There are only a handful of real, shut-down, lights-out closers in MLB at any given time who are consistent and can be expected to sustain that. At the moment, Mariano and Joe Nathan come to mind. Maybe they have a special mentality or mental edge, or maybe they are especially physically gifted - probably some combination thereof. However, nearly all teams do not have one of those guys.

The Mets paid a ton of $$$ for K-Rod, and despite an ERA right around 3, he has a WHIP of 1.26 (not impressive), 4.9 BB/9, and a 1.91 K/BB (again, not that impressive). Also, his K/BB has gone down every year since his sick 2006, and by chunks at a time.

 

So, if you don't have one of the select few, then the dropoff seems to be pretty significant. And I think this is where you can plus in a guy who is a pretty good reliever and expect to end up with similar results to the rest of the league, Yankees + Twins + whoever else I forgot notwithstanding.

 

As an aside, I don't think most of the posters above disagree as much as they think they do. I think we all realize that there aren't too many GREAT closers. For whatever reason (this is where there seems to be disagreement), many players in that role will be roughly average. The reality is that most teams end up closer to average than elite. Look at Papelbon's regression this year. Or look at the league leaders in saves. Fuentes has an ERA near 4. Ryan Franklin is a million years old and came out of nowhere - I have no earthly idea if he'll sustain this. Mo and Nathan are awesome IMO. You can do your own analysis if you like, and I think the results will support my conclusions above.

Totally Heartwrenching! Almost felt like crying...Huge blow to our playoff hopes! I know it's just one game but the Bullpen just imploded. CC still is on a tear

There are only a handful of real, shut-down, lights-out closers in MLB at any given time who are consistent and can be expected to sustain that. At the moment, Mariano and Joe Nathan come to mind. Maybe they have a special mentality or mental edge, or maybe they are especially physically gifted - probably some combination thereof. However, nearly all teams do not have one of those guys.

The Mets paid a ton of $$$ for K-Rod, and despite an ERA right around 3, he has a WHIP of 1.26 (not impressive), 4.9 BB/9, and a 1.91 K/BB (again, not that impressive). Also, his K/BB has gone down every year since his sick 2006, and by chunks at a time.

 

So, if you don't have one of the select few, then the dropoff seems to be pretty significant. And I think this is where you can plus in a guy who is a pretty good reliever and expect to end up with similar results to the rest of the league, Yankees + Twins + whoever else I forgot notwithstanding.

 

As an aside, I don't think most of the posters above disagree as much as they think they do. I think we all realize that there aren't too many GREAT closers. For whatever reason (this is where there seems to be disagreement), many players in that role will be roughly average. The reality is that most teams end up closer to average than elite. Look at Papelbon's regression this year. Or look at the league leaders in saves. Fuentes has an ERA near 4. Ryan Franklin is a million years old and came out of nowhere - I have no earthly idea if he'll sustain this. Mo and Nathan are awesome IMO. You can do your own analysis if you like, and I think the results will support my conclusions above.

Nunez made me forget all about Fredi's idiotic moves in the 8th.

 

BTW, it's really ironic how everyone wants Lindstrom to close, all of the sudden. Pretty funny. Knee-jerk reactions, FTW.

 

 

Right now I rather have Julio closing!!!!!!!!

BTW anyone know the record for fastest 3 runs scored in a game...The Marlins may just made it in the record books

BTW anyone know the record for fastest 3 runs scored in a game...The Marlins may just made it in the record books

 

 

I would imagine it was back to back to back jacks.

 

 

And on the subject of the "lost" closer, the one who got away because the FO is too cheap, etc. blah blah blah it might be worth mentioning that it's no secret that seemingly every conversation with virtually every team since 14 months ago included a demand for Stanton or Morrison etc.

 

Other GMs knew what we needed and what we had and the name of the game was get as much as you can for as little in return so I have no doubt if there was bargaining going on for a Heath Bell the asking price almost certainly included our most prized future stars.

