An interesting eighth

Start in the top of the frame.  Dodgers reliever Rudy Seanez, in his second inning of work, allows a leadoff single to Alfonso Soriano who goes to third on a Ryan Theriot knock.  Derrek Lee singles.  1-0 Cubs.  Action in the pen (I believe it came here).  Seanez forces Theriot at third on a bad Michael Barrett bunt attempt.  Mark DeRosa flies deep to center, advancing Lee to third.  Seanez then walks Matt Murton to load the bases. 

Next to bat for Chicago was speedy but relatively nonthreatening outfielder Angel Pagan, but Lou Piniella had both Cliff Floyd and Aramis Ramirez available on the bench.  Grady Little brings in lefty Joe Beimel, basically guaranteeing an at bat for the right-handed Ramirez, who as we all know, doesn't suck.  Ramirez hits the ball hard, pushing Brady Clark to the track in right where he makes the catch.  Danger averted.  I asked Little about that sequence after the game:

BK: In the eighth, when you brought in Beimel, you knew Pagan wouldn't end up hitting against him, right?  You had Brazoban (who had warmed up as well). 

GL: That other kid (meaning Brazoban) is relatively new here to our ballclub this season.  What we're looking for right there with the bases loaded is somebody we know is going to throw a strike, in that situation there.  And Joe is our best bet for that.  If we put (Brazoban) out there, he walked the first hitter he saw the other day.  We didn't want to take a chance of that happening again. 

BK: You pulled Rudy because he was struggling a little bit?

GL: Rudy was out of gas.  He gave us everything he had there for an inning and two-thirds.  We know what's going to happen.  Either Floyd's going to be hitting against Rudy, or (Ramirez against a lefty).  We didn't feel like Pagan was going to be still hitting.  But it ended up Ramirez up there against Joe, and we trust Joe against anybody.  His numbers against righties are just as good as lefties in the last two years we had him here, and we knew Joe was going to throw a strike. 

BK: So in that situation, you don't necessarily worry about the lefty-righty thing.  You just pick the guy you have the most faith in? 

GL: We have to have somebody we know is going to throw a strike.  And a lot of pitches are different when the bases are loaded, when they're trying to throw a strike.  We're still bonding with Brazoban a little bit.  We've got to find out for sure what he can do.

I thought this was interesting.  And other issues were in play as well.  Little said after the game that they wanted to do everything they could to give Takashi Saito a day off (he spoke at length before the game about the need to keep his closer fresh).  That meant Jonathan Broxton was Sunday's closer, and might have to be used later in the game.  So what would normally be a natural time to use him wasn't on Sunday.  Chad Billingsley pitched three innings on Saturday, so I'm sure Little and Co. hoped to give him the day as well.  So in that context, they're choosing between Beimel and Brazoban.  Theoretically, I'd rather face Floyd than Ramirez, but in a tight spot would rather have Beimel on the mound than Brazoban. 

Now some numbers- Ramirez hits lefties at a .361 clip, righties at a still respectable .277.  Beimel had a good success in '06 against righties, holding them to a decent .277 average.  This year, however, righties have hit him harder (.302).  So at least in theory, the numbers say you'd want a righty to face Ramirez.  In practice, I think most people would feel more comfortable with Beimel (myself included).  Maybe he should have left Seanez in, then brought in Beimel if Piniella sent Floyd to the plate (the Cubs skip likely would have countered with Ramirez anyway, so there's a chance the situation would have ended up the same).  Or another option would have been to leave Seanez in for one more batter to keep the righty-righty matchup, but is a fatigued Seanez a better option than a fresh Beimel?  I'd say no. 

