iortiz

I want to see Arroyo in the lineup but I guess Travis is hot right now.

Thing is that I have different impression specially in the 9th. My impression could be wrong, but I think most of the times they don't bring the closers in tie games in the 9th, but again, I could be wrong. The 10th is more likely to bring a closer, yes, mostly before the new extra innings rule.

So, you imply those who disagree don't share your good common sense. In some aspects, unfortunately yes. For example if you want to compare a starter with a closer as you did, it does not make sense at all. BTW, how do you define the term mediocre? Mediocre in my book is kind of average tending to bad. Something between average and below average.

My chart only includes RP'ers in the years and time frames chosen. Your original chart has only 3 levels in order to differentiate pedigrees. FG's? seven. There's where the root of your flaw analysis begins What are you talking about "normalizing?" FG's player charts are not the same for Relievers in their scale so you have to normalize them. You chose fWAR, not me. It's not my stat of choice. Most of the times fWAR is a good metric in order to rate value. It's the choice, not mine. The stats I use actually shows Barnes worse than fWAR. I'm not trying to claim he's top 20% or even 25%. I'm just showing your stat of choice, this time, shows he was better than his peers, which means better than mediocre by definition. (I go by Webster not fangraphs normalization charts or whatever you claim when determining what mediocre means). Again, he is not. Look at FG's WAR chart. Not your bizarre chart IMO, he was above average by enough to place him out of the mediocre tier from 2017-2020. It's not by a lot, but he's not mediocre, and your stat, fWAR, shows he was not mediocre. Now, you're trying to claim he's in the 5th lowest tier out of 7? Based on FG's WAR chart (not my opinion) he was below average regardless how you want to slice it. The goalposts never stop moving. Not sure what does this mean lol

lol nope, it's called common sense most of the times.

Sure it happens, but sometimes they are brought but sometimes they are not. It is not clear to me that it happens most of times specially in the 9th.

Closers are brought when set ups can't hold in the 8th. In that situation you won't see a set up pitcher keep pitching and hold the the 8th. He most likely s*** the bed loading the bases and the closer is likely to come in to clean his s*** and very likely to get a BS. Life and Baseball sometimes are unfair.

mmm I'm not that sure moon about that, but if you have the numbers oks then.

Very few could handle the pressure in the 9th for a long time as Papelbon, Mo and few others did.

Thing is, most of the times, you don't bring your closer in tie games.

Yup, just don't tell to U? lol

That is a fair large career sample for a closer. Impressive.

88%? that's an impressive number. Wow! Whata I'm ready to say again is what I said several years ago. He drove most of his career in Mo's highway. He was an elite closer just as Mo.

You have to normalize the FG's rule-of-thumb fWAR chart to relievers and you will figure out. He is mediocre. Have to check it twice but in a Up-bottom look, He is at the 5th level out of 7th, so the term mediocre is probably even a gift. I normalized the chart for relievers in the other thread. Again, go figure.

You pick and choose your criteria. I use the same for everyone and every time. That's the difference. You can split clutch moments as you wish and then compare apples with apples. In Barnes' case does not make sense rate him as a closer because the sample is too short. He has never been a full-time closer until this year to start off. I noted that Barnes places 26th on the fWAR rankings. I never said that makes him the 2t6th best RP'er. Some RP'ers have smaller sample sizes, so had a lower fWAR. I et that. My data was only meant to show that some areas of evaluation show him to be better that mediocre. Certainly some show is was mediocre, too. No one is disputing that you said he is the 26th best reliever. I'm disputing that your chart doesn't make sense because you are putting him in a first tier. it does not make sense. Based on FG's WAR charts he is mediocre at very best. If clutch is only the 9th, then why count Kershaw's innings 1-8? Again, you change the criteria based on what you want to believe. LOL! here's where you compare apples with oranges. Kershaw is not a closer. The analysis in the 9th does not make sense. BTW, Barnes has more innings pitched in the 9th than the 7th or 1-5th combined. 128 IP in 8th .692 OPS Against 99 IP in the 9th .663 82 in the 7th .657 Seems he's done better in the ninth when compared to the 8th and his overall numbers, and his sample size is just 29 innings less than the 8th. Still the sample is very small. Many facts show Barnes was better than mediocre from 2017 to 2020 (before 2021). Only a few show him to be mediocre. If you use his whole career numbers, he looks a bit worse, but to me the 2017-2020 sample size is large enough and more indicative of who he was before this strange season he's having now. Well, fWAR rates all-in-all value and its source is FIP. He is mediocre I just wish you'd stick with the same criteria for every player you judge. You can't always use the same criteria. Clutch moments have different situations. For example. If you want to evaluate clutch moments for Barnes as a closer, it doesn't make sense because he hasn't been a closer. If you want to evaluate clutch rates in career POs numbers where the sample is fair like in Kershaw's case, you can do it. Again, it is a matter of criteria. It's not a rigid thing. It gets confusing and rather comical, at times. Actually is pretty simple the way I see it.

No problem but I guess great closers have something around 80% or above through their career. Saving 8 out of 10 opportunities speaks volumes of how good you are at closing in large career samples.

What is Papelbon SV%?

yup, Barnes hasn't been a full-time closer until this year for 4 months, so any analysis in that in order to rate him as a closer does not make sense to me.

Based on FG's rule-of-thumb WAR charts, Matt Barnes is mediocre. I'm not making up things. 1.3 is a mediocre number and it was his best WAR year before 2021. Hell he is at 1.4 this year and probably won't even make 2.0. We'll se though. As I told you before, your chart does not make sense. You want to put Matt Barnes in the first tier where the cream of the cream are. It's absurd by definition. As for his clutch numbers, he hasn't pitched enough in the 9th, so it's a mystery what we are going to get. His career numbers in other innings is a different story. They are not the ninth in order to be conclusive. You would not compare apples with apples.

lol I'm not saying that.

LOL! Chill moon. I meant lately —2 months or so. I need to check it twice but I think they didn't give him the 9th entering July as they used to. Rest is not necessary not play at all in this case. Pitching in low leverage situations is giving a break to closers. I think Barnes needs both, time and pitch in low leverage situations. IMO he is blocked right now mentally.

What is the job of a closer? Close games, no matter what. Career SV% is a solid stat in order to rate a closer.

My definition of clutch/choke is based on large samples/fair samples in high leverage situations. As simple as that. In Kershaw's case, his career PO sample is a fair sample to determine whether he is clutch or not. In Barne's case there's no history of him at closing so it's hard to tell whether he has this skill. Time will tell.

First off, his career fWAR before 2021 suggests he is nothing but a mediocre reliever based on fangraphs' rule-of-thumb charts. Normalize the chart for relievers and figure out. Regarding his clutch this year, as I said, the sample is so short to tell. I'm not saying it was fluke neither it is the real deal. We have to wait. This is his first year closing.

He's been better in the last two months. It's a fact.