We aren't making the playoffs with Nunez as closer and probably not with Lindstrom. But given that Nunez has displayed a key thing that you absolutely can't have in a closer (giving up the home run at a constant rate) it's not going to do us well to keep him there anyway.

 

Now when does the FO learn that you have to go out and spend a litte $$$ to get a closer ? You just can't plug in young players there very often and have it work. Next year if we see the same crappy bullpen, don't expect the season to end any differently.

 

 

32 for 37...

 

Also, until this year, we have spent some money at getting reclaimation (i.e. not youngin's) for our closer roles: Gregg, Jones, etc.

There are only a handful of real, shut-down, lights-out closers in MLB at any given time who are consistent and can be expected to sustain that. At the moment, Mariano and Joe Nathan come to mind. Maybe they have a special mentality or mental edge, or maybe they are especially physically gifted - probably some combination thereof. However, nearly all teams do not have one of those guys.

The Mets paid a ton of $$$ for K-Rod, and despite an ERA right around 3, he has a WHIP of 1.26 (not impressive), 4.9 BB/9, and a 1.91 K/BB (again, not that impressive). Also, his K/BB has gone down every year since his sick 2006, and by chunks at a time.

 

So, if you don't have one of the select few, then the dropoff seems to be pretty significant. And I think this is where you can plus in a guy who is a pretty good reliever and expect to end up with similar results to the rest of the league, Yankees + Twins + whoever else I forgot notwithstanding.

 

As an aside, I don't think most of the posters above disagree as much as they think they do. I think we all realize that there aren't too many GREAT closers. For whatever reason (this is where there seems to be disagreement), many players in that role will be roughly average. The reality is that most teams end up closer to average than elite. Look at Papelbon's regression this year. Or look at the league leaders in saves. Fuentes has an ERA near 4. Ryan Franklin is a million years old and came out of nowhere - I have no earthly idea if he'll sustain this. Mo and Nathan are awesome IMO. You can do your own analysis if you like, and I think the results will support my conclusions above.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure what that was for. He has regressed.

Some of us said that Nunez didn't have the composure to be a closer and was much better kept as a setup guy. Well, my worst case scenario is really coming to fruition at the absolute worst time. Nunez is best kept as a fiery setup man, but sometimes when you try and make those guys closers they crumble. Not only is this hurting our ballclub, now we have likely shattered the confidence of a guy who was our best set-up man.

 

We need to switch at closer in any way possible and NOW. Even in his better outings, Nunez is extremely prone to giving up the long ball. Nobody can afford that in the ninth inning.

 

One thing that I was trying to point out before it happened is that once again, Pinto cost us big time. His bb/9 is now 6.8 and that is just terrible. Pinto could not throw a strike if his life depended on it, and his success depends on hitters swinging at bad pitches. Fortunately for him, that happens semi-frequently and results in strikeouts or poor contact. But a pitcher's success can't rely solely on hitters chasing bad pitches, because (as the 6.8 bb/9 shows) there are a good amount of hitters at the major league level that simply won't chase bad pitches when they are smart enough to know they are coming.

 

While I know the focus is going to be on Nunez because he blew it in the ninth, we hadn't even allowed any runs to score until Pinto came in and opened the door with his poor pitching. This simply has to stop- Pinto will continue to hurt this team until he is removed from the roster. Pinto has seriously regressed this year, and I don't expect him to get better than what he is now because the league knows he can't throw a strike. And, as Logan Kensing showed us earlier this year, pitchers don't magically developed command overnight like some of this board have been hoping.

 

 

Nunez has blown 3 leads as a "closer." Nunez blew 3 leads before becoming the closer.

This closer stuff is crap. He is who he is, regardless of the role he's in. Setup...closer...at the end of the day, it's 1 inning with the lead late in the game. The 2 runs given up today in the 8th, meant just as much as the 3 that were given up in the 9th.

