OT- Baseball Closers

Widely held view.  It's sabermetrics -- read "Moneyball".

I'm a huge baseball guy but admittedly haven't read Moneyball and only vaguely know sabermetrics.

I would assume a major part of what they both don't consider much is the mental aspect of it.

Jose Valverde knows he's going to pitch the ninth, maybe the tenth.  He mentally and physically prepares for that.  He knows it every night.  Just like the other guys know that they have their roles to play.  So players are mentally prepared for certain situations and may not be as effective if they have to mentally and physically prepare for all possible situations.

Just imagine in Valverde is getting up 2-3 times a game and warming up instead of once.  Those are untotaled pitch counts that people don't think of that often.

Plus, you mentioned another reason - if I burn Valverde in the 7th in a big situation, then what do I do?  The tigers go to Benoit for an inning, maybe two, but at some point you're relying on situational guys to get through entire innings.  Instead, trust your situational guys to get your big situational outs. 

I feel like baseball has become so inundated with statistics that people forget to consider the things that can't be measured - the mental aspect, the roster make-up, etc.  One thing I will say is that the save stat itself is dumb.  If I'm closing out a 4 run game, my closer is coming in, without a doubt.

Closers are the most overpaid players in baseball. Saves are the most overrated stat in baseball. I don't necessarily agree with the premise that the closer is the best reliever on the team. They may have the best stuff, but they're prima donnas that are in most cases psychologically dependent on coming into a clean game, ie no one on, no one out in ninth. If you can't tell, I'm not a big fan of closers.

Interesting stuff, and I agree...but more factors would come into play for me, as you allude to above.  Batting order, the list of my available pitchers and how effective they are against the folks at bat, on deck, etc.  Is the pitcher known to be a groundball pitcher, flyball pitcher?  What baseball park are we in?

The theory of the closer is that if you give up the lead in the seventh you still have time to make up the needed runs.  Closers have more to do with a lack of outs left.  If you lose the lead in the bottom of the ninth, you lose.  If you give up the lead in the eighth, you still have trips to the plate left.

Honestly, I think it can be done either way.  If I have a lineup of absolute thumpers, I'll save him for the ninth.  If it isn't exactly murderers row trying to recapture the lead, use him to preserve any lead.

As others have said, check out Moneyball. It gives a good explanation about why teams don't do things like this. It's mostly an issue of the old guard in baseball doing things a certain way for so long that they don't want to change. Throw on top of that how over valued saves are and you end up risking having a disgruntled "closer" because he's not getting true saves in the normal sense.

I saw an article suggesting that the Mets, who are having money problems, should use K-Rod in the situations you suggested because it makes more sense from a Sabermetrics standpoint and would result in fewer traditional saves, in turn preventing some bonuses from activating. The only problem with that is the union would file a grievance. However the decision can be backed up b Sabermetrics and the team might be able to win that dispute.

A majority of teams have specialty guys that fill certain roles, leading to the closer pitching the 9th and getting the "toughest 3 outs."  Its a pressure situation thing...besides, you cant just say, "Hey, Giant Potato, we're in a pinch in the 7th right now, come in and save our asses." It takes time to warm up and you can't assume tight situations...if its a tight game in the 7th then its probably still close in the 9th. Most teams have a 7th inning guy (Ryan Perry), an 8th inning guy (Benoit), and a fairly reliable (and pleasantly theatrical) closer (Valverde), along with specialty pitchers like the long-relief guy, the go-to lefty, etc. In this situation, Jose isn't necessarily the best of the bunch, but has the experience. They all are very good pitchers and have very specific roles. Starters are asked to go at least 6 strong (rule doesnt apply to JV) so the pieces are in place to essentially close the door from the 7th on.

Also, another thing to consider: A closer is a game shortener.  When you go up against the Tigers, the Yankees, the Giants - anyone with an ace closer - you are playing an eight inning game.  This has huge implications.  Opponents of the Tigers have a strategic disadvantage when they know if they are down that they have one less inning to get things done. 

