The closer thread

[rjortiz]

No one, with the exception of Dayton Moore, takes QS seriously anyway.

[sk7326]

The stupidest of stats is (of the stats everyone knows) is Saves and Errors. Neither measure what it is supposed to measure particularly well, and both are based on odd criteria. Indeed, an error is - like a basketball assists - an opinion. And errors say nothing about getting to balls, which is a more useful area of defense. Pitcher wins and RBIs are way down there as well for wonky stats - as both are team accomplishments credited to individuals.

[Bellhorn04]

Pitcher wins and RBIs are way down there as well for wonky stats - as both are team accomplishments credited to individuals.

 

RBIs I might argue about a bit. Because the actual event of batting in a run is important. What was so frustrating about the last loss against Toronto? Well, it was the LOBsters, the lack of hitting with RISP, the fact that lots of guys were getting on, but no one was knocking them in.

 

Of course over the season total RBIs are often a product of opportunities.

 

To me it's one of those stats that shouldn't be tossed out, but which has to be looked at in context. Which is true for a lot of stats.

[sk7326]

RBIs I might argue about a bit. Because the actual event of batting in a run is important. What was so frustrating about the last loss against Toronto? Well, it was the LOBsters, the lack of hitting with RISP, the fact that lots of guys were getting on, but no one was knocking them in.

 

Of course over the season total RBIs are often a product of opportunities.

 

To me it's one of those stats that shouldn't be tossed out, but which has to be looked at in context. Which is true for a lot of stats.

 

Teams that get a lot of baserunners in general will have guys with RBIs ... you can get to the "great hitter" question in a lot of other ways. There was a lack of situational hitting - but there is very little evidence situational hitting is actually a repeatable skill (separate from just plain old hitting). The guys at the top of those lists are largely random (as is the teams at the top of the 1-run game lists). Runs scored (silly for the same reason) does not get the same sort of play as a "triple crown" stat yet is every bit as important in the run creation process.

 

I mean when Manny had 165 RBIs, he had an amazing season - but the RBIs were more of a reflection on how amazing Kenny Lofton, Omar Vizquel and Robbie Alomar were that season. Manny almost always had guys to knock in - and often he did.

[Bellhorn04]

I mean when Manny had 165 RBIs, he had an amazing season - but the RBIs were more of a reflection on how amazing Kenny Lofton, Omar Vizquel and Robbie Alomar were that season. Manny almost always had guys to knock in - and often he did.

 

And you gotta admit, 165 was a pretty cool number.

[Orange Juiced]

I was just having this conversation with my son - why are RBIs a Triple Crown category, but runs aren't? I mean, runs are far more important than runs batted in. The Sox just beat the Yankees 6 runs to 1 run, not 6 RBI to 1 RBI. You could theoretically score all your runs without actually registering an RBI. I wonder how RBI became a Triple Crown category.

[Behindenemylines]

I was just having this conversation with my son - why are RBIs a Triple Crown category, but runs aren't? I mean, runs are far more important than runs batted in. The Sox just beat the Yankees 6 runs to 1 run, not 6 RBI to 1 RBI. You could theoretically score all your runs without actually registering an RBI. I wonder how RBI became a Triple Crown category.

 

Good point! If a guy has high on base guys ahead of him he can have a lot of RBIs that he makes an out.

[Orange Juiced]

Good point! If a guy has high on base guys ahead of him he can have a lot of RBIs that he makes an out.

 

Yep. Which gets me wondering.... Picture the scenario: runner on 3rd, nobody out. A batter hits a medium-depth fly to right, guy tags up and scores. The scoring is F9, and give the batter an RBI, and no at-bat.

 

Now picture the same exact scenario, except this time the batter hits a grounder to deep 2b, they throw the guy out at first, but the run scores. The scoring is 4-3, and give the batter an RBI, but he gets an at-bat, and thus that at-bat is an 0-for-1.

 

Why does the first guy not have his out count against his batting average, but the second guy does? In each case, they drive in a run from third with an out. Why does the second guy get "punished" statistically but the first guy doesn't?

[sk7326]

Yep. Which gets me wondering.... Picture the scenario: runner on 3rd, nobody out. A batter hits a medium-depth fly to right, guy tags up and scores. The scoring is F9, and give the batter an RBI, and no at-bat.

 

Now picture the same exact scenario, except this time the batter hits a grounder to deep 2b, they throw the guy out at first, but the run scores. The scoring is 4-3, and give the batter an RBI, but he gets an at-bat, and thus that at-bat is an 0-for-1.

