Against all expectations, Ned Yost figured it out

42 Comments

Credit where credit is due: Ned Yost managed a great series against the Orioles.

By all rights, the Royals should have been dead in the wild card game. Down 7-3 against the A’s after the surprising move to have Yordano Ventura, pitching on one day of rest, relieve James Shields in the sixth, the Royals needed to score four runs in two innings against Jon Lester and one of the best bullpens in baseball. They did that and won it in 12, though between the Ventura call and the four sacrifice bunts (in a 9-8 game), Yost seemed to do more harm than good.

Related: Royals sweep Orioles to advance to first World Series since 1985

The sweep of the Angels? That was a better, easier series for Yost. About the only criticism one could lay down at his feet is that he declined to use his closer in tie games on the road. Of course, it didn’t hurt him one bit. The series included just one sac bunt (by Alcides Escobar in Game 2; it didn’t lead to a run). There weren’t really many tough decisions at all. All three of his starters pitched well, and none needed to be removed mid-inning. The relievers were great, because they’re Royals relievers and it’s required.

Against the Orioles, Yost seemed to learn from everything that had come before. There were two sac bunts in the series, and the first of those was left-handed hitter Mike Moustakas bunting against a left-hander in a tie game in the top of the ninth. No one is arguing against that one. The only starter he seemed to keep in too long was Ventura in Game 2. In Game 3, he patted Jeremy Guthrie on the backside after five innings of one-run ball and went right to the pen. In Game 4, Jason Vargas came out after allowing one run in 5 1/3 innings, even though he was at just 73 pitches.

As for his bullpen decisions… well, he had it pretty easy. His relievers allowed two runs in five innings in Game 1, but pitched 11 scoreless innings the rest of the way. There were no tough calls on when to use Wade Davis and Greg Holland. My only criticism was that he used Jason Frasor in the sixth against the heart of the Orioles order in Game 3, when it would have made more sense to go with Kelvin Herrera then and let Frasor face the bottom of the order in the seventh. But it didn’t matter. Yost went to Herrera during the sixth in both Games 1 and 4. That was the move he didn’t make in the wild card game. The one that nearly knocked his team out of the playoffs before this whole incredible run had a chance to get started.

It certainly helps that Yost has been able to stick to the script. He’s started the same lineup every game of the playoffs. He hasn’t had any pitching meltdowns to throw things off. Every starter has pitched between five and seven innings. Somehow, the Royals have had two pitchers leave with potentially season-ending injuries (Herrera in the ALDS, Ventura in Game 2) and turn out just fine. Yost never worries about pinch-hitting, only pinch-running and having Jarrod Dyson replace Norichika Aoki late in games. His players have made it simple for him, and he’s done absolutely nothing lately to muck it up. Admittedly, that might sound like a backhanded compliment, but as anyone who has watched the National League postseason can attest, not having a manager muck things up is really all there is to it.

Astros defend barring reporter from clubhouse

Getty Images
8 Comments

As we wrote about this morning, last night the Houston Astros, at the request of Justin Verlander, barred Detroit Free Press reporter Anthony Fenech from the clubhouse during Verlander’s media availability following the Tigers-Astros game. After Verlander was done talking to the press in the scrum setting — and after a call was placed to Major League Baseball about the matter — Fenech was allowed in.

As we noted, this was done in violation of agreements to which Major League Baseball, the Houston Astros and the Baseball Writers Association of America are parties. The agreements are meant to ensure full access to BBWAA-accredited reporters as long as they have not violated the terms of their credentials.  In no case do the clubs — and certainly not the players — have the right to bar access to BBWAA-accredited reporters. Indeed, the whole point of the BBWAA is to ensure such access and to ensure that teams cannot bar them simply because they are unhappy with their coverage or what have you.

This morning Verlander tweeted, obliquely, about “unethical behavior” on the part of Fenech that led to his request to the Astros to bar him. As we noted at the time, such an allegation — however interesting it might be — is of no consequence to the admission or barring of a reporter. If Fenech has acted unethically it’s a matter between him and his employer and, potentially, between him and the BBWAA. At the very least, if Verlander has a specific concern, it would be incumbent upon him or the Astros to take the matter up with either the Free Press or the BBWAA.

In light of all of this, it’s hard to make a case for Verlander’s request and the Astros’ honoring it. A few moments ago, however, the Astros released as statement on the matter which, basically, says, “so what?”

Which is to say, the Astros have made a decades-long agreement between the BBWAA and MLB regarding reporter access optional, because a player does not like a reporter who is covering him.  Someone without the power to alter the BBWAA-MLB relationship has just done so unilaterally. And they have done so in such a way that any player, should they decide they don’t like a reporter, will now presumably rely on as precedent. And, it should be noted, in doing so they gave at least some tacit credence to Verlander’s thus far unsubstantiated and unspecified allegations of unethical behavior on the part of Fenech.

It’s your move, Major League Baseball and BBWAA. Whatcha gonna do about it?