2013 Closers (1 Viewer)

[Mr. Pickles]

real-time changes are a lot more viable than they used to be back in the days of the telegraph.

I'll take your word for it.

 

[the moops]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

Platoon splits are real and there's an trend toward using relief pitchers to maximize that advantage--except in the 9th inning. Jim Leyland has used a committee approach before in Pittsburgh with some success. Stan Belinda was tough on RHB but was hittable against LHB. Leyland used Bob Patterson and even Bob Kipper when the situation called for it. RHP Bill Landrum was in the mix as well. I know the line that players like defined roles but I think most big league pitchers would like the opportunity to be on the mound for out #27.

When Theo Epstien tried this with the Red Sox, it was a huge failure.

This never happened. In the four pre-Papelbon years that Epstein ran the Red Sox, there was a total of two SV recorded by LHP (both by Alan Embree).

I think his comment was just the about the fact that the Sox did try the bullpen by committee thing in 2003. It didn't work because their bullpen sucked, not because of any philosophy though.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

Bad outing in a non-save situation for John Axford

Somewhere Derrick Turnbow is laughing.

 

[Eephus]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

Platoon splits are real and there's an trend toward using relief pitchers to maximize that advantage--except in the 9th inning. Jim Leyland has used a committee approach before in Pittsburgh with some success. Stan Belinda was tough on RHB but was hittable against LHB. Leyland used Bob Patterson and even Bob Kipper when the situation called for it. RHP Bill Landrum was in the mix as well. I know the line that players like defined roles but I think most big league pitchers would like the opportunity to be on the mound for out #27.

When Theo Epstien tried this with the Red Sox, it was a huge failure.

This never happened. In the four pre-Papelbon years that Epstein ran the Red Sox, there was a total of two SV recorded by LHP (both by Alan Embree).

I think his comment was just the about the fact that the Sox did try the bullpen by committee thing in 2003. It didn't work because their bullpen sucked, not because of any philosophy though.

A true committee approach is to use multiple relievers in flexible roles to maximize situational advantages. The Sox just ran a bunch of different pitchers through the closer role because Byung Hyun Kim was ineffective.

 

[Good Posting Judge]

Sorry if this is too team-specific, but it's about relative value of closers so I thought it was fine for this thread:

In a 10-team NL-only keeper, I have League and Grilli while another owner has both backups, Jensen and Melancon. That owner offered me Jensen for Grilli straight up.

I would be hedging away risk at the cost of saves (assuming Grilli performs well). Maybe Jensen also nets me 30 extra Ks and a slightly better ERA/WHIP, and he was $13 at auction so I don't know if I'll keep him at $18 next season. On the whole, Jensen is clearly the better player, but saves are so scarce in an NL-only that I'm not sure if it's worthwhile to hedge rather than bear the risk and ride out Grilli. I could try to trade for Melancon instead, but I'd have to overpay. Should I accept this? Leaning towards yes.

Send him an email, and tell him that you will send him another email in five minutes with your offer for Jensen.

Five minutes later, send him a blank e-mail.

 

[shadyridr]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

Platoon splits are real and there's an trend toward using relief pitchers to maximize that advantage--except in the 9th inning. Jim Leyland has used a committee approach before in Pittsburgh with some success. Stan Belinda was tough on RHB but was hittable against LHB. Leyland used Bob Patterson and even Bob Kipper when the situation called for it. RHP Bill Landrum was in the mix as well. I know the line that players like defined roles but I think most big league pitchers would like the opportunity to be on the mound for out #27.

When Theo Epstien tried this with the Red Sox, it was a huge failure.

This never happened. In the four pre-Papelbon years that Epstein ran the Red Sox, there was a total of two SV recorded by LHP (both by Alan Embree).

It did happen one year. It was such a failure the expirement lasted only about a month

 

[MAC_32]

Bad outing in a non-save situation for John Axford

Read velocity problems.

Uh oh.

Plan to add Henderson tomorrow after I get Straily's start vs. Hosuton.

 

[guru_007]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

There are a number of reasons that come to mind, but first and foremost, I believe that many managers try to emulate past successes of bullpens, with relievers who have defined roles.

Just off the top of my head, the Rivera bridge to Wetteland many years ago was about as shut down as there was. If you were behind the Yankees after 7, you were toast.

The Astros had perhaps the greatest trio when they had Dotel, Lidge and Wagner.

Managers just want everyone on their club to know their role, as that's where they should be most effective.

