Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
The Yankees come into the RC for three games. They may be in a snarly mood. A sweep of yesterday's double-header would have eliminated the Red Sox. Instead Boston swept them. Just to make matters worse, Derek Jeter's hit streak ended at 25 games, with the Yankee captain standing in the on-deck circle, his team trailing by a run, and the tying run on base. It was the longest hitting streak by any Yankee since Joe Gordon hit in 29 games in a row back in 1942. I think the team record was set the year before that...

And there's more...

The Yankees need to win two of the three games in order to formally eliminate the Blue Jays; whether they actually clinch the division will depend on what's happening between Boston and Minnesota. At any rate, unless the Blue Jays win this series, there is a dangerthat we will all witness the depressing spectacle of the opposition celebrating a championship. In Our House. Which has got to suck.

"But wait!", you say. Just winning the division? Why would Derek Jeter or Mariano Rivera get excited by that?

Well, that's what they play for.

It's true that Jeter and Rivera have never missed out on post-season play - this will be the 12th year in a row that they (along with Bernie Williams) have been involved in the post-season. It's the tenth straight year for Jorge Posada (who also made a cameo appearance in the 1995 playoffs, although he didn't make the big club to stay until 1997.)

As you would expect, most of the Yankees have some post-season experience, and many have played in the World Series. Hideki Matsui, Jason Giambi, Mike Mussina were all with the Yankees when they lost the World Series to the Marlins in 2003; Mussina was also around for the loss to Arizona in 2001. Jaret Wright made two fine starts for the Indians in the 1997 World Series (he would have been the wining pitcher in Game 7 if the bullpen had been able to hold a 2-0 lead); Wright also appeared in the post-season for Atlanta.

Alex Rodriguez, Chien-Ming Wang, Scott Proctor, and Jaret Wright have been part of those recent Yankees teams that were eliminated in the playoffs before the World Series. Sal Fasano got into one post-season game with Oakland in 2000. Kyle Farnsworth was with the 2003 Cubs and the 2004 Braves, neither of whom made it to the final series. Octavio Dotel got into the post-season with the Mets and Astros; Corey Lidle made two trips with Oakland. Ron Villone was with the 2001 Astros. Bobby Abreu had three pinch-hit appearances for the 1997 Astros, who lost to the Braves in three straight; Nick Green appeared in a couple of games for Atlanta when they lost to Houston in 2004.

But when you add it all up - Jeter, Rivera, Williams, and Posada own 16 World Series rings. (I assume they gave Posada one for 1995.) And all the rest of the Yankees have just four rings combined. They are: Gary Sheffield 1997 Marlins; Randy Johnson 2001 D'Backs; Johnny Damon 2004 Red Sox; and Mike Myers 2004 Red Sox (although Myers didn't get into a World Series game.)

So I don't know, but I think there could be some hunger in the opposing clubhouse this week...

Anyway, back on Saturday I was visiting the Chat, and Lefty was suggesting that one of the reasons re-signing Justin Speier should be a priority was because contending teams always have experience in the bullpen. This got my attention because, as is well known, I have a weird, irrational, practically superstitious aversion to Justin Speier. Don't ask me to explain. For some people it's Ted Lilly, for me...

But just to prove that I know I'm being silly, let's have a nice picture of Jay Spy the Setup Guy! Yesterday's winning pitcher, after all.


As I recollect, Lefty was thinking that counting on Ryan supported only by the likes of Accardo and League would amount to trusting just a little too much on unproven or inexperienced talent. I countered with the 2002 Angels, who struck me as similar to the Hypothetical 2007 Blue Jays - a pen with an experienced closer (Percival/Ryan) supported by a bunch of comparatively inexperienced and unknown arms (Weber, Donnellly, Schoeneweis in the case of the Angels.) The most memorable reliever on that 2002 Angels squad, Francisco Rodriguez, actually made his major league debut just two weeks before that post-season got going, and why he was actually eligible to appear in the post-season is still one of the Darker Mysteries of Our Time.

I did promise that I'd look into the matter. So I gathered together all the AL teams that have played in the post-season since 2000; I added the five teams still squabbling for the four spots up for grabs this season. I then mixed in two versions of the 2007 Blue Jays, one with Speier and one without. I took the five most frequently used reliever from each of these teams. I then added the career appearances, innings, and saves for all concerned (for our hypothetical Blue Jays squads I've pro-rated this season's numbers.) And voila! I have a Data Table!

