Intelligent bullpen talk at philly.com

by RememberthePhitans on Jun 16, 2009 2:40 AM EDT Comment 8 comments

Front-page bump because it links to such an interesting article that addresses many of the points regarding bullpen use that I've been stressing for years. Great job, Andy Martino.

I wanted to cut/paste big chunks of this article, but I'll just link it instead. Baseball writing is getting better in spots, and this is an instance where I think it shows. The discussion of Madson being less valuable as a "closer" than as a set up guy because of the leverage of the situation? Fabulous. If only someone would give Bill Conlin some tainted elderberry wine, it would make my day complete.

0 recs | Comment 8 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Martino

Andy Martino is one of the good rising sportswriters, in my opinion. Open to new ideas, dialogues with the blogosphere (hate that term/concept), etc. It’s cool that he was able to thoughtfully attempt to untangle this mess the sport has gotten itself into. And I am high-fiving him in my mind thanks to this sentence:

“The save rule has caused many a wasted reliever to sit through high-leverage situations in the middle innings only to enter when the game has already been won.”

/slow applause

http://www.thegoodphight.com

by WholeCamels on Jun 16, 2009 9:50 AM EDT reply actions

Guy like that won’t last long writing for a philly paper :)

"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."

Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.

by jemagee on Jun 16, 2009 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions

Why have just one closer?

I’ve often thought that the development of the “closer” concept has been a bad strategic development. So often the pressure packed, game deciding situation is when a reliever is summoned in the 6th or 7th inning to snuff out a rally with runners on base. A lessser pitcher is brought in to handle that situation, while the closer is saved to start the 9th inning with a clean slate and maybe the bottom of the order coming up. Ideally you’d have 3 or 4 guys capable of pitching a scoreless ninth and you’d feel free to go with the best guy for any particular critical point earlier in the game. It seems so obvious to me that this approach maximizes your chances to have the best talent on the mound at the most important times, why has saving the closer become such a fetish?

by MJW on Jun 16, 2009 2:53 PM EDT reply actions

Boston tried it – though not really
it failed
therefore it will never work

Boston is really the only team that would probably consider the idea again – only if they needed to

"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."

Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.

by jemagee on Jun 16, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm not sure one experiment is a good sample

I seem to remember back in the sixties (granted my memory of those years is hazy — because I was young then, not because of the controlled substances) that some teams used a variant of this approach and most teams were willing on a fairly regular basis to bring their best reliever in in the seventh or eight inning, although usually letting him pitch through the ninth. The notion that you’ve got one guy who’s going to pitch the eight if possible and another guy who’s being saved for the ninth seems overly specialized. Not every change constitutes progress.

by MJW on Jun 16, 2009 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions

It probably is overly specialized – and I’m not meaning to debate your point negativley (i was mostly being sarcastic) – but people in baseball dont’ change much – or often – the closer role is idiocit – the only thing dumber than the save is the ‘hold’ – stats invented by agents to make players more money and the owners allowed it – i’m just saying that it won’t happen any time soon because of the failure in boston

"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."

Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.

by jemagee on Jun 16, 2009 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions

You're right there

Change surely does come slowly to baseball. Especially with respect to concepts that become GABP — Generally Accepted Baseball Practice. And I guess part of my argument is that change isn’t always for the better either.

Totally agree about the hold. There are perfectly good metrics to measure a reliever’s effectiveness without inventing a meaningless stat.

by MJW on Jun 16, 2009 5:47 PM EDT reply actions

I have a question i was wondering about last night – and hopefully someone has already done it.

They were talking about hoffman was 15 for 15 (now 16 for 16) after his entry into last nights game on ESPN.

In the ‘modern’ era of closerdom and such – how unique is what Lidge did – i don’t know – set a barrier of 30/35 saves (or attempts) and how many closers have been perfect – what’s the ‘average’ of a blown save – etc…has that been done?

"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."

Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.

by jemagee on Jun 16, 2009 5:50 PM EDT reply actions