 

Being the closer is different than other roles in the bullpen. The mental stress is much higher on players and thats why some guys just can't handle the closer role at all, while guys like Joe Borowski manage to be employed as a closer even though they aren't even that good of a reliever- it's because some guys can handle the mental stress while others can't.

 

Guillermo Mota, Octavio Dotel, Latroy Hawkins, these guys were ace setup men who pitched poorly in the closer role despite having much better stuff than many closers.

 

I know it seems like the 8th/9th should be the same, but the mental challenge of being the guy to shut the door just is something that not all relievers experience. And it's why you want somebody composed to take over that role- so they don't crumble when things are starting to go wrong.

 

And how do you KNOW this? You honestly think Leo Nunez had more mental stress today than Kiko Calero who had to come into the game with the bases loaded and 2 outs in a "non-save" situation?

 

Come on.

 

Also, where are you getting your #'s from? Take a look at Latroy Hawkins career #'s...nothing special. Take a look at the year 2004, which clearly shows that LaTroy Hawkins has been able to have success in the closer's role. Heck...take a look at this year! If it's so damn stressful, why is it that he was able to do the job 11 times, while Valverde was out? This, Latroy Hawkins...at the age of 36?

 

Dotel has 83 career saves.

 

 

Look, you really lost on this one. Latroy Hawkins was TERRIBLE in 2004 as a closer. I know, because my dad is a Cubs fan, I am a Cubs fan, and I watched almost all of their games. Hawkins was 25 of 34 for save chances- that means that he pretty much blew one save for every two that he got. How is that in any way good? He got 25 saves through sheer opportunity because the Cubs were extremely strapped for relief help. But all the Cubs announcers, sports writers, and pretty much the coaching staff could talk about was how Hawkins wasn't getting the job done and that he didn't have the makeup to be a closer. But I guess they were all wrong, of course.

 

Nevertheless, Hawkins was traded to San Francisco early the next year after blowing 9 out of 15 save opportunities. That's not good by any measure.

 

I'm sure you looked at his career numbers and thought, "he's nothing special", but Hawkins had an ERA hovering around 2 as a setup man for several years, and had three good years as a setup man (and one bad one) since being converted from a starter. So yes, he was a very highly touted setup man at the time.

 

As for Dotel, yes, he has scattered some saves across a long relief career. But he has only been a full time closer twice- the first time, he ended with with a 5.40 ERA and a sub 70% conversion rate, and in the second time he was 36 for 45, which was seemingly better, but he was still traded by Houston during the season because he wasn't getting the job done good enough. And it's not like Houston was selling a good player- they were getting rid of an ineffective one because they wanted to make the playoffs.

 

It's no coincidence that these guys were never really turned to as closers for longterm stretches again. And I will be no coincidence that Nunez isn't either.

 

I realize that most closers were setup men (where on Earth would they come from), but that doesn't mean that all setup men can be closers. And for the record, I agree with the closer role being over-rated, but that's because you don't have to put the most exciting, most electric, or most dominant pitcher on your team in that role. These skills are over-rated in the closer role and can be much more important for setup men, who are going to be used in a larger variety of situations than a closer. But that doesn't mean that we should accept poor play from a closer, especially when blown saves are about the most deflating way to lose in the game.

 

2004: 2.63, 1.05 WHIP, 25 saves

That's a bad year? (talking about Hawkins)

You're counting 9 blown saves...how many of those came as the closer? He probably blew a couple as a middle reliever/setup guy (like Nunez this year), which is unfair to count, considering:

A. It has nothing to do with the closer's role.

B. If we're going to count his 7th/8th inning blown leads, we should count his holds, too.

 

And my point was that MOST good setup men can close. Also, overall, Latroy Hawkins has had an average, at best, career, anyway you spin it.

 

As for the blown save statistic...it's already been explained. Whether they have the "mentality" or not...FACT is, that despite mediocre statistics, Marlins closers (Lindstrom/Nunez) have converted 32 of their 37 save chances this year, when given a chance in the 9th. No one was even talking about this till Nunez' putrid performance today.

