Gorzo, John Russell and a day at Shea

by dtoddwin on May 3, 2008 5:14 PM EDT

I was at the Pirate game Wednesday afternoon in New York. The Bucs beat the Mets 13-1 on a beautiful day at Shea. Sounds like things were all good, right? Wrong. It resulted in one of the silliest and riskiest managerial decisions I have seen in a long time.

Let me preface my rant by saying I obviously wasn't on the mound and wasn't in any way privy to any conversation that took place there. Okay, that's my qualifying statement. Now let me set the scene. Bottom of the fifth, Pirates ahead 8-0, one out, man on first and Luis Castillo pops out to Ryan Doumit in foul territory. Two outs. However, Tom Gorzelanny appears to have suffered some sort of injury when he threw the pitch, the trainer, manager and infielders gathering to assess the situation. A few minutes of conversation ensues and Gorzo tests himself out by throwing a few pitches. It's clear he isn't 100%.

Now, here we have a young pitcher who is one of the key building blocks in your future plans. He's had some shoulder problems this year early in spring training and has a history of minor back problems. If it's a 3-2 game in September and we are two games out of first place, I'm pretty sure I'm taking him out. But, in this situation we're ahead 8-0 and it's the end of April. Well, you know where this is headed. Because of the situation and Gorzo only needing to get one more out to be in line for the win, all involved come to the conclusion that he can stay out there. As Russell and the trainer came off the mound I shouted my opinion and was close enough to the field to think they may have heard it. Gorzo ends up getting David Wright on a ground out to end the inning and is done for the day.

Well, word comes out today that Gorzo is going to miss his next start to make sure this flare up in his back settles down and he's 100% next time out. Now, I have no idea if the couple of pitches he threw to Wright after the initial tweak caused any further harm. Maybe not. But the shortsightedness of the decision to leave him in an 8-0 game at that point is beyond comprehension in my view. It was a horrific decision. And it's these kinds of decisions that can really set the franchise back. I think most of us have come to realize that wins and losses aren't necessarily a very good reflection of a pitcher's effectiveness. We now have much better tools to measure that. Russell's preoccupation with getting Gorzo a win really put the pitcher and his team in a very precarious situation.

Hopefully, Huntington, Rob Neyer or someone else out there was watching this and will make sure it doesn't happen again by telling Russell that he should manage to win games for the team and its long term benefit, and not manage to promote an individual's stats.

1 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

It could be that the mangers don’t actually make these types of decisions but rather the players do. That seems to me the only reasonable explanation for the way closers are used these days, for instance. And out here in SF it was always clear that it was Bonds and not the manager that decided when he would play and where in the order he would hit.

by WestCoastBuc on May 3, 2008 6:05 PM EDT 0 recs

The manager's job.....

is to make these decisions, in this case, in consultation with the trainer. Every player generally wants to continue playing. If a manager is acquiescing to a player in this situation they should fire him on the spot. Clearly Bonds was a unique case.

by dtoddwin on May 3, 2008 6:12 PM EDT up 0 recs

One would think so but in practice that is not the case. The managers throughout baseball generally do what the pitchers want in a case such as this. Another good example was when Pinella left Dempster in to face LaRoche a week or two ago with 2 out in the fifth and the bases loaded Cubs up 5-3. It was absolutely clear that Demptster was struggling and should have been removed. Luckily for the Cubs the ump gave him two close strikes and LaRoche ended up bailing him out by swinging at a couple of pitches around his ankles.

Your right Bonds is a special case and I shouldn’t have used it but the way closers are used today illustrates the point very well. One would have to be an idiot, and I am sure Russiel is not, to think it was right to bring on JVB to face the Mets in the bottom 11th a few days ago instead of Capps. But closers prefer not to be used in cases where no save opportunity is available unless they are in need of work.

by WestCoastBuc on May 3, 2008 10:30 PM EDT up 0 recs

Post-Gazette

a couple days later said Capps had a virus or something that day. Kind of negates your point, sorry.

by bucdaddy on May 3, 2008 11:11 PM EDT up 0 recs

Except That

managers fail to use their best reliever and closer in a spot like that all the time.

by WestCoastBuc on May 4, 2008 9:47 AM EDT up 0 recs

Closers

come in when the game is tied in the ninth in pretty much every opportunity across baseball. There are several examples where they don’t—usually because the closer just pitched the night before, or the team will not have an off day for a while, but managers do use their best reliever in a spot like that the vast majority of the time.

by DITO on May 4, 2008 10:41 AM EDT up 0 recs

Your missing my point.....

