These games are pleasing to me because they expose how the endless metrics and stats they inundate us with that have very little to do with who wins or loses. It's not pitch count, it's pitch selection and execution. More on that later.
It's been a real pleasure for me to see the maturation of the Orioles' Buck Showalter as a manager. I was announcing Yankee games in 1995 when Buck was managing them. He was not as free to be himself then because, well, because they were the Yankees and George Steinbrenner and his baseball people were still a little heavy-handed during that time and looking over Buck's shoulder.
Now he's become the most delightful, insightful, secure, unguarded manager I talk to for pregame preparation. How about him leaving a lefty, Andrew Miller, in to face Miggy? How many managers today would have the guts to do that? And walk the potential winning run intentionally? Great move. Brad Ausmus had no power hitters left on his bench.
Did you know Nathaniel "Buck" (aka "Nat") Showalter was a catcher in professional baseball? As a matter of fact, all four managers in this season's LCS are former catchers. Seven of the 10 teams that qualified for the postseason were managed by former catchers.
Over the past 58 years, as a former player and coach and current announcer for MLB Network, I have had the advantage and privilege of being in uniform for over 4,000 Major League games and in the broadcast booth for another 2,000. What I have learned from those games is that it is not the pitch counts, innings restrictions, OPS, WAR, WHIP, or any other acronym that determines who is going to win or lose.
As our friend Joe Torre said many years ago, the key is to be "intense without being tense" -- a fluid motion and less grip pressure on the ball and bat. The four teams that did that the best are the teams still standing. None of the four were favored to win by most people. They all certainly surprised and impressed me.
When are we going to quit "drinking the Kool-Aid" served by those who have never worn a Major League uniform or experienced what it is like to be in the game? There are hard-working managers and coaches who could have much more influence on their teams and players if they didn't have to be subjected to the metrics handed down from above. My longtime friend and teammate, Hall of Fame broadcaster Tim McCarver, and I delight in being accused of not embracing a lot of the metrics. We take it as a compliment.
Let's go back to pitch counts. I'm sure there is a lot of discussion about Clayton Kershaw's pitch count coming back on "just" three days rest. Let me go back to Game 7 of the 1965 World Series when our Minnesota Twins were playing the Dodgers. Sandy Koufax was pitching with two days of rest, coming off a complete game shutout in Game 5. He had an average curveball by his standards the first five innings, and then it lost its bite and he threw nothing but well-located fastballs the final four innings. The result was a 2-0 shutout.
Game 4 of the Cardinals-Dodgers NLDS solidified my thinking that there are more late-inning, game-winning hits off poorly thrown breaking balls than fastballs. Former coaches Eddie Lopat and Johnny Sain, both curveball specialists, taught me that early in my career.
If you watched Kershaw's curve in the early innings, it was crisp and sharp. Then it began to lose its bite. Cardinals pitcher Adam Wainwright predicted Matt Adams would hit a curveball out if he got one. He probably could see from the bench what I saw on TV. I would never second-guess the call of A.J. Ellis or Kershaw in throwing the curve. The pitcher and catcher know better than anyone in the park which pitch they think is best. It's the execution.
As Lopat taught me, if you throw a curveball late in the game when it isn't as sharp, you try to throw it "lower than low." Try to bounce it on the plate and it will come in at the knees. It always seems to come in a little higher than you intended.
That's all that happened on that pitch. It wasn't because his count was at 100-plus pitches. It was the execution. As the late, great Warren Spahn told me 50 years ago, "Kid, when the game is tied in the seventh inning, the game is just starting. You can't get by the last three innings with mistakes that you may have in the first six."
Taking starting pitchers out when they are rolling along is another area where gut and art are better than metrics. Jordan Zimmermann was rolling along like a freight train. Why stop the train? It's like taking the starting catcher out for a pinch-hitter when he and the pitcher have a shutout going. There was more pressure on Drew Storen in that situation than on Zimmermann. He had the feel of the ball, fluid motion, could smell the finish line. Why stop him?
Probably because the organization's protocol is that this is what we do in the ninth inning when the pitch count hits 100. What a shame that our game has come to be science rather than art and feel. I'm sure Nationals manager Matt Williams was influenced by how things are done day after day, regardless of the situation.
I like Kansas City's "Moneyball" -- not walks and home runs and taking pitches, but stolen bases, sacrifice bunts, great fielders and an outstanding bullpen. That's Moneyball for me.
Another item that those of us that have been in the game for a while have long recognized: The three men who affect the outcome of a game the most are the two starting pitchers and the home-plate umpire.
The last couple of Cardinals-Dodgers games were good indicators. Umpires are people, not robots. They all interpret the strike zone differently.
As Showalter told me earlier this year, "Some umpires hunt strikes; some hunt balls."
I know Dale Scott, Eric Cooper and several of the umpires. "Scotty" has always had a pitcher-friendly zone. In my era, Ed Runge was that way, too. His motto was, "They didn't come to see you walk."
Eddie Hurley was just the opposite. I called him "Cracker Box," because that was the size of his strike zone. There is no doubt that if a different umpire had been behind the plate in some of these LDS games, the outcome may have been different. But they're human and they're the best in the business.
Now, I do embrace some numbers. My favorite set of numbers is the final score. Score one more than the opposition, you win 100 percent of the time. Nice percentage.
The number three is scored most of the time according to the 25-year database my friend Merrianna McCully has in her book, "Three Up -- Three Down." Two runs is second most common. It's interesting that three runs were scored by one team on eight occasions in the 26 LDS games this year. The team scoring three runs won six of those eight. Impressive starting pitching, great fielding plays and lockdown bullpens enabled that. Two runs were scored seven times, with just two wins out of those seven games. Four or more runs were scored eight times, and those teams' record in those games was 6-2.
That's the norm during the season. If you score four or more every game, you should win the series. Not eight one day and none the next. Averages are meaningless. A consistent four runs is what you shoot for every game. You can see how that "swing run" is a little lower with these four teams left. Three runs might be enough.
Enjoy the rest of the postseason. I hope these LCS and World Series games are as good as the Division Series games.