Poll: Who Should Close?
by Charlie on Jul 29, 2008 12:34 AM EDT
19 comments
Now that Matt Capps is injured and Damaso Marte is gone, it's an open question who will close for the Pirates, and the Bucs are hoping someone wins the job outright. Who would you choose?
JOHN GRABOW
Pros: Best performance record of any remaining reliever
Cons: Availability limited lately because of injuries; only good lefty in bullpen, so making him a closer would limit situational possibilities; homered against twice Sunday night; may be traded soon anyway
TYLER YATES
Pros: Great stuff; control problems might matter less if used at beginnings of innings like a closer usually is, rather than coming in with runners on base
Cons: His control really is hideous. Let him close, and he's Jose Mesa
DENNY BAUTISTA
Pros: Good stuff; good performance record since joining Pirates; two shut-down innings Monday
Cons: Everything he ever did before joining the Pirates
SOMEONE ELSE
Your guess is as good as mine
MIX AND MATCH
Let it spin around like a gyroscope
0 recs |
19 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Not directly related...but roster moves overnight.
DK reported…Bixler called up…LaRoche to the DL.
by Thunder on Jul 29, 2008 2:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Other stuff there...
-Karstens will pitch Friday or Saturday… I’m not sure if he’s starting then or coming out of the ‘pen
-Ohlendorf making another AAA start today… didn’t he already make a start a couple days ago?
-Moskos to the ‘pen, though Kyle Stark says he will start again someday… whatever you say.
-the Red Sox might be looking at Jack… just trade him NH.
-Grabow being looked at as well: Cards, Phils, Red Sox, Rays, Angels… I wonder who the Angels would be willing to give up
As for Black Hole… I guess that opens up a spot for Eye Chart/Pearce to keep playing, even if Nate Sr. gets the start in right. Now you can start Jason-ity, Nate & Nate Sr. in the OF, with Eye Chart at 3rd and Pearce at 1st.
The Utah Jazz. The Jazz... duh.
The best NBA team in Utah... no doubts about it!
Playing For Pride. Pirates, Utes, Panthers, and more...
Because, in the end, only one team can "win it all".
by UtesFan89 on Jul 29, 2008 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do we need a "designated" closer?
Why can’t a team simply go with a “hot” pitcher chosen from a group of closers? No other sport proclaims only one player to occupy a given position for the entire year. Basketball always starts the best player irrespective of his position at the beginning of the year. I will never understand why managers will pull a man who has thrown a perfect 8th inning and replace him with the “designated” closer. Why not let him pitch into the 9th or until he become ineffective? So what if he can’t pitch the next night? Isn’t a victory “tonight” just as valuable as one tomorrow? If managers were to follow this logic they might occasionally have a well-rested bullpen even if it means having one less pitcher available.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jul 29, 2008 9:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
No other sport proclaims only one player to occupy a given position for the entire year.
ummm… ever heard of this guy?
by johnnycuff on Jul 29, 2008 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
IPF
“If managers were to follow this logic…”
Yes, if they could only see the light.
By the way, who is your “hot guy” that we should be using now?
by patthatt on Jul 29, 2008 10:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
patthat:
You have validated my point. I do not think that anyone should be designated as the closer but rather chosen based upon his previous performances. For example, Battista did very well last night and so I believe he should be allowed the opportunity to see if he can do it again. You seem to have missed my point about removing a reliever who has just pitched superbly in the 8th and not allowing him the chance to pitch in the 9th. My suggestion is based upon the methodolgy chosen by basketball coaches who shuffle their lineups around and arrange them so that whoever has played the best during that game is allowed to play the last quarter of the game. Similarly, whoever pitches great in the 8th should be allowed to pitch in the 9th. I don’t care if he is unavailable the next night if it assures me of a win tonight. If nobody pitches great in the 8th then choose whoever you want for the 9th but don’t make it automatic because that removes the element of competition. If a pitcher knows he has no chance of pitching in the 9th because he was not the pre-selected closer as you would have, then you lose the competition factor. Why are you so opposed to this?
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jul 29, 2008 10:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Save opportunities...
how many more is the team going to have anyways?
Oh, and just curious… when is Capps due back?
The Utah Jazz. The Jazz... duh.
The best NBA team in Utah... no doubts about it!
Playing For Pride. Pirates, Utes, Panthers, and more...
Because, in the end, only one team can "win it all".
by UtesFan89 on Jul 29, 2008 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I voted mix-n-match...
Bautista for the next bit, because he’s been doing well. Or (gulp) Osoria, who’s been good as of late (though I don’t recall his last outing).
I’d avoid Grabow if you want to trade him… there might not be enough save opportunities. I’d use him earlier to show him off to scouts. Plus, he hasn’t been the hottest hand as of late.
The Utah Jazz. The Jazz... duh.