This is an injury issue…........not effectiveness.

by dtoddwin on May 4, 2008 8:09 AM EDT up 0 recs

Which

illustrates my point precisely. If Gorzo had said “I’m hurt, better make a change” he’d have been gone. Gorzo made the decision to stay in the game not Russell.

by WestCoastBuc on May 4, 2008 9:50 AM EDT up 0 recs

I'm sure you are right that Gorzo said he wanted to stay in,

but Russell should have overridden that request. I don’t know why you think Gorzo can just stand on the mound if Russell tells him he is out. Greg Maddux was pulled from his last start in the seventh inning and was visibly upset that he wasn’t given the chance to pitch out of it. GREG MADDUX. Tom Gorzelanny does not choose when he pitches and when he does not.

by DITO on May 4, 2008 10:45 AM EDT up 0 recs

OK, OK

You guys win. Living out here in SF my view may have become jaded. It at has least appeared for several years that the lunitcs were running the asylum and I’ve wondered how pervasive that is in baseball. The two situations discussed above, the way closers are used today and not pulling starters in the fifth inning, seem to me to be situations in which manager make decisions based upon what the player wants and not what is best for the team.

I was wondering what others thought. Thanks for you comments.

by WestCoastBuc on May 4, 2008 11:23 AM EDT up 0 recs

dtoddwin

This is not the first time I have disagreed with Russell’s management of the starters and the bullpen (not to mention who and when he chooses to pinch-hit in certain situations).

I usually keep my mouth shut about managerial decisions because I have never managed a pitching staff, but in my humble opinion he has been doing a very poor job of it all year.

Maholm should not have started the sixth inning yesterday after struggling through 97 pitches in five innings. He was allowed to bat in a close game with runners on 2nd and 3rd in the top of the sixth when Doumit, Morgan, Minky, Rivas and Bixler were all still on the bench, why? And even if he hits there, he shouldn’t have taken the mound in the sixth.

by DITO on May 4, 2008 10:50 AM EDT 0 recs

Decsions like leaving Maholm in the game in that spot drive me crazy. It is almost enough to make me want to stop watching, but not quite.

by WestCoastBuc on May 4, 2008 11:29 AM EDT up 0 recs

Funny about Russell

I think he’s getting the big decisions right, but the small ones, which get over-magnified because they’re usually situational and memorable, have been lacking. I mean, he hasn’t let Morgan sniff the field for the most part, so the big picture is he gets that McLouth is a far superior player, and that’s important. I don’t think he’s had much choice but to let Bautista and LaRoche play their way out of their slumps. Two good games and now the much-maligned Bautista is out-OPSing the much-loved Minky by almost .200 points.

The use of Doumit when he doesn’t start is near bizarre in my opinion. He’s not optimizing him at all. He’s using him, but he’s waiting until the last minute instead of leveraging him when men are on base.

And the bunting, holy cow… I thought this was supposed to be a new-school management.

by azibuck on May 4, 2008 12:35 PM EDT up 0 recs

Agreed on Bautista and LaRoche

The have to play ever day, I guess, moving Pearce to right is starting to seem like a big mistake, though.

I thought Minky was going to be an emergency catcher so they wouldn’t have to worry about Doumit’s usage on off days.

by DITO on May 4, 2008 1:41 PM EDT up 0 recs

It's not that he hasn't used him

It’s that yesterday he saved him for the 9th. Defensible I suppose, but with the chance to score runs in the 6th and Maholm already at 97 pitches? And a few days ago, runners on 2nd and 3rd, one out, and the still-cold Bautista and Paulino up. With a righty on the mound. He let B & P bat, then used Doumit with no one on to lead off the 9th against Billy Wagner. When Doumit’s not in the line up he’s the best bench player by far, but it’s like Russell’s waiting for a low or no-leverage time to use him.

by azibuck on May 4, 2008 3:26 PM EDT up 0 recs