In terms of semantics, I specifically said small point. Others made that into a bigger deal. But, officially, no. If the winner of the Masters shoots -10 and then 8 guys shoot -9, the guy who shoots -8 doesn't tie for third.
They (and roughly 25 other relief pitchers) pitched a lot over a 2 month stretch. Throwing notoriously streaky Leiter in the mix kinda weakens your argument on the long term damage because he came back in 2024 pitching effectively (but streaky) and obviously held up enough to get traded at the deadline. You can't call it 'lucky' on the healthy side but somehow pre-ordained on the unhealthy side. I'm guessing if you look at those other 25 pitchers you'd see a mixture of 2024 effectiveness/ineffectiveness/injury. I'd guess if you looked at the next 25 guys after that you'd see a similar mix of results. Pitchers break, relief pitchers ERA explode, etc. If this was anywhere close to an exact science people would be a lot better at it.
I don't know. It seems like a narrative that's easy to put together in hindsight. We were in a playoff race and Ross leaned on his best pitchers. If he would have handed the ball to Michael Rucker or Palencia and we missed the playoffs all the same, that's a whole different narrative to throw at his feet. We had a garbage May/June and had to treat the entire second half like they were September playoff chase games, and at the deadline Jed (and everyone else in baseball) decided to go get a AAAA reliever and roll with that. There weren't good answers.