This may force early pinch hitters, overly aggressive play early on (PERFECT EXAMPLE: yesterday Ozzie Guillen playing the infield in in a 1-run game).  If I'm an opposing manager and in the 7th inning I have the heart of the order coming up, I'm going to play a bit more aggressive because I know they aren't coming up again, unless it's against a closer who will likely shut them down.  I may try to steal a base with a low success rate knowing I may not get another runner in scoring position. 

If Valverde comes in, my hand is forced in a good way - I play conservative, hope my big hitters can come through.  If they can't, I have two more innings against pitchers they have a much better chance against.

Teams usually have one lights out pitcher in the pen.  The goal of many games is to get to a starter early so that you can get to those less than average relievers in non-situational places. 

Yeah, I don't accept the premise of the "some scrub" idea.

You have to see the concept of Holds. A hold, for those who don't keep track of this statistic, is when a pitcher comes in and pitches in a 3-run or fewer game - but does not record the last out of the game and does not give up the tying run.

Looking only at ERA, of the top 50 holds-getters in 2010, only 7 had an ERA of 4.00 or higher. 10 of the top-50 saves-getters fall into that category. While this is an extremely rudimentary way of looking at it, in the end, the goal of a pitcher is to not give up runs.

Set-up guys are starting to get bigger contracts, and becoming more specialized and more talented. Teams don't just want one reliever who can blow people away anymore. They want at least 3.

Reminds me of what Bill James has said

Sabermetrics is an interesting discipline

Manny Acta did something similar against the Red Sox earlier this year. He didn't bring in his closer, but he also didn't use the "I only use this guy in the seventh inning or later" formula when he brought in Raphael Perez in the fifth inning. He said that getting the out (I think it was Ortiz) was the crux of the game.

No the closer Chris Perez, of course, but still goes with the OP's theory...

And didn't James advocate a committee of closers? That was tried by at least one team, but as soon as it failed once (as any closer fails over the course of a season once in a while) the team got set upon by the old school wolves and they stopped doing it.

There are several problems with your logic...

First off you don't just put in your best pitcher or "closer" at any point in a tight situation...

Lets start off by first saying if your closer is a right hander like rivera on the yankees..

Ok... now you say lets bring him in during a close game in the 6th or 7th inning to face the best hitters on another team..  That's fine and all, except you aren't thinking very clearly..

Every decision in baseball is based of situations,  they aren't going to bring in their closer in the 6th inning just because he is the best pitcher..?   He is a closer for a reason, most Closers are not use to coming into mid, or early game situations..  They are also going with scouting reports..  When a relief pitcher comes into a game it is for a reason, not because the starting pitcher is tired and they are just replacing him.  Maybe there are 2 men on with 1 or 2 outs and Pujols is up.  They take out the starting pitcher who is a righty, and bring in a lefty who pujols has struggled against in the past with runners in scoring position.

This is the reason why some pitchers come in and pitch to 1 guy then they are taken out and say another righty comes in to face the next batter because of what they have done in the past against them.  

So to end this, they aren't going to waste their closer..  All closers are so use to coming into games in the 9th inning that a lot can struggle early in games.  Reason why a lot of starters in the Majors get moved to be a closer and just throw for one inning because they couldn't handle starting or relief roles and are better off being able to come into 1 inning to close it down.

As a Yankees fan it always seems to me that Rivera pitches better when the game is on the line.  I don't follow the team much anymore, now that I have Michigan football, so I haven't watched that many games in the past 4-5 years, but in 1or 2 run games I feel Rivera actually pitches better than when he is brought in in tie games or before the ninth.  I'm sure there is some place that can be looked up and it may prove me wrong.  Rivera may also be a unique case because he is so different from every other closer in the league.  How many closers were going to be the next Rivera and are no longer any good?

"I don't buy into the 9th inning is a differnt pressure theory"

I was a closer, and trust me there is definitely more pressure pitching in the last inning than earlier in the game. Some pitchers just cant handle the role.

