Barnes extended

[Hugh2]

I understand the thinking behind that, but I don't think it's quite that simple.

 

In modern baseball you need it all - position players, starting pitchers and relievers.

 

As far as individual players go, sure, a reliever can never be as valuable, because they only log 60-70 innings.

 

If you think market prices have any meaning, the most a reliever can make is about half of a starter (Chapman vs. Cole, for example).

 

But there's a value in having an elite closer which is not necessarily measurable. The Red Sox might have won the World Series in 1975, 1986 and 2003 if they had a great closer those years. And Foulke, Papelbon and Koji were huge factors in 2004, 2007 and 2013.

 

So my hypothetical example that could never happen isn't that simple? Of course not, I used it to exemplify a point.

 

You'd draft Ohtani, Wheeler, Degrome, Cole, and Sale before you'd take a reliever. That's pretty simple, you need 5 starters. You'd take Franando Titis Jr, plug him at SS, maybe take Bogaerts and move him to 3B, you'd take Vladimir Guerro JR. and plug him at 1B, you'd take Altuve and finish off your infield before you took a reliever. At no point would someone say "well Titis is pretty good, but gosh darn it we need a closer"

 

CLosers are overvalued. #truth.

[Hugh2]

Saying something is overvalued is not analogous to it has no value.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I understand the thinking behind that, but I don't think it's quite that simple.

 

In modern baseball you need it all - position players, starting pitchers and relievers.

 

As far as individual players go, sure, a reliever can never be as valuable, because they only log 60-70 innings.

 

If you think market prices have any meaning, the most a reliever can make is about half of a starter (Chapman vs. Cole, for example).

 

But there's a value in having an elite closer which is not necessarily measurable. The Red Sox might have won the World Series in 1975, 1986 and 2003 if they had a great closer those years. And Foulke, Papelbon and Koji were huge factors in 2004, 2007 and 2013.

 

Good points all. I recently read an article about the good pitching vs. good hitting debate, with other assets also evaluated. The authors analyzed World Series winners for the past half century (I think); some were led by starting pitching, some with D, some with O. The one factor most champions had in common was a good bullpen.

[Hugh2]

Another thing to consider is this. There's a difference between saying a reliever holds value and a bullpen holds value. I think it's without contest that bullpens are more important today than they were 20 years ago. Bullpens are tremendously more valuable. But it's not like Closers are going 150 innings instead 70. So, it's not that your 70 IP closer has more value, it's the 70 IP set up man, 7th inning, 6th inning guy. It's the depth of the bullpens today that makeup it's increased value because that's where the uptick in innings pitched is coming from.

[moonslav59]

Good points all. I recently read an article about the good pitching vs. good hitting debate, with other assets also evaluated. The authors analyzed World Series winners for the past half century (I think); some were led by starting pitching, some with D, some with O. The one factor most champions had in common was a good bullpen.

 

I read a study once that showed WS winners almost always had plus defence at 1B.

[notin]

We are comparing Gary Gaetti , a .255 career hitter with a career OPS of .741 to Mariano Rivera , the greatest closer of all time , a unanimous Hall of Fame selection. It's been really hot lately. Pour a cold lemonade and crank up the A.C. a notch. You'll feel better soon.

 

Technically we were establishing why you don’t apply fWAR limits for position players to relief pitchers.

 

But summing up 4 time Gold Glive winner Gaetti by his batting average feels right. It would be like calling Rivera “a failed starter”…

[notin]

I understand the thinking behind that, but I don't think it's quite that simple.

 

In modern baseball you need it all - position players, starting pitchers and relievers.

 

As far as individual players go, sure, a reliever can never be as valuable, because they only log 60-70 innings.

 

If you think market prices have any meaning, the most a reliever can make is about half of a starter (Chapman vs. Cole, for example).

 

But there's a value in having an elite closer which is not necessarily measurable. The Red Sox might have won the World Series in 1975, 1986 and 2003 if they had a great closer those years. And Foulke, Papelbon and Koji were huge factors in 2004, 2007 and 2013.

 

Calvin Schiraldi (1986) and Byung-Hyun Kim (2003) both were very good closers…

[Bellhorn04]

Calvin Schiraldi (1986) and Byung-Hyun Kim (2003) both were very good closers…

 

Yes, but not good enough.

[notin]

Yes, but not good enough.

 

Schiraldi had fewer IP because he assumed the role later on the year, but his 299 ERA+ wasn’t good enough? That’s better than Foulke had!

 

I fear you might be entering the Realm of Circular Logic. The Sox won because they had a great closer! And the closer was great because they won!!

[mvp 78]

Calvin Schiraldi (1986) and Byung-Hyun Kim (2003) both were very good closers…

 

Um, actually, it was closer by committee.

 

Saves

Stanley 16

Sambito 12

Schiraldi 9

[mvp 78]

Schiraldi had fewer IP because he assumed the role later on the year, but his 299 ERA+ wasn’t good enough? That’s better than Foulke had!

 

I fear you might be entering the Realm of Circular Logic. The Sox won because they had a great closer! And the closer was great because they won!!

 

It's just a shame statcast wasn't around for the Calvin Schiraldi experience.

[notin]

Um, actually, it was closer by committee.

 

Saves

Stanley 16

Sambito 12

Schiraldi 9

 

No it wasn’t.

 

Schiraldi took over the role after Stanley and Sambito faltered…

[mvp 78]

No it wasn’t.

 

Schiraldi took over the role after Stanley and Sambito faltered…

 

I was joking. All 3 of those guys sucked.

[notin]

I was joking. All 3 of those guys sucked.

.

 

Schiraldi was actually very effective in the role…

[dgalehouse]

If any of the three Met's hits had been hit a little harder , they would have been caught and Schiraldi would be a hero. As John Sterling says , " That's baseball Suzyn."

