Was Ian Desmond's glove really harmless?

According to Dan Daly, they were, more or less:

● 16 of Desmond’s 34 errors – almost half – resulted in no runs being scored. The pitcher had to face an extra batter, but the Nationals got out of the inning unscathed.

● The last error he made that contributed to an unearned run came on July 29 – the 102^nd game. In the last 60 games he committed 10 errors, but none of them had any effect on the scoreboard.

● His errors cost the Nats perhaps three games, and only one actually caused the winning run to score (May 15 at Colorado).

See? His glove wasn’t that destructive. It just seemed that way.

Unfortunately, Daly's logic here isn't perfect. Beyond the fact that Desmond's glove was harmful enough to result in a -8.8 UZR in 2010, Daly fails to account for the more subtle impact Desmond's errors had on the Nationals. He briefly mentions that the "pitcher had to face an extra batter", but does not acknowledge that extra pitches the pitcher threw at that point to get out of the inning may have impacted him later in the game, or that the pitcher may have continued to pitch as he had been, but needed to exit the game earlier, making way for a less talented middle reliever to enter the game and proceed to surrender runs. Further, the possibility exists that a good reliever would be called into the game, and therefore been unable to pitch in a higher leverage situation later in the week. Obviously, this represents a bit of catastrophic thinking, but the general idea remains the same: in baseball, everything has an effect. Particularly when that "thing" involves giving the opposing team extra outs.