Who should close going forward?

[notin]

03 Sox just took too long to get to Scott Williamson.

 

Chad Fox only got 3 saves that year, none after April. Lyon got most of the saves until Kim fell out of the rotation and back into the pen. Kim was great as the closer in the regular season, but he just turned to a puddle in Game 4 and 5 of the 2001 WS.

 

The problem wasn't that a committee couldn't work, just that the committee wasn't very good. There were pieces of a good pen like Timlin, Embree (started season slow) and Kim at the start of the season, but they weren't in the right position to succeed. Williamson was really good down the stretch and into the playoffs. He just made that pen work a little better. It didn't help that the Sox signed Ramiro Mendoza and he just fell flat on his face after leaving the Bronx.

 

The problem with that pen was it didn’t much in the way of good pitching until Kim was acquired about a third of the way into the season. The weird thing is, that bullpen is remembered for being horribly ineffective, but they were quite good in the ninth inning even prior to acquiring Kim. They only blew three ninth inning leads prior to the trade, and that only resulted in two losses.

 

Now in the 7th and 8th innings, those guys got hammered like a sorority girl on Jell-O shot night…

[iortiz]

Barnes was an experiment at closing this year. He never was full-time closer. They gave him the job because we had no other option or at least a better option to start off. Probably Ottavino was going to be the next to be evaluated, IDK.

 

He started very good and kept the job. He was so good that he was even extended.

 

Said that Ottavino and Whitlock are the next best viable options at this point to continue the experiment.

 

Honestly I don't know what to expect from Barnes moving forward, his good performance this year is a very short sample vs what his career numbers suggest.

[notin]

03 Sox just took too long to get to Scott Williamson.

 

Chad Fox only got 3 saves that year, none after April. Lyon got most of the saves until Kim fell out of the rotation and back into the pen. Kim was great as the closer in the regular season, but he just turned to a puddle in Game 4 and 5 of the 2001 WS.

 

The problem wasn't that a committee couldn't work, just that the committee wasn't very good. There were pieces of a good pen like Timlin, Embree (started season slow) and Kim at the start of the season, but they weren't in the right position to succeed. Williamson was really good down the stretch and into the playoffs. He just made that pen work a little better. It didn't help that the Sox signed Ramiro Mendoza and he just fell flat on his face after leaving the Bronx.

 

Chad Fox got released that year on July 30, making him I guess the one guy to go from ninth inning to waiver wire. He did catch on with the Marlins and actually became a key member of their bullpen and got himself a World Series ring…

[iortiz]

You are saying he has done well since his time off?

 

That is wrong on every level. They had to yank him last night like we yanked Barnes, last night.

 

Own up. The guy as sucked in his 3 games after the "rest."

 

I'm cherry-picking?

 

I used the stat I always use (OPS against) and the one you used to bash Barnes (ERA). Now, you switch to Blown saves and SV%.

 

The only reason Chapman has few blown saves in August is because he was rested from 8/5 to 8/18.

 

He has pitched in 3 games and finished only 1. He sucked in 2 of 3, and not just by a little bit.

 

LOL I didn't bash Barnes. All his career stats, including ERA, are way far from his 2021 performance until August. That was all my point all along. He was a mediocre pitcher. This year (before August) he had been Koji 2.0.

[iortiz]

It's nice that baseball is so simple like that.

 

 

yup, some people want to see a circle as a square lol

[mvp 78]

https://www.billjamesonline.com/the_closer_by_committee/

 

That was the third step in this debacle: 1) We decided to save money in the bullpen, 2) We signed several inexpensive relievers, and 3) Somebody in our organization directly or implicitly Okayed the use of the term "Closer by Committee".

 

On opening day of the 2003 season, the Red Sox in Tampa Bay, the Red Sox went into the bottom of the 9th with a 4-1 lead. Alan Embree gave up a single, a homer, and a single. Chad Fox got two outs but then gave up a walk and another homer. We lost, 6-4.

In the second game of the season we were up 8-6 going into the bottom of the eighth. Bobby Howry gave up a single and a homer, and the game went into extra innings, although the Red Sox eventually won it.

In the fifth game of the season, playing Baltimore, we went into the bottom of the 9th with an 8-3 lead. Ramiro Mendoza gave up six hits and four runs, and the Red Sox escaped with a one-run victory.

In the sixth game, Pedro Martinez pitched eight sterling innings, and the game was tied 1-1 going into the bottom of the ninth. Chad Fox walked in the losing run with one out.

In the eighth game, although the bullpen was never presented with a lead, they gave up three more runs in two and two-thirds innings, denying the offense a fair chance to come back and win the game.

In the tenth game of the season the Red Sox led 8-4 going into the bottom of the ninth. Mike Timlin gave up three runs, and the Red Sox escaped with another one-run victory.

The Red Sox haven’t even gotten to Fenway Park yet, and the bullpen has had SIX meltdowns. In Game 13, finally back in Fenway, the Red Sox led 5-1 through seven innings. Ramiro Mendoza gave up four runs without getting an out.