 

Why does the first guy not have his out count against his batting average, but the second guy does? In each case, they drive in a run from third with an out. Why does the second guy get "punished" statistically but the first guy doesn't?

 

It's silly - and the idea of the sacrifice fly itself is silly. Nobody in that case is REALLY trying to make an out. And making outs is - in terms of run prevention and run scoring - the worst thing you can do.

 

For the record, OBP punishes both of those cases equally - and one of the good reasons to use it over BA. BA claims to measure one thing, but OBP measures it better.

[Orange Juiced]

It's silly - and the idea of the sacrifice fly itself is silly. Nobody in that case is REALLY trying to make an out. And making outs is - in terms of run prevention and run scoring - the worst thing you can do.

 

For the record, OBP punishes both of those cases equally - and one of the good reasons to use it over BA. BA claims to measure one thing, but OBP measures it better.

 

Right - there's no doubt that OBP is a better stat than AVG, but nobody remember's Ted Williams' OBP in 1941, but every baseball fan knows the number .406.

[Orange Juiced]

Getting back to the thread topic, to me the key is finding guys that can handle the pressure of 9th inning close situations. Not everyone can do it. I don't like how managers manage their bullpen by the save stat, but you do need to have guys that can perform in those situations. It has to be harder than doing it in the 7th inning - there's just so much less room for error, because if you blow it in the 7th, there's time to recover; if you blow it in the 9th, it very well could be game over.

[sk7326]

Right - there's no doubt that OBP is a better stat than AVG, but nobody remember's Ted Williams' OBP in 1941, but every baseball fan knows the number .406.

 

Oh sure - but at the same time fans knew a lot less generally in 1941. Less was tracked - the old stats were all we had. It's one of the reasons I had very little patience with the "But Triple Crown!" argument for Cabrera over Trout. We know so much more about value now than we did in the old days (and even Williams in his .406 season did not win the MVP!).

 

The exceptions for BA are very silly - I definitely agree there.

[Bellhorn04]

It's silly - and the idea of the sacrifice fly itself is silly. Nobody in that case is REALLY trying to make an out. And making outs is - in terms of run prevention and run scoring - the worst thing you can do.

 

For the record, OBP punishes both of those cases equally - and one of the good reasons to use it over BA. BA claims to measure one thing, but OBP measures it better.

 

I disagree. The sacrifice fly is a positive event and deserves credit. Blame the rules of baseball if you don't like runs scoring on outs.

[Bellhorn04]

Here's the most ridiculous thing about the save stat. It's when the TV announcers feel it necessary to point out to us that 'it's not a save situation'. Who f***ing cares? Uehara came in today to get 3 speedy outs and send everybody home. Who f***ing cares if it's not a 'save'?

[sk7326]

I disagree. The sacrifice fly is a positive event and deserves credit. Blame the rules of baseball if you don't like runs scoring on outs.

 

It is a positive event for an out ... I don't think players or managers are necessarily looking for it over - say a base hit. In general the out-for-run trade is a bad one ... obviously there are particular non-pitcher hitting cases where it helps (in particular, if you really need exactly one run). But in general sacrificing and trading outs is not a great strategy.

[Bellhorn04]

Twice this year the Sox have had back-to-back sac flies. I thought that was pretty cool.

[Orange Juiced]

I disagree. The sacrifice fly is a positive event and deserves credit. Blame the rules of baseball if you don't like runs scoring on outs.

 

A grounder that scores a runner from third is a positive event as well by the same exact logic. You get credit for an RBI just the same but you get "penalized" with an at-bat (with no hit) on the ground out, but not the fly out. That makes no sense.

[jung]

A grounder that scores a runner from third is a positive event as well by the same exact logic. You get credit for an RBI just the same but you get "penalized" with an at-bat (with no hit) on the ground out, but not the fly out. That makes no sense.

 

I think the "logic" is that the scoring credits the hitter hitting the sac fly for being able to lift the ball deep enough to the outfield to get the runner home while the ground out in many instances simply seems like a poorly hit ball. Sort of like an element of the way we worry if a pitcher is a fly ball out pitcher....suggests the hitters are having their way with him a little more than we would be comfortable with normally.

 

Trading an out for a run can make some sense late in a close game. I really hate it early in a game cause outs are rally killers and early in the game you really want to rally if you have the chance.

