skyking162

Over the past two days, two of my favorite baseball blogs have pointed out managers failing to use their closers in ninth inning ties. First, Eddie Guardado doesn’t make an appearance in the top of the ninth at home against the Angels, and then Mariano Rivera’s passed over in favor of Scott Proctor in the bottom of the ninth at Oakland. (To be fair, Joe Torre usually does pitch Rivera in tie games.)

Both scenarios can be tackled with a little win probability, but first let’s consider what the managers might have been thinking. For Mike Hargrove, it was impossible to find a save-situation for Guardado from the ninth inning on. The only way a new inning is started is if the game is tied. A tie means no save situation. Guardado could, however, ensure that the Angels don’t score in the top of the inning so that the Mariners only need one run in the bottom half. This strategy, however, doesn’t follow the typical closer usage, which puts supreme value on preserving leads. Putting a closer into a close game with the lead guarantees a win if the closer pitches perfectly. Putting a closer into a tie game merely increases the likelihood of winning with one run in the bottom half. If the team doesn’t score, it appears the closer’s abilities have been wasted — they haven’t guaranteed a win.

Flip to the Yankees. In a tie-game, Kyle Farnsworth finished the bottom of the eighth, but was removed with the game tied going into the bottom of the ninth. On the road, there definitely could be a save situation for Rivera if the Yankees can score in the top half of any extra inning. But they had to get there first. Again, saving the closer for a save would put him in a position to guarantee a win, while pitching in a tie game would only allow him to guarantee the Yankees didn’t lose in that inning. Losing later in the game would somehow invalidate Rivera’s appearance earlier.

While the strategy of having your best pitcher guarantee a win sounds good, it can be inefficient. For example, shutting the door on a 5-1 game guarantees a win, but teams would win 97% of those game with Joe Shmoe on the mound. The key, as has been beaten to death, is to use the best pitcher to maximize wins — to use him in situations that have the greatest influence on changing the probability of winning the game.

Here are some common situations where a closer might be used and their corresponding win probaiblities(from Baseball Prospectus Premium):

At Home

At home, up two runs, top of the ninth or later: 98% (still win 50% of the time if you give up exactly two runs)
At home, up one run, top of the ninth or later: 85%
At home, tie game, top of the ninth or later: 52%
At home, down one run, top of ninth or later: 12%

A home, two-run save results in a win probability change of only 2%! (98% to 100%)
A one-run save is worth a change of 15% (85% to 100%).
A scoreless inning in a tie game is worth 16% (52% to 68%).
Holding the visitors to a one run lead is worth 3% (12% to 15%).

So, using a closer in a tie-game is very slightly more productive than a one-run save situation at home. Considering that there won’t be any save situations once the game is tied going into the ninth, using Guardado in the tie game is the best option. Heck, even if the team’s down by one run, using the closer is every so slightly more useful than the very common two-run save at home.

On the Road

On the road, up two runs with no outs, bottom of ninth or later: 92%
On the road, up a run with no outs, bottom of ninth or later: 85%
On the road, tied with no outs, bottom of ninth or later: 32%

In a game with a two run lead, a closer’s perfect inning is worth an 8% change in win probability (92% to 100%).
In a game with the small lead, a perfect inning is worth a 15% change in win probability (85% to 100%).
In a tie game, a perfect inning is also worth a 15% change in win probability (32% to 47% — home team advantage).

Those numbers show that pitching in a tie game is just as productive towards winning as pitching with a one-run lead, not mention the wasted usage in a two-run game. And what’s the better plan — using the closer immediately in a tie game where you KNOW you’re getting a 15% swing in probability, or waiting for a half-inning down the road where your team is up exactly one run. Heck the A’s showed that even they can play smallball for one run in the bottom of the ninth against Scott Proctor.

Guaranteeing a win is nice (although often overkill), but significantly increasing the chances of winning is better.

Popularity: 2% [?]

This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 5th, 2006 at 10:04 am and is filed under Baseball. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.