Annibal Sanchez throws 7 innings of 2-hit shutout ball only to see Joe Nathan get destroyed in the ninth. Tribe is looking to climb to within 4.5 games out with Kluber on deck. Like I said 2 weeks ago when the tribe was 10.5 out...stick a fork in em...they're done. lol.

Footwedge;1622378 wrote:Annibal Sanchez throws 7 innings of 2-hit shutout ball only to see Joe Nathan get destroyed in the ninth. Tribe is looking to climb to within 4.5 games out with Kluber on deck. Like I said 2 weeks ago when the tribe was 10.5 out...stick a fork in em...they're done. lol.

Gotta finish this one still.

Kipnis is out there putting on an awful display of base running but the Red Sox refuse to throw him out.

Ok, Mr. Allen. 3 more here kid.

Footwedge;1622378 wrote:Annibal Sanchez throws 7 innings of 2-hit shutout ball only to see Joe Nathan get destroyed in the ninth. Tribe is looking to climb to within 4.5 games out with Kluber on deck. Like I said 2 weeks ago when the tribe was 10.5 out...stick a fork in em...they're done. lol.

In Joes defense, they put him in in a tie game (0-0). When will managers learn???

W....nice!

Cody Allen is probably a no go for tomorrow, but Shaw should be available. Hopefully Kluber does what he does and we dont need either.

But, Allen is the closer, even if Axford ever finds himself.

Nice W. Tomorrow I will count all the reverse jinx' I put on TJ House tonight. At this point, I can never say anything nice about hiim.

Laley23;1622384 wrote:In Joes defense, they put him in in a tie game (0-0). When will managers learn???

No joke here. Not his fault. Closers thrive on the thrill of the game being won and trying to save it. They don't focus the same in tie games. I totally get it.

TBone14;1622396 wrote:No joke here. Not his fault. Closers thrive on the thrill of the game being won and trying to save it. They don't focus the same in tie games. I totally get it.

Exactly. I mean, my closer wouldnt be the last guy I used in the pen, but Id use every arm that I trust leading up to a save before him...

Of course, for the Tribe, Allen has only been a closer for 2 weeks. So, Tito might be able to use him whenever. But, the point remains. You are just asking for a loss.

: thumbup: Good game ....good result. I consider Peavy's ass whupped.

Tough roadie on the horizon. Gonna have to start winning on the road. A sweep of the world champions would be nice. Hopefully the Tiger free fall continues.

On another note...there was discussion regarding the Ubaldo trade a few months ago. Worth noting..Pomeranz...5-2 with a 2.37 ERA Salary < 1 million. Ubaldo 2-6 4.39 ERA salary > than 12 millions ago. Still one of the worst trades ever. Lshlup proven wrong once again.

Last year, in one start vs Boston, Kluber went 6 and 2/3rds...allowing just a run on 3 hits. He struck out 10 and walked 1.

The Indians lost that game 6-5 but not due to Kluber. Would love an outing like that or better tonight.

Laley23;1622384 wrote:In Joes defense, they put him in in a tie game (0-0). When will managers learn???

It's actually the opposite. You should put your best pitcher in when the game could still be decided (which is obviously the case in a 0-0 game). http://grantland.com/the-triangle/ned-yost-greg-holland-using-closers-in-tied-road-games/

Laley23;1622384 wrote:In Joes defense, they put him in in a tie game (0-0). When will managers learn???

TBone14;1622396 wrote:No joke here. Not his fault. Closers thrive on the thrill of the game being won and trying to save it. They don't focus the same in tie games. I totally get it.

Presented without comment. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/ned-yost-greg-holland-using-closers-in-tied-road-games/

Laley23;1622257 wrote:Jeremy Sowers had a heck of a run the second half of his rookie season. Like, really good.

