Rox at Padres, 4-6 to 4-8 Series Thread

[DieHardRoxFan]

Meanwhile while Fuentes is underused and doesn't get enough work to stay sharp ,Hawkins is in every game for what reason? These are the kind of losses the manager has a direct influence on. Unless the offense comes alive look for the Rockies to get swept in LA.

[Roxpert]

The infield was in anyway in that situation. So the odds of a ball getting through are the same, whether or not the bases are intentionally loaded.

BTW, I doubt that Fuentes has that much higher of a walk rate than league average (I think it has been less than 4 per 9 innings the last few years), and his K-rate is so high that I'm comfortable taking the risk of loading the bases and bringing him in. Or at least more comfortable than I was having Hawkins face the batter with the winning run at 3rd base.

[Heltonfan]

BTW, I doubt that Fuentes has that much higher of a walk rate than league average (I think it has been less than 4 per 9 innings the last few years), and his K-rate is so high that I'm comfortable taking the risk of loading the bases and bringing him in.

What does the K rate have to do with it? The strikeout is no less valuable with runners on the corners than it is with the bases loaded (in fact, it ought to be slightly more valuable, since you don't have the force at the plate). The K rate is relevant to the issue of Fuentes vs. Hawkins, but not the issue of bases loaded vs. runners on the corners.

As for Fuentes' control, it's not the BB rate that matters, it's the BB+HBP rate. The odds of him issuing the game-ending free base are 22% compared to the league average of 19%. That's not a huge difference, but again, the benefit of having the bases loaded is so small that you need a near-perfect matchup in order for it to be worthwhile. And no matchup involving Fuentes can possibly meet that description (even the platoon issue is irrelevant here, since Fuentes allows roughly the same OBP to lefties as he does to righties).

[Roxpert]

True enough, but really the direct comparison in this case is Hawkins facing Kouzmanoff with a runner at 3rd and 1 out, or Fuentes facing a lefty pinch hitter with the bases loaded and one out. As DHRF just pointed out, Hawkins has already been overused in the same manner that Mesa was by Hurdle last April, and Fuentes has been underused. So you likely have a fresher reliever, and a clearly better pitcher, facing the pinch hitter if the bases are intentionally loaded and Fuentes is brought in.

I realize there are other choices, such as bringing in Fuentes to face Kouzmanoff in order to try to get the K, instead of intentionally walking him, or walking Kouzmanoff and bringing in Fuentes for the next batter, etc.

The point is to get our stud guy in the game in a desperate, and high leverage, situation to get a key strikeout and extend the game to the 11th inning. I happen to think Fuentes would have given us a better chance, even with the bases loaded, than Hawkins in that situation with just a runner on 3rd base.

BTW, I really don't see the point in walking someone intentionally in that situation to set up a 1st and 3rd DP opportunity if the infield is being brought in. Perhaps the better setup would be to load the bases, bring in Fuentes, and play in at the corners and at double play depth up the middle. That way, a hard hit ball to shortstop could result in an easy force at the plate and a possible 6-2-3 DP. Having all infielders playing in would increase the chances of that hard hit ball getting through for a game-winning single.

[Heltonfan]

You're really overestimating the difference that matchups can make. The expected OBP against Fuentes, without considering the quality of the hitter, is around .320; against Hawkins, .340 (which leads me to another point: let's stop pretending that Fuentes is some kind of star). Now, the matchup with Blum is an awfully good one for Fuentes (because Blum is terrible)... let's say that the expected OBP there is .280. Jose Cruz is a league average hitter, which makes him an expected .340 against Hawkins (I'm assuming that we walk Kouzmanoff in either case). So we've got a 6% chance of the matchup difference being relevant (.280 vs. .340). But again, the odds of the bases-loaded walk or HBP happening are 22%. This isn't close.

BTW, I really don't see the point in walking someone intentionally in that situation to set up a 1st and 3rd DP opportunity if the infield is being brought in.

Fair point. But really, you walk Kouzmanoff because he's much better than the hitters following him, and because the downside (back-to-back walks of Cruz and Blum to end the game) is minuscule. The fact that it sets up a possible DP is just a bonus.

Walk Kouzmanoff, and bring in Fuentes to face Cruz. Anything else is just asking for trouble.

[Roxpert]

So we've got a 6% chance of the matchup difference being relevant (.280 vs. .340). But again, the odds of the bases-loaded walk or HBP happening are 22%. This isn't close.