There are only a handful of real, shut-down, lights-out closers in MLB at any given time who are consistent and can be expected to sustain that. At the moment, Mariano and Joe Nathan come to mind. Maybe they have a special mentality or mental edge, or maybe they are especially physically gifted - probably some combination thereof. However, nearly all teams do not have one of those guys.

The Mets paid a ton of $$$ for K-Rod, and despite an ERA right around 3, he has a WHIP of 1.26 (not impressive), 4.9 BB/9, and a 1.91 K/BB (again, not that impressive). Also, his K/BB has gone down every year since his sick 2006, and by chunks at a time.

 

So, if you don't have one of the select few, then the dropoff seems to be pretty significant. And I think this is where you can plus in a guy who is a pretty good reliever and expect to end up with similar results to the rest of the league, Yankees + Twins + whoever else I forgot notwithstanding.

 

As an aside, I don't think most of the posters above disagree as much as they think they do. I think we all realize that there aren't too many GREAT closers. For whatever reason (this is where there seems to be disagreement), many players in that role will be roughly average. The reality is that most teams end up closer to average than elite. Look at Papelbon's regression this year. Or look at the league leaders in saves. Fuentes has an ERA near 4. Ryan Franklin is a million years old and came out of nowhere - I have no earthly idea if he'll sustain this. Mo and Nathan are awesome IMO. You can do your own analysis if you like, and I think the results will support my conclusions above.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure what that was for. He has regressed.

 

 

No, he hasn't.

There are only a handful of real, shut-down, lights-out closers in MLB at any given time who are consistent and can be expected to sustain that. At the moment, Mariano and Joe Nathan come to mind. Maybe they have a special mentality or mental edge, or maybe they are especially physically gifted - probably some combination thereof. However, nearly all teams do not have one of those guys.

The Mets paid a ton of $$$ for K-Rod, and despite an ERA right around 3, he has a WHIP of 1.26 (not impressive), 4.9 BB/9, and a 1.91 K/BB (again, not that impressive). Also, his K/BB has gone down every year since his sick 2006, and by chunks at a time.

 

So, if you don't have one of the select few, then the dropoff seems to be pretty significant. And I think this is where you can plus in a guy who is a pretty good reliever and expect to end up with similar results to the rest of the league, Yankees + Twins + whoever else I forgot notwithstanding.

 

As an aside, I don't think most of the posters above disagree as much as they think they do. I think we all realize that there aren't too many GREAT closers. For whatever reason (this is where there seems to be disagreement), many players in that role will be roughly average. The reality is that most teams end up closer to average than elite. Look at Papelbon's regression this year. Or look at the league leaders in saves. Fuentes has an ERA near 4. Ryan Franklin is a million years old and came out of nowhere - I have no earthly idea if he'll sustain this. Mo and Nathan are awesome IMO. You can do your own analysis if you like, and I think the results will support my conclusions above.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure what that was for. He has regressed.

 

 

No, he hasn't.

 

 

1.22 WHIP suggests he has.

The fact he only has 3 BS, is on pace for just as many saves as last year, and the fact that he is on pace for as many K's as last year begs to differ. Walks don't mean a damn thing if you give up less runs. Hell it means he's gotten better in tough situations.

 

The WHIP shows poor control, not as much ineffectiveness (especially when you ERA is under 2).

The fact he only has 3 BS, is on pace for just as many saves as last year, and the fact that he is on pace for as many K's as last year begs to differ. Walks don't mean a damn thing if you give up less runs. Hell it means he's gotten better in tough situations.

 

The WHIP shows he hasn't been as accurate as last year, it doesn't show that he hasn't been more effective.

 

 

 

All mystikol said was that he has regressed.

A career .99 WHIP to a 1.22 = regression.

 

1.22 = not dominating, anymore.