But yeah, he fooled us all...I guess it makes sense since the only way these guys ever have real success is when the hitters have not seen them before lol

As a Pirates fan, I call that the Zach Duke Syndrome. Dude was 8-2 with a 1.8ish ERA as a rookie. After that, it was year after year of double-digit losses and a 4.5 to 5.5 ERA.

Footwedge;1622448 wrote:On another note...there was discussion regarding the Ubaldo trade a few months ago. Worth noting..Pomeranz...5-2 with a 2.37 ERA Salary < 1 million. Ubaldo 2-6 4.39 ERA salary > than 12 millions ago. Still one of the worst trades ever. Lshlup proven wrong once again.

I will address you once and once only, and then I'm done talking about a topic in which you proved your lack of knowledge about something as simple as mathematics.

Let's lay out some basic facts:

1) The argument centered around the production you get from prospects. The team that traded for Pomeranz, and thus initiating the discussion? The Rockies. Now FW, keep this in mind, because it's important, he was traded to the Rockies.

2) Ubaldo, while not great, had a fantastic 2nd half last year and helped lead us to the playoffs.

3) Pomeranz was so bad for the Rockies, he no longer plays for them.

4) Pomeranz is pitching fantastically for the A's, however, the A's are not the ones who traded for prospect Pomeranz. They traded for a poorly performing major league pitcher.

5) The Indians, the team who traded for UJ, are not the ones saddled with his contract or performance.

Summation: Ubaldo for Pomeranz unequivocally worked out for Cleveland, and now UJ sucks and Pomeranz is killing it, but they're doing it for teams that are not involved in our decidedly lhslep-dominated argument.

Sidenote: I would love for FW to go up to a Rockies fan and tell them how good the trade was for Colorado because of how well Pomeranz is pitching now, for the A's.

Footwedge;1622448 wrote:On another note...there was discussion regarding the Ubaldo trade a few months ago. Worth noting..Pomeranz...5-2 with a 2.37 ERA Salary < 1 million. Ubaldo 2-6 4.39 ERA salary > than 12 millions ago. Still one of the worst trades ever. Lshlup proven wrong once again.

You did really well with your argument. Especially the fact you're giving Pomeranz' numbers with a team whom he wasn't traded to by Cleveland and Ubaldo's currently with a team that isn't Cleveland. While completely ignoring that neither Pomeranz nor Alex White did shit with Colorado, while Ubaldo was an important component on last year's playoff team, making it a no-brainer who actually won the trade.

Your attempts at logic are shockingly bad and your arguments are pathetically weak. You should just stop trying. Anything.

Enjoy that response you f*cking idiot POS, that's the last time you'll elicit a response on the gift that keeps on giving, i.e. the stupid argument that makes you look dumber every time you bring it up.

lhslep134;1622459 wrote:Presented without comment. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/ned-yost-greg-holland-using-closers-in-tied-road-games/

I enjoy Jonah Keri but I think he is off base on this one. First of all, the scenario in the article is a tied game on the road going to the 9th or extras. Who is going to close the game for you if you burn your closer in the 9th? What if it goes 11 and you take the lead in the 11th? Some middle reliever is going to come in and lock it down? Perhaps, but if he can get 3 pressure packed outs in the 11th to save the game, why can't he get 3 pressure packed outs in the 9th when the game is tied?

This reminds me of a story from Joe Torre's book- if you haven't read it...do it. Good read even as a Yankee hater-. He is talking about a game vs Boston in an ALCS or perhaps even a World Series game, I can't remember, it has been awhile since I read it. He used Rivera on the road in a tie game in extra innings and I think it was Don Zimmer who comes up to Torre and says, "You are going with Mo? Who the fuck is going to save this game when we get the lead." Torre looks at him and says something to the effect of, "I don't know but we gotta get there first."

Obviously that situation was a little different considering the stakes. I just don't think you can run your closer out there every time you have a tied game all season. His arm will fall off.

