How valuable is a closer?

[luso2kx]

Since the clutch hitting thread seems to have grown some legs, I decided to let rip another ESPNer topic.

Considering the talk about who should be closer this year, what do you think about the closer role?

[EverettsTheoryOfEvolution]

I think we've seen how miserable the "closer by committee" idea was first hand.
Also, how valuable was Foulk in '04? Paps last year? I think maybe it is true that any good relief pitcher can pitch 1 good inning and be a closer - however the best relievers tend to become closers! It's not about "being a closer" so much as putting your best man in the highest leverage situation.

[Fully Tilted]

While I think a guy who can come in in the 9th and shut things down is very important (look at NYY's success since Rivera has become their closer and even before that with Wetteland), I feel that the "save" statistic is as equally vague as "win" for pitchers.

[oldskool138]

I voted that you need a shut-down guy in the ninth. We all saw what Paps did last year and what Foulke did in '04. Heck, look at the monster season Gordon and Lowe had as closers.

It's very important in my book.

EDIT: I like potatoes, too ;)

[EverettsTheoryOfEvolution]

Agreed. "Saves" are pretty meaningless per se.

The only question that really needs to be asked (and I don't know if anyone has ever had the stones to experiment with this) is whether the 9th inning is always the highest leverage situation. I.E. is it better to put your best reliever in the 9th, or is it better to use him in the 7th if things start to get hot.

[Fully Tilted]

Agreed. "Saves" are pretty meaningless per se.

The only question that really needs to be asked (and I don't know if anyone has ever had the stones to experiment with this) is whether the 9th inning is always the highest leverage situation. I.E. is it better to put your best reliever in the 9th, or is it better to use him in the 7th if things start to get hot.

Quick question--who are you at PP again?

That's a great question and another good topic is arising I can see! I think you presented two questions actually:

1) Is the 9th inning always the highest leverage situation?

Generally speaking, no. If a game is tied and the score is broken wide open in the 7th inning, it's safe to say that inning had the highest leverage situations.

2) Is it better to use your best reliever in the 9th inning or earlier on if the situation is or can be deemed, "high leverage"?

I honestly don't know. To spin it in another way, one of the reasons I am glad that Papelbon is (or might be) a SP as opposed to our closer is because he may not ever get the chance to affect a game. I want more innings from our best arms. What good is a Mariano Rivera in the 9th if you can't bridge the first eight innings to him to close it out? I don't think i answered the question at hand--it's a great one

[Fully Tilted]

EDIT: I like potatoes, too ;)

Just fried and cut into long rectangular greasy shapes for me.



Nice new avatar!! I hope you know I was only kidding though :D

[oldskool138]

Quick question--who are you at PP again?

That's a great questiona nd another good topic is arising I can see! I think you presented two questions actually:

1) Is the 9th inning always the highest leverage situation?

Generally speaking, no. If a game is tied adn the score is broken wide open in the 7th inning. It's safe to say that inning had the highest leverage situations.

2) Is it better to use your best reliever in the 9th inning or earlier on if the situation is or can be deemed, "high leverage"?

I honestly don't know. To spin it in another way, one of the reasons I am glad that Papelbon is (or might be) a SP as opposed to our closer is because he may not ever get the chance to effect a game. I want more innings from our best arms. What good is a Mariano Rivera in the 9th if you can't bridge the first eight innings to him to close it out? I don't think i answered the question at hand--it's a great one

Yeah, I used to think that the ninth was the most important inning. Francona said something in an interview recently that changed my mind. (I'm not quoting) He said sometimes the most important inning is the 7th or 8th because that's where the heart of the other team's line-up will come to bat. Those outs might prove to be the most important of the game than the ones in the 9th.

I hadn't thought about it that way before. Tito, like Belichick, has a great way of breaking down the game into "layman's" terms (that's not the word I wanted to use because it implies that we fans know nothing or are simple but it's the only one I could think of.).

[oldskool138]

Just fried and cut into long rectangular greasy shapes for me.



Nice new avatar!! I hope you know I was only kidding though :D

Nah, I'm a bigger Wake fan anyways. I remember back in '96 watching Wake shut down the Tribe (he threw a two-hitter or something like that). I've been a big Wake fan ever since. Plus, the knuckler is the only pitch I can sort of throw. :)

[EverettsTheoryOfEvolution]

I'm (P - shoulder) over at PP. Not as vocal, largely due to the fact that it's pretty tight (and large) club over there already, so my voice is much smaller, but I am still happy I found my way over there. I'm loving it here so far. I can see this board is starting to gain some life - I think we'll have an awesome season.