The fact he only has 3 BS, is on pace for just as many saves as last year, and the fact that he is on pace for as many K's as last year begs to differ. Walks don't mean a damn thing if you give up less runs. Hell it means he's gotten better in tough situations.

 

The WHIP shows he hasn't been as accurate as last year, it doesn't show that he hasn't been more effective.

 

 

 

All mystikol said was that he has regressed.

A career .99 WHIP to a 1.22 = regression.

 

1.22 = not dominating, anymore.

 

Well what mystikol said was very general, which I took as regressing as a pitcher. Yes his control has regressed, but Papelbon as a pitcher hasn't regressed, evident by his ability to close out games regardless of the moderately high walk total (basically what we wish Pinto could be in middle relief).

The fact he only has 3 BS, is on pace for just as many saves as last year, and the fact that he is on pace for as many K's as last year begs to differ. Walks don't mean a damn thing if you give up less runs. Hell it means he's gotten better in tough situations.

 

The WHIP shows he hasn't been as accurate as last year, it doesn't show that he hasn't been more effective.

 

 

 

All mystikol said was that he has regressed.

A career .99 WHIP to a 1.22 = regression.

 

1.22 = not dominating, anymore.

 

Well what mystikol said was very general, which I took as regressing as a pitcher. Yes his control has regressed, but Papelbon as a pitcher hasn't regressed, evident by his ability to close out games regardless of the moderately high walk total (basically what we wish Pinto could be in middle relief).

 

 

That made little sense. Control is part of being a pitcher. You can bet that over the long-term if he continues his 1.2 WHIPish ways, his ERA will be a little higher than it currently is.

 

Also, what does the comment on Pinto mean? Pinto's been the same type of pitcher, only to a greater extent. Up until a week or two ago, Pinto's WHIP was in the 1.5's with an ERA under 3. That's "bend, but don't break," which it seems like Papelbon is doing more of, this year.

oh Erick, you see exactly what you want to see. No need to further explain myself./

2004: 2.63, 1.05 WHIP, 25 saves

That's a bad year? (talking about Hawkins)

You're counting 9 blown saves...how many of those came as the closer? He probably blew a couple as a middle reliever/setup guy (like Nunez this year), which is unfair to count, considering:

A. It has nothing to do with the closer's role.

B. If we're going to count his 7th/8th inning blown leads, we should count his holds, too.

 

And my point was that MOST good setup men can close. Also, overall, Latroy Hawkins has had an average, at best, career, anyway you spin it.

 

As for the blown save statistic...it's already been explained. Whether they have the "mentality" or not...FACT is, that despite mediocre statistics, Marlins closers (Lindstrom/Nunez) have converted 32 of their 37 save chances this year, when given a chance in the 9th. No one was even talking about this till Nunez' putrid performance today.

 

 

You're looking at blown saves alone and I just don't think that provides an accurate gauge of how bad both of our closers have been. Yes, their badness hasn't resulted in as many actual blown saves as it should have, but that has a lot to do with the fact that they haven't been asked to get a lot of one run saves. In absolutely countless outings this year, either Nunez or Lindstrom allowed a run or two before finally shutting the door. The fact of the matter is that their ERA as closers is almost twice as much as a good closer should have, and while they bent but didn't break on some occasions, they get to the point where they start playing to their components.

 

And I thought this conversation started with me mentioning that I had brought up Nunez before now?

oh Erick, you see exactly what you want to see. No need to further explain myself./

 

 

 

If you have nothing else to say, you might as well...say nothing.

2004: 2.63, 1.05 WHIP, 25 saves

That's a bad year? (talking about Hawkins)

You're counting 9 blown saves...how many of those came as the closer? He probably blew a couple as a middle reliever/setup guy (like Nunez this year), which is unfair to count, considering:

A. It has nothing to do with the closer's role.

B. If we're going to count his 7th/8th inning blown leads, we should count his holds, too.

 

And my point was that MOST good setup men can close. Also, overall, Latroy Hawkins has had an average, at best, career, anyway you spin it.