T-Bone, that's why I presented without comment. I tend to agree with both of you, but I also am interested in the fact that Keri thinks it's a potential strategy that could be exploited. Even though I'm interested, I still don't completely agree. Then again, think about the volatility of closers and how some guys can be great one year and terrible the next. The only consistently great closers? Ones with great stuff. Otherwise, most closers are just another reliever with what the manager deems to be the "closer" mindset. Since that seems to be a mental thing, it makes sense that there is year to year turnover with closers.

I think if I was a manager, I would approach the 9th inning the same way as I would the 7th and 8th: I don't care about roles, I want the pitcher on the mound with the best chance to retire the person standing in the batters box. If that means I have to switch pitchers in the middle of the ninth, I don't care. I don't care about who gets the save, only that I put my team in the best position to get the W.

Heretic;1622462 wrote:You did really well with your argument. Especially the fact you're giving Pomeranz' numbers with a team whom he wasn't traded to by Cleveland and Ubaldo's currently with a team that isn't Cleveland. While completely ignoring that neither Pomeranz nor Alex White did shit with Colorado, while Ubaldo was an important component on last year's playoff team, making it a no-brainer who actually won the trade.

Your attempts at logic are shockingly bad and your arguments are pathetically weak. You should just stop trying. Anything.

Repped. He's making us older guys look bad.

lhslep134;1622476 wrote:T-Bone, that's why I presented without comment. I tend to agree with both of you, but I also am interested in the fact that Keri thinks it's a potential strategy that could be exploited. Even though I'm interested, I still don't completely agree. Then again, think about the volatility of closers and how some guys can be great one year and terrible the next. The only consistently great closers? Ones with great stuff. Otherwise, most closers are just another reliever with what the manager deems to be the "closer" mindset. Since that seems to be a mental thing, it makes sense that there is year to year turnover with closers.

I think if I was a manager, I would approach the 9th inning the same way as I would the 7th and 8th: I don't care about roles, I want the pitcher on the mound with the best chance to get out the person standing in the batters box. If that means I have to switch pitchers in the middle of the ninth, I don't care. I don't care about who gets the save, only that I put my team in the best position to get the W.

In general, I agree with Keri and the other advanced stats guys about closers. More or less, they are a dime a dozen and unless you have money coming out of your ears, you should never spend big money on them in free agency; especially due to the volatility you mentioned. It sounds like you probably have similar views.

As for your second point, I don't know. If we were dealing with robots, then yes, but these are humans who have emotions and egos. There is a reason they are called managers as opposed to coaches. Not only are they managing the baseball situations, they are managing the players as well. If I am deemed to be the closer, I don't want to go out there in the 8th inning of a game just because the other team has 3-4-5 coming up in the order and the inning is going to be more difficult than the 9th. I want the "save", not the "hold". Holds don't get people multi millions in free agency, saves do. Tito tried to go with the "there are no roles/closer by committee" idea. It didn't stick. These guys like to have to roles to play. It helps them prepare.

TBone14;1622483 wrote:
As for your second point, I don't know. If we were dealing with robots, then yes, but these are humans who have emotions and egos. There is a reason they are called managers as opposed to coaches. Not only are they managing the baseball situations, they are managing the players as well. If I am deemed to be the closer, I don't want to go out there in the 8th inning of a game just because the other team has 3-4-5 coming up in the order and the inning is going to be more difficult than the 9th. I want the "save", not the "hold". Holds don't get people multi millions in free agency, saves do. Tito tried to go with the "there are no roles/closer by committee" idea. It didn't stick. These guys like to have to roles to play. It helps them prepare.

Can't argue with that. Even though I would do it differently doesn't mean I think you're wrong, it means my approach would be radical and has the potential to fall flat on its face. I wouldn't pay money for a "closer", I would pay money for a reliever with good stuff. I don't buy completely into the "closer" mindset because, IMO, almost every bullpen guy can, or at least should be able to, "close", but not all of them can handle a tie game.