 

We had, in fact, made a very serious mistake. Whether that mistake was failing to designate a Closer or whether it was deciding to save money in the bullpen or whether it was signing Ramiro Mendoza or whether it was gambling on Chad Fox to come back from an injury. . .what difference does that make?

 

But among you there are a few baseball historians, and there are a great many younger people, some of whom who will be writing books about baseball history when Grady Little and me are six feet under and Theo still isn’t talking about it. I thought I owed it to you, at some point, to explain what had really happened. The Closer by Committee wasn’t Grady’s idea, it wasn’t Theo’s idea, and it wasn’t mine. Like the Great Fire of Chicago and the tilt in the Leaning Tower of Pisa, it wasn’t anybody’s plan for this to happen. It wasn’t anybody’s idea; it was just something that happened.

 

​

 

Interesting read on 2003 situation by Bill James who took a lot of flack at the time.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Ramiro Mendoza was a double secret agent in 2003.

[Bellhorn04]

Interesting read on 2003 situation by Bill James who took a lot of flack at the time.

 

Catch phrases like "Closer by Committee" and "Bridge Year" are certain death.

[iortiz]

https://www.billjamesonline.com/the_closer_by_committee/

 

That was the third step in this debacle: 1) We decided to save money in the bullpen, 2) We signed several inexpensive relievers, and 3) Somebody in our organization directly or implicitly Okayed the use of the term "Closer by Committee".

 

On opening day of the 2003 season, the Red Sox in Tampa Bay, the Red Sox went into the bottom of the 9th with a 4-1 lead. Alan Embree gave up a single, a homer, and a single. Chad Fox got two outs but then gave up a walk and another homer. We lost, 6-4.

In the second game of the season we were up 8-6 going into the bottom of the eighth. Bobby Howry gave up a single and a homer, and the game went into extra innings, although the Red Sox eventually won it.

In the fifth game of the season, playing Baltimore, we went into the bottom of the 9th with an 8-3 lead. Ramiro Mendoza gave up six hits and four runs, and the Red Sox escaped with a one-run victory.

In the sixth game, Pedro Martinez pitched eight sterling innings, and the game was tied 1-1 going into the bottom of the ninth. Chad Fox walked in the losing run with one out.

In the eighth game, although the bullpen was never presented with a lead, they gave up three more runs in two and two-thirds innings, denying the offense a fair chance to come back and win the game.

In the tenth game of the season the Red Sox led 8-4 going into the bottom of the ninth. Mike Timlin gave up three runs, and the Red Sox escaped with another one-run victory.

The Red Sox haven’t even gotten to Fenway Park yet, and the bullpen has had SIX meltdowns. In Game 13, finally back in Fenway, the Red Sox led 5-1 through seven innings. Ramiro Mendoza gave up four runs without getting an out.

 

We had, in fact, made a very serious mistake. Whether that mistake was failing to designate a Closer or whether it was deciding to save money in the bullpen or whether it was signing Ramiro Mendoza or whether it was gambling on Chad Fox to come back from an injury. . .what difference does that make?

 

But among you there are a few baseball historians, and there are a great many younger people, some of whom who will be writing books about baseball history when Grady Little and me are six feet under and Theo still isn’t talking about it. I thought I owed it to you, at some point, to explain what had really happened. The Closer by Committee wasn’t Grady’s idea, it wasn’t Theo’s idea, and it wasn’t mine. Like the Great Fire of Chicago and the tilt in the Leaning Tower of Pisa, it wasn’t anybody’s plan for this to happen. It wasn’t anybody’s idea; it was just something that happened.

 

​

 

Interesting read on 2003 situation by Bill James who took a lot of flack at the time.

Wonder how many teams this year have been applying closer by committee?

 

I also have been noticed that some teams like KC and TBR have been using "Closer by Situation" which is a different thing.

[iortiz]

Catch phrases like "Closer by Committee" and "Bridge Year" are certain death.

 

 

Does "getting pitching good enough" apply? lol

[moonslav59]

LOL I didn't bash Barnes. All his career stats, including ERA, are way far from his 2021 performance until August. That was all my point all along. He was a mediocre pitcher. This year (before August) he had been Koji 2.0.

 

You bashed the hell out of him and used ERA almost exclusively.

 

Own up.

[notin]

Catch phrases like "Closer by Committee" and "Bridge Year" are certain death.

 

The bridge year one was laughable mass hysteria.

 

Theo uses that phrase to talk about what I understood to refer to the minor leagues and his drafting philosophy, and fans started freaking out that because wasn’t trying to win. Bear in mind this happened right after the Sox signed John Lackey to the biggest contract ever given to a Sox starting pitcher at the time…

[mvp 78]

Catch phrases like "Closer by Committee" and "Bridge Year" are certain death.

 

Thanks Boston media.

[mvp 78]

Ramiro Mendoza was a double secret agent in 2003.

 

He was a bad one then. Should have been good until October and then tried to sink the season.

[iortiz]

You bashed the hell out of him and used ERA almost exclusively.

 

Own up.

 

Naahhh pointing out the facts is not bashing.

