Interesting but, of course, the problem with all counter-factuals is it’s really difficult to isolate all the variables to come up with a meaningful “if this would have changed, this would have been the outcome” conclusion. For example, in this case, a 7 or 8 inning game rule would change a great many variables, not least of which is the trailing team’s strategy and tactics in innings 6, 7 and 8. You would see more aggressive use of pinch hitters, small ball strategy trading off probability of big innings for probability of single runs, etc. Interestingly, you would also see substitution of innings pitched by middle relievers with innings pitched by setup guys and closers…precisely the guys that caused the problems in the 8th and 9th innings. It’s not unreasonable to think that the final standings would not differ materially if you made this rule change, as the Cards’ 8th and 9th inning guys would be blowing games in the 7th and 8th innings. In fact, you could make an argument that the Cards would finish WORSE in this environment if we had shorter stamina starters and more effective middle inning relievers than our primary playoff competitors.

This by the way, would be an interesting topic…how would the game change with a 7 or 8 inning structure. Fewer pitchers and more position players on the roster? More aggressive use of match-up pinch hitting? Etc, etc, etc.

Yeah DG, that thought has been brought up in my nick of the woods. Thanks for digging out the numbers. I found it to be quite the interesting and entertaining read.

The scariest part about “the blown saves” is, LaRussa’s insistence on using players in roles that, it was VERY evident, they couldn’t handle. Maybe the Cards didn’t have a defined closer but, at least try to convert one of your players, versus seeing Isringhausen and Frankilin blow save after save.

The poor use of the Pen was an obvious reflection on LaRussa. St. Louis deserves better than his poor managerial skills.

Good article DG, but you made this WAY more complicated than it has to be. The math is much simpler. Let’s just go over the things that could have been changed throughout the season, like not blowing so many saves. The Cardinals finished with 86 victories, the Brewers finished with 90, and the Cubs finished with 97. The Cardinals also had 31 blown save losses, right? Convert half of those losses for 15 more victories and the Cardinals win this division. Maybe that’s a bit ambitious, though, so let’s just convert 10 of them…that’s 96 victories, good for an easy Wild Card berth and maybe still being in the divisional race on the final weekend. Now the question is this: At what point in the season could the team have inserted Chris Perez/Jason Motte or made a trade for an effective closer to eliminate just 1/3 of this team’s blown save losses? June 1? July 1? Don’t get me wrong; on every other level this season was a great success for the Cards when you consider how things projected in Spring Training. But the 9th inning failures of Izzy & Franklin killed what became a legitimate chance to make the postseason.

Interesting idea, DG.

Intersting to consider how a seven inning game would effect the way a manager would strategize. As the first commenter posted, it probably would change how many position players and pitchers a team would carry on its roster. I would have to think more position players and a very few relievers, probably we’d see a couple eigth inning guys and a closer, and a long reliever just for security.

It won’t take much for the bullpen to be better statistically next year, than this year, and I can’t help but get excited about the bullpens potential. CPR (Chris Perez), Motte, and K-Mac. Watch out! Now, the deciding factor in all of this is will TLR let CPR become the closer, and let him fight through the ups and downs of his first big league season. DG, are you concerned about Motte? His fastball is great, but I know he can’t just blow people away with his FB for a full major league season, he must develop a reliable secondary pitch. Also, hopefully, Josh Kinney should contribute, he was impressive in his 7.0 innings this year. The only thing left is a lefty reliever. Brian Fuentes would be nice, probably to much money… Will Ohman?…or is Randy Flores the man?

DG - Your last comment regarding Carpenter and Mulder says it all. Fantasy land.

JackD,

Hence, the purpose of the phrase.

Chris,

I think you covered this, but it is worth repeating — like plate appearances being different than at-bats, for example — that not all blown saves are losses and not all bullpen losses are blown saves. They are two different stats, and some blown saves came in games the Cardinals won. Some bullpen losses came in games that did not include a blown save. I’ve seen some people just add the blown saves to the team’s record and call it a 110-win or whatever team. Not even close.

Maybe a 90-win team, probably a 92-win team, but no need to go crazy.

dg
-30-

The other thing you could do with ties is treat the 9th inning (or 8th) as the first extra inning.

Back when I was commissioner of my Strat-O-Matic leagues, I experimented with some rules changes. One was making the games 8 innings long (this also changed the formula for ERA). Most of the extra-inning games still went 10 innings. Another separate change required teams to play extra innings 3 at a time, so if the visitors gave up a run in the 10th they could still have a chance to win in the 11th or 12th.

Currently, 7-inning games are played as game 2 of minor league doubleheaders, and NCAA double headers can have either 7 or 9 innings (or one game of each).

If you quit play after 7 innings it would be softball.

Thanks. Tip your waiters. Be here all week.

(This blog was worth writing just as a setup for Mizzou’s punchline.)