 

As for the blown save statistic...it's already been explained. Whether they have the "mentality" or not...FACT is, that despite mediocre statistics, Marlins closers (Lindstrom/Nunez) have converted 32 of their 37 save chances this year, when given a chance in the 9th. No one was even talking about this till Nunez' putrid performance today.

 

 

You're looking at blown saves alone and I just don't think that provides an accurate gauge of how bad both of our closers have been. Yes, their badness hasn't resulted in as many actual blown saves as it should have, but that has a lot to do with the fact that they haven't been asked to get a lot of one run saves. In absolutely countless outings this year, either Nunez or Lindstrom allowed a run or two before finally shutting the door. The fact of the matter is that their ERA as closers is almost twice as much as a good closer should have, and while they bent but didn't break on some occasions, they get to the point where they start playing to their components.

 

And I thought this conversation started with me mentioning that I had brought up Nunez before now?

 

 

And that's exactly the reason why the closer's role is overrated. You can come in 40 times in one year with a 3 run lead...allow 2 runs in each outing (ERA of 18), and go 40/40. That is, exactly, my point.

 

That's why it's dumb to overpay for closers. That's why I don't get the whole "mentality" thing. Seriously...how hard is it for a big league reliever to close the game with a 2, 3 run lead? If it's any other inning, it's not even noticed.

 

I don't buy the whole "he doesn't have the mentality to get it done" thing. Fact is, he's "gotten it done" 18 times in 21 tries...despite being mediocre. That, in itself, shows how overrated the role is. It's 1 inning, where a pitcher is forced to get 3 of 27 outs (or more, if it's extra innings), in order to get the W.

 

Like honestly...you never answered my question. Who faced more "pressure" today? Leo or Kiko?

There are only a handful of real, shut-down, lights-out closers in MLB at any given time who are consistent and can be expected to sustain that. At the moment, Mariano and Joe Nathan come to mind. Maybe they have a special mentality or mental edge, or maybe they are especially physically gifted - probably some combination thereof. However, nearly all teams do not have one of those guys.

The Mets paid a ton of $$$ for K-Rod, and despite an ERA right around 3, he has a WHIP of 1.26 (not impressive), 4.9 BB/9, and a 1.91 K/BB (again, not that impressive). Also, his K/BB has gone down every year since his sick 2006, and by chunks at a time.

 

So, if you don't have one of the select few, then the dropoff seems to be pretty significant. And I think this is where you can plus in a guy who is a pretty good reliever and expect to end up with similar results to the rest of the league, Yankees + Twins + whoever else I forgot notwithstanding.

 

As an aside, I don't think most of the posters above disagree as much as they think they do. I think we all realize that there aren't too many GREAT closers. For whatever reason (this is where there seems to be disagreement), many players in that role will be roughly average. The reality is that most teams end up closer to average than elite. Look at Papelbon's regression this year. Or look at the league leaders in saves. Fuentes has an ERA near 4. Ryan Franklin is a million years old and came out of nowhere - I have no earthly idea if he'll sustain this. Mo and Nathan are awesome IMO. You can do your own analysis if you like, and I think the results will support my conclusions above.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure what that was for. He has regressed.

 

 

No, he hasn't.

 

 

Papelbon has walked over three times as many people as he did last year, his K/BB has gone from 9.63 to 2.83, he's allowed more home runs in ten less innings, his FIP has increased from 2.01 to 3.25, and he's transformed from a groundball pitcher into a flyball pitcher. His stuff has also taken a hit, with all three of his pitches decreasing in velocity.

 

Yes, he's regressed.

2004: 2.63, 1.05 WHIP, 25 saves

That's a bad year? (talking about Hawkins)

You're counting 9 blown saves...how many of those came as the closer? He probably blew a couple as a middle reliever/setup guy (like Nunez this year), which is unfair to count, considering:

A. It has nothing to do with the closer's role.

B. If we're going to count his 7th/8th inning blown leads, we should count his holds, too.

 

And my point was that MOST good setup men can close. Also, overall, Latroy Hawkins has had an average, at best, career, anyway you spin it.

