K-Rod ties saves record

Interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

 

I don't think anyone is saying he should win it. I'm just questioning whether Soria or Nathan will finish higher in the voting.

 

You don't think there's any credence to the idea of a closer's "looming presence" -- that a team's strategy doesn't change if they have a dominating closer waiting to finish the game? Hell, the late-'90s Yankees almost made a trademark out of turning games into 6-inning contests because of their dominating bullpen. You don't think that affects both teams' mind-set in a close game?

It's true that most good closers are going to have similar 90-95 percent save conversion rates, but I think it's safe to say that individual closers do make a helluva difference, the way they're used in today's game.

 

The only way voters would pick Roy Halladay over Cliff Lee is if they were applying the Canadian exchange rate to their statistics.

 

I'm saying Paps and Mo have the same presence. Probably Nathan, too. Soria hasn't earned that rep yet, but who knows what his rep would be on a real team.

 

I didn't say it's the only reason. Obviously, the Yankees' offense is a lot better than the Angels'.

But you're nuts if you think having Mariano Freakin' Rivera on the team doesn't affect the Yankees' performance on all sides of the ball.

 

Trade K-Rod for Rivera straight up and that butterfly takes a nap.

 

Seriously, Buck, I usually agree with anything you have to say about baseball.
But if you think having Mariano Rivera affects any hitting the Yankees do, you are very sadly mistaken.

 

If it did, then maybe they could've won some games this year.

Seriously, though, I think I get what buck is getting at. Having a dominating closer, like Rivera, does change situations. It's not just about the last three outs. People start pressing if they are behind, because they know a guy that gives up few hits is coming in, etc.

His example of the late '90s Yankees is probably the best. That combo of Nelson-Stanton-Rivera changed lots of things, maybe more in the postseason than the regular season, but still his point stands.

 

Let's see here, Mo's having arguably his best season statistically (lowest WHIP, second lowest ERA).

And how does this Yankees team compare to the previous 13 with Rivera?

 

I forgot to add earlier. In 2005, Rivera had a 307 ERA+.

 

Basically, no. I mean, it affects the team's offensive performance about as much as whether or not one of the clubhouse attendants decided to hike her skirt up another two inches to show off her new Brazilian wax or whether or not the Erin Andrews touched his elbow or forearm.

If anything, I'd say that it makes the offense more lackadaisical. If you know you've got Todd Jones back there, you might be more inclined to steal third base when you're up by 3. But if you know you've got Mo Rivera back there, you might not be as interested in stealing that extra bag.

I think the closer is the most interchangeable piece in the game. You can look at KRod's stats and Nathan's stats and safely assume (particularly since closers are usually high strikeout guys) that the numbers would be largely similar on opposite teams.