I must point out a few errors with your Cardinal's scenario.

1) Pujols bats before Holliday. Pujols third, Holliday fourth, Berkman fifth.

2) If I was the other team, I'd really love for St. Louis to take the lead right there. Because then when we stupidly send out Ryan Franklin for a save chance, he can blow it again. It's a guaranteed win for you if we're leading in the eighth or ninth and Franklin pitches.

It's not about the mental side of the pitcher or conventional wisdom or any of that. It's manager's wanting to save their ass. Managers and coaches in all sports will routinely use sub-optimal strategies because they're the safe route. If a manager uses their ace reliever in the 7th inning to get out of a bases loaded jam, but then they lose it in the 9th, he'll get cruicified by the fans and media. Nevermind that it was most likely the correct strategy. If he uses his 2nd or 3rd best reliever in the 7th, and they give up a grand slam, no one is going to question the manager. He did the "right" thing in the eyes of idiots so people will just be upset they lost.

You see the same thing in Football. Coaches will punt when it's incredibly stupid to do so just because they are "supposed" to do it. Perfect example from a couple years ago: Patriots go for it on 4th and 2 against the Colts. They don't make it, Colts score and win the game. Fans and media go apeshit for 2 weeks about how awful the decision was to them. The reality is, the Pats made the right choice based on game situation, it just didn't work out that time. Pretty much only Bill Belichick has the guts to actually do that, and the history/support with his team to do it, have it not work, and not have to worry about job security.

As for the conversation above about books, Moneyball is a nice read for a story, but pretty much the only lesson to take from it is that if you are a team with a limited budget, you should figure out what the market is undervaluing and stock up on that. At the time, it was high OBP hitters. That's quickly evolved to defensive players as the league as a whole has become more intelligent and those high OBP guys aren't as cheap.

If you want a really good read on stats and their application to baseball, go buy this book:

http://www.insidethebook.com/

It's a hundred times better than Moneyball.

Closer in non 9th inn save opps was probably sparky anderson. He was definately a believer in bringing out your closer in the 7th or 8th if u needed a big out. Used hernadez and henneman that way. Problem sometimes was willie would throw a great 7TH and maybe 8th ad would gassed into throwing screwballs the whole 9th. For the most part sparky got away with thay, but see 85 and I think 91 when that strategy backfired costing tigers pennant runs.

Against the tigers earlier this year, Feliz was on the bench in critical situations in the bottom of the 9th, and each time the tigers got a walk off win. I understand not wanting to bring in a closer too early, but in the 9th, with a tie game, you've gotta make sure you get another inning at the plate.

I don't think it's a bad theory. Sometimes I feel the same way. However, there really aren't more than maybe a dozen truly dominant closers. Actually, a lot of teams have a set-up man or two that are just as good as--or better than--their closer, so they end up doing this without really "trying;" if that makes sense.

Take the team I follow (Atlanta) as an example.  Craig Kimbrel seems to be a lights out closer. Probably one of the 5 or 10 nastiest  relievers in the game since he came up last season (54Ks in 30 1/3 IP for his career). Even so, our top set-up guy Jonny Venters is on basically the same level (double digit k/9 and a ridiculously high ground ball %). Venters throws a sinker that's so heavy that batters almost never get the ball in the air. In the situation you described, Venters would go in and have a great chance of getting out of it with a double play ball, coming back to pitch the 8th, and then Kimbrel is still there in the ninth.

Obviously it depends on the team, but I don't think this costs teams nearly as many runs as some think because the difference between a closer and his team's top set-up men is usually negligible.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_James



All the math has been done (by bill James) on this one but few teams ever follow the advice of what the stats say...I guess managers want to feel as if they matter...which they don't.

you bring in your closer for the 9th for the simple reason that his facial hair is more intimidating than your other relievers, see:

and I remind you Wilson led the NL in saves and closed out the WS, before you mock him I will also remind you: CHAMPS! Fear the Beard,  Go Giants