 

As for the blown save statistic...it's already been explained. Whether they have the "mentality" or not...FACT is, that despite mediocre statistics, Marlins closers (Lindstrom/Nunez) have converted 32 of their 37 save chances this year, when given a chance in the 9th. No one was even talking about this till Nunez' putrid performance today.

 

 

You're looking at blown saves alone and I just don't think that provides an accurate gauge of how bad both of our closers have been. Yes, their badness hasn't resulted in as many actual blown saves as it should have, but that has a lot to do with the fact that they haven't been asked to get a lot of one run saves. In absolutely countless outings this year, either Nunez or Lindstrom allowed a run or two before finally shutting the door. The fact of the matter is that their ERA as closers is almost twice as much as a good closer should have, and while they bent but didn't break on some occasions, they get to the point where they start playing to their components.

 

And I thought this conversation started with me mentioning that I had brought up Nunez before now?

 

 

And that's exactly the reason why the closer's role is overrated. You can come in 40 times in one year with a 3 run lead...allow 2 runs in each outing (ERA of 18), and go 40/40. That is, exactly, my point.

 

That's why it's dumb to overpay for closers. That's why I don't get the whole "mentality" thing. Seriously...how hard is it for a big league reliever to close the game with a 2, 3 run lead? If it's any other inning, it's not even noticed.

 

I don't buy the whole "he doesn't have the mentality to get it done" thing. Fact is, he's "gotten it done" 18 times in 21 tries...despite being mediocre. That, in itself, shows how overrated the role is. It's 1 inning, where a pitcher is forced to get 3 of 27 outs (or more, if it's extra innings), in order to get the W.

 

Like honestly...you never answered my question. Who faced more "pressure" today? Leo or Kiko?

 

I cant tell you who felt more pressure as that depends on each of the players personality's but I can tell that ive heard many times relievers and managers say the ninth is different than any other inning. It probably isn't hard for a ML pitcher to get 3 outs for a 2 or 3 run lead but for some reason guys have made the ninth a big deal when maybe it really isn't. I don't know as Ive never pitched in a ML game. I remember hearing something about how Rivera is so good because he just goes out there any treats the ninth like any other inning.

2004: 2.63, 1.05 WHIP, 25 saves

That's a bad year? (talking about Hawkins)

You're counting 9 blown saves...how many of those came as the closer? He probably blew a couple as a middle reliever/setup guy (like Nunez this year), which is unfair to count, considering:

A. It has nothing to do with the closer's role.

B. If we're going to count his 7th/8th inning blown leads, we should count his holds, too.

 

And my point was that MOST good setup men can close. Also, overall, Latroy Hawkins has had an average, at best, career, anyway you spin it.

 

As for the blown save statistic...it's already been explained. Whether they have the "mentality" or not...FACT is, that despite mediocre statistics, Marlins closers (Lindstrom/Nunez) have converted 32 of their 37 save chances this year, when given a chance in the 9th. No one was even talking about this till Nunez' putrid performance today.

 

 

You're looking at blown saves alone and I just don't think that provides an accurate gauge of how bad both of our closers have been. Yes, their badness hasn't resulted in as many actual blown saves as it should have, but that has a lot to do with the fact that they haven't been asked to get a lot of one run saves. In absolutely countless outings this year, either Nunez or Lindstrom allowed a run or two before finally shutting the door. The fact of the matter is that their ERA as closers is almost twice as much as a good closer should have, and while they bent but didn't break on some occasions, they get to the point where they start playing to their components.

 

And I thought this conversation started with me mentioning that I had brought up Nunez before now?

 

 

And that's exactly the reason why the closer's role is overrated. You can come in 40 times in one year with a 3 run lead...allow 2 runs in each outing (ERA of 18), and go 40/40. That is, exactly, my point.