Onto the bottom of the inning.  Little sends Andre Ethier to the plate, pinch hitting for Andy LaRoche, with Wilson Betemit on deck.  Piniella then replaces righthanded reliever Michael Wuertz- who has held lefties to a .263 average this year, all hitters to an overall .143 average in May, sports a 1.83 ERA and had worked a perfect seventh- with lefty Scott Eyre, who has basically been throwing B.P. this season.  In theory, Piniella gets the lefty-lefty matchup he wants, and can turn Betemit around to bat righthanded.  Little countered with Nomar instead of Betemit.  Piniella brought in righty Bob Howry to face Garciaparra.  Little then sent Betemit to the plate after Nomar anyway, and he was able to bat lefthanded.   So what did Piniella get for all his maneuvering?  Three pitchers burned in the inning, and the tying home run from Eithier off Eyre. 

Obviously, the results favor Little and the Dodgers.  But it could have just as easily gone the other way.  Not because one guy was right and the other wrong- although given Eyre's lack of success this season, I don't see why he'd be brought in to face anyone in a tight game- but because in most any situation where you're talking pitchers and hitters, the odds favor the hitter failing and the pitcher succeeding.  That's just how the game works.  I asked Little about what he was thinking in the bottom half of the inning as well:

BK: You pinch hit Ethier in the bottom half with Betemit out on deck.  Were you hoping to chase Wuertz at that point?  Or was it simply a matter of wanting Andre to bat?

GL:  We knew Andre was in the game, because we knew we were going to hit for Clark right after that also, and we don't have an abundance of players we can shuttle (in and out).  But it turned out good, didn't it? 

BK:  But in terms of maneuvers, did you get what you were looking for?  Was that what you were hoping would happen, in terms of matchups?

GL: Andre was going to hit.  And we knew Betemit and Nomar were going to hit that inning.  It turned out good today. 

I didn't expect Little to call Piniella an idiot or anything (though it would have made for fun blogging).  And certainly just as the Dodgers staff knew Ramirez or Floyd would hit for Pagan, I'm sure Piniella's gang thought Nomar and Betemit were a possibility as well.  This, of course, follows the general rule of "If I can see it coming, the guys in the dugout probably can, too."  And I don't know the ins and outs of the Cubs pitching staff over the last week or two.  Who's been working too much, who's been underworked, etc.  I do know they haven't pitched well in the pen for a large part of the season, which impacts things, I'm sure.  As I left his office, I told Grady I thought it was a fun inning, because a lot was going on.  "There's a lot happening the whole game," he said.  And of course, that's true.

To me, it revealed some potential differences in management style.  Little went with the arm he was most comfortable with in Beimel, rather than sticking to the numbers (the gaudy average of Ramirez against lefties being the most striking).  But Little also was working within other constraints- a very strong desire to give Saito a day off (long term vs. short term consideration), Broxton in a closer role, three innings of Bills the day before, and the fact Brazoban is still relatively fresh off injury and only recently returned to the bigs.  Piniella seemed to favor the lefty-lefty matchup, bringing in Eyre to face Ethier.  Ramirez almost made Little pay.  Ethier cashed in on Piniella and Eyre.  In general, I tend to think Little plays numbers and matchups less by the numbers (though he and his staff are aware of them) and more by larger trends and what his gut tells him is right.  Sometimes that's good, since a slavish devotion to matchups or stats can be very counterproductive.  Sometimes it's bad (playoffs, Penny). 

There's a good chance a seasoned baseball guy would look at this and point out other factors I left out of the equation (in fairness, nobody wants to read literally EVERYTHING there is to say about the eighth inning of Sunday's game).  I'm sure I'm forgetting something, or underestimating something else.  I just thought it was a great example of what makes baseball fun.  For many managerial moves, there's often a second option that seems very viable.  Or a third, or a fourth.  From day to day, the "correct" move may indeed be correct for that day, but working against long term considerations, like giving a guy a day off.  On the other hand, maybe sticking to the idea that player must have rest that day is a mistake.  And for any move a manager makes, there's a counter from the opposing manager.   

Generally the one who is deemed a genius is the guy for whom the result turns out the best, whether it was really "the best" move or not.  Because for a lot of things- a pitching change or matchup, for example- the odds favor a good result for the hurler.  Conversely, they'll almost always work against a batter. And in the end, we'll usually evaluate the results based on which team won, and our own concepts of what we'd do if we were in charge.  It's all part of the fun. 

BK