There is also a different mindset for different relief roles, and some pitchers don't have the mental capacity to pitch every day in highly leveraged situations. It's easier to pitch the 7th or 8th than it is to get the last out. Dotel has carved out a fantastic career as a setup man, but never was all that great as a closer.

Of course the 800lb gorilla in the room is money. Shut down closers make way more money than setup men - and every bullpen pitcher has an ego (and an agent). They are going to fight tooth and nail to stay in the game to get the save, even if a lefty may be a better matchup in certain situations.

When you're carrying a 11-12 man staff, you need to manage your pitchers effectively. I don't really think there is anyway to roll with a closer by committee approach - maybe when rosters expand at the end of the year you could, but at that point, don't you really want your best guy out there to get the last out if playoff's (or your job) are on the line?

 

[Eephus]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

There are a number of reasons that come to mind, but first and foremost, I believe that many managers try to emulate past successes of bullpens, with relievers who have defined roles.

Just off the top of my head, the Rivera bridge to Wetteland many years ago was about as shut down as there was. If you were behind the Yankees after 7, you were toast.

The Astros had perhaps the greatest trio when they had Dotel, Lidge and Wagner.

Managers just want everyone on their club to know their role, as that's where they should be most effective.

There is also a different mindset for different relief roles, and some pitchers don't have the mental capacity to pitch every day in highly leveraged situations. It's easier to pitch the 7th or 8th than it is to get the last out. Dotel has carved out a fantastic career as a setup man, but never was all that great as a closer.

Of course the 800lb gorilla in the room is money. Shut down closers make way more money than setup men - and every bullpen pitcher has an ego (and an agent). They are going to fight tooth and nail to stay in the game to get the save, even if a lefty may be a better matchup in certain situations.

When you're carrying a 11-12 man staff, you need to manage your pitchers effectively. I don't really think there is anyway to roll with a closer by committee approach - maybe when rosters expand at the end of the year you could, but at that point, don't you really want your best guy out there to get the last out if playoff's (or your job) are on the line?

If a team has a great reliever or multiple great ones, there's nothing wrong with the now standard system of a defined closer and 8th inning guy. But that's not usually the case.

I was talking about using a committee for a bullpen where there's no standout guy. Managers insist on elevating one guy to be the closer even when he's not any better than the other option. I think they'd be better off playing the splits and using relievers more situationally.

The argument about overuse is probably valid but I don't think it's a showstopper. Throwing 15 pitches in the 7th causes the same fatigue as in the ninth. A manager and pitching coach would have to monitor usage and think a couple of innings ahead; they're doing this today but slightly differently.

The salary argument could apply although a lot of relievers are pre-arb guys and player on short term deals. Some of the top setup pitchers are getting paid as much as relievers now but again I'm focusing on shaky bullpens without elite closer options.

 

[ceo3west]

Valverde resigned by Tigers

 

[shadyridr]

Just searched twitter for Rondon and he's getting blasted after today's outing. Many including sports writers calling for his demotion to AAA, sounds like it may happen. Either way, almost no chance he'll be closing for the Tigers next week.

Anybody buying Big AL?

From what I've read today it sounds as if he's a candidate to be sent down as well. This situation is a mess, why they don't resign Valverde is mind-blowing.

No it isn't. Don't you think Valverde would have been signed by someone, anyone, if he was even reasonably able to fill a bullpen role?

Gonna have to start thinking about changing your name to Nostradumbass

-Vinny

 

[Eephus]

Who's the better closer option for Toledo? Rondon or Valverde?

 

[Limp Ditka]

Who's the better closer option for Toledo? Rondon or Valverde?

:deepaaaleague:

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Are the Tigers really that desperate? I guess so.

 

[whoknew]

Are the Tigers really that desperate? I guess so.

The reality is there's no downside. Its a minor league contract.

 

[Eephus]

Are the Tigers really that desperate? I guess so.

The reality is there's no downside. Its a minor league contract.

Valverde can opt out if he's not promoted by May 5th

 

[MAC_32]

An extra two run cushion for Marmol to f up, this should be fun...

 

[Wrigley]

An extra two run cushion for Marmol to f up, this should be fun...

I just don't understand Marmol.....he throws gas, but seems to fall in love with his slider.

Just throw strikes first.

 

[the moops]

An extra two run cushion for Marmol to f up, this should be fun...

2 batters, 2 baserunners

 

[the moops]

jesus

 

[Wrigley]

An extra two run cushion for Marmol to f up, this should be fun...

3 batters,3 baserunners

 

[MAC_32]

An extra two run cushion for Marmol to f up, this should be fun...