Rank Year Team                   Games  Innings   Saves
1 2005 Boston 2846 2846.2 406
2 2004 Boston 2455 2928.1 371
3 2006 NY Yankees 2349 2826.0 419
4 2004 NY Yankees 2338 4022.2 428
5 2003 NY Yankees 2061 3942.1 292
6 2002 Minnesota 2031 3090.1 274
7 2005 NY Yankees 1968 3881.0 463
8 2002 NY Yankees 1676 2433.1 321
9 2001 Seattle 1636 2420.0 163
10 2003 Boston 1635 2304.0 202
11 2001 Cleveland 1529 1845.2 150
12 2000 Oakland 1499 2243.2 328
13 2000 NY Yankees 1494 1965.1 213
14 2001 Oakland 1409 2167.1 65
15 2005 Chicago White Sox 1300 2846.2 70
16 2001 NY Yankees 1285 2005.1 236
17 2006 Detroit 1243 1373.1 243
18 2007 Toronto w/Speier 1190 1483.1 99
19 2003 Oakland 1171 1349.1 136
20 2003 Minnesota 995 1864.1 119
21 2006 Minnesota 928 1314.0 93
22 2007 Toronto w/out Speier 910 1160.2 100
23 2002 Oakland 906 998.2 119
24 2005 LA Angels 879 1358.2 74
25 2000 Seattle 833 1735.2 150
26 2002 Anaheim 818 1296.2 214
27 2004 Anaheim 786 985.1 300
28 2004 Minnesota 681 1107.2 4
29 2000 Chicago 583 755.0 73
30 2006 Chicago 547 716.1 21
31 2006 Oakland 401 718.1 32
Once more, let me emphasize - these numbers represent just the five most frequently used relievers. The 2005 White Sox total does not include Bobby Jenks, the 2002 Angels do not count K-Rod. Who would both add zero to the totals anyway. The numbers represent their career totals going into the season in question.

As you can see, with or without Speier, the 2007 Blue Jays will not have the greenest bullpen in the recent history of post-season play. The five pitchers I am using, by the way, are Ryan, Accardo, League, Downs, and either Speier or Frasor. As it turns out, the 2002 Angels really are a decent comparison. On both teams, a veteran closer accounted for roughly half of the total career appearances. Both teams had a LH reliever (Schoenweis and Downs) who had accumulated most of his big-league innings as a starter. The Jays unproven RH relievers, Accardo and League, actually have more experience than Weber and Donnelly. Weber had pitched in 75 games before 2002; Donnelly, like K-Rod, had no major league experience prior to their championship run. The Angels did have an experienced LOOGY, Alan Levine.

The most inexperienced bullpens of all are in the thick of this year's action - Bobby Jenks, of course, had never pitched in the major leagues until the season that ended with him closing out games for the World Champions. The most experienced of this year's White Sox relievers is Cliff Politte, even if he has already been cut loose. Neal Cotts is the only other top Chicago reliever other than Politte who had appeared in more than 100 games prior to this season. Oakland has two relievers who have both pitched in about 125 games (Calero and Duchscherer) - the others (Street, Gaudin, Halsey) are all second-year players who had pitched in 149 games between them coming into this season.

The most experienced bullpens have been seen hanging around the top of the AL East these last few years, and topping the list were last year's Red Sox, who took these numbers into the season:

Player    Games  Innings  Saves
Foulke 501 660.1 175
Timlin 812 955.1 117
Myers 684 419.1 14
Embree 568 515.1 7
Mantei 281 296.1 93
TOTAL 2846 2846.2 406
Embree, of course, actually ended up moving on to the Yankees later in the year - but he was one of Boston's five most often used relievers, and not one of New York's.

The bullpen crew with most innings pitched? Your 2004 New York Yankees, which saw the great Rivera supported by a man who had been both a successful closer and a successful starter (Tom Gordon), and one of the great rubber arms of recent years (Paul Quantrill). (The 2005 Yankees had the most saves, as Rivera had added another 53 to his total in 2004, which more than offset the loss of Quantrill.).

Player  Games Innings Saves
Rivera 512 650.0 283
Quantrill 705 1091.1 20
Gordon 591 1807.0 110
Heredia 461 417.0 6
Prinz 69 57.1 9
TOTAL 2338 4022.2 428

And finally, let us consider the 2004 Minnesota Twins. They headed bravely into that season with their five most important relievers having combined for the whopping total of four - yes, 4 - saves. Two of those had been recorded by Aaron Fultz, a LOOGY of no fixed abode. Joe Nathan and J.C. Romero had one apiece. They did OK.