 

As I said, using ERA is a solid stat when you use it in career samples. Using ERA for short samples and even in year samples for relievers is terrible specially in order to predict future. I used as well career WAR, career run prevention stats, career peripherals, etc. He was mediocre at most of them based on fangraphs charts.

 

You were the one who made a bizarre chart that doesn't make sense, not me.

 

Also, in Barnes' case you can not use SV% ratios because he hasn't been a full-time closer. Common sense.

[a700hitter]

Naahhh pointing out the facts is not bashing.

 

As I said, using ERA is a solid stat when you use it in career samples. Using ERA for short samples and even in year samples for relievers is terrible specially in order to predict future. I used as well career WAR, career run prevention stats, career peripherals, etc. He was mediocre at most of them based on fangraphs charts.

 

You were the one who made a bizarre chart that doesn't make sense, not me.

 

Also, in Barnes' case you can not use SV% ratios because he hasn't been a full-time closer. Common sense.

You were pretty much dead on accurate that his early season performance was not sustainable. Everything in his extensive body of work plus his age pointed in that direction.

[notin]

You were pretty much dead on accurate that his early season performance was not sustainable. Everything in his extensive body of work plus his age pointed in that direction.

 

 

But then Barnes has shot well past just “regressing to the norm” all the way to “bullpen liability” recently.

 

I don’t think he’s as bad as his last few outings, but he needs to right the ship fast, even if it’s getting back to the pitcher he was for the rest of his career…

[a700hitter]

But then Barnes has shot well past just “regressing to the norm” all the way to “bullpen liability” recently.

 

I don’t think he’s as bad as his last few outings, but he needs to right the ship fast, even if it’s getting back to the pitcher he was for the rest of his career…

Maybe he has aged out of what he had been previously. I think his contract extension will be a sunk cost. I am still baffled that Bloom extended him in season.

[notin]

Maybe he has aged out of what he had been previously. I think his contract extension will be a sunk cost. I am still baffled that Bloom extended him in season.

 

So Barnes’ contract is sunk cost based on 4 bad innings?

[a700hitter]

So Barnes’ contract is sunk cost based on 4 bad innings?

No, not based on 4 bad innings. Based on age and decline.

[iortiz]

You were pretty much dead on accurate that his early season performance was not sustainable. Everything in his extensive body of work plus his age pointed in that direction.

 

Barnes' issues in the past was control and command. Those issues have come again lately and even worse.

 

Not sure whether Barnes benefited from the spider tack thing early in the season and/or they just adjusted his mechanics, but right now Barnes is blocked mentally IMO.

 

Will he bounce back and close to what he was early in the season? Very unlikely IMHO. Maybe to his career form but maybe not at closing. We'll see though.

[TylerD]

Well we are all in favor though. Definitely no Barnes lol

 

I think it will be a competition now. There isn’t just one guy. Go with what works, and if that guy sucks go to someone else. Simple

[dgalehouse]

The best thing you can do now is to try and get Barnes straightened out. Keep him down a few days and let the pitching coach work with him and earn his keep. If a save situation happens in the meantime , Whitlock clearly has the best stuff to get the job done. As I have said ad nauseum, Closin' ain't easy!!!!

[mvp 78]

But then Barnes has shot well past just “regressing to the norm” all the way to “bullpen liability” recently.

 

I don’t think he’s as bad as his last few outings, but he needs to right the ship fast, even if it’s getting back to the pitcher he was for the rest of his career…

 

^^^

[notin]

The best thing you can do now is to try and get Barnes straightened out. Keep him down a few days and let the pitching coach work with him and earn his keep. If a save situation happens in the meantime , Whitlock clearly has the best stuff to get the job done. As I have said ad nauseum, Closin' ain't easy!!!!

 

But then not all of his struggles have been in save situations. This really has nothing to do with the role of closer…

[dgalehouse]

But then not all of his struggles have been in save situations. This really has nothing to do with the role of closer…

 

The contrarian.

[iortiz]

The best thing you can do now is to try and get Barnes straightened out. Keep him down a few days and let the pitching coach work with him and earn his keep. If a save situation happens in the meantime , Whitlock clearly has the best stuff to get the job done. As I have said ad nauseum, Closin' ain't easy!!!!

 

yup, it goes beyond of only "good stuff".

 

Knowing Cora, I think Robles is the the next closer by committee until he shits the bed.

[dgalehouse]

yup, it goes beyond of only "good stuff".

 

Knowing Cora, I think Robles is the the next closer by committee until he shits the bed.

 

Robles has been in MLB for seven years and has an ERA over 4. So, better get the clean sheets ready.

[Kimmi]

Let’s get this discussion going

 

I say Whitlock.

 

I like Whitlock in the role he is currently being used in. I wouldn't make him the closer.

 

I think that Barnes needs a break for a couple of games to get out of his own head. I believe Barnes will be back to being reliable Barnes soon enough.

 

In the meantime, I'd probably go with Taylor or Ottavino, depending on matchups.

[iortiz]

Robles has been in MLB for seven years and has an ERA over 4. So, better get the clean sheets ready.

 

LOL! yeah.

 

IMO Whitlock is the best option.