WS2016 - Hendricks

[scythe]

Hello Guys!

 

I was a bit lazy lately, so I didn't write in the Forum as I should.

 

There is one think I still need and want to ask: After Game 7 last year I watched the full game a few more times. So about 50 times. And I always remember my feelings from that match. Here in Europe I switched on at midnight and during the first innings I got really relaxed. There was Spirit on the field and I thought everything is fine. Until the moment Maddon removed Hendricks... Afterwards I nearly got a heartattack....

 

So I recovered from that and I recovered from the celebration afterwards... But my european brain is still not understanding why maddon changed the pitcher that early... Is there somebody who can explain me that?? Was that a good decision?? In my opinion Hendricks was still fine...

 

Maybe there was already a discusson about that. If please let me know :)

[rocket]

It was Maddon's gameplan before the game to have Hendricks go about 5 innings, Lester go 2 innings, then have Chapman go the last 2. I think the general idea was to prevent Kyle from facing the lineup a 3rd time around.

[jersey cubs fan]

Historically Hendricks has been a 5 innings guy. He's been really effective for 5 innings and runs into trouble in the 6th. In a lot of his games he doesn't even record an out in the 6th.

 

Hendricks history isn't that vast, and even with as good as he was in 2016, the trend somewhat held. Looking at this 1-5 innings he was a way below 3 ERA, and in the 6th he was over 4. He wasn't getting shelled or anything, but there was reasonable risk for letting him go past the 5th inning. In game 3 he was pulled in the 5th inning, but he was already up to 85 pitches that game.

 

They went into game 7 with all hands on deck, stud starting pitchers ready to pitch an inning or two, and a goal of getting Hendricks through 4-5 innings. You can argue it was overly conservative, but it did make sense.

[UMFan83]

In most prior postseasons that move would be unthinkable, but there seems to be a trend in baseball, based on statistical evidence, to avoid having your pitchers face hitters a 3rd time around the order.

 

Hendricks was cruising but when Santana came up it represented the 3rd time around the order. When Santana walked, Joe decided he wanted Lester (LHP) to face the lefty Kipnis, who was probably their hottest hitter at the time. Joe was going to pull Hendricks no matter what after the 5th it sounds like, he just did it 1 out earlier because a tough lefty was up.

[mikeyt34]

Yeah, as already stated, Joe and Bossio had a game plan to get Lester in the game for the 6th and 7th. Lester's an older pitcher so It would have been difficult to ask him to get warmed up twice if Joe changed his mind. Joe had a game plan and stuck to it. Ideally it would have been better if Lester started the 6th clean instead of coming in the finish the 5th. Hendricks should have gotten out of the 5th inning if it weren't for a terrible call by the home plate umpire, he should have struck the guy out. I firmly believe that Hendricks should have been allowed to finish the 5th and bring Lester in clean to start the 6th, personally that was my only issue with Joe's decisions during game 7.

[jersey cubs fan]

In most prior postseasons that move would be unthinkable, but there seems to be a trend in baseball,

 

this sounds like something Tim McCarver would have said 15 years ago. Going to the bullpen early isn't exactly new, let alone unthinkable.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

In most prior postseasons that move would be unthinkable, but there seems to be a trend in baseball, based on statistical evidence, to avoid having your pitchers face hitters a 3rd time around the order.

 

This is the key phrasing. The problem wasn't innings, it's that he didn't want Hendricks facing the Indians big LH hitters a 3rd time with a chance to do damage. They gave him Santana to try to get through it since there was no one on and 2 outs, and he did in fact strike out Santana(https://i.imgur.com/fdh642P.png), but since the ump didn't agree Santana walked and Lester was the choice to get Kipnis.

[bukie]

In most prior postseasons that move would be unthinkable, but there seems to be a trend in baseball, based on statistical evidence, to avoid having your pitchers face hitters a 3rd time around the order.

 

This is the key phrasing. The problem wasn't innings, it's that he didn't want Hendricks facing the Indians big LH hitters a 3rd time with a chance to do damage. They gave him Santana to try to get through it since there was no one on and 2 outs, and he did in fact strike out Santana(https://i.imgur.com/fdh642P.png), but since the ump didn't agree Santana walked and Lester was the choice to get Kipnis.

And Kipnis hit the ball 10 feet.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

In most prior postseasons that move would be unthinkable, but there seems to be a trend in baseball, based on statistical evidence, to avoid having your pitchers face hitters a 3rd time around the order.

 

This is the key phrasing. The problem wasn't innings, it's that he didn't want Hendricks facing the Indians big LH hitters a 3rd time with a chance to do damage. They gave him Santana to try to get through it since there was no one on and 2 outs, and he did in fact strike out Santana(https://i.imgur.com/fdh642P.png), but since the ump didn't agree Santana walked and Lester was the choice to get Kipnis.

And Kipnis hit the ball 10 feet.

 

Yep, the plan didn't really backfire, it took a hilarious combination of flukes to not get out of that inning scoreless.

[scythe]

So as far as I understand it was a good idea or lets say nothing which would surprise a fan in that moment.

 

OK. Thanks for the answer. I was still thinking about that. In the end it didn't matter, but it was tension after all.

[JennieGarthAlgar]

I think it was an ok idea followed by a bad one (inserting Lester and Ross into a dirty inning), but whatever, we won!

[Sammy Sofa]

I think it was an ok idea followed by a bad one (inserting Lester and Ross into a dirty inning)

 

Why was that a bad idea?

[bcl412]

I wanted the Hendricks complete game because that would have been awesome and I think he would have done it but that's a dumb reason to leave a guy in for game 7. It wasn't a bad call strategically.

[squally1313]

Had no problem with Lester coming in when he did. Kyle's line looked good, but I seem to remember him getting hit harder than usual. Chapman for the 9th was pretty questionable (especially after Chapman pitching as much as he did in game 6). Might have preferred Jake there, but it all worked out in the end.

[mikeyt34]

Had no problem with Lester coming in when he did. Kyle's line looked good, but I seem to remember him getting hit harder than usual. Chapman for the 9th was pretty questionable (especially after Chapman pitching as much as he did in game 6). Might have preferred Jake there, but it all worked out in the end.

 

Yeah in the 3rd, Kyle got hit hard but got some luck with some line shots hit right at people, especially the one Napoli hit right at Bryant to end the inning. He looked great in the 4th and 5th so that's why I was kind of wondering why Joe went and got him when he did. I still think Joe should have let Kyle end the inning and bring in Lester clean. If that damn ump would have called the 3rd strike on Santana to end the inning it could have been an entirely different ballgame. But whatever, we won.