2019 Series #18 Cleveland Indians @ Boston Red Sox May 27, 28, 29

[AZ_]

Most underrated aspect of every Indians/Red Sox series is the fact that Rick Manning and Dennis Eckersley are one booth apart.

Media dining at Fenway is already pretty small. I wonder how frosty that relationship is after however many years it’s been.

 

[EdMonix11]

I don’t subscribe to BP, so our numbers might be slightly off. If what you’re looking at is free data, I’m happy to look at and use the same numbers if you have a link.

Ultimately this has turned into a whole different argument, a "should they? v. why did they?" thing but fundamentally speaking I am just in disagreement on the whole “playing for one run” thing.

I understand that was likely Francona’s mindset last night, but it’s a flawed mindset to me.

1 run lead going into the B9 = 81.8% chance of winning
2 run lead going into the B9 = 92.1% chance of winning
3 run lead going into the B9 = 96.67% chance of winning
(via GregStoll.com)

My personal opinion is that teams should put themselves in position to score as many runs as possible in an inning, regardless of what inning is it and what the score is. Giving away outs without scoring runs is something I just can't get behind in any scenario.

Here ya go (its free):

https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1928919

Look, I understand what you're saying. Normally I'd agree but the needing one run situation changes your tactics completely and it changes the analytics. If we're talking about the 6th inning, yeah, try to score as many runs as possible. 9th inning and a tied game? You want to give the ball to your closer with any sort of lead at all costs.

I know you want more runs in the 9th, I would too, but I'd rather have a one run lead and a 81.8% chance of winning the game going into the bottom of the 9th than just a *34.5% chance of winning if the game is still tied in the bottom of the 9th. Plus, if you have a Brad Hand, I think that 81.8% is closer to 90%.

*Used your Greg Stoll link. Bot 9, Tie game, home team has ~65.5% chance of winning. Subtract 100-65.5 = 34.5

 

[Stark]

Mookie Betts just slaughtered that. Good God.

 

[CBBI]

I know you want more runs in the 9th, I would too, but I'd rather have a one run lead and a 81.8% chance of winning the game going into the bottom of the 9th than just a *34.5% chance of winning if the game is still tied in the bottom of the 9th. Plus, if you have a Brad Hand, I think that 81.8% is closer to 90%.

Obviously I would rather score 1 than 0, but it's not an either or scenario. Opting to not play for one run by swinging away 1st and 2nd with 0 outs doesn't mean you're going to score 0 runs necessarily. It's only about a 4% difference on which scenario (bunting/not bunting) is more likely to end in 0 runs, but when Boston inevitably loads the bases by IBB on the very next batter, the odds of scoring 0 runs actually increases by a few percent and the odds of scoring multiple runs drops.

It ended up working out last night, but I would still rather take my chances with Mercado and Santana swinging away than I would sacrifice Mercado, have Santana IBB'd and put the game in Luplow's hands against a RHP considering how horrific he is against RHP this year and his entire career.

I respect your Hand point because he's having a very good year converting saves, but he's still just 84% on saves since becoming a full time closer in 2017. Plus the five batters he had to face in the 9th were .815 OPS, .871 OPS, .901 OPS, .876 OPS, .931 OPS. So that was no sure thing either.

 

[Stark]

Offense coming to life the last two games is nice to see. It's at Fenway, but still.

 

[MirORich]

Well god damn, it’s an actual offense the past few games

 

[MVD]

2 triples in 3 innings. As of a few weeks ago I don't think we had any triples this season. Hopefully we can hold this lead.

 

[Soar]

What a stupid time to steal...

We really lack the basics this year.

 

[Real Deal]

Dumbass Martin screwed over Frankie's chances that time

 

[Stark]

What a stupid time to steal...

We really lack the basics this year.

Yup, that was awful.

Best hitter we've got working a nice AB and that pitcher was all over the place. Terrible.

 

[Huber.]

Most underrated aspect of every Indians/Red Sox series is the fact that Rick Manning and Dennis Eckersley are one booth apart.

Media dining at Fenway is already pretty small. I wonder how frosty that relationship is after however many years it’s been.

Did that inspire the Major League Vaughn/Dorn wife hookup? Even Vaughn's name is Rick


Also, not sure if you saw this last year

 

[Lee]

Mookie Betts just slaughtered that. Good God.

Better Mookie? Betts or Blaylock?

(Don't anyone dare say Wilson, we know that's not true)

 

[Real Deal]

The Santana man can

 

[Stark]

Figures, our offense starts going so our starting pitching fucking collapses.

 

[Soar]

What the fuck...