I think you’re seriously misrepresenting Gleeman’s critique of Nathan’s usage. This whole discussion has been about whether to use Nathan for two innings more often. That was not Gleeman’s point. He did say that Nathan could probably have pitched more than 9 pitches if Gardy wasn’t so wedded to his formulaic one-inning thinking. I wouldn’t take out Nathan after 9 pitches in a tie game either. But that was not his main point.

His main point has always been not that Nathan should pitch more innings (though maybe he should) but that the innings he pitches should be in the most crucial game-determining situations. This sounds obvious, but Gardenhire (along with almost every other manager) often prioritizes using their closer in SAVE situations over using them in IMPORTANT situations.

When is it more important to get good pitching: in a tie game with two men on in the eighth, or with a three run lead and no one on in the 9th? Yet Nathan’s role, as currently defined, would be to wait for the 9th, even if that means there’s no more lead for him to protect, and he then has to be used in mop-up the next day to get some work. That’s not leveraging your best pitcher. And it’s not just Gleeman who says this—Twins Geek just wrote about the same thing too, as has everyone from Bill James down.

Personally it drives me crazy to see Gardy play for the save, not the win. He does use Nathan in tie situations sometimes, but often he’ll put in a lesser pitcher, even in the 9th, because there’s no lead to protect yet. And sometimes the game is lost because he didn’t use his best pitcher in a key situation.

I am not 100% dogmatic about this. It’s possible that the psychological benefits of having a very circumscribed role improves people’s play. I don’t know any evidence of that, but people who work with actual players in actual games believe it, so I assume there’s something to it. I still think players should and could get used to the idea that their role was high-leverage situations, not ninth-inning-with-a-lead situations. But I’m open to arguments from more knowledgeable people.

Gleeman does point out that star closers routinely pitched more than 100 innings until their use was dictated by maximizing saves, not team wins. I haven’t seen any evidence that 100 innings is inherently more dangerous than 70. It might be, and Gleeman acknowledges that.

“For better or worse limiting closers to 60-70 innings has become the standard throughout baseball, so Gardenhire certainly shouldn’t be expected to completely buck that trend by having Nathan throw 100 or 120 innings.”

He clarifies that his real complaint is:

“However, there’s no reason why Nathan should be lifted after five pitches when the game is still in doubt (as was the case last week versus the Rangers) or go unused altogether while Crain, Guerrier, Rincon, Korecky, and Bass work multiple innings when one run can lose the game.”

and summarizes his point more generally:

“Gardenhire’s refusal to use his best reliever in crucial non-save situations has already hurt the team and will continue to do so. We’ve seen Nathan left unused in the bullpen in tie games while lesser relievers take losses, because Gardenhire was holding him back for a “save situation” that never arrived.”

I totally agree with that. Call him arrogant and dismissive all you want, but you need to respond to his actual argument if you want to convince me he’s wrong.

I think Nathan’s usage falls into the same category as managing to get a starter a “win” (remember when Twins Geek always used to use the product trademark symbol for this?) rather than the team an actual win. Or keeping everyone in their standardized lineup slot, even if it means some backup catcher bats where Mauer would, or some feeble AAAA infielder bats second because that’s where infielders bat. Again, he works with actual players and I don’t, and it may reap rewards in player loyalty or whatever. But as pure game strategy, it’s illogical. If you want to defend this kind of managing, show me what the benefits are and I’ll keep an open mind. But until then, seeing Nathan to get him personal saves instead of team wins will continue to drive me crazy.