Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

(Fill in your favorite closer) stuggles in non-save outing.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • (Fill in your favorite closer) stuggles in non-save outing.

    Is anyone surprised by this anymore? Today, it was Hanrahan. Brought in to pitch the ninth in a 6-2 game, he was mediocre at best, allowing a couple of runners to score and leaving a couple more stranded.

    It seems clear to me that it is very common for closers to struggle when there is not a save on the line. We see it over and over. I'm guessing it has something to do with focus...maybe when you spend your professional life geared up to go out there and get that save, and suddenly you're just out there to finish up the game, there's a lack of intensity. It seems to be as big an issue when the skipper sends the closer out in a game the team is losing "just to get a little work".

    I would love to see some numbers or other study showing whether closers pitch crappier when the game (or at least the save) is not on the line, or whether it just seems that way.

    Now, it's a totally different issue as to whether a closer should be used in the 7th or 8th in a tie game or a tight situation because he's the best reliever available. I'm assuming the manager of this hypothetical club follows the traditional wisdom on closers instead. Given that, I think that if I were the skip I would never send my guy out unless the game or the save was on the line (and maybe not at all unless there was a save at issue).

    I'm trying to imagine what it would be like if someone came up to me before a trial and said "we want you to go ahead and hear this case, but you should know that the parties have already settled the case and there is no real legal issue at stake". I'm wondering if I could put together my "A" game. I do recall one time when I found a defendant guilty and turned to the issue of sentencing. I started inquiring as to information which would help me determine a fair punishment under the circumstances, including particulars about the defendant. The lawyer told me "it doesn't matter how you sentence him, Judge, I'm appealing your ruling this afternoon." I have to admit that at that point I simply imposed the standard penalty, without going through the process I usually do.

    Well, I wandered there, but I'm wondering whether someone smart like KS could weigh in on this issue.

  • #2
    Someone did do a study and they do pitch worse. I don't remember the details but it was a couple years ago

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by joncarlos View Post
      Someone did do a study and they do pitch worse. I don't remember the details but it was a couple years ago
      It doesn't take a study to see this. It happens all the time. Everyone who follows baseball sees it, except the managers.
      "I lingered round them, under that benign sky: watched the moths fluttering among the heath and harebells, listened to the soft wind breathing through the grass, and wondered how any one could ever imagine unquiet slumbers for the sleepers in that quiet earth."

      Comment


      • #4
        Focus is one explanation -- adrenaline and the ability to control it is another. The best closers may channel this into slightly better skills, making them more effective.

        OTOH, some guys may not properly channel the adrenaline rush which hurts their skills and leads to the "can't handle the pressure" label.
        Follow me on Twitter @ToddZola

        Comment


        • #5
          For whatever reason, this is traditionally true. However, I don't think this necessarily means that managers are wrong to use their closers in non-save situations. If the closer hasn't pitched in a week because there have been no close games, it may make sense to use the closer in a blowout. Sure, he might give up a few runs, but the game is a blowout, so who cares? Then, the idea is, the closer is sharper the next time a save situation comes up.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by cavebird View Post
            For whatever reason, this is traditionally true. However, I don't think this necessarily means that managers are wrong to use their closers in non-save situations. If the closer hasn't pitched in a week because there have been no close games, it may make sense to use the closer in a blowout. Sure, he might give up a few runs, but the game is a blowout, so who cares? Then, the idea is, the closer is sharper the next time a save situation comes up.
            I agree. The Pirates hadn't had a save situation in a couple days and the way they were playing it looked like they might not have another one any time soon. Hammer needed to work. Might as well keep him sharp and save that 1 inning from Juan Cruz or whoever for another day.

            Comment

            Working...
            X