 

That's why it's dumb to overpay for closers. That's why I don't get the whole "mentality" thing. Seriously...how hard is it for a big league reliever to close the game with a 2, 3 run lead? If it's any other inning, it's not even noticed.

 

I don't buy the whole "he doesn't have the mentality to get it done" thing. Fact is, he's "gotten it done" 18 times in 21 tries...despite being mediocre. That, in itself, shows how overrated the role is. It's 1 inning, where a pitcher is forced to get 3 of 27 outs (or more, if it's extra innings), in order to get the W.

 

Like honestly...you never answered my question. Who faced more "pressure" today? Leo or Kiko?

 

I cant tell you who felt more pressure as that depends on each of the players personality's but I can tell that ive heard many times relievers and managers say the ninth is different than any other inning. It probably isn't hard for a ML pitcher to get 3 outs for a 2 or 3 run lead but for some reason guys have made the ninth a big deal when maybe it really isn't. I don't know as Ive never pitched in a ML game. I remember hearing something about how Rivera is so good because he just goes out there any treats the ninth like any other inning.

 

Easier said than done, he may go out there like it's any other inning, but he still knows it's the 9th and he's got pressure. Rivera is near perfect because of his skills, not his mentality going out there (although I will say that can factor).

There are only a handful of real, shut-down, lights-out closers in MLB at any given time who are consistent and can be expected to sustain that. At the moment, Mariano and Joe Nathan come to mind. Maybe they have a special mentality or mental edge, or maybe they are especially physically gifted - probably some combination thereof. However, nearly all teams do not have one of those guys.

The Mets paid a ton of $$ for K-Rod, and despite an ERA right around 3, he has a WHIP of 1.26 (not impressive), 4.9 BB/9, and a 1.91 K/BB (again, not that impressive). Also, his K/BB has gone down every year since his sick 2006, and by chunks at a time.

 

So, if you don't have one of the select few, then the dropoff seems to be pretty significant. And I think this is where you can plus in a guy who is a pretty good reliever and expect to end up with similar results to the rest of the league, Yankees + Twins + whoever else I forgot notwithstanding.

 

As an aside, I don't think most of the posters above disagree as much as they think they do. I think we all realize that there aren't too many GREAT closers. For whatever reason (this is where there seems to be disagreement), many players in that role will be roughly average. The reality is that most teams end up closer to average than elite. Look at Papelbon's regression this year. Or look at the league leaders in saves. Fuentes has an ERA near 4. Ryan Franklin is a million years old and came out of nowhere - I have no earthly idea if he'll sustain this. Mo and Nathan are awesome IMO. You can do your own analysis if you like, and I think the results will support my conclusions above.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure what that was for. He has regressed.

 

 

No, he hasn't.

 

 

Papelbon has walked over three times as many people as he did last year, his K/BB has gone from 9.63 to 2.83, he's allowed more home runs in ten less innings, his FIP has increased from 2.01 to 3.25, and he's transformed from a groundball pitcher into a flyball pitcher. His stuff has also taken a hit, with all three of his pitches decreasing in velocity.

 

Yes, he's regressed.

 

Yeah, this. Well said. I'm not saying he's bad, just that even he's not "lights out" year after year, or at least we shouldn't expect him to be if he keeps showing those peripherals.

Good news, Phillies got swept. We are 6 games back with 6 games left vs the Phillies. Technically, we are once again in control of our own playoff chances.

Good news, Phillies got swept. We are 6 games back with 6 games left vs the Phillies. Technically, we are once again in control of our own playoff chances.

 

We're not quite in control of our fate yet....while the Phillies are 6 games in front of us...they've played 2 fewer games and have 7 fewer losses....

Phillies 77-58

Marlins 72-65

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/

So if we would win out, and Philly wins out(except for the 6 losses to the Marlins), we would end up 1 game back when the dust settles....

Our "magic number" is currently 21 in the NL East race....20 in the Wild Card race....