Analysis: Why Continue Piggyback When Tactic Lacks Intended Benefit?

From the score of the game itself, the Mariners’ performance on Monday against the A’s was as good as they could hope for. Seattle took advantage of some defensive miscues in the top of the third to scratch across a pair of runs before the wheels flew off Sacramento starter Aaron Civale’s bus with two outs and the team wound up with a 6-0 lead before the end of the frame and a 9-2 win by the end of the game.

But that explosion of runs papered over some clear tension as the team continued to use its tactic of piggybacking two of their six starters. To be abundantly clear, the tension itself isn’t the main reason why the idea is flawed - that would be the self-imposed constraints on player usage - but given that it seems to have been adopted in order for such tension to be avoided, the uneasiness was notable and instructive.

Bryce Miller had spun a gem given his pitch limitations on Tuesday, May 19, going 5 ⅔ innings in the first of Seattle’s attempted piggybacked starts. The game fell apart in the ninth as the M’s tried to stretch the piggyback beyond the point where it made sense, but Miller’s performance itself during that game was a good sign.