My MVP Ballot

That's not really true. As Olney (I believe) wrote yesterday, a guy like Verlander or Halladay allows a manager to be more aggressive with his bullpen the night before one of them starts. Leyland and Manuel have a pretty good idea their aces are going to throw seven or eight innings. Those types of pitchers also give the bullpen a "rest day," which allows them to be fresher the following night.

So, really, a pitcher of that caliber can have an effect -- however large or small -- on three games, all in a row.

 

You are telling me that there are elite closers who don't appear in tie games? May not happen as much as it should but it happens.

 

My point is that a save situation doesn't necessarily mean the game is "hanging in the balance."

Saves are not that hard to get, as evidence by the fact that some pretty mediocre pitchers can rack up 25 to 30 of them. A three-run lead, or even a two-run lead, with just three outs to get, is frankly not that hard. You don't need to be Mariano Rivera to get the job done.

Right now Leo Nunez is 33 for 39 and Mariano Rivera is 34 for 39. And Jose Valverde is 39 for 39. (Rather have him than Rivera?)

Oh by the way, teams also win about a quarter of the time when a closer blows a save, because he only gave up the tying run.

So once you get your closer in there, whether it's a HOFer or a garden-variety mediocre one-year wonder, you have about an 80-90 percent chance of winning. That's not a very big difference over 162 games (perhaps only 50 of which will be save situations in the ninth).

(I'm trying to look up the exact figures.)

That's my point.

 

http://www.tangotiger.net/welist.html

Home team starts top of the ninth with a 1-run lead: It wins 84.1 percent of the time.

Road team starts bottom of the ninth with a 1-run lead: it wins 80.6 percent.

I don't have time to look through all the stats for 2- and 3-run leads, but you can assume they go even higher.

 

Also, that chart is from 2002, the peak of the steroid era. With offense down significantly now, the percentages are certainly even higher.

Point is, the difference between a great closer and a mediocre one is not nearly as big as the difference between a great starter and a mediocre one.

 

You are starting to tread into "Win Percentage Added" territory, BB. You take stats like that, and credit or debit the pitcher with the difference between when he entered the game and when he left the game. If it's 84.1% to win a 1-run lead in the ninth as the home team, and a pitcher closes it, then he gets +0.16 WPA. If he blows it and gives the other team a one-run lead, then he gets -0.65 (or something, math is hard) because his team now has a 19.4% chance of winning.

It's not a perfect measure of player value, by any means, or even close, but it can shed some light on some interesting things.

This year's relievers aren't that impressive, but check out 2003:

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=n&type=3&season=2003&month=0&season1=2003&ind=0

Gagne tops the list, ahead of Pedro Martinez and Roy Halladay.

The best starting pitchers will usually be more valuable than the best relievers. But once in awhile a reliever will have such an amazing lights-out season, and get to pitch in so many high-leverage situations, that he can be right up there with the top starters.

 

Starters affect one game in every five. Lights-out closers affect at least one in every three.
[/quote]

And who has a bigger effect when he goes out there? The starter throwing 6-8 innings or the closer throwing one?

That's what I thought.

 

It's not cut-and-dried enough for you to intone "That's what I thought" at the end of it. That's a bit smarmy.

 

And who has a bigger effect when he goes out there? The starter throwing 6-8 innings or the closer throwing one?

That's what I thought.
[/quote]

Depends on the relative score, to be honest. I'll take a shutout top of the ninth in a tied game over 7 IP, 3 ER.

 

?

 

misread it.

 

Yes, I voted for Gagne for Cy Young in 2003. I've had a Cy Young vote probably seven times, and that's the only time I voted for a closer.

By the way, the numbers I quoted earlier were from 2002, which was the height of the steroid era, when runs came much more easily than they do today.

If you use this tool...

http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/other/wpa_inquirer.php

... and start with a run environment of 4.5 runs per game (it's actually only 4.26 this year) ...

1-run lead: Road 80 percent; Home 83.7 percent
2-run lead: Road 90.9 percent; Home 92.6 percent
3-run lead: Road 95.9 percent; Home 96.7 percent

The point is that all save situations are relatively easy, so that the difference between a really good closer and a mediocre one is not that great, over the 50-some 9th inning save situations a given team may have in a season.

That's why starters have a much greater impact on a team than closers.

Got one more thing I'm gonna look up....