[Orange Juiced]

I think the "logic" is that the scoring credits the hitter hitting the sac fly for being able to lift the ball deep enough to the outfield to get the runner home while the ground out in many instances simply seems like a poorly hit ball. Sort of like an element of the way we worry if a pitcher is a fly ball out pitcher....suggests the hitters are having their way with him a little more than we would be comfortable with normally.

 

Trading an out for a run can make some sense late in a close game. I really hate it early in a game cause outs are rally killers and early in the game you really want to rally if you have the chance.

 

Well grounding to the right side of the IF when you have a runner on 2nd and nobody out is something that players sometimes try to do. So it's a productive out but they don't get credit for a "sacrifice". So I don't understand why the scoring rules are the way they are with some of these things.

[sk7326]

Well grounding to the right side of the IF when you have a runner on 2nd and nobody out is something that players sometimes try to do. So it's a productive out but they don't get credit for a "sacrifice". So I don't understand why the scoring rules are the way they are with some of these things.

 

The player tries to pull it, but he's going for a hit first. But yes, they don't get credit for what that out does. In general though, the out trade is still ultimately a negative (even if you walk, 1st and 2nd, nobody out is still a better situation and a runner at 3rd and one out).

 

Jung is generally right - trading outs is bad until it's really late and close. BTW: the early sacrifice disease (especially with good hitters) is particularly a disease when you watch your local high school or a college game.

[Orange Juiced]

And the guy who hits a medium depth fly ball that scores a runner from 3rd is trying to hit a medium depth fly ball for an out instead of getting a hit?

 

Nobody, BTW, is arguing against you on the whole, it's better to not trade the out thing. My beef here is with the inconsistency in the rules of scoring that credit a sac fly but not a ground out that scores the same runner.

[sk7326]

And the guy who hits a medium depth fly ball that scores a runner from 3rd is trying to hit a medium depth fly ball for an out instead of getting a hit?

 

Nobody, BTW, is arguing against you on the whole, it's better to not trade the out thing. My beef here is with the inconsistency in the rules of scoring that credit a sac fly but not a ground out that scores the same runner.

 

Sorry - did not mean to say you were. I agree about the inconsistency with the rules of scoring - it is funny that this stuff has not evolved even though the game itself and the statistics therein have.

[SCM33]

I always argue the point... At the end of a player's career, career save numbers, and save percentages matter significantly more than they do season-by-season. Anyone can get lucky for a season, but only quality players can do it for their career.

 

I can agree with this as well. Pal, is Lee Smith a HOF then?

[Bellhorn04]

Rodney is hurting the Rays big-time this year. Last night's blown save was his 8th of the year. And 7 of those have ended up as Rays losses.

 

Last year Rodney only had 2 blown saves, both ending up as losses.

 

So you could argue that the Rays have been 5 games worse because of their problems at closer. That'd put them 2.5 ahead instead of 2.5 behind.

 

It'll be interesting to see if Maddon makes a move there.

[sk7326]

Maddon and Friedman are generally pretty creative here - the tough thing they have with Rodney is that if he is not pitching the 9th, he really can't pitch at all.

[a700hitter]

Rodney is hurting the Rays big-time this year. Last night's blown save was his 8th of the year. And 7 of those have ended up as Rays losses.

 

Last year Rodney only had 2 blown saves, both ending up as losses.

 

So you could argue that the Rays have been 5 games worse because of their problems at closer. That'd put them 2.5 ahead instead of 2.5 behind.

 

It'll be interesting to see if Maddon makes a move there.

No, Maddon will keep Rodney in his role. The belief that Maddon is some out of the box thinker genius manager is a fallacy.

[Behindenemylines]

Rodney is hurting the Rays big-time this year. Last night's blown save was his 8th of the year. And 7 of those have ended up as Rays losses.

 

Last year Rodney only had 2 blown saves, both ending up as losses.

 

So you could argue that the Rays have been 5 games worse because of their problems at closer. That'd put them 2.5 ahead instead of 2.5 behind.

 

It'll be interesting to see if Maddon makes a move there.

 

Remember the Sox had problems with the closer role until Uehara took over. I'm sure there are a few blown saves (games) for the Sox as well. That is why finding a closer is so hard. Based on the current trend it could play a huge role in the out come of the AL East.

[sk7326]

He'll stay in the 9th because he is incapable of doing anything else.

[Orange Juiced]

He'll stay in the 9th because he is incapable of doing anything else.

 

Rodney, not Uehara, correct?

[sk7326]

Rodney, not Uehara, correct?

 

Yeah, Rodney.