Embedded within the .280 are all those walks and HBPs, so I hope you aren't double-counting. Who was going to follow Blum, anyway, assuming Fuentes retired him without the winning run scoring? I haven't looked at the game log, and can't recall.

BTW, while you're right that Fuentes isn't a "lights-out" stud reliever, he is still a stud reliever by our standards, and relative to our alternatives at that point in the game. The way Hawkins has been pitching of late, and given the amount of overuse vs. Fuentes being fresh, I also think the OBP differential there is more than .280 vs. .340. Maybe .260 vs. .360? That would be significant, though wholly unprovable, which brings up another point - sometimes, as a manager, you have to go with hunch instead of overall percentages.

Rarely does Hurdle go with such a hunch, and when he does, it's usually the wrong hunch.

[Heltonfan]

Who was going to follow Blum, anyway, assuming Fuentes retired him without the winning run scoring?

Marcus Giles. Who isn't significantly different from Cruz, so it doesn't affect our calculations.

I'll go along with your .260 vs. .360 guess. Hell, for the sake of argument, I'll go along with .220 vs. .400. Because that's about what it would take in order for loading the bases to be so much as a break-even proposition.

Again, you might be able to argue that loading the bases is a decent move in some matchup situations. But you'll never be able to legitimately criticize a manager for not doing it. The odds just don't work that way.

[BigRapidsJackass]

Walk Kouzmanoff, and bring in Fuentes to face Cruz. Anything else is just asking for trouble.

I'm convinced. That would've been the optimal strategy. Interestingly, Cruz Jr has better numbers (883 OPS vs 745 OPS) as a RH hitter over the last 3 years, but given that he's only had 360 or so PAs as a RHH I doubt this is significant.

[ofhdhdy]

Jeff Francis going strong today! 4-2 Rockies in the bottom of the seventh and I hate the Dodgers, GO ROCKIES!

[HoyaRoxFan]

I seem to vaguely recall a very recent discussion about a hypothetical scenario involving Fuentes with the bases loaded, one out, it being the bottom of the ninth... fancy that...

[Roxpert]

and obviously the Fuentes we saw today would have lost the game in that hypothetical situation yesterday. Such is baseball.

[Dante Bichette]

Originally Posted by Dante Bichette

Am I the only one who doesn't completely trust Fuentes? I know he has been an all star the past few seasons, and I know his stats are good, but his stuff just doesn't seem good enough to be a dominant closer. With him it is all about changing speeds and keeping the batter's timing off with that funky delivery and arm angle, which makes it hard. Still, if a batter guesses correctly at which pitch is coming and picks it up, Fuentes gets crushed. Because of his arm angle the only movement he can get on his pitches is in against righties and away from lefties. Otherwise, his pitches are flat and his stuff isn't overpowering, like most good closers.

Allow me to quote myself from an earlier post, since we saw Fuentes struggle again today and I did not receive any replies last time.

Thoughts on Fuentes?

[Heltonfan]

I think your conclusion on Fuentes is accurate. He's clearly in the lower tier of closers; I have him projected at a 3.59 component ERA, which is only about a quarter of a run better than the average reliever. I think it makes all the sense in the world to deal him after this season (if not earlier); there's always a team out there that can be easily seduced by the "proven closer" reputation.

But I have to quibble with the rest of your analysis. Fuentes is plenty dominant; aside from Billy Wagner, he's as tough to hit as any lefty in the game (no, he doesn't have the blazing fastball, but the arm angle more than makes up for it). And I don't think there's anyone better at making batters look silly. His problem isn't his stuff, it's his control.

[HoyaRoxFan]

I think he was just mad that he hasn't been used properly in the past few days, so he wanted to make things interesting.

He's clearly still one of the better arms in the pen, although certainly not the long-term option at closer. Sometime in the next few years, I think that job will belong to someone like Ubaldo Jimenez or maybe Manny Corpas(?). To folks with a better grasp of such things than I, in the event Fuentes were to struggle this year, do you suppose Kim would be the first in line to step into that role, if he's still with the team? I wonder if we'd start seeing him in that 8th-inning setup role in the meantime, given Hawkins' problems. Are we going to use Kim for anything but mop-up duty???

[BigRapidsJackass]

Bring back Shawn Chacon!