And as to the leverage question - there is a further problem. If high leverage situation appears in the 7th, do you use your star reliever then, or do you save him in case a higher leverage situation comes up later? Of course, if you save him, maybe there isn't a higher leverage situation - maybe or maybe not because you put a lesser pitcher in right away! There is definitely a gamble involved there!

[Steve-o]

I think the closer is important, but no more so than the middle relievers, probably a little less.

Todd Jones vs. Joel Zumaya - who would you rather have?

[Lord Papelbon]

I voted for the shutdown guy, but I like potatoes too

[Fully Tilted]

I'm (P - shoulder) over at PP. Not as vocal, largely due to the fact that it's pretty tight (and large) club over there already, so my voice is much smaller, but I am still happy I found my way over there. I'm loving it here so far. I can see this board is starting to gain some life - I think we'll have an awesome season.

Ahhh yes, P-Shoulder--now I remember you saying that before, I just couldn't remember who you were anymore. I'm new at PP and here but enjoy both places. I'm like you though, much smaller voice @ PP.



And as to the leverage question - there is a further problem. If high leverage situation appears in the 7th, do you use your star reliever then, or do you save him in case a higher leverage situation comes up later? Of course, if you save him, maybe there isn't a higher leverage situation - maybe or maybe not because you put a lesser pitcher in right away! There is definitely a gamble involved there!

This is why it's so important to have set roles in the bullpen. If you have your 7th inning guy, setup man and closer roles all defined and have pitcher's in there who throw strikes and get hitter's out, you know you can save your "best" for last.

As Steve-O pointed out though, it's not always the case. He brought up Zumaya (who hits 100 MPH on the gun regularly) and Jones as an example. It's not the norm, but it does happen. Rafael Soriano and JJ Putz comes to mind from last year, though Putz was a rock so you couldn't complain. They were a great teandem but Soriano was traded and it'll be intersting to see how many save opportunities Putz gets now that his solid setup man is gone.

[EverettsTheoryOfEvolution]

Yeah, having someone that fits each role well would make the point moot, but I think it's a much more interesting question (though less desirable situation) when you have one lights-out guy, and then a bunch of mediocre guys. Questions like that are how you build a team using role players rather than shelling out cash for an all star cast.

[TITAN126]

I like potatoes, but I also like a good, shut down closer too. :D

[#1Patsfan_chica]

Before the whole "closer by committee" disaster, I thought closers were overrated but man was I wrong and the Red Sox.

It's important to have a good closer. Papelbon was amazing last year and I'm going to miss that.

[Mikiemo83]

A closer makes your starters better by not over working them like Billy Martin did to all his different staffs and burning them out.

A closer gets your starter a couple more wins each year because he can stop the bleeding

A closer is very important but is not needed yet - we can over pay in June if Pinero or the closer of the day all suck

[luso2kx]

Bump. Maybe Cysuzaka will want to take a crack at this one.

[Cysuzaka]

Bump. Maybe Cysuzaka will want to take a crack at this one.

Like I said. Nobody bothers to listen to the genius that is me.

[Tacobellgarces]

5 to 10 years.....the only shut down closer on the list would be Rivera. And Foulke was NOT a shut down closer, that is laughable. Foulke was a very good closer....a poor starter who was moved to the pen.

Which in the point. You don't take a guy with the potential to be a top flight starter, and stick him in the pen as your closer. It would be a gross misallocation of talent.

You can find good closer through alternative means.

[brenan252]

It seems to me that there are two separate issues at work here. One is, do you need to have a dominant pitcher in the closer's role to be successful? The answer to this one is clearly no. Even closers with not-so-dominant ancillary numbers such as WHIP and ERA can save most of the games they are asked to. A good team that sticks with a closer over the course of the season can likely get 35-45 saves with 6-10 blown saves out of many pitchers. Look at the Marlins with Hoffman, Nen, Benitez, Looper, Alfonseca, Todd Jones, etc. The more interesting question is how much effect a dominant closer can have on a team. This is harder to quantify. A dominant closer affects the opposing team's strategy, making it more likely that they will pinch hit/run, use their best relievers in non-save situations, and give up outs with steals/hit-and-runs to try to manufacture runs. He also affects his own team's psyche in terms of their confidence in late-game situations. Does this make him more valuable than a dominant starter? It is probably better to have a dominant starter and a weaker closer than a mediocre starter and a dominant closer, but the most important thing is to put people in the role where they consistently perform the best.