2 batters, 2 baserunners

3 batters, 12 pitches, 7 balls, 3 baserunners, 1 run. Hilarity.

 

[the moops]

Rizzo has got to stop that ball there

 

[MAC_32]

Another routine save for Carlos. Boy, do I not miss you.

 

[pollardsvision]

Marmol slams the door. Clutch.

 

[rascal]

Axford was just dropped in my league. I checked his stats and he is AWFUL in the spring so I'll pick up him and see what he can do (this is why I don't draft closers). He might be a good buy-low if the owner is antsy, or stupid in my leagues case.

 

[Annyong]

Axford was just dropped in my league. I checked his stats and he is AWFUL in the spring so I'll pick up him and see what he can do (this is why I don't draft closers). He might be a good buy-low if the owner is antsy, or stupid in my leagues case.

He almost as bad as Marmol

 

[cheese]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

Platoon splits are real and there's an trend toward using relief pitchers to maximize that advantage--except in the 9th inning. Jim Leyland has used a committee approach before in Pittsburgh with some success. Stan Belinda was tough on RHB but was hittable against LHB. Leyland used Bob Patterson and even Bob Kipper when the situation called for it. RHP Bill Landrum was in the mix as well. I know the line that players like defined roles but I think most big league pitchers would like the opportunity to be on the mound for out #27.

One of the concerns I have with this idea is the nature of playing series' in a baseball season. I think the natural result of what you are suggesting is that relievers would face the same hitters 2 or 3 days in a row. Your best right reliever needs to pitch through the heart of the lineup, your LOOGY faces this particular lefty, etc. While I like the idea in general, I suspect that a negative consequence of taking situational relievers to that extreme is that they would do worse once the exact same hitters just saw them yesterday and/or the day before. I have absolutely no data to back up that claim though.

 

[Statorama]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

Platoon splits are real and there's an trend toward using relief pitchers to maximize that advantage--except in the 9th inning. Jim Leyland has used a committee approach before in Pittsburgh with some success. Stan Belinda was tough on RHB but was hittable against LHB. Leyland used Bob Patterson and even Bob Kipper when the situation called for it. RHP Bill Landrum was in the mix as well. I know the line that players like defined roles but I think most big league pitchers would like the opportunity to be on the mound for out #27.

When Theo Epstien tried this with the Red Sox, it was a huge failure.

This never happened. In the four pre-Papelbon years that Epstein ran the Red Sox, there was a total of two SV recorded by LHP (both by Alan Embree).

Sorry, but it did. There are a lot of articles out there about the Red Sox closer by committee gamble in 2003 (at the urging of Bill James no less).

Here's a link to an article where it mentions the closer by committee, when it failed it's first test: http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=230331130

 

[Eephus]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

Platoon splits are real and there's an trend toward using relief pitchers to maximize that advantage--except in the 9th inning. Jim Leyland has used a committee approach before in Pittsburgh with some success. Stan Belinda was tough on RHB but was hittable against LHB. Leyland used Bob Patterson and even Bob Kipper when the situation called for it. RHP Bill Landrum was in the mix as well. I know the line that players like defined roles but I think most big league pitchers would like the opportunity to be on the mound for out #27.

When Theo Epstien tried this with the Red Sox, it was a huge failure.

This never happened. In the four pre-Papelbon years that Epstein ran the Red Sox, there was a total of two SV recorded by LHP (both by Alan Embree).

Sorry, but it did. There are a lot of articles out there about the Red Sox closer by committee gamble in 2003 (at the urging of Bill James no less).

Here's a link to an article where it mentions the closer by committee, when it failed it's first test: http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=230331130

Thanks for the link Stat. That narrows it down a lot. I looked at the 2003 game logs for the Sox http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/tgl.cgi?team=BOS&t=p&year=2003 It looks like they sort of used a committee for a few weeks and then started giving most of the 9th inning work to a very young Brandon Lyon. He wasn't very effective and by July, BH Kim (who they had acquired at the end of May) pretty much took over the closer's role through the end of the season.

Considering the quality of the staff, the lack of LHP (they had two lefties Alan Embree and Scott Sauerbeck who was terrible) and the fact that Grady Little was the one pulling the strings, they didn't do that badly. They won 95 games, finished around the league average in SV and had an above mean ERA+. Vintage Pedro helped that considerably but he was the only starter who was better than OK. Their early season record while experimenting with the bullpen was better than after Kim took over for good.

I'm not saying it was a successful experiment but the prospects are limited when you have Kim, Lyon, Embree, Chad Fox and an old Mike Timlin to work with.