So it can be done...

TDIB Monday: In Our House? | 33 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Barry Bonnell - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 08:38 AM EDT (#155563) #

Steve Simmons being Stevel Simmons make of this what you will but he says:

"This has to be interpreted as good news for the Blue Jays: There is so much unrest with the Texas Rangers that Vernon Wells’ good friend, Michael Young, is indicating he won’t re-sign with the team a year from now. "http://www.torontosun.com/Sports/Columnists/Simmons_Steve/2006/09/17/1852359.html

Does anyone else find it insulting and ridiculous that Mike Wilner is toeing the party line and claiming that J.P has never actually said there is a 5 year plan?

Mike Green - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 09:24 AM EDT (#155566) #
League and Accardo are very different cases, to my mind.  League is ready for prime time.  I am not worried at all about his relative youth.  Accardo is a different story.  He may end up as a very fine pitcher, but he's going to have his ups and downs.  I would want him in a low leverage role for half a season at least. The key is for the organization to realize that it need not show immediate returns from the Hillenbrand trade, by placing him in a high-leverage, high-pressure role from the outset.

League and Frasor makes for an excellent tandem to set up Ryan.  Lack of experience is not really an issue.  The personnel in the bullpen should be the least of the off-season concerns.

MatO - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 10:11 AM EDT (#155570) #
Considering the cost of even mediocre starting pitching the Jays should ponder moving League to the rotation now that he's added the splitter as a legitimate K pitch and the tremendous pitch count efficiency he's shown  since being called up.  It would be a lot cheaper then to resign Speier as opposed to a starter. 
MatO - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 10:21 AM EDT (#155571) #

Reports at the time of the trade indicated that Accardo had been worked very hard with the Giants and that certainly continued with Gibbons' usage of him after the trade.  He got some significant time off while they were on the west coast and he's looked a lot better recently.  Gibbons has to monitor his workload which should be easier with Frasor pitching well.

Mick Doherty - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 02:11 PM EDT (#155590) #

The Michael Young thing is silly. Wishful thinking on the part of the Sun, I presume.

I say this as someone who lives 15 miles from The Ballpark in Arlington (or whatever they call it now) and reads The Fort Worth Star-Telegram every day, and I am pretty sure that if Young was that unhappy, some sort of story would have appeared somewhere in North Texas media. That has not happened.

I don't think Wells comes here next year, tho -- not after Gary Matthews Jr. takes his Gold Glove from him while hitting .310 with 20 homers. It may be a one-season anomaly, maybe start of a trend -- but I can't see VW in Ranger blue any time soon.

 

ken_warren - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 02:56 PM EDT (#155594) #
I really think Wilner's fantastic.  I think he goes overboard protecting JP sometimes, but if you listen to Wilner, then listen to anyone other than Jack Armstrong talk about the Raptors, or pretty much anyone talk about the Leafs, you realize that Wilner does a great job.

He spouts the party line even to the extent of actual lying.  He has never once been critical of one of JP's moves,  and even changes his own opinion when JP disagrees with something he says.  I recall both Wilner and JP singing the praises of HInske's defense when Hinske was still the third baseman.

He grades the Blue Jays managers in-game decisions and has the attitude that he really knows more than they do and actually has the knowledge to rate their decisions.

He believes that Gibbons had to physically threaten Hillenbrand and attack Lilly to maintain respect in eyes of the other players.

He knows virtually nothing about teams other than the Blue Jays.  In many cases he doesn't even know who the regulars are for other teams.

He has repeatedly chastized Blue Jay managers for not bringing a closer into a tie game on the road, seeming to forget that a road team has to pitch another inning if they ever do take the lead.

He had no understanding of defensive metrics, but talks as if he is an expert on analyzing defensive performance.  He thinks Glaus is doing fine???  And Wells is still a Gold Glove centre fielder??

He still claims that Wang, Cano, and Melky Cabrera are not good major league players and that Jeter is not a bonafide MVP contender, for no other reason other than he doesn't like Jeter.  He likes to compare Jeter's stats at shortstop to A-Rod's stats at 3B and somehow manages to turn this into a negative.  He refuses to compare Jeter's stats to other shortstops or to listen to any caller who may want to.

