The Jays Do Not Need a Closer

Woodman, you’re sooooooo right. For a time I figured that my failure to understand the “proven closer” obsession was due to my being relatively new (11 years) to baseball.

Good article.

I think all the closer talk is just that – blah, blah, blah

Now if we could only get this message out to the casual fans…

It’s a “made-up” stat. Which trumps “questionable”…

It’s interesting, because Farrell has a mixed record with the pen. For the first couple months he made awful mistakes, but he was pretty good from June onwards.

I think the key is, Farrell seems to want to have a go to guy in the 9th. But that doesn’t necessarily mean a prototypical closer, in the sense of your best reliever. I’d be fine with having a defined closer role, I just don’t want it to be the best arm. I guess we’ll see.

“Ridiculous” to suggest it’s not an issue? Have you done research to prove a correlation (let alone causation) between blown saves and losing streaks? Because there has been enough research to prove believers in blown saves as an important statistic to be blatantly wrong.

Also, “short-sighted”? When Francisco had a decent 3.55 ERA. When the Jays’ relief corps was middle of the pack (like the team in general) in almost every statistic?

I wouldn’t take AA too literally. He speaks like a politician: he says what people want to hear and keeps his real thoughts to himself, and his assistants.

but there is no proof that they are doing anything more than trying to figure out which of their dozen or so internal options is the best one. I think they are just appeasing the people interviewing them, they aren’t stupid. They aren’t going to pay a fortune for a closer.

Papelbon is only a shut down closer some seasons. 2010 he blew 8 saves, our terrible closer, Kevin Gregg blew 6 and they both had 37 saves. So he’s a shutdown closer one year and not the next. Is that something you want to pay $14 million a year to get?

And course when you save blown ‘multiple leads over multiple innings’ that isn’t a closer issue that’s a bullpen issue.

Really if you look at his second-half numbers, he wasnt that bad. Not good enough to give up the potential picks, but he wasn’t as horrible as most people portray him as.

Also, when the Jays last had a reliable closer we won two world series. It’s worth it, trust me.

First off, the first year of BJ Ryan was about as reliable as closers generally get. Heck, even the one year of Accardo wasn’t too shabby.

Second, Henke was really nothing when the Jays acquired him. He certainly wasn’t an established MLB pitcher let alone a closer. Ward was home grown and only had one season as a closer before his arm gave out.

The whole point is that closers are generally extremely unreliable from year to year. They might be good or they might be bad. Given that, it makes more sense to gamble on what you have or pick up cheap veterans hoping to catch them on a good year than it is to waste big bucks and many years on an “established” closer (unless his name is Rivera)

… and didn’t replace him with another long reliever. That part was the key. The short relievers were forced to pitch too much, and their ERA’s exploded. When CV returned to the bullpen, all was well again.

It’s not a "job description£ like 1B, C, SP or RP. It’s rather that you’d need certain strengths in your game to be used as one. Lead-off should have good on-base skills; closer should have good shut-down skills.
The point is that both roles should be subject to the manager’s judgement on a game-to-game basis (consistency helps, of course, but is not crucial).

So what we need is “good (relief) pitchers with shut down skills” even if they never pitched a 9th inning. I might use any of them as a closer at a given game.
Same goes for the need for “guys with good OBA and some speed” that might be used to lead of at any given game.

Why would there be any one thing that makes you a successful closer other than simply being a good pitcher and being able to pitch short amounts of time 3-4 times a week? There are all kinds of closers out there with their own kind of repertoire.

He already had the 8th inning role, did he not?

Also, you basically gave no argument why having 8th and 9th-inning guys should be part of the game other than that is how it’s currently done. With the exception, of course, of possibly the smartest team/GM/manager in the Tampa Bay Rays. Want to argue their success?

at the professional level in the most competitive league in the world and can speak to that

But that is a) a different game and b) not at a professional level. If we were more professional, we’d play to our best in each and every situation, regardless of our teammates.

we have a good-to-excellent top 3 or 4 in Janssen, Litsch, Carreno and Villanueva. beyond that we have Perez, and maybe one or more of McGowan, Cecil, Drabek (eventually). then we have question marks for the back end with upside in Farquhar, Uviedo and Carpenter. I don’t think adding a big time reliever really helps this team much, and almost certainly not as much as using those assets to fill another hole

Just keep in mind he’s a journalist, not a scout. 2012 will be interesting for Molina. The numbers are bullish, the scouts are bearish.

they started winning when Atlanta started losing

You can argue the Braves blew it more than STL earned it (I would say STL had just as much to do with it, but arguable), but my other point still stands. Every playoff team had a closer. Even Tampa, notorious for its patchwork bullpens, had Farnsworth closing more often than not. Although they probably didn’t admit it. All I’m saying is, even shoe-string budget Tampa signs guys in the offseason for the BP. Toronto might have some pieces, but they still need to bring in affordable veterans.

Motte was their closer and LaRussa had finally figured it out (with the help of increased bullpen depth via TO)

that’s what Seattle did to Morrow. I think the Jays are hoping Drabek has a good Spring Training so they can slot him back into the rotation. if not, they’ll work on his mechanics in AAA for 2012. if all goes well, then great, he’ll be a fixture in our rotation until 2016. if not, then I think they’ll hope he can fix himself by 2013 Spring Training, and if not, they’ll try to convert him to a reliever permanently. the guy is 23 and a former top prospect. not time to panic yet.

Drabek led the majors in walks when he was starting, did he not? He has the stuff obviously, but if he had control he’d be starting.

If you’re going to lose, losing in the 6th hurts less than losing when you only need three more outs.

and if not why not?

Scott Carson is part of the Rogers organization, as are the Jays. So by virtue of him writing that, by default it’s true.

It’s a little tautological, but I think it’s the best way to explain that “debate”.

what if the Jays were actually wrong about Lawrie’s defense? by the eye test (to me) and by metrics, he was somewhere from average to outstanding defensively. I get the idea that the Jays shouldn’t jerk Lawrie around the diamond, but if the Jays have actually decided they like his glove enough to stick at 2B (I can see him being as good as KJ, I don’t think that’d be unreasonable) then why not stick him there for the next five seasons?

and yes. I know the Jays thought his defense unacceptable at 2B before this year. but it’s at least hypothetically possible that the Jays have reconsidered their position. in fact, I’d be tremendously disappointed if the Jays don’t reconsider positions in light of new information

/facedesk

Please.

Ridiculous that St. Louis gets included. I was ambivalent about the lottery, but it just seems stupid now.

Pitchers perform no differently in high-presure situations than they do otherwise