds!

    "there's no scraps in my scrapbook"

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    La Puente, CA
    Posts
    12,750
    Quote Originally Posted by MJNetsIsles View Post
    I dislike it, outside of putting the DH in the National League, I am a Baseball purest and hate seeing the game change. The “opener” there should only be a “Closer” the “opener is called a starting pitcher. I hate the shift even though the numbers/analytics back it up. It just looks weird every position should have a set spot on the field, nerds are ruining the game of baseball. I hate instant replay Baseball was beautiful when mistakes were made and the number of mound visits having a limit. Again I’m not a fan. I hate changes and Baseball is slowly but surely becoming a different game than I grew up watching. I am however a fan of pitch counts and matchups in the Bullpen I think that’s great.
    It seems like you're saying the contrary in the expansion thread.

    But these are two reasons why I hate instant replay.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUyOykaLTSc
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgjIVvEQo_o

    In the heat of the moment, do you really want something so anticlimactic as having to wait for an umpire in NY before celebrating?

    Future Hall of Shamers:
    (1) B.A.L.C.O. Barroids (2) Mark McJuicer (3) Jose Chem-seco (4) Rafael Palmeiroids (5) Ken Chem-initi (6) Jason Gi-andro (7) Ryan Fraud (8) Muscle Melk (9) Woman-Ram (10) Shammy Sosa (11) Roger Clear-mens (12) A-Roid (13) Ryan HGHoward

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,952
    My issue with it is that while I understand the numgers behind the idea, I think it’s a situation of misunderstanding/misrepresenting what the numbers are actually indicating.

    The idea is that the first inning is the inning where the most runs are scored. So the idea is that you put a good pitcher in the first to limit runs, then follow with the starter.

    But I think that’s slightly flawed. First off, a huge reason that the first inning scores the most runs is because it’s the only inning guaranteed to face the 1-3 hitters. So you’re guaranteed to face better hitters than every other inning on average. So putting a reliever in the game doesn’t guarantee better results. To guarantee better results, it had to be a reliever who’s actually a better pitcher than the starter. So typically, that would probably mean it has to be one of your top 3 or 4 relievers.

    And the problem with that, at least in my mind, is that you run the risk of “wasting” one of your better relievers early in a game that may not need it. What if that game results in a blowout, either a win or loss. You’ve now wasted a quality reliever in a blowout, and he may not be available for the next game or the game after that if you try to start guys back to back.

    To me, the idea seems okay in theory. But I think it’s one of those things that doesn’t make as much sense when you start actually using it. A better idea than this is to just use your bullpen in a way that maximizes favorable matchups. So instead of holding your best reliever until the 9th to face the 5-7 hitters. Bring him in for the 8th to face the 2-4 hitters.

    And better yet, I actually really like what the brewers have been doing, which is have relievers who can throw 2 innings at a high level, and allow them to relieve the starters earlier in the game. It limits the amount of hitters the starter sees 3 times without killing the bullpen by using 4-5 guys every night to cover 4 innings. I think that’s a more sustainable model than starting a reliever.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    MASS
    Posts
    53,301
    in Sergio Romos last 2 "starts" 2.1 IP 0 hits 6 Ks

    i know the sample size is very limited, but this is pretty impressive? doesnt give 1-3 to get a 2nd look at the started in the 3rd/4th inning

    I am interested to see this playout for the rest of the season


    First Sim League Title!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    53,677
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    My issue with it is that while I understand the numgers behind the idea, I think it’s a situation of misunderstanding/misrepresenting what the numbers are actually indicating.

    The idea is that the first inning is the inning where the most runs are scored. So the idea is that you put a good pitcher in the first to limit runs, then follow with the starter.

    But I think that’s slightly flawed. First off, a huge reason that the first inning scores the most runs is because it’s the only inning guaranteed to face the 1-3 hitters. So you’re guaranteed to face better hitters than every other inning on average. So putting a reliever in the game doesn’t guarantee better results. To guarantee better results, it had to be a reliever who’s actually a better pitcher than the starter. So typically, that would probably mean it has to be one of your top 3 or 4 relievers.

