they don't believe in paying big money to anyone. so I'm not shocked they don't do it for closer ok, so we stop using those guys in inning 5-7 who are you using instead? and now Ott isn't available in the 9th either. who are you using? eventually, you're gonna have to throw guys who aren't real consistent. Personally, I don't want those guys starting and forcing us to use ever arm in the pen before we ever get to inning 5. I also really don't want them throwing in the 9th, where a blown lead means a lost game. So, naturally, you use them to eat up innings in middle relief. Ott is our best reliever. We use him in the most crucial moment in the game. It's called the 9th inning. Also known as crunch time. Last year, we needed another starter. This year, our bullpen is what seems thin. Since our bullpen is thin, I don't advocate removing the BEST guy we have there.
mf'er. after we wore down ks, tulane beat them tonight with a score of 1-0. ive already heard all about it. someone just freakin shoot me now. cause if that freakin green team wins tomorrow night, i will never hear the end of it. my only response was "you're welcome".
While I agree with the analysis of your post, it simply doesn't prove anything. I don't expect he would have a 0.91 era as a starter, as starting is more difficult, but a sub 3.00 over more innings would be extremely helpful to the team right now. We don't know whether he could do this, but there is great reason to expect he could and we have little to lose this early on. Either way, the team benefits greater as he pitches extra innings. On an unrelated note, while I use era in my analysis for simplicity, it isn't the best indicator of a pitcher's success. No act here, sir. I believe we have quite a number of good pitchers, which is why I'm certain we can find an appropriate mix of relievers if we start Ott. He best helps the team by maximizing his innings, rather than pitching 1.1 in a losing weekend. Much as your original post, I hope you don't take offense to this, but I am honestly baffled by this convoluted logic. Anyway, I'll be leaving town for the weekend tomorrow (Vegas), so I will likely be unable to respond further. It's been nice discussing with you guys and I look forward to continuing throughout the season. Let's hope the boys pull it together this weekend.
I can understand where your thought process is coming from, but what I don't think it takes into account is the games that are a 1-2 run differential, which is more often than not. We can't afford to take an arm like Ott's out of the bullpen in those situations. We need to have a shutdown closer to preserve, either our lead or prevent additional runs from the opposition and hope the bats can get us the winning runs. Not having a shut down closer in those games could cost us.
no offense taken. I'll try to clear it up a bit. Using this year's LSU team as our example: The arms currently struggling can not be completely avoided. They will have to be used, and on a somewhat regular basis. When would you use these guys? You have now moved Ott into a starting position, so he is no longer available in the bullpen. How are you now going to use the pen? Who are you gonna throw in a tight spot in the 6th? Now you're in an even tighter spot in the 9th, who are you gonna throw? According to your logic, you used your best bullpen arm in the 6th. Now you're in an even more crucial spot, but your best arm is no longer available to you. But since you upgraded you best reliever to starter, you're actually relying on your THIRD best reliever in what is now the most important spot of the game. On most college (and even pro) teams, the difference between best and 3rd best is usually a pretty big talent gap. we've seen what LSU's bullpen is capable of. I'm not gonna be real comfortable with a 1 run lead, a man on with no outs in the 9th against Ole Miss if someone other than Ott is on the mound. P.S. hope you enjoy your trip, and look forward to continuing the discussion when you return.
Pictures of actual baseball! Not the home run. I believe this was his second hit. I have more pictures than these posted (about 20 so far plus more of Mike). If you want to look at those, click the Flickr link in my signature.
Thanks for bringing up this point. In fact, the logic does take this downside into account. By my count, of the 69 games LSU played last year, just 24 were decided by 2 runs or less, which accounts for less than 35% of games (LSU was 17-7 in these games). I agree that removing Ott from the closers role and potentially replacing him with a less effective reliever could cause a swing in the outcome of a few of these games. However, a statistically average team would go 12-12 in these close games, which LSU is decidedly not. So, the maximum swing would be approx. 5 games. It would likely be ~3 games if the new closer/s was noticeably worse. LSU had a 71.01 win percentage last season. They had a 70.83 win percentage in games decided by 2 runs or less and a 72.72 win percentage in games decided by more than 2 runs. So, even with Ott, it's a fallacy to say that LSU was even better in close games, they weren't, they performed at their average. Conversely, Ott as a starter has the opportunity to start a minimum of 15 games (including games already played this season). In addition, he could likely make at least a few relief appearances (Coleman made 9 his senior season). This could easily double Ott's inning total from 50.1 to ~100 (Coleman had 129 last season, primarily as a starter). More innings from Ott equals more successful innings for LSU, which should easily account for an increase of 3 or more wins throughout the season. Ott's benefit to the team and fans is their personal security. You feel good about having Ott come in because you hate to lose a game in the 9th. I understand that. However, you don't notice the games that are lost in innings 1-5 when the starters give up too many runs to recover. [/rant] This argument rests on the assumption that there will be a more crucial spot in every 9th inning, however, it overlooks the fact that the majority of 9th innings pass in 1-2-3 fashion or with little fanfare. If the other team has scored those runs that were on base at the crucial point earlier in the game, they don't NEED the runs in the 9th because they've already won. If you stop them from scoring earlier in the game, you're just three outs away from victory. And Thanks!
That is very nice work there, but there is no way to mathematically quantify your claim. To speculate that is just that speculation. It looks really good, and even might have the ability to validate your position to some, but to anyone who really follows the game it is just a bunch of fancy numbers. Your assumption is based on all things being equal, which this is baseball all things are never equal.
