On Saturday night Josh Beckett went out and pitched 8 strong innings against the New York Mets, ultimately in a losing effort for his team. Beckett has struggled a bit this year. At this point in the season his ERA is a hair over 5, yet somehow he has managed to keep a respectable record. Beckett's numbers from Saturday night were as follows:
8 IP, 0 ER, 5 Hits, 5 K's, 117 pitches*
Tito Francona, manager of the Boston Red Sox, has also had his own pitching struggles and particularly with respect to Josh Beckett. It seems that Tito is often afraid to go to the mound in order to hook Beckett. As if Beckett is going to tell him to "fuck off", and he will have to skulk back to the dugout, embarrassed and upset.
Long story short, after 8 innings of fine pitching, Beckett exits the game in favor of "Don" Jon Papelbon. Papelbon lets up a two-run bomb, and the Red Sox lose the game.
Now there are many logical reasons as to why Beckett should not have returned to the mound for the 9th inning; high pitch count, Papelbon is right there and ready to go, obvious ghosts from seasons prior when pitchers are left in the game for too long (ahem). But, there is one very prominent and mystical argument for leaving Beckett in the game. Namely, the Complete Game.
Complete games once were the norm. The pitcher was expected to go the distance. However, within the last few decades we have seen managers paying closer attention to pitch counts, ballooning salaries forcing GM's to be more delicate with their prized arms, and the modification of the disabled list allowing for greater flexibility and protection. We have also seen the advent of the sophisticated bullpen; setup men, righty/left specialists, and fireball closers garnering almost as much value as a pitcher in the starting rotation. Because of these factors, the complete game has become more and more elusive.
The Numbers:
In 1880, Jim McCormick threw 72 for the Cleveland Blues
In 1902, Cy Young threw 41 for the Boston Americans
In 1946, Bob Feller threw 36 for the Cleveland Indians
In 1987, Roger Clemens threw 18 for the Boston Red Sox
In 2008, Roy Halladay threw 9 for the Toronto Blue Jays
The trend is difficult to miss (Oh and those numbers refer to total Complete Games).
However, this isn't a call to revert back to older, tougher times. But it is a call for a greater respect of the the Complete Game and it's extensive value. So often, we are caught up in the pursuit of the no-hitter. No-no's are a rare, extraordinary affair and deserve to be revered so highly. Yet as the demonstrated trend suggests, so too is the Complete Game.
The effective difference between the No-Hitter and the Complete Game occurs primarily in the psyche of the pitcher. Pitchers actually pursue the No-No whereas the Complete Game comes to the pitcher. If after 8 innings a pitcher has allowed 0 hits, then even if that pitcher is out of gas they still have to go back out there in the 9th. It's required. If a pitcher has simply thrown 8 innings of solid pitching, well then it's up to the pitcher and ultimately the coach whether he goes back out there or not.
The difference is subtle... The No-Hitter is a singular event which does not necessarily carry over into a future start. The No-Hitter is execute, and it's legacy consists, within a vacuum, so as soon as that pitcher allows a hit in a subsequent game, then that vacuum is punctured and so too, often times, is the pitcher's focus. The Complete Game, however, is a long-term, far-reaching phenomenon. Sure it occurs in one singular game, but what is carried over into the next start is something larger, and even more useful. Once the pitcher reaches the final out in the 9th inning, he knows that even though he may have allowed a few hits or even a few runs, he can go the distance and keep his team in the ball game all by himself.
On May 19 of 2008 Jon Lester tossed a No-No against the Kansas City Royals. In each of his next two starts he lasted only five innings. He averaged 6 innings per start and had 2 complete games that same season. That same year, Roy Halladay threw 0 No Hitters, but 9 Complete Games and averaged over 7 innings per start (and also, only averaged 8 more pitches per game than Lester). For further evidence on the long-term effectiveness of the Complete Game, please see exhibit Greinke.
The Complete Game is about more than individual performance. The offense, defense, and the pitcher all combine to realize and actualize the Complete Game. The Complete Game is about domination, and not just on one particular day. The Complete Game burns an image into the minds of everyone on the field that day, opponents included. So that next game when the pitcher takes the mound, it isn't about a No-Hitter, or a shutout, or even the win. Rather, it is about the inspired confidence that leads a pitcher to believe that the next 9 innings are going to be about performance and dominance, and that everyone has his back in the process. No-Hitters are flash in the pan. The Complete Game is a slow-smoked barbecue that lasts all summer long.
So the next time Tito Francona decides to wield his shaky hook, let's hope that he considers the ramifications, not just for the game at hand, but for the pitcher's next start and all those yet to come. Let us also hope that next time, he chooses not to taunt the spirits.