He talks down to not only idiotic callers, but also to callers who clearly have a better understanding of baseball than he does.


Mick Doherty - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 03:03 PM EDT (#155595) #

He believes that Gibbons had to physically threaten Hillenbrand and attack Lilly to maintain respect in eyes of the other players.

He knows virtually nothing about teams other than the Blue Jays.  In many cases he doesn't even know who the regulars are for other teams.


He has repeatedly chastized Blue Jay managers for not bringing a closer into a tie game on the road, seeming to forget that a road team has to pitch another inning if they ever do take the lead.

He had no understanding of defensive metrics ...

I can't listen to Wilner down here in Texas so can't speak to whether or not the above points are true. If they are, I am fairly confident in saying they are NOT "the party line" and to present them as examples of such is just silly. 

Paul D - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 03:14 PM EDT (#155597) #
He spouts the party line even to the extent of actual lying. 

I have never seen/heard him do that.

He has never once been critical of one of JP's moves,  and even changes his own opinion when JP disagrees with something he says. 

That's a blanket falsehood.  I have heard him criticize JP on numerous occaisions.  He's been critical of the Prokopec deal, he used to mention Scott Ayre, and I've heard him say that he (Wilner) thinks that the Jays have jerked some of their pitchers around too much (starter-bullpen-starter etc).
The difference is that he doesn't think that the negatives outweigh the positives, and he doesn't dwell on the negatives, unlike some.

I recall both Wilner and JP singing the praises of HInske's defense when Hinske was still the third baseman.
He had no understanding of defensive metrics, but talks as if he is an expert on analyzing defensive performance.  He thinks Glaus is doing fine???  And Wells is still a Gold Glove centre fielder??

I put these comments because they're related and because I agree with you on this.  It seems as though he refused to consider any defensive stats.  I remember that there was a caller who used to call in frequently and say that Hinske's defence was the same as usual, he was last in the league in ZR.  And Wilner said that he didn't know what ZR was (I think it was ZR, maybe have been a different, bettter defensive stat), but that you could look at Hinske and see the difference.  That may have been true, but I think you owe it to your listeners to at least try to explain why the defensive metrics are wrong.

He grades the Blue Jays managers in-game decisions and has the attitude that he really knows more than they do and actually has the knowledge to rate their decisions.

I don't really have a problem with this.  I see where you're coming from though, but it's sort of the job of the radio guy to argue about the manager's moves. 

He believes that Gibbons had to physically threaten Hillenbrand and attack Lilly to maintain respect in eyes of the other players.

This was probably the most ridiculous thing I heard him say this year.  Maybe ever actually.  He was way way way out of line with regards to his comments on Lilly.

He knows virtually nothing about teams other than the Blue Jays.  In many cases he doesn't even know who the regulars are for other teams.

I've seen no evidence of this.  He seems to have a pretty good idea of other teams and players.

He still claims that Wang, Cano, and Melky Cabrera are not good major league players and that Jeter is not a bonafide MVP contender, for no other reason other than he doesn't like Jeter. 

Well, I think that the jury's still out on Cabrera, and there's lots of reasons to think that Wang won't be able to keep this up.  But yeah, maybe he should give more credit to the Yankees.  On the other hand, I don't really need to tune into a Jays telecast and hear how good the Yankees are, I get enough of that everywhere else (see Rod Black).
VBF - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 03:17 PM EDT (#155598) #

And Wells is still a Gold Glove centre fielder??

Vernon won a Gold Glove in 2004 and 2005. Sounds like a Gold Glove centrefielder to me...

Ryan Day - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 03:43 PM EDT (#155603) #

  Let's bear this in mind: It's not Wilner's job to be objective. He's employed by Rogers to work on Blue Jays programming, which isn't exactly hard news. I've heard him offer many criticisms of the organization, both Ricciardi and Gibbons, but to expect him to be completely unbiased is unrealistic. And it shouldn't be surprising that he lays off a bit when Ricciardi is on the show - for one, there may well be specific ground rules to "WWJP" questioning, and for another, Ricciardi has no reason to show up if he's going to get hammered every week.

  It's also hardly "party line" to think a player is fine defensively even it doesn't agree with certain defensive metrics. There are plenty of people who would say that Glaus or HInske were adequate third basemen, and not all of them work for the Jays.