 

[Eephus]

Bruce Rondon with a scoreless inning (1 BB allowed) in a non-SV situation for Toledo

 

[Annyong]

What kind of leash does Holland have. He jus blew an ugly one

 

[the moops]

What kind of leash does Holland have. He jus blew an ugly one

 

[Annyong]

What kind of leash does Holland have. He jus blew an ugly one

Short leash apparently

 

[RnR]

I'd consider that wide open at this point.

 

[derek245583]

What kind of leash does Holland have. He jus blew an ugly one

Short leash apparently

Which is awful because he struck Chase Utley out last night and as it turns out the blown call cost him the game

 

[pollardsvision]

So, time to grab Herrera if he's not already owned, I guess.

Time to grab Wesley Wright too? He hasn't had a save opp yet (HOU needs to score a run at some point for that), but Vera's given up runs in 2 of 3 outings.

 

[rascal]

This is why I didn't draft closers. Wow it's ugly.

 

[Tiger Fan]

So, time to grab Herrera if he's not already owned, I guess.

Time to grab Wesley Wright too? He hasn't had a save opp yet (HOU needs to score a run at some point for that), but Vera's given up runs in 2 of 3 outings.

ESPN has Crow & Collins ahead of Herrera:

http://sports.espn.go.com/fantasy/baseball/flb/story?page=REcloserorgchart

 

[the moops]

Considering Herrera got the save yesterday I think espn is full of ####

 

[pollardsvision]

Considering Herrera got the save yesterday I think espn is full of ####

Also, I think Herrera got the 8th in KC's only close win without a BS, if that means anything.

 

[Tiger Fan]

Considering Herrera got the save yesterday I think espn is full of ####

Also, I think Herrera got the 8th in KC's only close win without a BS, if that means anything.

Didn't even realize that

 

[rascal]

Considering Herrera got the save yesterday I think espn is full of ####

Also, I think Herrera got the 8th in KC's only close win without a BS, if that means anything.

Didn't even realize that

FWIW, Yost came out and said Herrera came in there solely because of his matchup with Nixs.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Because of the K's, whip and potential of saves Herrera is worth owning any way. I paid above what I should have for him in FA bidding last night but he's a guy I'd like to have in there daily regardless of saves. Him, Cook, Kenley, Storen, Clip and a few others are going to give you a good spread of numbers across 5X5 with at least an occasional save.

Doesn't seem like KC is set with anyone right now but if Herrera gets a few ops and converts, hard to imagine they'd go away from him. Holland is a lefty so using them situational could be possible for awhile. Crow also an option but it seems like he's a guy they can stretch out some so maybe that leaves it to Holland and Herrera. We'll see, chasing saves one of the most enjoyable/painful things in fantasy sports.

 

[Spartans Rule]

I don't understand the reluctance to use a real bullpen-by-committee. As a fantasy owner, I hate it but as a baseball fan, I like the idea of teams trying to solve a problem differently.

Platoon splits are real and there's an trend toward using relief pitchers to maximize that advantage--except in the 9th inning. Jim Leyland has used a committee approach before in Pittsburgh with some success. Stan Belinda was tough on RHB but was hittable against LHB. Leyland used Bob Patterson and even Bob Kipper when the situation called for it. RHP Bill Landrum was in the mix as well. I know the line that players like defined roles but I think most big league pitchers would like the opportunity to be on the mound for out #27.

When Theo Epstien tried this with the Red Sox, it was a huge failure.

This never happened. In the four pre-Papelbon years that Epstein ran the Red Sox, there was a total of two SV recorded by LHP (both by Alan Embree).

Sorry, but it did. There are a lot of articles out there about the Red Sox closer by committee gamble in 2003 (at the urging of Bill James no less).

Here's a link to an article where it mentions the closer by committee, when it failed it's first test: http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=230331130

Thanks for the link Stat. That narrows it down a lot. I looked at the 2003 game logs for the Sox http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/tgl.cgi?team=BOS&t=p&year=2003 It looks like they sort of used a committee for a few weeks and then started giving most of the 9th inning work to a very young Brandon Lyon. He wasn't very effective and by July, BH Kim (who they had acquired at the end of May) pretty much took over the closer's role through the end of the season.

Considering the quality of the staff, the lack of LHP (they had two lefties Alan Embree and Scott Sauerbeck who was terrible) and the fact that Grady Little was the one pulling the strings, they didn't do that badly. They won 95 games, finished around the league average in SV and had an above mean ERA+. Vintage Pedro helped that considerably but he was the only starter who was better than OK. Their early season record while experimenting with the bullpen was better than after Kim took over for good.