[Bellhorn04]

If any of the three Met's hits had been hit a little harder , they would have been caught and Schiraldi would be a hero. As John Sterling says , " That's baseball Suzyn."

 

Poor Calvin blew the save two separate times in that game. You don't see that too often.

[harmony]

We're just saying that Barnes' deal isn't an overpay. That's it.

Nor was the Barnes deal a "highway robbery steal" for the Red Sox.

[moonslav59]

Nor was the Barnes deal a "highway robbery steal" for the Red Sox.

 

I already admitted that was hyperbole, but keep drilling it home, if you enjoy that.

 

I still say it was a steal.

[Hugh2]

If Barnes pitches for the next two years like he did before this year it will be a good deal. Not a steal but a decent deal. If Barnes has come into his own and is a good closer for the next several years then this deal will have been a steal.

 

Given his age and progression, it’s obvious teams would weigh his recent performances more. They got him for much less than what they’d have to pay to replace him in FA.

[moonslav59]

If Barnes pitches for the next two years like he did before this year it will be a good deal. Not a steal but a decent deal. If Barnes has come into his own and is a good closer for the next several years then this deal will have been a steal.

.

 

That's exactly how I see it.

 

He was a very good set-up man from 2017-2020 combined.

 

I'm glad we extended him.

[Bellhorn04]

Schiraldi had fewer IP because he assumed the role later on the year, but his 299 ERA+ wasn’t good enough? That’s better than Foulke had!

 

I fear you might be entering the Realm of Circular Logic. The Sox won because they had a great closer! And the closer was great because they won!!

 

You're right about Schiraldi, he was very good that year. Just unfortunate.

 

I think the real point is that seasons often get decided by whether the closer can nail it down or not.

 

Admittedly I am one of those who 'over-romanticize' the postseason.

[Maxbialystock]

Barnes's career ERA is 3.93, but this year it's 2.61. I tend to throw out 2020 as an anomaly, a nonseason that had to be counted as a real season. In the three prior seasons (2017-2019), his ERA's were 3.88, 3.65, and 3.78, which is a pretty tight shot group.

 

This year is clearly different, not at all like those three good seasons setting up for the closer. And I think two things changed for Barnes to get 2.61 this year. First and foremost, he changed his repertoire to a very good knuckle curve, a good fastball, and nothing else. In prior seasons he threw other pitches which weren't as good. The other change was becoming the closer, which meant he usually knew when he would be called upon--usually with a clean inning. A possible third thing is that none of his set up guys (Ottavino, Whitlock, Sawamura, et al) throw his particular mix of pitches.

[moonslav59]

Barnes's career ERA is 3.93, but this year it's 2.61. I tend to throw out 2020 as an anomaly, a nonseason that had to be counted as a real season. In the three prior seasons (2017-2019), his ERA's were 3.88, 3.65, and 3.78, which is a pretty tight shot group.

 

This year is clearly different, not at all like those three good seasons setting up for the closer. And I think two things changed for Barnes to get 2.61 this year. First and foremost, he changed his repertoire to a very good knuckle curve, a good fastball, and nothing else. In prior seasons he threw other pitches which weren't as good. The other change was becoming the closer, which meant he usually knew when he would be called upon--usually with a clean inning. A possible third thing is that none of his set up guys (Ottavino, Whitlock, Sawamura, et al) throw his particular mix of pitches.

 

Nice summary. I’d only add that he is throwing first pitch strikes way more often, this year.

[iortiz]

IMO the most important thing (and pretty impressive) that Matt Barnes has improved this year is his command which is translated and reflected in his peripherals metrics, specially in his BB/9 which is 2.61. That simple metric has boosted all his run prevention stats, specially SIERA (1.84), which IMO is the greatest run prevention estimator among them since it is the only that considers balls in play.

 

Is it sustainable? If his command continuos this way, I say yes because his stuff has been elite this year.

[Maxbialystock]

Nice summary. I’d only add that he is throwing first pitch strikes way more often, this year.

 

Good point.

[Maxbialystock]

IMO the most important thing (and pretty impressive) that Matt Barnes has improved this year is his command which is translated and reflected in his peripherals metrics, specially in his BB/9 which is 2.61. That simple metric has boosted all his run prevention stats, specially SIERA (1.84), which IMO is the greatest run prevention estimator among them since it is the only that considers balls in play.

 

Is it sustainable? If his command continuos this way, I say yes because his stuff has been elite this year.

 

Agree command is a big factor, which I think is helped by going with just 2 pitches.

[Behindenemylines]

Agree command is a big factor, which I think is helped by going with just 2 pitches.

 

Good deal for the Sox! Still a moveable contract down the road if the need arises. With Barnes it is the command that is the big difference. When he gets ahead of the hitter in the count he has been unhittable.

[mvp 78]

If he went to FA, he gets more money IMO. Good deal.

 

Hello me, meet the real me.

 

@JMastrodonato

Matt Barnes has a 7.84 ERA with five saves, two blown saves and three losses since the Red Sox signed him to a two-year contract extension on July 11.

[jad]

You're right about Schiraldi, he was very good that year. Just unfortunate.

 

I think the real point is that seasons often get decided by whether the closer can nail it down or not.

 

Admittedly I am one of those who 'over-romanticize' the postseason.

 

Like Grady Little and Pedro. If whass-is-name (Posada) had actually put a good swing on the ball, it would have been a lazy fly ball and both Little and Pedro would have been hailed as heroes. I loved Schiraldi!

[harmony]

Hello me, meet the real me.

 

@JMastrodonato

Matt Barnes has a 7.84 ERA with five saves, two blown saves and three losses since the Red Sox signed him to a two-year contract extension on July 11.

The hyperbolic highway robbery.