November 23, 200619 yr Disagree with Wagner (to a certain degree), Ray, Gordon, Fuentes (especially). And all of your questionables. So you refuse to even call them "good"? Probably. They are the products of their specialized role. you're bordering on the absurd I would think you of all people would know better than that. No better than to say that Chris Ray, Tom Gordon and Billy Wagner aren't good pitchers? All 3 have fantastic stuff and are real good at what they do. Whether its the 9th inning or the 7th inning. They get the job done. They are good pitchers, whether you like it or not.
November 23, 200619 yr Tom Gordon's numbers outside of closing are not very flattering. And I'm skeptical of Ray and Wagner until they have been tried elsewhere. I've never been a Wagner fan myself, as I don't buy into the fastball dependency style of pitching. Sure, he can change speeds on you, but his reliance on the gas just begs to be hammered by the expecting eye. Wagner isn't a good pitcher? wow :blink: . Wagner, while posting a 17-3 record in three years at Ferrum College (VA), set the Division III mark for career strikeouts with 327 in 182 1/3 IP. He still holds the single-season NCAA records for K/9 IP (19.1) and fewest H/9 IP (1.58) as well as the career record for fewest H/9 IP (2.22). Yes, you read those numbers right. He averaged more than 19 Ks and fewer than two hits per 9 IP as a sophomore in 1992. link
November 23, 200619 yr Gordon is an average pitcher, one only has to look at his career. Wagner on the other hand is an excellent pitcher. He has a career WHIP of 1.00 and a 3-1 K:BB ratio. There is nothing not to like. Fuentes is going to have to demonstrate that 2006 was accurate and not just an example of strenght in a small sample size. I don't think Ray will hold up.
November 23, 200619 yr Tom Gordon's numbers outside of closing are not very flattering. And I'm skeptical of Ray and Wagner until they have been tried elsewhere. I've never been a Wagner fan myself, as I don't buy into the fastball dependency style of pitching. Sure, he can change speeds on you, but his reliance on the gas just begs to be hammered by the expecting eye. Wagner's reliance on the gas has produced a .297 SLUGGING percentage during his career. He's getting absolutely hammered by expecting eyes. Hate that career 1.00 whip and 11.96 K/9 in over 700+ innings too? Cocaine is one hell of a drug.
November 23, 200619 yr At this moment I have no problem with either trade. Bostik isn't a top notch prospect. He was a prospect, period. Trading away a single A player that we were hoping would make it to AA next year Bostick was a AA/AAA pitcher hoping to make it to the majors this year I still like the trade, but get your facts right Sorry bout that. I stand corrected.
November 23, 200619 yr Closer are closers because they thrive under pressure, don't have much stuff, and don't have endurance.
November 23, 200619 yr Closer are closers because they thrive under pressure, don't have much stuff, and don't have endurance. what?
November 23, 200619 yr Closer are closers because they thrive under pressure, don't have much stuff, and don't have endurance. Not true its arguable that besides some SP closers have the best stuff if they didnt some of them wouldnt have an ERA that low or the number of SO that high theres a reason people like Messenger or Herges didnt close this season
November 24, 200619 yr If you actually think about it, guys like Eric Gagne never really had much stuff until they were converted to closers. Most closers do not have stuff, they are usually fire ballers who thrive under pressure and successfully discourage hitters during late clutch situations. I can only think of a few guys that close today that have much stuff if any.
November 24, 200619 yr most young closers are guys that can throw gas....but you can't expect someone to throw 100mph for 6-7 innings....so they just go max effort for one inning and then they are a success....then as they get older and learn how to pitch then they can still close without having the gas
November 24, 200619 yr Rorod gave the best description of why a closer is successful, and how the success lasts... the fact is "max effort for one inning" is a lot easier than trying to deceive hitters with the same stuff over the course of several innings, if not a complete game...
November 24, 200619 yr Closer are closers because they thrive under pressure, don't have much stuff, and don't have endurance. Not true its arguable that besides some SP closers have the best stuff if they didnt some of them wouldnt have an ERA that low or the number of SO that high theres a reason people like Messenger or Herges didnt close this season How do closers have the greatest stuff? They're out there for one inning. Hitters never get a chance to really figure them out. A starting pitcher has to fool the same hitter 3-4 times over the course of a game.
November 24, 200619 yr Closer are closers because they thrive under pressure, don't have much stuff, and don't have endurance. Not true its arguable that besides some SP closers have the best stuff if they didnt some of them wouldnt have an ERA that low or the number of SO that high theres a reason people like Messenger or Herges didnt close this season How do closers have the greatest stuff? They're out there for one inning. Hitters never get a chance to really figure them out. A starting pitcher has to fool the same hitter 3-4 times over the course of a game. THANK YOU, SOMEONE WITH BRAINS!
November 24, 200619 yr If you actually think about it, guys like Eric Gagne never really had much stuff until they were converted to closers. Most closers do not have stuff, they are usually fire ballers who thrive under pressure and successfully discourage hitters during late clutch situations. I can only think of a few guys that close today that have much stuff if any. Please,please,please tell me how they "discourage" hitters during late clutch situations? Do they use a really mean stare ? I bet this guy would be a great closer, eh? :
November 24, 200619 yr Closer are closers because they thrive under pressure, don't have much stuff, and don't have endurance. what? That's pretty accurate. If they had the stuff, they'd be starters. No closer is good enough to be a starter unless he is misused. Smoltz was wasted in the closer role for instance.