I'm not saying it was a successful experiment but the prospects are limited when you have Kim, Lyon, Embree, Chad Fox and an old Mike Timlin to work with.

There's definitely a selective perception issue with using closer by committee... any time someone blows a save, fans will blame it on the lack of a true closer. But of course every team is going to blow a few saves regardless of bullpen strategy.

I'm all for the Tigers using a committee. My concern with them isn't the lack of a closer, it's that they have a lousy bullpen in general.

 

[E-Z Glider]

While it was nice to see both Frieri and Fujikawa pay instant dividends, I'm not sure it changes that much. Sveum said Marmol is still closer and you have to imagine they'll do their best to showcase him for a trade. No idea why they didn't try to trade him in the offseason but I suspect they'll continue to trot out Marmol. Frieri should have a good start but if he has any hiccups that could open it up for Madson. It'll be interesting though if Frieri starts hot because I'm not sure how they'll demote him at that point.

Madson hasnt played baseball since the 2011 season and is still experiencing discomfort from surgery he had a year ago. He hasnt even begun throwing a baseball yet because every time he does, he experiences another setback. Hard to imagine him being a factor in the closing situation any time soon, if ever.

Madson finally throws a BP sesson. Says he STILL isnt pain free.

Roenicke noncommittal when asked if Axeford was still his closer. Sounds like the Jim Henderson era is set to begin.

 

[pollardsvision]

Because of the K's, whip and potential of saves Herrera is worth owning any way. I paid above what I should have for him in FA bidding last night but he's a guy I'd like to have in there daily regardless of saves. Him, Cook, Kenley, Storen, Clip and a few others are going to give you a good spread of numbers across 5X5 with at least an occasional save.

Doesn't seem like KC is set with anyone right now but if Herrera gets a few ops and converts, hard to imagine they'd go away from him. Holland is a lefty so using them situational could be possible for awhile. Crow also an option but it seems like he's a guy they can stretch out some so maybe that leaves it to Holland and Herrera. We'll see, chasing saves one of the most enjoyable/painful things in fantasy sports.

Yeah, I spent 3.5% for him. A little much for a current set-up guy but that price would triple if Holland struggles next time out. Holland struggling is a solid gamble, I think.

I generally spend about 80-90% of my season FAAB on RP's anyway. It's the only position where players go from being worthless to pretty valuable literally overnight. Except call-ups, but the ones worth bidding big bucks on are almost always going to owned anyway.

 

[Angry Beavers]

Because of the K's, whip and potential of saves Herrera is worth owning any way. I paid above what I should have for him in FA bidding last night but he's a guy I'd like to have in there daily regardless of saves. Him, Cook, Kenley, Storen, Clip and a few others are going to give you a good spread of numbers across 5X5 with at least an occasional save.

Doesn't seem like KC is set with anyone right now but if Herrera gets a few ops and converts, hard to imagine they'd go away from him. Holland is a lefty so using them situational could be possible for awhile. Crow also an option but it seems like he's a guy they can stretch out some so maybe that leaves it to Holland and Herrera. We'll see, chasing saves one of the most enjoyable/painful things in fantasy sports.

You have to a little masocistic to enjoy chasing saves... probably why I do it every year.

 

[Eephus]

Because of the K's, whip and potential of saves Herrera is worth owning any way. I paid above what I should have for him in FA bidding last night but he's a guy I'd like to have in there daily regardless of saves. Him, Cook, Kenley, Storen, Clip and a few others are going to give you a good spread of numbers across 5X5 with at least an occasional save.

Doesn't seem like KC is set with anyone right now but if Herrera gets a few ops and converts, hard to imagine they'd go away from him. Holland is a lefty so using them situational could be possible for awhile. Crow also an option but it seems like he's a guy they can stretch out some so maybe that leaves it to Holland and Herrera. We'll see, chasing saves one of the most enjoyable/painful things in fantasy sports.

You have to a little masocistic to enjoy chasing saves... probably why I do it every year.

Axford's and Holland's ADP were both around 150. Marmol was more of a crap shoot at 240. There isn't any other position where guys who are selected that highly would get benched after one week. Axford's sample size is 3 appearances and 2 2/3 IP. Even if an underperforming position player was yanked from the starting lineup, he'd still have more value than a deposed closer.

 

[Eephus]

Ned Yost gives Aaron Crow the ball in the 9th today just to #### with us.