The best NBA team in Utah... no doubts about it!
Playing For Pride. Pirates, Utes, Panthers, and more...
Because, in the end, only one team can "win it all".
by UtesFan89 on Jul 29, 2008 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm wondering
if 20 or 40 years from now, we’re going to look back (those of us still alive, of course) and wonder what managers in this era were thinking by having their bullpen roles so regimented. I voted for “mix and match.” I don’t really know if there’s really some mental advantage to be gained by having set roles for everybody, and I’m betting nobody in baseball really knows either. My guess is that with everything else a manager has to worry about during a game, he likes having as many “automatic” decisions as he can. So he always bats the pitcher ninth (Russell and LaRussa excepted, of course), and he always bunts with the pitcher up, and he always uses X to pitch the seventh, Y to pitch the eighth and Z to pitch the ninth. And who can argue those moves, except a handful of statheads?
All I know is this: Every year a dozen teams have their closer blow up, to injury or ineffectiveness, and they have to find somebody else on the staff who can do the job, and what do you know? They usually do. I also know that most closers don’t last in the role as long as Matt Capps does. So I think there’s an advantage in having most guys on your staff able to close. Plus, if you must talk about mental edges, wouldn’t there be some mental edge to be gained by making them all feel you have the confidence and trust in them to let any one of them close on any given night?
Just rambling here.
by bucdaddy on Jul 29, 2008 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
bucdaddy:
I don’t think you were rambling. It made perfect sense to me. Perhaps, this is the reason baseball managers make so much less than either NBA or NFL coaches. They don’t think for themselves and never deviate from what is expected from them. Sure, LaRussa will bat his pitcher 8th but that does not have a meaningful effect on the game. One has only to observe all the different plays a football coach must diagram or the various plays designed for the NBA to see why these guys are all college graduates while most baseball managers are products of their farm system. As one knowledgeable announcer once said: “There are no Don Zimmers in the NFL”. ‘Nuf said.
by Illinois Pirate Fan on Jul 29, 2008 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed 100%
I will never understand why, if your starter is getting roughed up in the sixth or seventh and lets a runner or two on and you are only up a run, you don’t bring in your best bullpen guy. Instead, you save him for the ninth just in case the lead gets that far. In does not make ANY sense.
by DITO on Jul 29, 2008 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Off-topic
and I know you’re probably sick of me posting crap like this, but… I have to do it. Sorry. :)
The Marlins are searching for a catcher.
And their 4 targets? Bengie Molina (Giants). Ramon Hernandez (Orioles). Gerald Laird (Rangers). And… Ronny Paulino. (I wish.) Ryan Doumit.
What would it take from them to pry Doumit from us? Would the Pirates even consider it? Would they be stupid not to? Ron Cook over at the PG would be against it... just FYI.
Just curious. I don’t know the Marlins system (you could say that for 31 of the 30 teams), but yeah…
The Utah Jazz. The Jazz... duh.
The best NBA team in Utah... no doubts about it!
Playing For Pride. Pirates, Utes, Panthers, and more...
Because, in the end, only one team can "win it all".
by UtesFan89 on Jul 29, 2008 10:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I would be against it
in theory. But if Ron Cook doesn’t like it, we should probably do it.
by DITO on Jul 29, 2008 10:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As I recall Bill James was a proponent of mix and match
and when he joined the Red Sox a few years ago he convinced them to try it. That resulted in some early excurtiating losses and the experiment ended.
I voted for mix and match as well. If I were managing I would use my available best relievers in close games almost regardless of the inning and ordinarily try to get more than one inning out of them per appearance. it seems to me that is the best way to maximize the use of one’s best relievers in the high leverage innings.
by WestCoastBuc on Jul 29, 2008 1:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Those excruciating losses
would have just been losses of the lead in the 7th or 8th, probably, instead of a blown save in the 9th, anyway. So what’s the difference?
I know we are on the same page, I just wanted to post that to respond to the “excruciating losses” part.
by DITO on Jul 29, 2008 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yates
take a guy without a whole lot of value, put him in a role where he can rack up numbers that would convince someone else that he’s valuable, trade your newly minted closer and reap the rewards… in the meantime, build a good bullpen around the other guys (grabow, bautista)
by Captain Easychord on Jul 29, 2008 3:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is a good idea,
I never thought of that.
by DITO on Jul 29, 2008 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That seems too easy
and too logical?
The Utah Jazz. The Jazz... duh.
The best NBA team in Utah... no doubts about it!
Playing For Pride. Pirates, Utes, Panthers, and more...
Because, in the end, only one team can "win it all".
by UtesFan89 on Jul 29, 2008 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Poll
Why not give Bautista a whirl? Really,what’s to lose at this point?
by rissaldar on Jul 30, 2008 3:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