November 24, 200619 yr I think you guys saying closers don't have "stuff" have absolutely no clue what "stuff" means.
November 24, 200619 yr I think you guys saying closers don't have "stuff" have absolutely no clue what "stuff" means. The enlighten us o sage of baseball wisdom. I thought stuff meant pitch movement and arm speed. Basically how hard your can throw the ball in something other than a straight line. Velocity, movement, deception, and command are what it takes to get guys out. If you are missing the last two you don't have the stuff to be a starter, because you are going to get killed on the second or later PAs. If you have all four, and are not a starter, you are either misused or have some kind of delivery problem that effects your endurance. Most closers are not fireballers when compared to starters. Every closer you can identify that can really bring it, I could identify 4 starters, which is about the proportion.
November 24, 200619 yr I think you guys saying closers don't have "stuff" have absolutely no clue what "stuff" means. The enlighten us o sage of baseball wisdom. I thought stuff meant pitch movement and arm speed. Basically how hard your can throw the ball in something other than a straight line. :blink: :blink: :blink: You are right. That is "stuff". So, basically, what youre saying is that these 18 pitchers (out of 30 closers) don't have stuff ??? - (stolen from Ramp.) KRod, Trevor Hoffman, Billy Wagner, BJ Ryan, Huston Street, Joe Nathan, Jonathan Papelbon, Mariano Rivera, Akinori Otsuka, Chris Ray, Mike Gonzalez, Takashi Saito, Tom Gordon, Brian Fuentes, Chad Cordero,Jason Isringhausen, Bobby Jenks, Frank Francisco ? BTW, I sure as hell thought the Braves were a lot harder of a team when you knew the game was over if you weren't winning by the 9th inning because Smoltz was coming out to slam the door in 02-04, compared to this year when the Braves had Chris Reitsma closing. I wouldn't call Smoltz wasted as a closer.
November 24, 200619 yr I think you guys saying closers don't have "stuff" have absolutely no clue what "stuff" means. The enlighten us o sage of baseball wisdom. I thought stuff meant pitch movement and arm speed. Basically how hard your can throw the ball in something other than a straight line. :blink: :blink: :blink: You are right. That is "stuff". So, basically, what youre saying is that these 18 pitchers (out of 30 closers) don't have stuff ??? - (stolen from Ramp.) KRod, Trevor Hoffman, Billy Wagner, BJ Ryan, Huston Street, Joe Nathan, Jonathan Papelbon, Mariano Rivera, Akinori Otsuka, Chris Ray, Mike Gonzalez, Takashi Saito, Tom Gordon, Brian Fuentes, Chad Cordero,Jason Isringhausen, Bobby Jenks, Frank Francisco ? BTW, I sure as hell thought the Braves were a lot harder of a team when you knew the game was over if you weren't winning by the 9th inning because Smoltz was coming out to slam the door in 02-04, compared to this year when the Braves had Chris Reitsma closing. I wouldn't call Smoltz wasted as a closer. Yep, the game was over when Smoltz came in. He was absolutely lights out. The Braves were a much more formidible team with Smoltz at the end of games.
November 24, 200619 yr I think you guys saying closers don't have "stuff" have absolutely no clue what "stuff" means. The enlighten us o sage of baseball wisdom. I thought stuff meant pitch movement and arm speed. Basically how hard your can throw the ball in something other than a straight line. :blink: :blink: :blink: You are right. That is "stuff". So, basically, what youre saying is that these 18 pitchers (out of 30 closers) don't have stuff ??? - (stolen from Ramp.) No. I am saying that they don't have the stuff to be a starter, or they are misused.
November 24, 200619 yr Yep, the game was over when Smoltz came in. He was absolutely lights out. The Braves were a much more formidible team with Smoltz at the end of games. Except that there is no evidence whatsoever to demonstrate that assertion and much to dispute it. Smoltz is very far ahead of the average starter in wins, and was only slightly more successful than other closers. An average closer blows anywhere from 2 to as many as 4 more games than the league leader. Smoltz converts 7-10 more wins than a league average starter each season. Even if Smoltz was the most successful closer in all of baseball, he is worth more wins as a starter.
November 24, 200619 yr Closer are closers because they thrive under pressure, don't have much stuff, and don't have endurance. what? That's pretty accurate. If they had the stuff, they'd be starters. No closer is good enough to be a starter unless he is misused. Smoltz was wasted in the closer role for instance. Thats not true at all, Bobby Jenks is a prime example. He had a constant health problems as a starter. He has 4 plus pitches 3 that would tip out on as an 80 on the scout scale. The reason he was put on waviers was because he had "charecter" issues and he could never stay healthy in the angels organization. He was very overweight and he has a screw in his arm. The Sox decided they could get the most out of him as a closer and limit the stress on his body. If closing was so easy why is it that when a regular relief pitcher is asked to close they often fail? or why do organizations as a whole often draft closers in the early rounds(1-5), why not spend those draft choices on posistion players? two reasons: 1.) they usually have the best make up and 2.) they usually have the best "stuff". Further more closers usually have the best stuff on a entire pitching staff, i've seen jenks pitch 3 inning saves before where he had to face a hitter twice and simply dominated them.
November 24, 200619 yr Eric Gagne didn't have a great time starting either. John Smoltz is just great at everything he does. If Hollywood wasn't there, Smoltz would probably be an All Star CF too.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.