    And the problem with that, at least in my mind, is that you run the risk of “wasting” one of your better relievers early in a game that may not need it. What if that game results in a blowout, either a win or loss. You’ve now wasted a quality reliever in a blowout, and he may not be available for the next game or the game after that if you try to start guys back to back.

    To me, the idea seems okay in theory. But I think it’s one of those things that doesn’t make as much sense when you start actually using it. A better idea than this is to just use your bullpen in a way that maximizes favorable matchups. So instead of holding your best reliever until the 9th to face the 5-7 hitters. Bring him in for the 8th to face the 2-4 hitters.

    And better yet, I actually really like what the brewers have been doing, which is have relievers who can throw 2 innings at a high level, and allow them to relieve the starters earlier in the game. It limits the amount of hitters the starter sees 3 times without killing the bullpen by using 4-5 guys every night to cover 4 innings. I think that’s a more sustainable model than starting a reliever.
    If you can sit their 1-5 hitters down in the first inning without scoring, then bring in a 5 inning guy to face 6-9, 1-9, 1-9, then you have effectively limited the number of times these guys see that starter, or at least the good hitters. And you let the back end see him 3 times (potentially)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    10,753
    Quote Originally Posted by MJNetsIsles View Post
    I dislike it, outside of putting the DH in the National League, I am a Baseball purest and hate seeing the game change. The “opener” there should only be a “Closer” the “opener is called a starting pitcher. I hate the shift even though the numbers/analytics back it up. It just looks weird every position should have a set spot on the field, nerds are ruining the game of baseball. I hate instant replay Baseball was beautiful when mistakes were made and the number of mound visits having a limit. Again I’m not a fan. I hate changes and Baseball is slowly but surely becoming a different game than I grew up watching. I am however a fan of pitch counts and matchups in the Bullpen I think that’s great.
    As a baseball purest, you would then know that the shift is over 70 years old and has often been used to stop the greatest hitters of the game. That's right it goes back to the 1940's when baseball was at it's purist. I would consider myself a purist as well, using different strategies to try to win more games does not go against the purist.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Modesto
    Posts
    1,512
    How long before an opposing manager starts with 7-9 to offset the percieved advantage

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    If you can sit their 1-5 hitters down in the first inning without scoring, then bring in a 5 inning guy to face 6-9, 1-9, 1-9, then you have effectively limited the number of times these guys see that starter, or at least the good hitters. And you let the back end see him 3 times (potentially)
    But wouldn’t you rather have that reliever face those guys later in the game, when you know if it’s high leverage or not?

    And that’s the biggest part of this argument. Waste your 3rd best reliever in a game that turns out to be 8-2 doesn’t seem super wise.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    2,777
    Quote Originally Posted by mike_noodles View Post
    As a baseball purest, you would then know that the shift is over 70 years old and has often been used to stop the greatest hitters of the game. That's right it goes back to the 1940's when baseball was at it's purist. I would consider myself a purist as well, using different strategies to try to win more games does not go against the purist.
    Are you referring to any kind of shifting or the exaggerated/extreme shifting that's happening in the last few seasons? I'm 32 so I've only watched baseball for a couple decades that I can actually remember well but I don't recall seeing the kinds of exaggerated shifts that are being deployed now beyond just the last few years. I'm talking about the shifts with 3 men on the right side of the infield with a guy out in short RF and pretty much the entire left side of the infield vacated. I know there's been shifting to account for RH vs LH batters for a long time but I'm just not sure if it's been this extreme until the last few years. I'm not 100% on that though.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    5,819
    Quote Originally Posted by RCarlson85 View Post
    Are you referring to any kind of shifting or the exaggerated/extreme shifting that's happening in the last few seasons?...I'm talking about the shifts with 3 men on the right side of the infield with a guy out in short RF and pretty much the entire left side of the infield vacated.

    If anything the shift against Ted Williams was even more ridiculous than the modern shift.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    2,777
    Quote Originally Posted by otatop View Post

    If anything the shift against Ted Williams was even more ridiculous than the modern shift.
    Good to know, thanks for the info. I didn't realize exaggerated shifting had been going on that long.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    53,677
    Quote Originally Posted by SfgiantsJD3 View Post
    How long before an opposing manager starts with 7-9 to offset the percieved advantage
    They'll get extra PA

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •