2013 MLB Thread

[GGGG]

Trevor Hoffman.  He is pretty close.

He's probably second, but it isn't all that close.  I'm not going to go through the details, but just look at them statistically.  Especially post season.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/hoffmtr01.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/riverma01.shtml

[jmayer1]

While I do generally agree with you about the save statistic, I don't think a lot of people realize that not only is he the best closer ever....but whomever is second really isn't all that close.

Being the best closer is a lot like being the tallest midget, they just don't pitch enough to make a big difference in the grand scheme of things. Rivera is a very good pitcher and role model, but the celebrations of his career have been way over the top; it's not like Rivera is a baseball legend. If you're in to statistics, Rivera is only 70th in career ptiching WAR per baseball reference.

This is a pretty good article on the overrating of Rivera and closers in general:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/9718373/mariano-rivera-overrated-well-beloved-respected

Also, the HOF comparables for Rivera from baseball reference:

Black Ink

Pitching - 9 (272), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink

Pitching - 51 (503), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor

Pitching - 262 (8), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards

Pitching - 30 (144), Average HOFer ≈ 50

JAWS

Relief Pitcher (2nd), 57.0 career WAR/28.9 7yr-peak WAR/43.0 JAWS
Average HOF RP (out of 5) = 40.6 career WAR/28.2 7yr-peak WAR/34.4 JAWS

[Lennys Tap]

I'm a Red Sox fan, but its hard not to like that guy. 

I know I am in the minority, but the true value of a closer is wildly overrated.  Using your best pitcher for only one inning in games you're going to win 92% of the time anyway is a tremendous waste of resources.  In my opinion, Andy Pettitte had a more valuable regular season career than did Mariano (200+ innings/year of above average pitching vs 65-70 innings/year of dominant pitching).  Rivera's true value was in the postseason, when they used him like they used to (and should) use relievers.  Multiple innings in tight ballgames, to escape jams, etc.

It's so weird how tied managers are to the save statistic.  If the save stat was never invented, I'd wager that Rivera would have pitched more like 100-110 innings a year, almost exclusively in high leverage situations.  As it was, he pitched 70 innings a year, 20 of which were' to "get him some work" when save siutations hadn't popped up in a while, while lesser pitchers tried to escape jams in the 7th or 8th inning or pitched in tie ballgames.  Makes no sense.

I read somewhere that the Yankees winning pecentage in games where they had the lead entering the 9th inning is about 1% better during the Mariano era than it was in the 18 years preceding it.

This is not meant to be a knock against Rivera, who is truly a great pticher.

Agree 100%. A starter with 12 wins and 200 innings pitched is more valuable than almost any closer.

[CTWarrior]

While I do generally agree with you about the save statistic, I don't think a lot of people realize that not only is he the best closer ever....but whomever is second really isn't all that close.

He's the best "closer" ever, and I agree it's not even close.  But closers in their current sense have only been around for 25 years or so.  He's got the most saves by a good amount, but he's not in the top 50 of guys with saves of 2 or more innings.  He's like the best guy ever at kicking field goals under 40 yards.  There's value in that, but is it really that important that your guy makes those kicks 100% of the time vs the other guys who make it 95% of the time?

The thing is, he's not going to be that hard to replace.  The Yanks used Rafael Soriano last year when Rivera got hurt, and he had your basic Rivera season.  There was no drop-off.  Check out Papelbon or Kimbrel or Chapman, etc.  There are lots of guys who can do what he did.  Not for 18 years, though.  That's what seperates him from the other guys.  That and his brilliant post-season career, where he was a relief pitcher, not just a closer.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'm a Red Sox fan, but its hard not to like that guy. 

I know I am in the minority, but the true value of a closer is wildly overrated.  Using your best pitcher for only one inning in games you're going to win 92% of the time anyway is a tremendous waste of resources.  In my opinion, Andy Pettitte had a more valuable regular season career than did Mariano (200+ innings/year of above average pitching vs 65-70 innings/year of dominant pitching).  Rivera's true value was in the postseason, when they used him like they used to (and should) use relievers.  Multiple innings in tight ballgames, to escape jams, etc.

It's so weird how tied managers are to the save statistic.  If the save stat was never invented, I'd wager that Rivera would have pitched more like 100-110 innings a year, almost exclusively in high leverage situations.  As it was, he pitched 70 innings a year, 20 of which were' to "get him some work" when save siutations hadn't popped up in a while, while lesser pitchers tried to escape jams in the 7th or 8th inning or pitched in tie ballgames.  Makes no sense.

I read somewhere that the Yankees winning pecentage in games where they had the lead entering the 9th inning is about 1% better during the Mariano era than it was in the 18 years preceding it.

This is not meant to be a knock against Rivera, who is truly a great pticher.

The game has changed a lot.  I think to win it all you usually need a very good closer as one of the pieces, along with a good setup man.  There is something to be said when you only need your starter to go 7 innings because they aren't going to score in the last 2 innings.  I agree with you that they are easier to find and definitely replaceable. 

I'm not sure he is the greatest closer, either, because the game is so different.  The days of Goose Gossage coming in and throwing for 3 innings are gone.  I think the save rules are also way to lax.  You get a save if the tying run is in the on deck circle...really?  A bit generous for my tastes.

[MUBurrow]

I am very annoyed the Brewers are winning games. Very. While the worst Brewers team since the early 2000's suddenly has found the will to win, their draft position is shooting down. Dropped three spots alone today. I may sound like a bad fan, but I just want to build a better future and a higher draft pick would help that.

I really dislike the way most leagues operate their drafts. I think that the NBA lottery is the closest, but still not quite right. I think that each league should institute a draft lottery where the first team to miss the playoffs gets the highest odds. The only real downside is that you risk putting absolutely top talent on an already good team. But odds are also that those teams might also already have good players at that top talent position. Not out of the ordinary example: in the 2011 NFL draft, the Giants would have had the top pick. Would they have picked Cam Newton with Eli around? Probably not. And if they looked to trade out, then at least its more of a market system. And trades. Everyone loves trades.

[buckchuckler]

Being the best closer is a lot like being the tallest midget, they just don't pitch enough to make a big difference in the grand scheme of things. Rivera is a very good pitcher and role model, but the celebrations of his career have been way over the top; it's not like Rivera is a baseball legend. If you're in to statistics, Rivera is only 70th in career ptiching WAR per baseball reference.

This is a pretty good article on the overrating of Rivera and closers in general:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/9718373/mariano-rivera-overrated-well-beloved-respected

Also, the HOF comparables for Rivera from baseball reference:

Black Ink

Pitching - 9 (272), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink

Pitching - 51 (503), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor

Pitching - 262 (8), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards

Pitching - 30 (144), Average HOFer ≈ 50

JAWS

Relief Pitcher (2nd), 57.0 career WAR/28.9 7yr-peak WAR/43.0 JAWS
Average HOF RP (out of 5) = 40.6 career WAR/28.2 7yr-peak WAR/34.4 JAWS

Haha,  wow.  Someone hasn't watched a baseball game since 1975.  Bullpens have become just as important as a great rotation, or offense.  Rivera is the best pitcher ever to walk onto the field to close a game.  I think he actually is a baseball legend.  He is the guy that all closers will ever be judged by.  If that isn't a legend, I don't know what is. 

[wadesworld]

Haha,  wow.  Someone hasn't watched a baseball game since 1975.  Bullpens have become just as important as a great rotation, or offense.  Rivera is the best pitcher ever to walk onto the field to close a game.  I think he actually is a baseball legend.  He is the guy that all closers will ever be judged by.  If that isn't a legend, I don't know what is. 

I didn't even bother reading the post you quoted but I'm guessing the person was claiming Rivera's importance is incredibly overrated. And it is. Sure he shut down teams when he came in. But regardless of whether it was Rivera or any other Yankees relieved, when you have a lead and 3 outs to get, the probability of winning the game is VERY high. Compare that to a 0-0 game with 27 outs to get and the chance you win that game are much lower, thus the importance of a stud starter is much more important than that of a stud closer.

[MUBurrow]

Rivera is the best pitcher ever to walk onto the field to close a game.  I think he actually is a baseball legend.  He is the guy that all closers will ever be judged by.  If that isn't a legend, I don't know what is. 

This is true - until the paradigm shifts for closers again. Ironic that you criticize OP for having a short baseball memory, then in turn speak of today's closers as if the position has been consistent over baseball history. As long as closers only perform in today's limited capacity, Rivera will be the standard. But with the rate analytics are taking over the game, that will probably be only another ten years or so. Then, Rivera will always be remembered as the best closer during the one inning only, save situation era. I would bet that a decade from now, you see "closers" getting a lot more statistical wins and a lot fewer statistical saves as they will evolve to be more like middle relievers brought in when games are close in the sixth or seventh inning.

Actually, I'm surprised more teams don't treat their closers that way now as they try to transition them into the rotation. I'm thinking teams with young stud closers like Feliz in TX, Chapman in Cin, Rosenthal in StL. Instead, TX was wedded to the idea of a traditional closer, tried to keep Feliz in that role for an entire year, then stretch him out in the offseason and bring him into the rotation. Boom, his arm exploded. Maybe that happens anyway, but if they slowly stretch him out during high-pressure situations during the season to the point where its not unusual for him to go three innings, then rest him more in the offseason like a traditional starting pitcher, I have to wonder if that wouldn't be more effective.

[CTWarrior]

I'm not sure he is the greatest closer, either, because the game is so different.  The days of Goose Gossage coming in and throwing for 3 innings are gone.  I think the save rules are also way to lax.  You get a save if the tying run is in the on deck circle...really?  A bit generous for my tastes.

I think we are in agreement.  I don't consider Goose Gossage or Dan Quisenberry to be closers in the current sense.  They were relief pitchers, used when they were needed most regardless of the save situation.  A great season from one of those guys (100-125 IP almost exclusively in high leverage situations)was much more impactful to your W/L record than a great season from Rivera.  To me closers are the one inning guys that started in the late 80s with guys like Eckersley, and truthfully, he came into games in the 8th a lot more often than the Rivera/Hoffman guys.

As for the save rule, all baseball stats are a little subject to context.  You can pitch 5 innings and give up 6 runs, but get a win if your team scores 7 while you're in the game.  You can come in in the 9th and blow a 3 run lead and get the win if your team scores a run in the bottom of the 9th.  You canget an RBI for hitting a lazy flyball or a weak grounder to second with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs.  Think about this, if you score  a run because you got 3 singles, the first guys gets a run scored and the last guy gets an RBI, but the guy who got the middle hit was just as important and gets nothing extra.  OTOH, you can argue that the save is the most important stat in baseball because it is the only one that comes to mind that, for some strange reason, dictates strategy. 

[tower912]

Unless Detroit collectively grows a set, Cleveland is going to win the central.    Right now, Detroit is incapable of getting a clutch hit, getting a big out, or making the big defensive play.     Two hitters on the team are driving in runs, the bullpen is leaky.    Francona has the Indians playing loose and is getting the most out of his talent.    Now that Raburn is no longer the whipping boy for everything that went wrong in Detroit up to and including Hoffa, it turns out he is a decent hitter.  Cleveland has the momentum right now and Detroit has feet of clay.    80 games to get it sorted out. 

I was close.    Francona for manager of the year.    I can only hope that the Tigers were playing rope-a-dope and are going to flip the batting switch to 'on'.

[GGGG]

I was close.    Francona for manager of the year.    I can only hope that the Tigers were playing rope-a-dope and are going to flip the batting switch to 'on'.

The Indians were bum-slayers though.  Going 17-2 against the White Sox and 13-6 against the Twins really helped.  OTOH they went 4-15 v. Detroit.

[StillAWarrior]

The Indians were bum-slayers though.  Going 17-2 against the White Sox and 13-6 against the Twins really helped.  OTOH they went 4-15 v. Detroit.

The Indians were incredibly fortunate to have their last 10 games (and 14 of their last 17) against the three worst teams in the AL.  I'll take it.  Go Tribe!

[NavinRJohnson]

The Indians were bum-slayers though.  Going 17-2 against the White Sox and 13-6 against the Twins really helped.  OTOH they went 4-15 v. Detroit.

Not sure I understand...are you criticizing them for beating up on the bad teams on their schedule? Isn't that what your supposed to do? What about the 5-1 vs. TEX? 5-2 vs. OAK? DEt was 0-6 vs. LAA. Works both ways.

[GGGG]

Not sure I understand...are you criticizing them for beating up on the bad teams on their schedule? Isn't that what your supposed to do? What about the 5-1 vs. TEX? 5-2 vs. OAK? DEt was 0-6 vs. LAA. Works both ways.

Not criticizing them.  Just don't think they are very good.

[buckchuckler]

Not criticizing them.  Just don't think they are very good.

Yeah, lots of teams just win 92 games with out being very good. 

[GGGG]

Yeah, lots of teams just win 92 games with out being very good.  

Yep.  Especially when they get lots of games versus bottom-feeder opponents.

[CTWarrior]

Cleveland was very strange this year.  They were 41-11 against the AL's true bottom feeders (CHW, MIN, SEA and HOU) but they were also 5-2 vs OAK and 5-1 vs TEX.  Their impressive finishing stretch was against a trio of teams that had totally surrendered and were even worse at the end of the season than they were during the season.   I really can't see them getting past the Red Sox should they win the wild card game.

I think any of Oakland/Boston/Detroit can win the AL and any of LA/Atlanta/Saint Louis can win the NL.  Should be an excellent postseason with no dominant team.

[wadesworld]

The Indians were incredibly fortunate to have their last 10 games (and 14 of their last 17) against the three worst teams in the AL.  I'll take it.  Go Tribe!

Go Tribe!

[MerrittsMustache]

The Dale Sveum Era has ended in Chicago.

[Dr. Blackheart]

The Dale Sveum Era has ended in Chicago.

Buy the man a razor.  Maybe he can shave more than once a week when he goes on job interviews. He made Quade look awake. 

[buckchuckler]

Buy the man a razor.  Maybe he can shave more than once a week when he goes on job interviews. He made Quade look awake. 

Hard to blame him.  Would have you wanted to be awake and watch that for 2 years. 

[NavinRJohnson]

Sveum was hired as the sacrificial lamb during rebuilding, and I suspect he was well aware of that. Still, I gotta believe they had intended for him to be around one more year at least, before they hire the guy they want once they are closer to being a finished product. Seems as though the (lack of) development of Rizzo, Castro, Lake, etc. was key to this decision, unless of course they have an opportunity, and feel like their only opportunity to hire Girardi is now.

[MerrittsMustache]

Sveum was hired as the sacrificial lamb during rebuilding, and I suspect he was well aware of that. Still, I gotta believe they had intended for him to be around one more year at least, before they hire the guy they want once they are closer to being a finished product. Seems as though the (lack of) development of Rizzo, Castro, Lake, etc. was key to this decision, unless of course they have an opportunity, and feel like their only opportunity to hire Girardi is now.

My assumption is that they're going to make a run at Girardi and I don't blame them. If you can get a top 5 manager, you go for it. If not, they can bring in Dale Sveum 2.0 and be right where they are now.

Castro was a "see the ball, hit the ball" type of hitter for his first 3 seasons in the Majors. He hit .297 with a .336 OBP during that time. The Cubs wanted him to be more selective, take more walks and go the other way more often. As a result, they got him all out of sorts at the plate and his average, OBP and slugging all plummeted while his K's increased, walks decreased and his WAR dropped by over 4 points. If a team has a 23-year-old who's a proven .300 in big leagues, let him do his thing. I'm not pinning that all on Sveum but when something like that happens, there's going to be a fall guy.

[🏀]

I wouldn't count the Maddux brothers out of this race.