He grades the Blue Jays managers in-game decisions and has the attitude that he really knows more than they do and actually has the knowledge to rate their decisions.

  Wait: I thought the problem was that Wilner didn't question the Jays hard enough? But now he shouldn't be criticizing experienced baseball people? What makes Ricciardi fair game but Gibbons a Sacred Cow?

Ryan Day - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 04:19 PM EDT (#155610) #

  I'm not sure how relevant what J.P. said five years ago is today. Things change, and people change their opinions and methods. Even if  Ricciardi did say he could win in five years, so what? The Yankees' payroll has gone up a hundred million dollars in that time; surely that's a variable that has to be taken into account.

  On top of that, of course the Jays are going to put a positive spin on things - that's what they do.  Are people still mad at Pat Gillick for telling us that Eddie Zosky was the Jays' shortstop of the future?

MatO - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 04:23 PM EDT (#155611) #

I think Barry and Ken have been confusing Ricciardi with this guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin

And this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Year_Plan_(USSR)

Thomas - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 04:23 PM EDT (#155612) #

In addition to all the other objections to your comments, this statement is very debatable.

He has repeatedly chastized Blue Jay managers for not bringing a closer into a tie game on the road, seeming to forget that a road team has to pitch another inning if they ever do take the lead.

I know a lot of people who would argue that bringing the closer into a tie game on the road is the right thing to do. Some would disagree, but it's hardly a knock against Wilner for believing in one theory of bullpen management over another.  I'mn not going to get into a big mathematical debate over this, but let's asume you're fairly confident B.J. Ryan isn't going to give up a run and much more unsure about Speier or Accardo. If it's the bottom of the 9th and it's 1-1 it makes a lot of sense in many people's eyes to bring in Ryan and (almost) ensure the game goes to the 10th inning.

If the Jays score in the 10th then maybe you can use Ryan for a second inning; if they score maybe they score multiple runs and/or maybe the hitters due up in the 9th inning were much better hitters than those due up in the 10th. There's a strong argument to be made for guaranteeing that the games goes to extra innings and dealing with the bottom of the 10th when you get there, rather than making a riskier gamble by not using the team's best reliever, on the hope that your team takes the lead sometime in extra innings.

Wilner's not "forgetting" about the 10th. He just wants to get there in the first place. Which the team might with Speier/Frasor, but almost certainly will with Ryan.

VBF - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 04:33 PM EDT (#155614) #

To add to Thomas' point, this exact thing happened twice to the Seattle Mariners when they visited the Jays this past July.

Both times on Saturday and Sunday, games were lost because of Hargrove's 'slave to the save' mentality. It got to the point where Hargrove was using his long men just because he didn't want to bring in Putz in a tie game.

It's debatable at the very least, but Wilner's not a "bad" person for believing in it.

Gerry - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 05:03 PM EDT (#155616) #

He grades the Blue Jays managers in-game decisions and has the attitude that he really knows more than they do and actually has the knowledge to rate their decisions.

Don't many of us do this?  Are there not some people who post here whose posts would have you believe they know more than the GM and the manager when it comes evaluating their moves?

Bruce Wrigley - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 05:27 PM EDT (#155621) #

I'd go one further from what Thomas is saying.  Tied in the bottom of the 9th or later, I'm pretty sure that you would definitely rather have your best reliever(s) on the mound, rather than your second best.  Even if you can only get one inning out of him, you want your ace up then, not saving him for the save that may never arrive... if you score no runs in the top of the next inning you're in exactly the same situation, and if you score multiple runs you're in a lower-leverage situation.  Meanwhile, one run loses the game.

Tied in the bottom of the 9th or later with no outs, you're crazy not to have your best reliever on the mound, because the leverage of the next hitter is very, very high.

I don't have The Book here, but I think it would agree...

Mike Green - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 07:29 PM EDT (#155625) #
Tango graciously publishes LIs on his website.  Bottom of the ninth, tie game, has a leverage over 2. 
Craig B - Monday, September 18 2006 @ 07:44 PM EDT (#155626) #

Tough one.

If you get through the ninth, and get to the 10th up a run, the LI is higher... it's 3.6 instead of 2.3.  But if you score two runs, it's 2.0, and three runs gives you 1.0.

Then factor in the increased chances of not getting to the 10th with your second best pitcher instead of your best... I think that you should put in the closer.

TDIB Monday: In Our House? | 33 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.